HS2 under review

[Davexoc]

4 hours ago, Kelly said:

 Once the infrastructure starts to catch up it with become more viable. Besides, by 2040 you won't be able to buy anything not electric/hybrid/hydrogen anyway.

First hurdle is get sufficient generation capacity, because frankly wind has been pretty poor this month, and jsut when will new nuclear come on stream/

Second is that fast charging requires much bigger cables or three phase supply, which isn't available domestically. So even if you have off road parking, charging could still be a problem.

Thirdly, if like Brexit, airport expansion, recycling, smart metering etc. someone has to make a decision and come up with standards. At the moment we don't have a very good record on that front......

[JohnDMJ]

Have I missed something here?

 

The whole point of the European High Speed network is to reduce the number of short haul flights; the check-in desk for Air France flights from Bruxelles to Paris is at Bruxelles Midi station, for example.

 

The key is long distance fast, not a short hop to four miles down the track.

 

A quick check suggests that London to Edinburgh by air involves a flight of 1.25 hours average with a 2 hour check-in, totalling 3.25 hours plus transit time from the city centres to the respective airports.

 

A decent high speed train service running at, say, 200mph (as is normal for some French TGVs!), would cover the distance of just over 400 miles from London to Edinburgh in around 2 hours city centre to city centre with ticket barrier 'formalities' the same as for any other train in the UK.

[Kelly]

2 hours ago, Davexoc said:

First hurdle is get sufficient generation capacity, because frankly wind has been pretty poor this month, and jsut when will new nuclear come on stream/

Second is that fast charging requires much bigger cables or three phase supply, which isn't available domestically. So even if you have off road parking, charging could still be a problem.

Thirdly, if like Brexit, airport expansion, recycling, smart metering etc. someone has to make a decision and come up with standards. At the moment we don't have a very good record on that front......

 

I was referring to garages and rest stops, services etc rather than domestic. Overnight charging is probably fine for most people to some extent. On street parking is a potential problem, though no reason that points can't be installed along the roadside I guess.  But it is a matter of costs and is unlikely to be funded by a government hell bent on austerity. 

[TheQ]

9 hours ago, Davexoc said:

First hurdle is get sufficient generation capacity, because frankly wind has been pretty poor this month, and jsut when will new nuclear come on stream/

Second is that fast charging requires much bigger cables or three phase supply, which isn't available domestically. So even if you have off road parking, charging could still be a problem.

Thirdly, if like Brexit, airport expansion, recycling, smart metering etc. someone has to make a decision and come up with standards. At the moment we don't have a very good record on that front......

Oddly in the older places with over ground wires, 3 Phase is actually quite easy to install domestically, I look at the telegraph poles crossing the garden and there are the 3 phase Cables, so 2 additional droppers and a change to a 3phase meter that can cope with  1 phase being more used than the others (the house supply) and away you go..

 

I'm sure the electricty companies will charge a fortune for the work though.. 

Edited May 29, 2019 by TheQ

[Edwin_m]

An overnight slow charge would be good enough for most domestic customers.  Not sure of the figures but it's probably a similar load to a power shower and can use spare generation capacity from nuclear or renewables. 

[ess1uk]

1 hour ago, Edwin_m said:

An overnight slow charge would be good enough for most domestic customers.  Not sure of the figures but it's probably a similar load to a power shower and can use spare generation capacity from nuclear or renewables. 

Provided the sun is shining 

[298]

14 hours ago, Davexoc said:

First hurdle is get sufficient generation capacity, because frankly wind has been pretty poor this month, 

 

Last Sunday saw 11 hours of negative prices and offshore wind farms were told to turn down their output...

[Ron Ron Ron]

On 19/05/2019 at 11:06, lmsforever said:

With electric cars to get to Edinborough.  will take at least two days including stops to recharge  still there will be trains so no probs.

 

On 19/05/2019 at 15:04, melmerby said:

Considering with some cars you can already do more than half then distance from London to Edinburgh whilst keeping up with the rest of the traffic and a charge takes between 30 & 45 mins at a charge point that is twaddle.

Break halfway for lunch, car charged whilst you eat, simples.......

 

19 hours ago, Kelly said:

 

Some electric cars already have the range to get most of the way from London to Edinburgh, with it improving all the time. Fast charging can already recharge some cars in less than 45 minutes to mostly full battery charge, perfectly fine to stop once on the way for toilet/cuppa/food whilst it charges.....

 

The situation is not static as the technology and development of new vehicle models is progressing quite fast.

The latest EV cars coming into the showrooms currently, are providing "real world", actually ranges from 220 to 330 miles.

300 to 400 mile range capability is not far off.

 

Along with increased battery ranges, comes faster charging capability .

For example, the UK's first 350kW EV charging station has just opened in Kent.

As new car models become more able to take advantage of these ultra rapid chargers, charging times will (in fact are doing) reduce quite significantly.

0 to 80% (optimum) in around 15 to 20 mins.

 

However....

 

2 hours ago, Edwin_m said:

An overnight slow charge would be good enough for most domestic customers.....

 

...as Edwin says, overnight charging will account for most regular charging requirements.

 

 

 

.

[Joseph_Pestell]

48 minutes ago, 298 said:

 

Last Sunday saw 11 hours of negative prices and offshore wind farms were told to turn down their output...

 

That just reflects a lack of storage capacity at present. But quite a few large schemes are coming on stream.

[Ron Ron Ron]

On 19/05/2019 at 15:04, melmerby said:

....But there's a problem. The infrastructure for electric cars isn't in place yet, just a few scattered charging bays.

Two in central Birmingham are always full, sometimes with a Police Transit (No it's not electric!)

 

 

Did you know................??? 

 

In the UK, there are....

8394 petrol filling station sites (down from 13,104 sites in 2000)

8591 public EV charging sites.

 

Of course that doesn't tell the whole story, as many of those EV charging sites consist of only one, two or just a handful of charging points/devices.

Many are earlier generation, low powered units and sites can be scattered and often inconvenient or unusual locations.

 

That situation is changing as the first dedicated charging "filling stations" are starting to open and as a couple of the major oil companies start to roll out their own chargers at regular petrol filling stations.

Older, unreliable, public charging points will also be gradually replaced with newer, faster units.

Over 600 new charging points (devices) are being installed every month.

The public charging landscape will look completely different in a few years time.

 

 

n.b. Zap Maps stats say....

 

8591 charging locations, consisting of....

13,752 charging devices, which provide....

23,234 individual, simultaneous vehicle connections.

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

[Colin_McLeod]

Once upon a time petrol stations were few and far between.  Like petrol stations, EV charging points will expand with increased vehicle ownership.

[Richard E]

My local filling station (BP) has just installed two charging points on the forecourt.

[Ron Ron Ron]

18 hours ago, JohnDMJ said:

.....A quick check suggests that London to Edinburgh by air involves a flight of 1.25 hours average with a 2 hour check-in, totalling 3.25 hours plus transit time from the city centres to the respective airports.

 

A decent high speed train service running at, say, 200mph.......would cover the distance of just over 400 miles from London to Edinburgh in around 2 hours city centre to city centre ......

 

Sorry John, that's the usual, comparing Apples with Oranges, argument; full of false assumptions..

 

London to Edinburgh.

The scheduled flight times are as you say, average around 1hrs 25m. (add another 5 to 10 mins southbound due to potential for holding)

Note this is not the flight time, which is around 1 hr + or - 5 mins.

 

For the majority of passengers these days, there is NO airport check-in time, as they check-in online, in advance.

For those who check-in at the airport, the minimum is 45 mins at Heathrow T5 (for domestic routes) and 20 minutes at London City.

For those who have hold luggage, the latest bag drop time is usually about the same as for checking-in at the airport, even if already checked-in online.

There are also  lots of self-check-in kiosks at the airports and sometimes self-service bag drop facilities that eliminate any queuing.

 

Therefore the primary time allowance required at an airport, pre-flight, is that for queuing and proceeding through the security checks (varies according to the size and efficiency of the airport)....

.....and navigating through the terminal to the gate, to arrive in sufficient time ahead of boarding (say 15 - 20 mins before departure time at the gate for a domestic flight).

At Heathrow T5 , I'd personally aim to arrive in the terminal at least 50 mins to an hour prior to departure, with cabin baggage only, but at London City, 30 to 45 mins minimum is achievable.

 

Travelling times to and from the respective airports varies widely, whilst noting that most journeys are from home to place of business or hotel....or vice versa.

This also applies to the corresponding alternative rail journey.

It may take just as long to get to or from the journey starting point and rail terminus, than to or from the airport.

 

If that notional rail journey from terminus A to terminus B is 2hrs long, then you also have to factor in travel times to/from the terminus station, a suitable time allowance to arrive in good time for the rail trip and for boarding.

 

For that notional 2 hr rail journey time, the actual travel time from London to Edinburgh is going to be in the region from a very minimum 2hr 30m  (if starting and finishing within 10 mins of both termini ....i.e. not very common) to some 3hr 30m or longer.

In today's reality, that total journey time range is 4:50hr to some 6 hours.

 

You can fly with a total journey time a low as 2hrs 40 m. therefore something approaching a 2 hr terminus to terminus rail journey is needed to become competitive on total journey time.

 

I would say, that typically, air is in the 3hr to 3hr 30 m range as opposed to 5hr 15m to 6hr for present day rail.

HS2 as proposed (phase 2 in total) will undoubtedly make some inroads into that SE England to Scotland air travel market, without having to be extended any further north.

 

 

 

 

.

 

Edited May 29, 2019 by Ron Ron Ron

[Mike Storey]

8 hours ago, TheQ said:

Oddly in the older places with over ground wires, 3 Phase is actually quite easy to install domestically, I look at the telegraph poles crossing the garden and there are the 3 phase Cables, so 2 additional droppers and a change to a 3phase meter that can cope with  1 phase being more used than the others (the house supply) and away you go..

 

I'm sure the electricty companies will charge a fortune for the work though.. 

 

I do not pretend to understand even remotely the physics involved in using single phase as opposed to three phase. However, wot I kno, is that three phase was pretty common here in France, in rural areas, especially for farms and many domestic properties with some domestic cottage industry going on. There has been a massive change to single phase, due to the number of deaths and injuries that were occurring with three phase, due to unqualified interference with the primary installations (which themselves were a little hairy compared to modern standards). I concur that any resurgence of 3 Phase would be extremely expensive, having to be both professionally installed and resistant to DIY-ers.

 

[Joseph_Pestell]

8 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

 

I do not pretend to understand even remotely the physics involved in using single phase as opposed to three phase. However, wot I kno, is that three phase was pretty common here in France, in rural areas, especially for farms and many domestic properties with some domestic cottage industry going on. There has been a massive change to single phase, due to the number of deaths and injuries that were occurring with three phase, due to unqualified interference with the primary installations (which themselves were a little hairy compared to modern standards). I concur that any resurgence of 3 Phase would be extremely expensive, having to be both professionally installed and resistant to DIY-ers.

 

 

Nothing intrinsically more dangerous about 3-phase than single phase if you know what you are doing. For some applications, its a lot safer. Those extra deaths would mainly be due to other problems such as inadequate wiring. I visited one house where all the appliances were being fed by cotton-covered lighting wires, joined together in places with masking tape (no junction boxes). Amazing that the place never burned down although there had been several small fires over the years. New owners rewired the whole house - only for a floor to collapse due to woodworm in a beam and take out the floor below as well.

 

In France, where Mike is based, single-phase could not provide enough amps to power a large house. So it was a commonplace installation and I used to come across a lot of them. Confused quite a few Brit holiday home owners.

 

In a block of flats (or a street for that matter) the single phase in each unit of accommodation is only a question of taking a different part of the three-phase that is out in the street (or block).

[Mike Storey]

43 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

Sorry John, that's the usual, comparing Apples with Oranges, argument; full of false assumptions..

 

London to Edinburgh.

The scheduled flight times are as you say, average around 1hrs 25m. (add another 5 to 10 mins southbound due to potential for holding)

Note this is not the flight time, which is around 1 hr + or - 5 mins.

 

For the majority of passengers these days, there is NO airport check-in time, as they check-in online, in advance.

For those who check-in at the airport, the minimum is 45 mins at Heathrow T5 (for domestic routes) and 20 minutes at London City.

For those who have hold luggage, the latest bag drop time is usually about the same as for checking-in at the airport, even if already checked-in online.

There are also  lots of self-check-in kiosks at the airports and sometimes self-service bag drop facilities that eliminate any queuing.

 

Therefore the primary time allowance required at an airport, pre-flight, is for queuing and proceeding through the security checks (varies according to the size and efficiency of the airport)....

.....and navigating the way to the gate, to arrive in sufficient time ahead of boarding (say 15 - 20 mins before departure time for a domestic flight).

At Heathrow T5 , I'd personally aim to arrive in the terminal at least 50 mins to an hour prior to departure, but at London City, 30 to 45 mins minimum is achievable.

 

Travelling times to and from the respective airports varies widely, whilst noting that most journeys are from home to place of business or hotel....or vice versa.

This also applies to the corresponding alternative rail journey.

It may take just as long to get to or from the rail terminus, than to or from the airport.

If that notional rail journey from terminus A to terminus B is 2hrs long, then you also have to factor in travel times to/from the terminus station, a suitable time allowance to arrive in good time for the rail trip and for boarding.

 

For that notional 2 hr rail journey time, the actual travel time from London to Edinburgh is going to be in the region from a very minimum 2hr 30m  (if starting and finishing within 10 mins of both termini ....i.e. not very common) to some 3hr 30m or longer.

In today's reality, that total journey time range is 4:50hr to some 6 hours.

 

You can fly with a total journey time a low as 2hrs 40 m. therefore something approaching a 2 hr terminus to terminus rail journey is needed to become competitive on total journey time.

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

Not so Ron Ron etc...... Research undertaken over the past 15 to 20 years now suggests that the competitive journey time for rail over air or road, is three hours. Eurostar proved this to some extent, although passport/customs issues fog the matter on this. But Thalys (between Paris, Brussels and Amsterdam) has shown how modal shift is perfectly possible with the journey times projected. And now the emerging Italian and of course German high speed  networks have shown the same.

 

What France has discovered, because of absolutely crazy changes in government policy over several decades, is that cost is becoming an equal factor. So they introduced OuiGo, first as road coaches, but as now as very successful high speed, low frequency, low fare trains. But these cannot possibly repay the cost of the infrastructure. France, having encouraged a high speed train infrastructure, and a modal shift for freight to rail, then reversed previous policy and abandoned additional long distance freight road tariffs. They also not only basically de-regulated long distance road coach operation, but encouraged it, without deregulating local or short distance bus and coach operation. So you cannot cheaply (or at all) get to your nearest rail or road coach operator by public transport, but you can travel cheaper between, say, from Bordeaux to Paris, than you can in getting in to Bordeaux to catch the train or coach, unless you live in Bordeaux.

 

That does not suggest that HS2 should follow the French example - it shows it what to avoid. The Italians have become the first people since BR InterCity, to create a national intercity network that makes a profit, but they have done that by investing mega-bucks in high speed infrastructure and trains, creating timetables that are attractive, and charging attractive fares. This, from an organisation that 20 years ago was a laughing stock. But a lot of that depended on a whole series of urban authorities that had invested well in local transport, and that is the strength in the Italian system (something the current incumbents of the Italian government seem to have a problem with - with their objection to the new Turin-Lyon connection for example).

 

So those who argue that getting to the HS2 stations is just as important as the route itself, are quite right. Which is why many opponents of HS2 quote the very popular £100 billion cost. But that entirely ignores the fact the additional £40-ish billion is down to having a country and regions that recognises local accessibility to long distance public transport is as important as the transport. So far, only London and a handful of others, have accepted this. The rest just concentrate on the political headlines of the present - even Manchester, who have been so leading-edge in promoting vastly superior local transport investment, have recently knee-jerked, when some decisions just seem immediately popular, or as in the case of the Picc-Oxford Road expansion, unpopular.

 

Ultimately, HS2 will get built, or it won't, but it won't be about the truth of the matter. It will be about public opinion. Great for democracy? Watching the threads about "What to do with scrapped Pacers", and the comments sections of newspapers of the same, you would never know that they all disappear this year. Old, out of date arguments about something that will, very shortly, no longer matter. It reminds me of much that is wrong with our current, national debates.

 

 

 

[Mike Storey]

14 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Nothing intrinsically more dangerous about 3-phase than single phase if you know what you are doing.

 

Quite.

 

As was explained to me, it is much harder to kill yourself, or your nearest and dearest, with single phase.

 

[298]

3 hours ago, Colin_McLeod said:

Once upon a time petrol stations were few and far between.  Like petrol stations, EV charging points will expand with increased vehicle ownership.

 

Yes, I've got one at home. Petrol stations aren't as prevalent as they once were, 30 years ago there were four near a major Island on my way to work, that area now has a major trunk route added and probably four times the traffic, but only one filling station.

 

(The EV thread in Wheeltappers is worth a look, in case the conversation about HS2 here goes off tangent).

[locoholic]

43 minutes ago, 298 said:

 

 

(The EV thread in Wheeltappers is worth a look, in case the conversation about HS2 here goes off tangent).

You mean in case it actually returns to being about HS2?!

[TheQ]

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Nothing intrinsically more dangerous about 3-phase than single phase if you know what you are doing. 

Even the professionals get it wrong,  I drove to RAF Leuchars from Milton Keynes to find out why the RAF couldn't get a test equipment working. 

I had installed the equipment  and had no problem other than a shortage of mains sockets. So I used a 4 socket extension. The RAF had extra sockets installed by the MOD contractors. 

 

Instead of feeding through additional cabling from the switch board, they drilled through the wall to take power from the next door workshop. 

The problem was each workshop was on a different phase.  So when they plugged it all in different bits of this multi thousand pound equipment expecting a common 240Volt supply had 400volts  between sections, it was surprising there wasn't  a Big Bang... 

[Davexoc]

On 29/05/2019 at 12:38, 298 said:

 

Last Sunday saw 11 hours of negative prices and offshore wind farms were told to turn down their output...

Whereas the weekend before it was totally useless and gas was working hard.

Wind isn't reliable, nor is solar. What we need is tidal, which is fully predictable.

[jcredfer]

25 minutes ago, Davexoc said:

Whereas the weekend before it was totally useless and gas was working hard.

Wind isn't reliable, nor is solar. What we need is tidal, which is fully predictable.

 

.......  and using a far more viscous, heavy medium, with far more energy than the parliamentary wind option.  How much more do the windbags have to get wrong before we insist they only open their self-seeking mouths on matters they are qualified to have an opinion on?

 

Julian

[PhilJ W]

11 minutes ago, jcredfer said:

 

.......  and using a far more viscous, heavy medium, with far more energy than the parliamentary wind option.  How much more do the windbags have to get wrong before we insist they only open their self-seeking mouths on matters they are qualified to have an opinion on?

 

Julian

I have always thought that The Rays, a series of sandbanks running n/s off of the east coast would be the ideal site for a tidal power station. In fact they are used for offshore wind farms already.

[Mike Storey]

21 minutes ago, jcredfer said:

 

.......  and using a far more viscous, heavy medium, with far more energy than the parliamentary wind option.  How much more do the windbags have to get wrong before we insist they only open their self-seeking mouths on matters they are qualified to have an opinion on?

 

Julian

 

So why has there been so much trouble getting the tidal Swansea version approved?

 

[bimble]

11 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

 

So why has there been so much trouble getting the tidal Swansea version approved?

 

 

the £1.3bn price tag probably had something to do with that... though there is a new proposal in the works that comes in 30% cheaper, and with 10,000 homes...