Soldato
A few months back it cost €2 for me and the then Mrs to travel the 50km from Paris Beauvais to Amiens by coach.
why all the hate for hs2?
- Thread starter 233
- Start date
Caporegime
My daughter has a 16-17 pass and from Boston to Grantham (60 mile round route) it costs £10 a day which to be fair is quite cheap for this country!
Obviously it is massively discounted for her.
Last edited:
Cost of ‘bat shed’ to protect colony near HS2 has topped £100m, chair says
Jon Thompson tells industry conference there was ‘no evidence’ that bats were at risk from the trains
www.theguardian.com
Silly money, it’s on the extreme end but is an open secret such projects get low balled, with everyone in the room knowing full well it’ll NEVER get delivered at said price, but then it would never get greenlit otherwise.Cost of ‘bat shed’ to protect colony near HS2 has topped £100m, chair says
Jon Thompson tells industry conference there was ‘no evidence’ that bats were at risk from the trains
Same for military procurement. What can one say? We’re abit **** at this kind of stuff but politicians love big projects to show off. This kind of thing should probably be decided by someone else and not short term leaders that pop off after 4 or so years.
The benefit to car users from fully implemented HS2 would have been that the significantly increased network capacity would have affected cargo as well as passenger trains, thus reducing the amount of commercial traffic on the motorway network, thus increasing the amount of motorway capacity available to cars, thus less congestion/traffic.
Caporegime
It increases capacity for more rubbish to come into this country and be distributed to areas even faster. The roads will become even more clogged as more and more logistics will be needed at either end.
You are not reducing anything. You are merely increasing something that is already capped.
Last edited:
Soldato
Caporegime
I know inflation is a massive thing but the Humber bridge cost £98 million in 1980. Even for £350 million in todays money that is a bargain for what it provides and the boost to the economy. Not to mention it paid itself back decades ago.
Last edited:
Soldato
Thats £409 million in todays money , factoring inflation only. would be close to £1 billion with other costs
And yet they still charge a toll which is probably having a drag on the economy of Hull and the area to the south.
What’s worse is the toll booths are not even automated so a huge chunk of the money get spend paying people to sit there 24/7 taking £1.50 card payments.
It’s insane if you think about it for more than 5 minutes.
What’s worse is the toll booths are not even automated so a huge chunk of the money get spend paying people to sit there 24/7 taking £1.50 card payments.
It’s insane if you think about it for more than 5 minutes.
Caporegime
That is for 1.38 miles of bridge over water. The bat shed is 0.6 miles long on land so to construct the same length of bat shed would be 250ish million. It is still madness!
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,611
And then watch further past the CEO talking to see why the CEO is an idiot
This sort of thing really needs parliament to empower infrastructure projects to get a load of these conflicting departments etc.. to **** right off.
There's just so much BS and red tape with this stuff - the amount of **** HS2 has been paying for is ridiculous.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,611
HS2 had already planned for it 10 years ago, this is an issue with the left hand of HS2 not knowing what the right hand was doing, the CEO can't even get the location correct, saying Befordshire when it was Buckinghamshire
Commissario
very much, it looks like he basically didn't get a single thing apart from the cost of the bat tunnel thing right, the bats are endangered, they are on a protected list, there is evidence of them being hurt by highspeed trains, and the recommendation for something to protect it, and the design came from his own people.
What's the basis for this claim that they planned for the bat tunnel in advance?
I think you've misunderstood what he said - he said they're protected in the UK what you've conflated that with is him pointing out that they're common and not protected in Europe.
It's clearly rather farcical to spend so much just to avoid a few bats from being splatted.
Commissario
IIRC they are actually protected in Europe as there aren't that many colonies of them in much of Europe and the protection we have for them is based oddly enough on the European list.
The video posted further up the thread actually goes into it in a fair bit of detail, and basically the guy got almost everything wrong about them, starting with where they were, and who did the assessments on the effects of trains on them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 12,611
The video of the post you quoted literally contains the information, so tell us you didn't watch the video without telling us
But because you asked
Natural England's role in High Speed 2
There has been inaccurate coverage about Natural England’s involvement in the development of HS2's bat tunnel. Natural England has not required HS2 Ltd to build the reported structure, or any other structure, nor advised on the design or costs. The …
naturalengland.blog.gov.uk
Last edited:
Nah this is misleading AF - you're not talking about something that was planned for and budgeted well in advance, you're just highlighting that the incident being referred to occurred 10 years ago - and in that case so what? This is a big project over many years, this being used as an example of initially unforeseen expenditure is still valid no?
HS2 was announced as going ahead 12 years ago, so this would be 2 years into that process and seems like it's still a legitimate example of something they'd not have initially estimated right? Or if not then provide an actual explanation of why as simply saying the event happened 10 years ago doesn't negate anything here.