HS2 - Government proposals, alternative routes and general discussion

[whole diary]

[TonyK]

Presumably he isn't employed by the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page), well probably not directly?

I think he may well be. The previous move to everybody being self-employed through service companies was rather frowned upon. In any case, writing "Personal capacity" after every utterance wouldn't stop the BBC not sending any more work, should they think he was bringing the game into disrepute.

HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)), if I remember correctly, will be electrically-propelled.

That's my reading of the situation too. Whether the investment in concrete for an all-slab track railway makes it highly polluting and that is his beef, I don't know. The production of cement is, after all, responsible for three times the emissions of aviation worldwide. Then there's the matter of the trees being felled to make way, but trees are springing up all around us and HS2 are planting them by the dozen. If you want to go down that route, then the mess made in extracting neodymium and other rare earth metals for the wind turbines that will provide the motive power should be knocked off. There is a school of thought (not mine) that sees cycling as polluting because of the energy used in manufacture.. It is all a matter of degree, and I am sure that someone somewhere would be able to prove that a coal-fired jet plane is an actual benefit to the planet.

Statistics....

OTC

67% of all statistics are made up on the spot. There are lies, damned lies, and statistics, as neither Mark Twain nor Benjamin Disraeli ever said.

[Robin Summerhill]

I am sure that someone somewhere would be able to prove that a coal-fired jet plane is an actual benefit to the planet.

I wouldn't want to fire it...

[johnneyw]

...That's before we start discussing whether an all-electric railway emits more carbon dioxide than a couple of motorways full of cars and a few airliners...

On Monday, at the TravelWatch South-West meeting, Thomas Ableman of SNAP (an on-demand coach operator) presented a case that motor-coaches are the most carbon-efficient form of transport per passenger-kilometre. If I can, I'll put up the slide he showed us when it's published on the TWSW^» (TravelWatch SouthWest - website) website, but (as I remember it) it showed that diesel coaches emit 45 carbons per passenger kilometre whilst trains emit 65. Which is more. Cars and aeroplanes emit hundreds and hundreds, of course, but we all agree that we need fewer of those (don't we?)

He did admit that electric trains emit less than 45 (it would have been nice to see the figures, but that wouldn't have served his argument), but he claimed that that was neither here nor there because so many trains have dirty old diesel engines.

HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)), if I remember correctly, will be electrically-propelled.

and off course, coach tyres release the micro particulates that have given rise to so much concern whereas railway tyres do not.

[TonyK]

and off course, coach tyres release the micro particulates that have given rise to so much concern whereas railway tyres do not.

...and brake dust.

[Rhydgaled]

That's before we start discussing whether an all-electric railway emits more carbon dioxide than a couple of motorways full of cars and a few airliners.

I recall reading years ago, but forget the source, that HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) was carbon-neutral at best. For an all-electric railway not to acheive a carbon reduction suggests to me that somebody has made a very poor decision somewhere along the line while developing the scheme design. I have always suspected that this was due to the sharp increase in energy consumption by pushing speeds up to (if I recall correctly) 400kph, but could be wrong. The fact that most of the modal shift is/was expected to be from the existing 125mph electric west coast main line probably also has something to do with it; modal shift from road doesn't require 400kph and perhaps there isn't enough modal shift from air travel to justify 400kph. I've therefore for some time been of the opinion that HS2 should be a 325kph / 200mph railway, which should also allow the impact on ancient woodlands etc. to be reduced through slightly tighter curves.

Whether the investment in concrete for an all-slab track railway makes it highly polluting and that is his beef, I don't know.

Wait; they're planning to build HS2 as essentially a concrete road with rails set into it like a tram line in a city (is that what 'slab track' is?)? If true, that sounds like it could very well be the "very poor decision" I mentioned above. What changes would be required to allow them to use ballasted track instead and would this significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions versus slab-track?

[ellendune]

The fact that most of the modal shift is/was expected to be from the existing 125mph electric west coast main line probably also has something to do with it;

Yes it will take some of the traffic from the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line), the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) and the MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about), but that is to release capacity on those lines for other traffic.

However that is not model shift the extra capacity of HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) will allow a modal shift.  If there are no space seats then no one is going to change modes.

modal shift from road doesn't require 400kph and perhaps there isn't enough modal shift from air travel to justify 400kph. I've therefore for some time been of the opinion that HS2 should be a 325kph / 200mph railway, which should also allow the impact on ancient woodlands etc. to be reduced through slightly tighter curves.

Some increase in speed is required to reflect that rail journeys are not always door to door and may involve changes.  Higher speeds give more scope.

High speeds are indeed necessary for modal shift from air to rail. 

Wait; they're planning to build HS2 as essentially a concrete road with rails set into it like a tram line in a city (is that what 'slab track' is?)? If true, that sounds like it could very well be the "very poor decision" I mentioned above. What changes would be required to allow them to use ballasted track instead and would this significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions versus slab-track?

Slab track is not like tramlines in that the rails are not set into the concrete, but sit on top. Think of it like one continuous concrete sleeper. 

Slab track give a more stable alignment and therefore lower maintenance.  Some of this may have been driven by the procurement model rather than need. I suspect this change will be looked at - at least in later stages. 

[TaplowGreen]

HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) chief gets 46k bonus for "budget control"

You genuinely couldn't make it up! 🤦‍♂️

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/03/07/hs2-boss-defends-46k-bonus-linked-control-projects-budget/

[Rhydgaled]

The fact that most of the modal shift is/was expected to be from the existing 125mph electric west coast main line probably also has something to do with it;

Yes it will take some of the traffic from the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line), the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) and the MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about), but that is to release capacity on those lines for other traffic.

However that is not model shift the extra capacity of HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) will allow a modal shift.  If there are no space seats then no one is going to change modes.

modal shift from road doesn't require 400kph and perhaps there isn't enough modal shift from air travel to justify 400kph. I've therefore for some time been of the opinion that HS2 should be a 325kph / 200mph railway, which should also allow the impact on ancient woodlands etc. to be reduced through slightly tighter curves.

Some increase in speed is required to reflect that rail journeys are not always door to door and may involve changes.  Higher speeds give more scope.

High speeds are indeed necessary for modal shift from air to rail. 

Wait; they're planning to build HS2 as essentially a concrete road with rails set into it like a tram line in a city (is that what 'slab track' is?)? If true, that sounds like it could very well be the "very poor decision" I mentioned above. What changes would be required to allow them to use ballasted track instead and would this significantly cut greenhouse gas emissions versus slab-track?

Slab track is not like tramlines in that the rails are not set into the concrete, but sit on top. Think of it like one continuous concrete sleeper. 

Slab track give a more stable alignment and therefore lower maintenance.  Some of this may have been driven by the procurement model rather than need. I suspect this change will be looked at - at least in later stages. 

Thanks for those answers; I understand the need for capacity to make space on the trains for modal shift, but it doesn't look good on the carbon balance sheet if 125mph capacity would have done the job. I take the point about connections but again 125mph is a fair bit quicker than the 70mph maximum permitted for road journeys. HS2 needs to be targeting more modal shift from air, which is one of the reasons I think the phase 2b leg from Birmingham to Leeds needs to be able to accomodate through services from Bristol and Plymouth, assuming it goes ahead at all. Slab track does sound like it would involve rather alot of concrete; how does the carbon footprint of that compare to ballasted track I wonder.

[Celestial]

I understand the need for capacity to make space on the trains for modal shift, but it doesn't look good on the carbon balance sheet if 125mph capacity would have done the job....  HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) needs to be targeting more modal shift from air,

Do you think there would have been modal shift between London and Paris if the Eurostar was limited to 125mph? The same is true for Glasgow/Edinburgh, where 125mph is already the limit.

But I think the limit could be reduced slightly with little impact on the competitiveness of HS2, and maybe reduction in the build cost. However, the alignment for Phase 1 is set in stone through the Act of Parliament, so that is a given at this stage.   

[TonyK]

However, the alignment for Phase 1 is set in stone through the Act of Parliament, so that is a given at this stage.   

No it's not - it's concrete! 

[Bmblbzzz]

Here's an argument that the BCR^▸ (Benefit Cost Ratio) has been fiddled in order to meet government targets, but in fact it's not a particularly relevant metric to HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)).

Apart from such malleability in analysis, there are two big problems with the standard approach to the economic appraisal of proposed transport investments. First, the time-saving benefits arise from trips between cities and say nothing about economic development within cities.
...
The second problem is that average travel time, as measured in the National Travel Survey, has hardly changed over the past 45 years. This is despite many billions of pounds of public investments in the transport system justified by the value of journey time savings. What actually happens is that these investments into quicker travel allow us to travel further and to gain access to more distant destinations, opportunities and choices.

https://theconversation.com/hs2-true-value-to-cities-in-the-north-of-england-has-not-been-made-clear-130918

[Rhydgaled]

I understand the need for capacity to make space on the trains for modal shift, but it doesn't look good on the carbon balance sheet if 125mph capacity would have done the job....  HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) needs to be targeting more modal shift from air,

Do you think there would have been modal shift between London and Paris if the Eurostar was limited to 125mph? The same is true for Glasgow/Edinburgh, where 125mph is already the limit.

Yes, of course you need high speed where you are competing with air travel (even then, the original Eurostars are only 300kph and the new ones 320kph). 200mph would only be a tiny bit faster than Eurostar's e320 trains so the captive sets for phase 2 could basically be off-the-shelf designs. But my main point is that a large proportion of HS2's services (over half I think) are planned to be relatively short distance services that don't compete with air travel (eg. London-Birmingham, Birmingham-Manchester and Birmingham-Leeds shuttles). These will only be competing with road (and existing rail services), so don't really need to do more than 125-140mph but you cannot run them that slow or they'd get in the way of the high speed London-Manchester/Leeds/Scotland services.

[TonyK]

Slab track does sound like it would involve rather alot of concrete; how does the carbon footprint of that compare to ballasted track I wonder.

That's an interesting question. The production of cement is very energy intensive, and  over the whole planet, the making of concrete produces three times the CO₂ of the aviation industry. Whether than gives overall environmental benefits when compared to other materials, I dio not know, but I would guess that concrete slab will require a lot more energy to lay than would ballast. You can take away from that the concrete used in sleepers on normal track, the energy cost of extracting and sizing the ballast, and probably a fair bit more. Concrete slab will be the more environmentally sound option if it has a very long lifetime and very little maintenance, and I think that is the rationale. The lines will be complex to build, because settlement or heave will be much harder to correct after construction than in ballasted rail, but the lines will be much straighter than we are used to, which will cut energy costs in operation, and reduce wear and tear. At least I think so from what I have read, but I'm no armchair civil engineer.

Here's an argument that the BCR^▸ (Benefit Cost Ratio) has been fiddled in order to meet government targets, but in fact it's not a particularly relevant metric to HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)).

BCR was introduced to bring objectivity into major projects, but those days are long behind us. The common method now seems to be to write down on a piece of paper the BCR figure you want to achieve. Put this on a spreadsheet, then work backwards through all the elements that make it up, to make sure that they are adjusted to achieve the number that you wrote on the piece of paper.

[TaplowGreen]

Senior Civil Servant accused of withholding information about HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s))

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/03/14/senior-civil-servant-accused-withholding-information-hs2/

[TonyK]

Senior Civil Servant accused of withholding information about HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s))

Better than having to blame a minister, I suppose. Although Chris Grayling is available - if the civil servant told him and he told her to keep schtum, things will get very interesting. This will be seized on by the Telegraph's loyal band of anti-HS2 campaigners as another reason to scrap it, but it is irrelevant now that the real "true" costs are known.