Electrification - Back to Square One

[APOLLO]

In coming decades London (along with other near sea level mega cities like Bangkok, Tokyo etc) may be flooded by rising sea levels caused by polar ice melt. 

 

Time to move up north & higher above sea level (long term) ?

 

Interesting map  http://flood.firetree.net/

 

Brit15

Edited July 25, 2017 by APOLLO

[Joseph_Pestell]

If you want to really start tackle this problem (London bias, funding imbalance compared to rest of country etc), you need to address the fact that the country revolves around London.

 

The solution is not just CR1/2 etc, or MML/GWML/TP electrification.

 

There needs to be a more even distribution of power, wealth and decision making throughout the rest of the country.

 

And I would start that by not spending a fortune on renovating the awful Palace of Westminster and moving Parliament out of London.

[Joseph_Pestell]

In the matter of funding public transport, we have a perfectly viable example just across the Channel in Paris, where they have had a "Crossrail" for 40+ years and now have four (I am counting RER C as being more of a Thameslink equivalent). The fares are also far more affordable.

 

Paris gets far more transport spending than any other French region but that has been paid for by taxes levied on businesses in the capital. Has that led to businesses locating elsewhere? No.

[runs as required]

My 16 year old grandson's idea (he lives in Qxford) is to hive off London as an independent City State like Singapore. He's currently planning a new capital at Newark/Gainsborough for the future downtrodden Brexitland.

 

I remembered that Stoke-on-Trent/Newcastle-u-Lyme/Crewe was plugged as the new national capital by the architect Cedric Price in 'New Society' magazine back in the swinging sixties. Better located for the future electric/diesel/battery powered HS2; 3 et.seq. network.

dh

[phil-b259]

And I would start that by not spending a fortune on renovating the awful Palace of Westminster and moving Parliament out of London.

 

I'm not sure I know of any country that has its primary legislature outside of its Capital City. Yes in some places a 'new' Capital City has been created and the business of Government reallocated, I don't think there is prescient for moving a Capital from one established place to another.

 

Of course some counties have had considerable sucess in moving the machinery of Government away from their principle Capital City - though this is greatest where the actual capital has moved for some reason. For example much of the German government machinery is still located around the City of Bonn (the 'temporary' Capital City of West Germany) even though Parliament and key ministries naturally relocated to the historic Capital of Berlin upon reunification of the country.

 

The other issue with moving Parliament to somewhere other than London is you have to be sure it s effective. To illustrate the principle, when the BBC moved certain shows to Manchester or when 'This Morning was broadcast fro Liverpool, it was sometimes a struggle to get high profile guests to be live on set as they were unwilling to travel up from London. While in one sense you could say more fool the guest for not wanting to appear, the reality is that there will usually be someone else competing for their time and as such viewing figures would take a hit. Translating that to the world of Government, if ministers are not where the action s with respect to business, then it could be that investment opportunities get missed and business is lost to overseas competitors who have more accessible Government.

 

That doesn't mean the idea of shifting MPs out of London doesn't have merit - but its not quite as straightforward as it appears, even if it does satisfy the rather simplistic view that moving Government out of London would do wonders for rebalancing the UK economically.

Edited July 25, 2017 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

In the matter of funding public transport, we have a perfectly viable example just across the Channel in Paris, where they have had a "Crossrail" for 40+ years and now have four (I am counting RER C as being more of a Thameslink equivalent). The fares are also far more affordable.

 

Paris gets far more transport spending than any other French region but that has been paid for by taxes levied on businesses in the capital. Has that led to businesses locating elsewhere? No.

 

Which is not that different to the UK. London contributes something like 40% of the UKs GDP if I remember rightly - more than or next 10 biggest cities put together etc. (which admittedly is largely due to the shift in economic policy in favour of financial and other service sectors at the expense of manufacturing). As such London does indeed pay for its own transport investment through taxes too - and in fact when you crunch the numbers London gets back far less than it puts into the system.

Edited July 25, 2017 by phil-b259

[jjb1970]

I always think this is one of those areas where people should be careful about what they ask for. If you instigated a policy of spending money in the area from which it was raised then the loser wouldn’t be London. Whether it’s right or wrong, or whether people like or dislike the fact, London and the London commuter belt basically subsidise the rest of the country in financial terms.

As has been pointed out, a high percentage of the money spent on projects like Crossrail is raised locally and paid for by Londoners, although much of the benefit is felt by people from outside London who commute in/out. If Northern cities want to fund half of the cost of rail electrification projects through local levies then I’m guessing DafT and central government would be quite happy to receive their proposals.

[jim.snowdon]

Mainland Europe has a far more enlightened attitude towards public transport than does the UK. It's also more stable politically, which also helps.

 

Jim

[Joseph_Pestell]

I'm not sure I know of any country that has its primary legislature outside of its Capital City. Yes in some places a 'new' Capital City has been created and the business of Government reallocated, I don't think there is prescient for moving a Capital from one established place to another.

 

Of course some counties have had considerable sucess in moving the machinery of Government away from their principle Capital City - though this is greatest where the actual capital has moved for some reason. For example much of the German government machinery is still located around the City of Bonn (the 'temporary' Capital City of West Germany) even though Parliament and key ministries naturally relocated to the historic Capital of Berlin upon reunification of the country.

 

The other issue with moving Parliament to somewhere other than London is you have to be sure it s effective. To illustrate the principle, when the BBC moved certain shows to Manchester or when 'This Morning was broadcast fro Liverpool, it was sometimes a struggle to get high profile guests to be live on set as they were unwilling to travel up from London. While in one sense you could say more fool the guest for not wanting to appear, the reality is that there will usually be someone else competing for their time and as such viewing figures would take a hit. Translating that to the world of Government, if ministers are not where the action s with respect to business, then it could be that investment opportunities get missed and business is lost to overseas competitors who have more accessible Government.

 

That doesn't mean the idea of shifting MPs out of London doesn't have merit - but its not quite as straightforward as it appears, even if it does satisfy the rather simplistic view that moving Government out of London would do wonders for rebalancing the UK economically.

There is a difference between moving Parliament out of London and moving Government out of London. I accept that the latter could cause some issues.

[Gerald Henriksen]

Translating that to the world of Government, if ministers are not where the action s with respect to business, then it could be that investment opportunities get missed and business is lost to overseas competitors who have more accessible Government.

 

 

 

USA - government in Washington DC, business in NYC, Boston, SF.

Canada - government in Ottawa, business in Toronto, Montreal

[rodent279]

USA - government in Washington DC, business in NYC, Boston, SF.

Canada - government in Ottawa, business in Toronto, Montreal

Australia -Gov't in Canberra, business in Sydney. Germany federal Government split between Bonn & Berlin, Lander (State governments) distributed throughout the country. Business largely in Frankfurt, but much more distributed.

 

It's not uncommon for the seat of govt to be remotely located from the major business centres.

[jim.snowdon]

I'm not sure I know of any country that has its primary legislature outside of its Capital City. Yes in some places a 'new' Capital City has been created and the business of Government reallocated, I don't think there is prescient for moving a Capital from one established place to another.

The Netherlands, where the capital is accepted as Amsterdam, but the seat of Government is in The Hague.

 

Jim

[caradoc]

I note that one of those getting steamed up about Crossrail 2 is the Mayor of Manchester, a city which has the biggest and best light rail system in the whole of the UK, including London ! The fact is, whether we like it or not (and it does not bother me) London is the capital city, the biggest city, and the biggest revenue generator, therefore spending on transport there will always dwarf the rest of the country.

 

Having said that, the apparent abandonment of Transpennine electrification does surprise me, given that the difficult bits (the big stations, ie Liverpool Lime St, Manchester Piccadilly, Leeds, York and Newcastle) and substantial parts of the route (Liverpool/Manchester including Manchester Airport, and south of York/Newcastle) are already wired. This kind of infill scheme should be going ahead.

[scouser]

In coming decades London (along with other near sea level mega cities like Bangkok, Tokyo etc) may be flooded by rising sea levels caused by polar ice melt. 

 

Time to move up north & higher above sea level (long term) ?

 

Interesting map  http://flood.firetree.net/

 

Brit15

Given all of the talk about global warming and rising sea levels, might elevated railways be a better long term project?

[APOLLO]

Given all of the talk about global warming and rising sea levels, might elevated railways be a better long term project?

 

Already built in Bangkok !!

 

 

They have also built an underground system as well !!!!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

Edited July 25, 2017 by APOLLO

[phil-b259]

The Netherlands, where the capital is accepted as Amsterdam, but the seat of Government is in The Hague.

 

Jim

 

However I would say that is no different to the situation in Australia where most Brits (and probably quite a few other European / American nationalities) think that Sydney is the capital when its not.

 

As such I don't see the the situation in the Netherlands* being different in that the primary legislature is still located in the offical Capital City of the country.

 

* (which most Brits incorrectly call 'Holland' even though that is actually only one of the provinces / county's / whatever they are called that make up the country)

Edited July 25, 2017 by phil-b259

[ForestPines]

However I would say that is no different to the situation in Australia where most Brits (and probably quite a few other European / American nationalities) think that Sydney is the capital when its not.

 

As such I don't see the the situation in the Netherlands* being different in that the primary legislature is still located in the offical Capital City of the country.

 

* (which most Brits incorrectly call 'Holland' even though that is actually only one of the provinces / county's / whatever they are called that make up the country)

Amsterdam is the official capital city of The Netherlands, as per article 32 of the Dutch constitution. It is not just the largest city.

 

When I have been to Amsterdam (or, indeed, Skegness) I enjoy annoying pedants who ask where I went. "Holland". "Ah, I think you mean 'The Netherlands'." "No, I went to Holland."

 

(If they were a true pedant their follow-up would be "North Holland, South Holland, or the Parts Of Holland?)

[HillsideDepot]

A week is a long time in politics....

 

July 20th: diesel trains are good - so good in fact that we are cancelling lots of railway electrification

July 26th: diesel road vehicles are bad - so bad in fact that we are banning sales of new ones from 2040 and electric is the future

 

You couldn't make it up!

[Bernard Lamb]

There is a difference between moving Parliament out of London and moving Government out of London. I accept that the latter could cause some issues.

It did move to Kings Langley at one time.

Seeing that the current occupants of the site are having a few problems they might be up for a swap.

Bernard

[jjb1970]

I think the 2040 figure will be a bit superfluous given the accelerating trend towards electric cars.

 

Something I do think is that we may need to be a bit more open minded about alternatives to wiring. Currently external power supplies are necessary for most trains (although battery trains are not new, I remember those old German battery powered railcars very well which were quite widely used by DB) but at the rate batteries and fuel cells are developing we may not be too far away from a point where wiring may become unnecessary for some lines. I think that it is unlikely we’ll see battery powered high speed trains and think wiring will continue to make sense for the main trunk routes (at least for the foreseeable future) but I do not think that the alternative to wiring has to be diesel trains. At the moment diesel engines are cheap and the IEP was designed with diesel technology, but you don’t have to look very far ahead to see viable alternatives.

[Fat Controller]

Already built in Bangkok !!

 

 

They have also built an underground system as well !!!!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

Nothing new there; the Paris Metro has had long stretches of elevated track in the middle of streets since its debut. There is even one section, at Gare d'Austerlitz, where a Metro line goes through the mainline station at first-floor level, at right-angles to the main line tracks ( https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@48.8423046,2.364744,3a,60y,90h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siQFUjuuZO5nq3keXRy2Udw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Several American cities have had similar systems, including one which delivered freight to warehouses at first-floor level.

[runs as required]

I would hope that we would never opt for that Bangkok (or Wuppertal) elevated railway solution in existing urban areas right outside upper floor windows.

Automated electric vehicles ought to be delivering an acceptable environmental transit service in our urban areas by 2040.

 

My train-mad old architectural mate spent 20 years ridding "the most noble view in England" up Ludgate Hill of its railway bridge. He even won praise from Prince Charles - a rare accolade for an architect.

 

dh

[bimble]

And I would start that by not spending a fortune on renovating the awful Palace of Westminster

 

it's a Grade I listed building & a UNESCO World Heritage Site so it has to be maintained... of course, if it can wait until HS2 is built, Parliament can be based elsewhere in the country and MP's will have a quick method to get back to London for business meetings

[rodent279]

Australia -Gov't in Canberra, business in Sydney. Germany federal Government split between Bonn & Berlin, Lander (State governments) distributed throughout the country. Business largely in Frankfurt, but much more distributed.

 

It's not uncommon for the seat of govt to be remotely located from the major business centres.

<pedant mode>

In fact, strictly speaking, the UK seat of Governemnt is in the City of Westminster, and the main business district is the City of London.

</pedant mode>

[rodent279]

A week is a long time in politics....

 

July 20th: diesel trains are good - so good in fact that we are cancelling lots of railway electrification

July 26th: diesel road vehicles are bad - so bad in fact that we are banning sales of new ones from 2040 and electric is the future

 

You couldn't make it up!

I suspect there is a fair amount of smoke & mirrors going on here. In other words, an attempt is being made to re-focus attention elsewhere for a while.

Bring it on I say, it's a decision that should have been comitted to years ago, and in all honesty, is it not something we can all foresee at some point anyway? 23 years may be a bit optimistic, but it'll happen eventually.

Edited July 26, 2017 by rodent279