Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Georgeconna said:

Seem HS2 will be destroying quite a lot of the Eniroment it ploughs throughall for a few fat cats saving a few minutes. In this day and age of people crying for the Amazon and the loss of habit in Oz same thing is happening on our doorsteps but not so dramatic.  

 

https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/hs2

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51115637

 

 

The purpose of HS2 has been done to death in this topic and to sum up, it is not about saving fat cats, or any other oversized animal, a few minutes.

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Georgeconna said:

Seem HS2 will be destroying quite a lot of the Eniroment it ploughs throughall for a few fat cats saving a few minutes. In this day and age of people crying for the Amazon and the loss of habit in Oz same thing is happening on our doorsteps but not so dramatic.  

 

https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/hs2

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51115637

 

How many more times do both the rail experts and members of the travelling public have to repeat that HS2 is not about a few cats saving a few minutes but it is about tens of thousands of people being able to continue to use the existing lines which have reached saturation point.

If the wildlife people would produce the estimates as to the effect of the alternative cars and planes that will be needed if HS2 is not built they might be regarded in a better light.

On the Daily Politic show at lunch time one of the panel trotted out the same old argument and was very quickly put in his place. 

We heed better transport links and railways are less of an evil than cars and planes. Get it?

What alternative can you offer that is wild life friendly?

Created a few self contained mega cities and flatten all the towns and villages in between and let nature take over?

Bernard

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Georgeconna said:

Seem HS2 will be destroying quite a lot of the Eniroment it ploughs throughall for a few fat cats saving a few minutes. In this day and age of people crying for the Amazon and the loss of habit in Oz same thing is happening on our doorsteps but not so dramatic.  

 

https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/hs2

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51115637

 

 

As others have said, despite name not about "a few fat cats saving a few minutes".

 

But lets also consider the Wildlife Trusts shall we?

 

From https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/sites/default/files/2018-12/HS2 Greener Vision Summary.pdf

 

  • "cuts through communities and mainly benefits people only near the few stations" - well, we know this is a total lie because it is all about creating additional capacity on a route that is full, and about creating capacity in cities where existing stations are full.  This benefits everyone, whether they are on the new HS2 or on the legacy WCML.
  • "it also puts massive constraints on large-scale plans to restore and re-connect habitats" - so it isn't so much that it destroys the environment, but that it is (one of many) obstacles to pie in the sky dreams that are unlikely to ever get the necessary funding.  So irrelevant.
  • "a new vision for HS2" "a ribbon of connected, ... landscape"  "a 1km wide ribbon of wildlife-rich habitat ... either side of the line" - so the truth of the matter.  It's not that they oppose HS2, but rather they are using as an opportunity to try have the government buy them off (at significant additional costs to an already expensive project) with expensive vanity wildlife spaces that they can take credit for, and thus use for further fundraising.
  • demands to MPs, which includes "3) ensure HS2 Ltd. commits to a significant net gain for nature and people's access to it -- not just 'no net loss'" - again, so it's not that HS2 will be destroying the environment, but that the trusts want HS2 to fund and build some pet projects, at which point having thrown billions of £s at the trusts, their opposition will go away.

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bernard Lamb said:

What alternative can you offer that is wild life friendly?

 

Well...

 

If Carbon Neutral ever comes to pass we will be riding horses, or walking.

 

With that do?

Edited by billbedford
  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, billbedford said:

 

Well...

 

If Carbon Neutral ever comes to pass we will be riding horses, or walking.

 

With that do?

 

Are horses like cows and emit methane ? Just asking !

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 6
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mdvle said:

 

As others have said, despite name not about "a few fat cats saving a few minutes".

 

But lets also consider the Wildlife Trusts shall we?

 

From https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/sites/default/files/2018-12/HS2 Greener Vision Summary.pdf

 

  • "cuts through communities and mainly benefits people only near the few stations" - well, we know this is a total lie because it is all about creating additional capacity on a route that is full, and about creating capacity in cities where existing stations are full.  This benefits everyone, whether they are on the new HS2 or on the legacy WCML.
  • "it also puts massive constraints on large-scale plans to restore and re-connect habitats" - so it isn't so much that it destroys the environment, but that it is (one of many) obstacles to pie in the sky dreams that are unlikely to ever get the necessary funding.  So irrelevant.
  • "a new vision for HS2" "a ribbon of connected, ... landscape"  "a 1km wide ribbon of wildlife-rich habitat ... either side of the line" - so the truth of the matter.  It's not that they oppose HS2, but rather they are using as an opportunity to try have the government buy them off (at significant additional costs to an already expensive project) with expensive vanity wildlife spaces that they can take credit for, and thus use for further fundraising.
  • demands to MPs, which includes "3) ensure HS2 Ltd. commits to a significant net gain for nature and people's access to it -- not just 'no net loss'" - again, so it's not that HS2 will be destroying the environment, but that the trusts want HS2 to fund and build some pet projects, at which point having thrown billions of £s at the trusts, their opposition will go away.

 

 

So I'm guessing you won't be signing the Wildlife Trust's letter to Boris asking him to can the whole project!

 

John.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

  • demands to MPs, which includes "3) ensure HS2 Ltd. commits to a significant net gain for nature and people's access to it -- not just 'no net loss'" - again, so it's not that HS2 will be destroying the environment, but that the trusts want HS2 to fund and build some pet projects, at which point having thrown billions of £s at the trusts, their opposition will go away.

 

 

 

Actually, net gain is not some whim of wildlife trusts and so on it is now government policy https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/biodiversity-net-gain-updating-planning-requirements but hs2 pre-dates that of course by several years. Other large emergining schemes that are some way off planning will probably have to move to this higher standard otherwise they won't get approval.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, The Great Bear said:

 

Actually, net gain is not some whim of wildlife trusts and so on it is now government policy https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/biodiversity-net-gain-updating-planning-requirements but hs2 pre-dates that of course by several years. Other large emergining schemes that are some way off planning will probably have to move to this higher standard otherwise they won't get approval.

 

Placing the onus on private developers or state sponsored schemes to improve environmental gain is laudable, but completely impractical. Whilst it will indeed be built into future planning guidance, there is little statement on enforcement. Witness the inability of any council, or even Sec of State referrals, to enforce the percentage of social housing to be included in any planning consent since, well, ages. Most find a way out of it, as they will this. It is a nonsense because the whole idea is to feed the idea of doing something, to public acclaim, without actually doing it. Only schemes like railway, power line and other such enhancements will ever have to comply.

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've made use of an HS2 environmetal project already, as have many people, and very nice it was too. Wendover Woods benefitted to the tune of £450k and I saw losts of dogs and their Range Rover driving owners making good use of it. Oh. hang on, won't that frighten the real wildlife away??.....

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, billbedford said:

Corse, if you really want to go big on biodiversity, what you need is a nuclear accident....

 

Jus sayin..

....and there you have it. Lots of dysfunctional nuclear particles whizzing around, no probs at all for nature. Just need to remove the humans...

 

John.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, John Tomlinson said:

....and there you have it. Lots of dysfunctional nuclear particles whizzing around, no probs at all for nature. Just need to remove the humans...

 

John.

But what survived would be very 'diverse' so he is correct in his post.

  • Agree 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Coombe Barton said:

Thought Northern Powerhouse relied

on HS2 

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, ess1uk said:

Thought Northern Powerhouse relied

on HS2 

 

The today programme on Radio 4 this morning said that the southern part of HS2 and the western phase 2 would be built but de scoped, whatever that is but the eastern arm NOT built. 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
55 minutes ago, class26 said:

 

The today programme on Radio 4 this morning said that the southern part of HS2 and the western phase 2 would be built but de scoped, whatever that is but the eastern arm NOT built. 

 

That would not surprise me. The eastern arm looks to have a much less sound economic case (cost benefit analysis) and also more controversial including as it does, demolition of a recently-built housing estate.

 

If more London - Edinburgh traffic can be accommodated on HS2 via Preston, there should be scope to upgrade the ECML to the original spec of 140mph (225 km/h) and provide more trains to Leeds and even Sheffield.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

That would not surprise me. The eastern arm looks to have a much less sound economic case (cost benefit analysis) and also more controversial including as it does, demolition of a recently-built housing estate.

 

If more London - Edinburgh traffic can be accommodated on HS2 via Preston, there should be scope to upgrade the ECML to the original spec of 140mph (225 km/h) and provide more trains to Leeds and even Sheffield.

 

I agree . Recently I was wondering when (if ever ) we would see 140 mph on the ECML. The necessary in cab signalling is there now and the system is being rolled out as far as Stoke Bank initially fairly soon I gather. As long as track conditions permit I think the only thing stopping 140 mph is level crossing but there is a worthwhile stretch between Tallington and Stoke Bank without crossings (I think) where 140 mph could be permitted perhaps and maybe some south of Peterborough ? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, class26 said:

 

I agree . Recently I was wondering when (if ever ) we would see 140 mph on the ECML. The necessary in cab signalling is there now and the system is being rolled out as far as Stoke Bank initially fairly soon I gather. As long as track conditions permit I think the only thing stopping 140 mph is level crossing but there is a worthwhile stretch between Tallington and Stoke Bank without crossings (I think) where 140 mph could be permitted perhaps and maybe some south of Peterborough ? 

Do the energy consumption figures for accelerating the train from 125 to 140 add up and can the train maintain 140 for long enough for the time savings to be worthwhile?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
2 minutes ago, royaloak said:

Do the energy consumption figures for accelerating the train from 125 to 140 add up and can the train maintain 140 for long enough for the time savings to be worthwhile?

 

Fair question. I think it would need more sections to be upgraded to 225kph to make it worthwhile.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Fair question. I think it would need more sections to be upgraded to 225kph to make it worthwhile.

The European signalling system is gradually being rolled out over the ECML, the first section being as far as Stoke Bank. The most likely lengthy section for 140 mph is York - Darlington but that is some years away. My feelings are it is important to break to 125 barrier at some point as once it`s broken other sections will follow . i do appreciate that tallington - Stoike bank is only approx 20 miles but this is hardly likely to happen in one phase.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, class26 said:

 

The today programme on Radio 4 this morning said that the southern part of HS2 and the western phase 2 would be built but de scoped, whatever that is but the eastern arm NOT built. 

 

That would be a big mistake. One of the key reasons for HS2 is to solve many capacity problems across the three, main north-south rail routes. This decision (if true) would end up solving only one (give or take Edinburgh too). The extreme capacity limits of MML services would not be solved, except for perhaps one small catchment) and the Harrogate/Shipley/Leeds/Wakefield to London services would still clog up the ECML at and south of Doncaster, and the line between Leeds and Doncaster. The total benefit score would therefore be significantly lowered, as well as making Northern Powerhouse much more expensive east of Manchester, due to stand-alone costs, and prevent expansion of West and South Yorkshire Metro services.

  • Agree 5
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Davexoc said:

I've made use of an HS2 environmetal project already, as have many people, and very nice it was too. Wendover Woods benefitted to the tune of £450k and I saw losts of dogs and their Range Rover driving owners making good use of it. Oh. hang on, won't that frighten the real wildlife away??.....

 

I was talking to one of the wardens at a wetlands near Bolsover last summer who was looking forward to HS2 passing right by his wetlands as it greatly decreased the chances of them building houses near by, and he hoped they might get an extra lake if they used local materials to build the enbankment it would be travelling on.

 

Admittedly, one of the few people who were pleased to see us...

  • Like 7
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • AY Mod locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.