why all the hate for hs2?

[Glaucus]

Because it's pointless, it's going to shave off what...30 mins travel time between London and Birmingham?

It's going to cost LOADS, this money can be used to improve our current networks and trains.

Yes, it willl create jobs for the people having to build it, which guess what, funnily enough they need paying too.

Just meh.

Just time, no increased capacity or any other benefits then? i think you need to think about it more.

Upgrade existing network, that's already happening and cost loads. Restricted by the line we already have with no land to expand and often building built upto the boundary line. Meaning you can't do much.

 

[hurfdurf]

Just time, no increased capacity or any other benefits then? i think you need to think about it more.

Upgrade existing network, that's already happening and cost loads. Restricted by the line we already have with no land to expand and often building built upto the boundary line. Meaning you can't do much.

Indeed, never mind the expansion after this. In this age it is absolutely ridiculous that the most efficient way to get from Scotland to London is to fly. Hopefully this will be a step towards changing that.

 

[peter_hutson]

I'd love those that are claiming we should use the money to invest in our current network to commute on those networks during the upgrade. Upgrading and repairing the existing network causes enormous disruption. The current network is working so close to capacity that there is simply not the slack to perform repairs without major distruption, let alone major upgrades.

HS2 will divert a significant portion of traffic off the existing lines and allow the network to be brought up to 21st Century standards. At the end of this process we should have an excellent high speed lik between Major hubs and a significantly improved secondary network.

HS2 also has the potential to start spreading the wealth of the SE further a field. This could kick start the rejuvenation of the Midlands and North of England. On it's own the impact will be small, but if combined with other initiatives the benefit could be significant. In the end it's always going to be "could", as there are no guarantees in life, but if we want to spend money we may as well do it in a way that leaves a significant asset for the future. As another poster said, I'm sure people at the time questioned the need for motorways, railways, the nation gird and every other major infrastructure project ever undertaken. The short term benefit to those making the investment was probably fairly modest, but to the nation as a whole it's almost immeasurable.

 

[clv101]

This is the kind of project we could be building a dozen times over instead of HS2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Supertram

It would improve the lives for far more people than the proposed HS2.

 

[Glaucus]

This is the kind of project we could be building a dozen times over instead of HS2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Supertram

It would improve the lives for far more people than the proposed HS2.

And helps a city not a country. Although I agree we should be doing such things. No way would that be done for 119m though.

 

[dazzerd]

The London to Birmingham route will cost £17 billion. The extensions to Leeds, Manchester and Heathrow (to be built later) will push the total cost to £32 billion.

This would link Birmingham with London and Heathrow reducing domestic air travel and reduce congestion on M6 and M1. In addition East Midlands Airport would be within 40 mins of London potentially reducing the need to expand Heathrow etc.

I'm all for advancement but this is nonsense. A new high speed line may take a few people off the M1 and M6, however we are talking 1000's of roads users going on the train out of the 100000's who use those routes on a daily basis and that assumes the cost is going to be cheap, which going on current prices it won't be. It also doesn;t take into account the fact that road use will increase over the same period anyway.

If the idea of this service is to make the distances between the major cities in this country commutable then they will have to charge commuter rates, which just isn't going to happen.

If this was a private exercise then fair enough, let them risk the investment; but this is literally setting a torch to £30bn squid which is about £500.00 for every man woman and child in this country.

 

[philip2009]

How many people are going to pay more(perhaps a lot more) to use an HS2 train rather than a standard one? Is this going to be a new "Concorde" for the 2000s, a great toy for the well-heeled?

 

[clv101]

And helps a city not a country. Although I agree we should be doing such think. No way would that be done for 119m though.

The figure's a decade old - increase it by a factor of five and we could still afford ~60 such systems for the price of HS2, enough for pretty much every city in the country. It would improve the commutes for most of the population.

 

[culvers]

For me it would have been better spent on a new fiber network or renewable energy research / installation.

As this benefits far more people and will help the country a lot more in the future.

have to agree, i think the govt should be investing in future tech as much as possible, and i cant see rail having much of a future.

 

[StriderX]

I can bet if we spent the money on projects like skylon, we would be able to cut off hours on worldwide journeys as well as freight times.

Much more important frankly, considering the line will be ruined by striking drivers, (no doubt).

 

[Glaucus]

The figure's a decade old - increase it by a factor of five and we could still afford ~60 such systems for the price of HS2, enough for pretty much every city in the country. It would improve the commutes for most of the population.

5 fold, I would be shocked. Try a few more times. Just look at hs2, now think about building lines intercity.
Also the rest of the country grinds to a halt, people already are using cars lest due to price. Now go forward 10 years, how much will petrol be.

We need both projects. Especially Bristol as we are one of the most congested cities in England.

 

[Glaucus]

I can bet if we spent the money on projects like skylon, we would be able to cut off hours on worldwide journeys as well as freight times.

Much more important frankly, considering the line will be ruined by striking drivers, (no doubt).

We should be spending it on skylon, the payback from that project would be phenomenal. We would get 99% of the worlds launch orders.

 

[dasyad]

It's not just about saving 30 minutes between Birmingham and London, places like Leeds, Manchester and Newcastle would also benefit from improved journey times.

 

[clv101]

We just need to think about the opportunity cost. We can only spend this £32bn once. Is it better to spend in on the high speed line, or on local light rail infrastructure, improving conditions in ~every city in the country? Far more people would benefit from local light rail.

 

[Spook187]

I welcome this project as it's my industry,People seem to forget that our current infrastructure is nearing capacity and this is just the start believe me.
The upgrade of the west coast main line which cost £9 Billion was badly needed,our rail network is behind the times and we do need this money spent on the infrastructure whatever the cost.

 

[StriderX]

We should be spending it on skylon, the payback from that project would be phenomenal. We would get 99% of the worlds launch orders.

Funny, but the benefits of that i think out way a railway line like this, perhaps if the rail went a bit faster, then perhaps it would be a nice addition, otherwise it just seems like a waste, considering the prices of tickets at the moment and my mentioned problem of naughty workers.

Doesn't seem like it would pay itself back in any good manner of time.

No im not ignoring that there is obviously a benefit of shaving off 30 minutes, which is great, but if you could get to Australia within 6 hours instead (compared to a day i think...i forget), what would you go for?

 

[Glaucus]

We just need to think about the opportunity cost. We can only spend this £32bn once. Is it better to spend in on the high speed line, or on local light rail infrastructure, improving conditions in ~every city in the country? Far more people would benefit from local light rail.

High speed.
There's not. Many huge cities and several of them already have tubes/trams. On top of that you have to think where they are going to run. They take up loads of road space and the initial Bristol one covered. Well one route, not most of the city like London tube.

I would willingly pay the purposed Bristol tram tax if it was ring fenced.

 

[clv101]

I welcome this project as it's my industry,People seem to forget that our current infrastructure is nearing capacity and this is just the start believe me.

So maybe we need to start looking at why we are travelling around so much? What can we do to reduce the need to travel? These are hard, social as much as economic and technological questions. The dumbest solution is just to build more capacity. The more intelligent solution is to find ways to doing what needs to be done without spending so much time and energy on the travelling itself.

 

[StriderX]

So maybe we need to start looking at why we are travelling around so much? What can we do to reduce the need to travel? These are hard, social as much as economic and technological questions. The dumbest solution is just to build more capacity. The more intelligent solution is to find ways to doing what needs to be done without spending so much time and energy on the travelling itself.

Only witches teleport, ARE YOU A WITCH?

 

[clv101]

Only witches teleport, ARE YOU A WITCH?

If only!