More Infill Electrification Announced

[whole diary]

[JayMac]

The Office for Budget Responsibility's Economic and Fiscal Outlook report from December 2013 gives Network Rail's debt as ^30 billion.

Page 103:

the classification of Network Rail: Network Rail is currently classified as a private sector body. The ONS^» (Office for National Statistics - website) is reviewing that classification against the revised guidance in ESA10. Network Rail had ^30 billion of debt recorded in its latest accounts, up from ^8 billion at formation in 2002. Based on published plans, its operations imply the equivalent of around ^3 billion of borrowing a year on average over the coming years. A change of classification could therefore increase PSND by about 2 per cent of GDP and PSNB by 0.2 per cent of GDP on average, with implications for future debt;

ESA = European System of Accounts
ONS = Office for National Statistics
PSND = Public Sector Net Debt
PSNB = Public Sector Net Borrowing

[Electric train]

^32 Trillion?

I used the English vernacular as I am aware of the aversion to Americanise (or is that Americanize)

Anywho its still a lot of dosh that both the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister of this and the pervious Government quietly leave off of the National bank statement 

[ellendune]

^32 Trillion?

I used the English vernacular as I am aware of the aversion to Americanise (or is that Americanize)

Anywho its still a lot of dosh that both the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister of this and the pervious Government quietly leave off of the National bank statement 

Pedant alert

^32,000,000,000,000 (^32 x 10¹²)was what you said, and that, according wikipedia is ^32 trillion in US. ^32 Trillion UK^▸ (United Kingdom) would be ^32,000,000,000,000,000,000 (^32 x 10¹⁸).

As I said, I think the correct number is however ^32,000 million (^32 x 10⁹) which is ^32 billion (US) or ^0.032 billion (UK)

I too have an aversion to Americanisation, but we seem to have lost the battle on billion and trillion. I though to use the UK term would simply confuse.

I agree it is still a lot of money.  Incidentally the water industry's ^30 billion they are not even thinking of putting on the public sector net debt, because it is privatised.  Of cause it is still part of the national debit as is everyone's mortgage and credit card debt if they have one.

[JayMac]

Short scale for billion (10⁹) and trillion (10¹²) have been in official usage in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) since 1974.

That's 40 years of official use, teaching and media use.

The battle, if ever there was one over such an abstract concept, is already lost. And I contend it is not the fault of the USA. Short scale numbers were widely used in Europe through the Enlightenment, and then taken to America.

[TonyK]

The fact remains that if you owe the bank ^1000, you have a problem. If you owe the bank ^1,000,000,000, then the bank has a problem. If you owe the bank Rs500 crore, you are in India, and have an entirely different problem, but the principle of shifting the money borrowed to support investment in rail infrastructure off the bottom line of the public accounts seems to be universal.

[onthecushions]

Looks better as ^0.32E+11

OTC

[stebbo]

Question - would the ^32 billion (if you believe the latest number) to be spent on HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) be better spent on rolling out further electrification/signalling improvements across the Network? Excepting Scotland of course until we see which way they vote next year.

[ChrisB]

No.

[JayMac]

Yes.

[stebbo]

As you might have guessed "yes"

[4064ReadingAbbey]

Question - would the ^32 billion (if you believe the latest number) to be spent on HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) be better spent on rolling out further electrification/signalling improvements across the Network? Excepting Scotland of course until we see which way they vote next year.

Yes.

[Tim]

Question - would the ^32 billion (if you believe the latest number) to be spent on HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) be better spent on rolling out further electrification/signalling improvements across the Network? Excepting Scotland of course until we see which way they vote next year.

yes,  but I don't think it is a choice of one or the other.  We might be able to have both

[ellendune]

Further electrification would be good, but it won't provide any additional capacity on the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) or the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) will it. 

[stebbo]

Of course the now abandoned Great Central re-opening/extension proposed over many years until recently - when the promoter died - might well have solved the problem as it would have taken freight from the North/Midlands to the Channel Tunnel.

But I question whether the High Speed rail link will actually take that much traffic. The price of travel is likely to be higher and people may decide to stick with the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) or not travel

[ellendune]

Of course the now abandoned Great Central re-opening/extension proposed over many years until recently - when the promoter died - might well have solved the problem as it would have taken freight from the North/Midlands to the Channel Tunnel.

But I question whether the High Speed rail link will actually take that much traffic. The price of travel is likely to be higher and people may decide to stick with the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) or not travel

If the present fast trains are all moved onto the HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) then it will release considerable capacity as if all trains on a line trains travel at the same speed increases capacity. If passengers still want to use the classic route then they will probably have to travel on semi-fast trains and their journey may be slower than it is now.

If the high speed trains are over-priced then of course no one will use them and the line will not make money.  However, I have never been on an empty train on HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) even if I do have to buy an advanced purchase ticket to get the best price. 

One question about re-opening the GC^» (Great Central Railway - link to heritage line) though.  Where would all that freight go when it got to the London end? Since it was never closed it cannot be reopened and I didn't thionk there was much capacity left of the Chiltern route.