
Our thanks and copyright acknowledgements to Enfinity Americas for the use of this image
The story so far:
"'Tis the season of myths and mellow votefulness. Boris rules a slumped blancmange Castle, close to a large river and filled with proportionally elected inhabitants, bound by the eternal rituals, quadrilles and gavottes of plotting and politics. Knowing that the unavoidable time of trial will come in the next year, Boris strikes out west to summon support. He pauses and wishes that he could seek advice from his close adviser and speechwriter, Wally Weasel, but fears that others will recognise the characteristic hard-to-pin-down style and mutter knowingly "Weasel's words" at the back of the auditorium.
Having first finished a letter to a campaign group, Boris tucks two books into his coat pocket. The first, an ancient self-help manual, now handily available as a Penguin classic, the second a lighter work of fiction, into his coat pocket. What secrets lie in the books? As gaily into Ruislip Gardens runs the red electric train, Boris wonders what evening will hold....
Now read on.
Poppy Bradbury writes in the Ealing Gazette about the remarks made by Boris Johnson's in his letter to the anti-HS2 group Aghast
London Mayor Boris Johnson has blasted the Government's High Speed Two (HS2) rail plans as 'inadequate' and called for the whole route through the Capital to be tunnelled.This is one of those problems where the best answer is a logical "and" rather than an "either/or" solution. Aghast believes that the HS2 rail link should not be built (or at least not near them) whilst the scheme's supporters see the largely vacant railway alignment that runs from Old Oak Common to West Ruislip as an ideal route for threading the new line into a heavily built up area.
Plans for the £17billion link from Euston to Birmingham currently see the line emerging from tunnel at Old Oak Common, in East Acton, before running alongside the Central line tracks through Hanger Lane, Perivale, Greenford and Northolt.
In a letter to an anti-HS2 campaigner, the mayor said he is concerned, in particular, about the environmental impact of the route through Ealing and Hillingdon.
He wrote: "It is perverse that a section of route through Greater London, clearly affecting large numbers of people, has been subject to so little environmental mitigation. I am seeking substantial changes in the design of the route to ensure these impacts are properly addressed, preferably by tunnelling the whole route through London. Without such changes, I cannot support the current proposal."
Last week, Ealing Council also spoke out against the plans on a similar basis.
Bruce Heywood, close to the line in Ealing Gardens, Perivale, is pleased to see Mr Johnson and his deputy, Richard Barnes, supporting the campaigners.
He said: "If it were built it would be in the interest of Londoners if the train was put in tunnels but the problem here is financial. The present estimates will cost every household in the country £1,000, how much more will it cost if it was put in tunnels?"
But Steve Pound, Ealing North MP, thinks building a tunnel beneath the borough is an infeasible option.
He said: "Boris Johnson knows even less about geology than he does about geography. Undercutting Ealing with a tunnel means my constituents, and his electoral voters, will fall into the ground. London's transport system is built on clay, it would cost more money to tunnel through that than if we replaced HS2 with sedan chairs and walked people to Birmingham."
Mr Barnes, who is also London Assembly member for Ealing and Hillingdon, said: "Whether building a tunnel through Ealing is feasible or not, Boris has made it very clear that the current route is just not acceptable. And a tunnel would make the business case even more unviable. I'm totally against it."
He is now urging Ealing Council to join the alliance of councils against HS2, known as 51M - the amount it could cost each parliamentary constituency: £51million.
Last week, the Gazette printed a cross-party response from the council. However, Ealing Council's Liberal Democrat leader, councillor Gary Malcolm, refused to back it. The Gazette is happy to clarify this situation.
Mr Malcolm said: "The Liberal Democrats feel that the benefits of HS2 far outweigh the negatives raised, that often relate to local circumstances. Despite there being a lack of detail we feel that projects like this, which will greatly improve transport, should be supported."
That line in question formed part of the Great Western Railways route from Paddington to Birkenhead and competed for traffic with the London and North Western Railways routes to Birmingham, Chester and Liverpool. Over the short journey to Birmingham and Wolverhampton the GWR offered fierce completion with, until 1962, trains taking two hours to reach Snow Hill headed, to the delight of enthusiasts, by no fewer than twenty seven of C.B.Collet's mighty "King" class engines.

Our thanks and creative commons copyright acknowledgements to Tutankhamen Sleeping for the use of this image.
The electrification of the West Coast Main Line saw the demise of through services on the 6th March 1967. The route slipped back into decline. The last regular service was a peak hour commuter train from Banbury at 07.15 which returned from Paddington at 17.53. It was hauled, still to the delight of a later generation of enthusiasts, by English Electric Class 50 locomotives, known prosaically to spotting cognoscenti as "Hoovers".
Although the line north of South Ruislip subsequently underwent a renaissance, trains from Birmingham then ran into Marylebone. The route down to Old Oak Common, running parallel to the Central Line was used by the odd train to keep up the driver's route knowledge of an emergency route, but most of the time it slumbered.
Until, that is, the HS2 route was put out for consultation when, alarmed by the prospect of fast and noisy trains rushing through their cities and countryside, the Agahst (Action Groups against High Speed Trains) pressure group was formed. This was the group to whom the Mayor addressed his remarks.
Close study of his words does, however, reveal that the Mayor as a consummate politician has built a certain amount of wiggle room into his words. He describes the route through London as "inadequate" and that his aim was to "mitigate the environmental impact". It would not be sound politics to give too many hostages to fortune in Ealing and Hillingdon, whilst just down the road at Old Oak Common the public mood conditioned by the potential for economic regeneration is different.
The mayor mentions tunnelling as a possible solution. Such a suggestion has credence because it has been done before. From Stratford to Saint Pancras the original HS1 route follows the alignment of the North London line. In June 2010 we touched upon the vagaries of tunnelling in London when considering the case of the Dalston Junction slab. Apart from some minor hiccoughs when sand lenses were struck, the tunnelled route has been an outstanding success - but this success came at a price. And contrary to Stephen Pound MP's assertion, as the Mayor knows from trying to balance the books for Crossrail, tunnelling is expensive.
However all is not lost, for an alternative may already exist. Originally developed as a shelter to prevent railways being carried away by rock falls or avalanches, the covered way has a long tradition in railway history. Travellers of the Cambrian route from Machynlleth to Pwllheli travel through such a tunnel at Friog, just south of Fairbourne, built after a train was swept away in 1870.

Our thanks and copyright acknowledgements to Ernie's Railway Archive for the use of this image.
The Japanese Shinkansen "Bullet Train" network was the first to face the challenge of integrating high speed trains into urban environments and responded with a range of mitigating noise pollution strategies. In Japan, Shinkansen noise is regulated at less than 70 dB in residential areas. This has been achieved by design improvements to reduce the noise footprint of the pantograph, through streamlining and other aerodynamic solutions and a kaizen "constant improvement" approach to weight saving in train carriages. At the side of the track the construction of barriers and other measures have been implemented, including covered ways. Current Japanese research is primarily aimed at reducing operational noise, particularly the boom phenomenon caused when trains exit tunnels at high speed. Following on from the Japanese example, noise mitigation has been one of the key design drivers on the European High Speed networks, including the HS1 route from the Channel Tunnel to London.
An example of such noise abatement already exists in centre of London. Just north of Kings Cross, and visible from the platform ends, HS1 emerges above the East Coast Main line before turning right to run into Saint Pancras International. Emerging from the tunnel from Stratford, it runs over a bridge which features a covered way encasing the railway tracks. This can clearly be seen in the picture below.

Of course one relatively small bridge might not seem enough to satisfy the residents of Ealing but in Belgium, north of Antwerp and south of the Dutch border where the High Speed Train network is being extended from Brussels to Amsterdam, a larger variant exists which not only reduces noise pollution, it also has potential emergent properties tackles atmospheric pollution.
Belgian TV have helpfully produced an extended news report that shows both the inside and the outside of the covered way.
The structure is two miles long with, for those of our readers who count in Routemasters, a surface area of eight football pitches. Its development is described in detail by Henry Gass writing in the Ecologist. It's an article that perhaps does not give enough emphasis to the noise abatement potential, but his piece is none the less an encouraging read, which I am taking the liberty of quoting in full.
The 'Solar Tunnel': a greener future for our railways?Now those of us who believe that watching Mayor Question Time is like watching "Neighbours" but with a better script, will notice that the Mayor, as well as demonstrating his tendency not to answer the question that has been put but the one to which he has a prepared answer for, is constantly accused of not doing enough in terms of transport for London and improving its air quality.
Henry Gass - 8th June, 2011
The opening of Belgium's 'Solar Tunnel' railway project has raised questions about the use of solar for UK transport projects, says Henry Gass
Railway infrastructure is being used to generate green energy for the first time in Europe with the inauguration of the 'Solar Tunnel' in Belgium. 3.4 kilometres of tunnel roof near Antwerp, part of the high-speed line connecting Paris and Amsterdam, has been covered with 16,000 solar PV panels, an area of roughly 50,000m2 - equivalent to eight football pitches.
The panels will generate an estimated 3.3 MWh of electricity a year, equivalent to the average annual electricity consumption of nearly 1,000 homes, and will decrease CO2 emissions by 2,400 tonnes per year. The electricity will be used to power the railway infrastructure (signalling, lighting, heating of railway stations etc.) and trains using the Belgian rail network. 4,000 trains per year - equivalent to one full day of rail traffic - will be able to run entirely on solar energy. Belgium-based renewable energy company Enfinity financed, developed and built the Solar Tunnel project, at a cost, says Bart van Renterghem, head of Enfinity UK, of around £14 million.
'Solar PV has one big advantage compared to other renewable energy technologies,' says van Renterghem. 'This kind of technology is really deliverable. We had a tunnel; the rooftop had no economic use at all. We installed solar PV, it's not disturbing anyone, but you are making use of assets that weren't productive before, using technology which does not create any sound, which has almost no visual impact, deliverable on a short time frame.'
According to van Renterghem, discussions around the Solar Tunnel project began at the start of 2010, and the project was finalised by the end of the year. 'I don't know any renewable energy technology where you can start developing and realising the project and getting it operational within one year,' says van Renterghem. The 3.3 MWh figure was calculated based on the forecast of the average sunshine in north Belgium. Many environmentalists, including George Monbiot, have argued that solar power is an impractical technology for the UK and northern Europe given the relative lack of sunshine the region receives. However, van Renterghem argues that projects like the Solar Tunnel are more sustainable than importing solar energy from sunnier regions. 'Solar PV, it's about de-central electricity generation. So they generate electricity on the spot where you're going to consume it. It doesn't make sense to build a big solar installation in the south of Italy and then transport green energy to the north of Germany to consume it over there.'
Pressing the DfT for HS2 to run through a covered way in the Ealing Ruislip corridor and cutting atmospheric pollution would seem to have merits. Much has been made of the Electric City programme, although this seems to be flagging recently (a topic to which we shall return) but the emphasis has been very much on the consumption end - the charging points debate and the availability of vehicles. The use of railway covered ways as generators of power offers the chance of a more holistic assessment.
Now at this stage, it is probably best to describe the Belgian tunnel as an advanced working prototype. Its ability to deliver both noise and environmental improvements needs to be monitored. But that is not to say that the design objective of the tunnel is not an excellent concept. Even if the Belgian system does not work as well as expected it will still provide a vast fund of data as to what does not work - if only we then have the talent to be able devise solutions that do work. Without apology, one of the hobby horses we saddle up on a regular basis is the need to involve the enormous talent base that exists in London's University and College base in creating engineering solutions for London. This is an area where the Mayor should strongly and publicly enlist their support, possibly in conjunction with the Swindon based National Technology Strategy Board, for whom this is also key development area.

Our thanks and copyright acknowledgements to Network Rail
London is already committed to a major solar installation. When the rebuilt Blackfriars station opens next spring 2012 spanning the River Thames, it will have the largest single collection of solar panels in the UK. The roof of the new station will have 4,400 panels and a capacity of 1MW, enough to provide 50% of the station's electricity. As Damian Carrington, writing in the Guardian, points out, "The development is not dependent on the level of government subsidy for solar power as the £7.3m bill was paid by the transport department's environment fund."
There are lots of similar corridors into London that could be similarly exploited if the technology can be brought to maturity.
The forensic readers of this blog will by now have noticed that I have not addressed l'autre éléphant dans la pièce identified by the Mayor - the consequential effects of HS2 on the connecting infrastructure in central London. System engineers recognise that upgrading one element of an integrated system often leads to strains being transferred to other pinch points. Whilst conflating the impact of HS2 on the tube is another useful tactical political stick that the Mayor can use to be perceived as the saviour of London from over-lofty central government decisions, what is really required is a Paris style master-plan for the Crossrail Network. That might take some time to out together but one easy step would be to relabel Crossrail as Crossrail 1, with the overt implication of more to come. Don't worry JB is standing in the wings to address this matter
But back to our story.... sometime later.
Relieved at his reception in the West, Boris returned to the East. He flicked through the pages of the one book remaining in his pocket - a masterpiece written by one of the most famous SPADs in history, Nicolo Machiavelli. He swiftly turned to chapter 6 and read, marked and inwardly digested:
"Those who by valorous ways become princes, like these men, acquire a principality with difficulty, but they keep it with ease. The difficulties they have in acquiring it arise in part from the new rules and methods which they are forced to introduce to establish their government and its security. And it ought to be remembered that there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new. This coolness arises partly from fear of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the incredulity of men, who do not readily believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them. Thus it happens that whenever those who are hostile have the opportunity to attack, they do it like partisans, whilst the others defend lukewarmly, in such wise that the prince is endangered along with them".
"Ah so, it was ever thus", thought Boris. Should he stand with the innovators or those against? What would Nanny do, in this situation?
Meanwhile back in Ealing a passer-by flicked through a novel by Tom Clancy that somebody attending the meeting had not seen fall from the Mayor's coat pocket - her eye fell upon an aphorism:
"I am a politician which means I am a liar and a crook. When I am not kissing babies I am stealing their lollypops."
Why was that underlined and by whom? "Ah so it was ever thus", she thought.
Should the present or indeed any aspiring mayoral candidate wish to swipe any Belgian lollypops, Eurostar offer a regular service to Brussels from Saint Pancras.
Um, 3.3MWh per year is all of 114 watts - I hope they can generate more than this from eight football pitches of solar panels. Should this be 3.3MW?
ReplyDeleteEncase the HS2 tracks in a concrete box as suggested, but two additional alternatives...
ReplyDeletePut more train tracks on top and use that extra capacity for mainline services.
Or, cover the top in turf/plants and turn it into a Western version of East London's Greenway.
I thought I had read a few years ago that the reglazing of Victoria and Paddington(?) was using special glass that incorporated power generation. Is this the case?
ReplyDeleteIf so I expect the power output is quite low.
Railway infrastructure is being used to generate green energy for the first time in Europe may not therefore be true, depending on your definition of Europe!
Excellent plan, its a far better alternative than tunnelling underground.
ReplyDelete@IanVisits: I think more trains on top would mitigate its selling point. Greenery though yes, it could be mixed with solar so most of it is solar panels with the odd" green bridge" across it. Or a strip along side so half is solar and the other half a greenway - a true Cycle Superhighway.
Anonymous (a different one), according to the original press release from "enfinity", the total annual output is 3,300MWh i.e. 11.88TJ. I make this equivalent to a constant output of 377kW. Averaged over 12 daylight hours, this would give 754kW.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like someone has forgotten that the Belgians use a commma to mark the decimal and full stops for marking thousands.
If it wasn't for platform capacity at St Pancras/LOndon Bridge, I'd seriously suggest re-scoping Thameslink as a "Crossrail" route- I've always felt, given the nature of the "core" section, that mixing long-distance and "metro" services is one of the weaknesses of the system- resulting in things such as trying to design stock that suit both passengers that may well be going Brighton-Bedford with those using it as a tube-type service.
ReplyDeleteGreat post! The question for me is why is Belgium able to plan, design and build a solar tunnel, while the UK can't even get it onto the drawing board? What does that say about strategic rail planning, and integrated policy across transport, energy and climate change?
ReplyDeleteSure Boris has got a point. Although tis largely political opportunism, he raises legitimate questions about connectivity at Old Oak Common and capacity at Euston. Old Oak Common does not feature connections to LUL, West London Line or North London Line. And it is built over the junction from the GW-GC to the GWML, so it will not then be possible to run Birmingham expresses into Paddington. It's a really poor design.
Indeed, the option of upgrading the GW-GC route for 125mph services to Birmingham and the West Midlands has not been properly explored. Towards the London end it has gentle alignments, flying junctions and long passing loops. This route offers a solution to the capacity issues on the WCML, and is also invaluable as a contingency route in the event of WCML blockages. Not now though.
Further, the route can be extended through to the empty Eurotunnel platforms at Waterloo, via the WLL, using a short stretch of new tunnel from East Acton.
...via the WLL?
ReplyDeleteQuite aside from having to regauge it to continental standards, then doing the same for Clapham Junction- Waterloo, what about the increasingly popular metro service over the line? Or the many current freight paths? Or the signalling, electrification, overburdening of the W&C, poor connections to St Pancras, limited speed, etc etc. You propose in effect that in preference to severing the GW-GC link the WLL should be amputated off, along with approach tracks to Waterloo; as the tracks must be dedicated to gain full use of the rest of the infrastructure.
As time progresses along with signalling, 125mph will be pushed where possible. 20 years ago there was talk of the ECML doing 140mph, the WCML doing 140mph with tilt and the GWML doing 160mph. Eventually something will happen.
To clarify though, HS2 will use the entire NR alignment from North Acton to South Ruislip according to an engineer from the roadshow; that'll be the final nail in the coffin for the New North Main line.
@Anon 17:25
ReplyDeleteYou may recall that Eurostar's old North Pole depot is at Old Oak Common. Eurostar trains used the route via the WLL to get there so it must be big enough for HS2 trains. I totally agree with your other points. There is no advantage to getting rid of the local LO/Southern services to direct trains either from Birmingham or the West to take a roundabout route into a congested Waterloo. It just screams out, WHY!?
You would not need to regauge the WLL as I am suggesting it could be used for domestic expresses, not HS2. It could be useful as a contingency, and building flexibility/resilience into the system is a legitimate investment objective. The HS2 design locks us out of some future options.
ReplyDeleteWaterloo is convenient for the City, Docklands and much of the West End. If it was considered feasible to put a European terminal there, then why not Midlands expresses.
The WLL anyway needs a strategic rethink, which should result in provision of long passing loops from Olympia to West Brompton, and resignalling for an intensive service. Whatever, the current design of HS2 Old Oak pretends that it's not even there.
I'm certainly not the only one to support new rail capacity (new lines, more tracks) while having a strong dislike for this HS2 route. The Chiltern route was chosen given three up front choices - 400kph, route to/near Heathrow, absolute minimum journey time. Given those 3 criteria, the chosen route is probably the best possible. The problem is that the 3 criteria are all flawed IMO.
ReplyDelete400kph and absolute minimum journey time are not what we should be spending precious money on - capacity should be the focus, and 155mph/250kph would be fine for UK geography (lots of biggish places close together). The to/near Heathrow criteria is similarly flawed - in overall terms, the numbers travelling to Heathrow via HS2 will be small (and since HS2 is full from day one there won't be capacity on it for direct Heathrow services anyway).
As such, for a new line I favour Euston - WestHampstead - Widened MML - M1 route to Northampton. Easier to build in phases and less objections next to a motorway. But in general, we need more 1/2bn projects and less 17bn ones.
Boris's comments are mostly electioneering, but the solar panel idea is a good one if HS2 does continue as is.
If HS2 had to be boxed in, surely there would be a better business case for using the roof as an airspace development.
ReplyDeleteMaybe not the office and shopping developments that can be seen at Liverpool Street and Victoria respectively, but housing out in the suburbs?
@stephenc
ReplyDeleteThe criteria depend on your aim (especially the Heathrow criteria). This kind of large public sector investment isn't, to take one example, to serve an existing market of Heathrow to Birmingham passengers. Rather it is to create and boom such a market for environmental and economic ends.
You may say we need more £1/2bn projects, but sometimes if you don't spend the one 17bn in th elong run you'll spend a hundred 1/2bn ones.
This just goes to explain why it takes 50 years to ever build something in this country......
ReplyDeleteAnd why every other county in the world already has it's own high speed network, and why we are still thinking about how to get the most out of a 18th century set of lines that were built for steam, then closed because they were not making enough money, them reopened in one disguise or another. 150 years later... (kingsland viaduct, the croxley rail link, cross rail, bakerloo extension plans etc)
The bottom line is we have run out of room above ground, and why CTRL had to be tunnelled under the NLL!
I'm not suggesting for one moment that hs2 should be tunnelled all the way into London as I suspect those who's houses it's runs underneath will dislike the constant noise and vibration as a 150mph train shoots under their house ever 15 mins!
But clearly a solution has to be found - the motorway box's failed for the same reason - nobody wants to be sitting in a traffic jam, but nobody wants their home demolished to build the relief road/tracks!
So where does it go? Well why not simply run it along side another set of tracks? Well all the bridges, over head lines etc will need to be widened and then there is the problem of the houses built along side the tracks etc, but why not just run it into Euston/ St P etc along side the MML or WCML - yes in the built time you will loose some services due to disruption, but hopefully after a few years people will be glad for the increased and JOINED UP hub you create - don't the goods yards behind kings cross still have some usable space if people out their minds to planning it - and yes I know it's been redeveloped over and over again, but basicly the beat option surely would be to drop a huge bomb on the whole Euston/StP/KX area and start again :)
Another option would be to run HS2 below the MML / WCML not London!
ps the suggestion above that Waterloo is a good place to terminate as it's good for the city - maybe you have moot been on the 521 or the W&C in the morning rush?
I live just by the NLL in Canonbury and thus nearly on top of the tunnelled HS1 and can report no vibration noticable from the high speed trains travelling below.
ReplyDeleteI live directly above the Kent and Ocntinent bound tunnel of HS1. Straffod and St. Pancras bound goes o uner our garden. You wouldn't know it was there.
ReplyDelete@stephenc
ReplyDeleteSpeed and journey time reduction help justify the *benefit* part of the cost benefit ratios. High speed rail has to compete and win on *total* journey time against other modes including private car and air. It also has to be a piece of infrastructure that will last 100-200 years, during which time speed and expectation for it will undoubtedly rise across all modes.
Not building new long distance rail lines for 400kph would be a serious bit of short-termism that would constrain future developments.
@Al
ReplyDeleteThe "wrong kind of train" argument again? Give it a rest - normal people want to sit on one train for as long as possible, not be forced to drag themselves and their baggage around crowded stations just to get onto the "right kind of train" for each bit of their journey.
Thameslink's success was always down to providing a medium distance cross-London service. Long may it, and the convenience this provides to its passengers, continue.
@Paul/Anonymous, France and Spain have huge distances between places, which makes a fast train hugely more appealing than the drive (5 hours Paris to Lyon). By comparison, Switzerland and Germany have more cities closer together. My argument is that we should be developing more like Switzerland and Germany than France and Spain. Which means less raw high speed and more smaller, shorter improvements within an overall plan.
ReplyDeleteMore generally though, I'd prefer projects that remove 10 minutes from a daily commute than ones that remove 30 mins from a journey taken 2 or 3 times a year. £33bn would probably buy 2 more crossrails and a host of smaller schemes, and I judge that better value for money.
@stephenc
ReplyDeleteEasy to say from the south. London to Scotland is further than Paris to Lyon. Birmingham is just the first stage.
As for Germany and Switzerland, they haven't managed to have high speed networks for specific reasons. Switzerland is too hilly to run a line with such low tolerance for curvature between its cities. Germany has too local local power, when you try to run a train line near a town they won't give it planning permission unless you put a stop there - which of course defeats the point of a HSL.
I'm with Stephen C on the why build HS2 when there are perfectly good cheaper solutions that may save 10-15 minutes off our daily commute and more than that pay for more and longer trains.
ReplyDeleteIf we are going to build HS2 then we should look at the cheapest route. From what I've heard on this debate why not start it from Paddington and take it straight up the old Birkenhead route to avoid tunnels altogether - and restrict it to 125mph in London to stop excessive noise.
There probably isn't enough room at Paddington itself for the HS2 station but there certainly is room to build a station over the railway tracks between Royal Oak and Paddington which I suspect would be much cheaper than a new station at Euston plus a tunnel to Old Oak Common.
Crossrail will connect it to central London and Heathrow. The Hammersmith and City to Euston and St Pancras, and even the Bakerloo is nearby to connect south to Waterloo.
@StephenC and @T33
ReplyDeleteNortherners are people too.
One could argue almost every piece of investment north of the Watford Gap should be scrapped in favour of something similar in the South-East, as it would accrue a greater measured benefit.
We do need to share the love so everyone gets at least a little bit. Social cohesion is an important part of government responsibility. The North has to remain a viable place to live and do business.
"If we are going to build HS2 then we should look at the cheapest route."
Pretty sure they would have thought of that!
Going back to Steve Pound's comment on Boris's geological knowledge. I fear said MP for Ealing is showing himself up as a total ignoramous. London has always been regarded by civil engineers as a great place to tunnel, almost entirely due to the presence of London Clay (not in spite of it). It's uniform in character, is watertight and easy to dig, but strong enough to support itself while the linings are erected. One real problem in central London is that there are already so many tunnels that threading more through within the clay layer is not very easy. However, west of Paddington it's a lot less congested.
ReplyDeleteAnon 11:48
ReplyDeleteTo get the 19 miles from my local station to central London in the rush hour takes 43-45 minutes depending on the train caught.
To get the 100 miles from Birmingham to London will take 43 minutes and cost £17bn to build.
So I am going to pay a huge amount of Tax to pay for this, so someone in Birmingham can commute daily to London and steal my job.
I'd like to see significant improvements in my daily commute as well as the High Speed line built.
However I think it important to remove unnecessary costs to allow investment elsewhere as it is needed.
Why spend billions tunnelling under London when you can terminate the services at a quality station with good links such as Paddington (Bakerloo/Hamm and City/Crossrail). Why even tunnel to Euston when you could join the West Coast Main lines approaches?
Then use those billions to improve lines currently heavily congested with Millions of people using daily - and not just in London but also in Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle, Sheffield and Glasgow