HS2 given the go-ahead - £33bn high-speed rail link from London to Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds; - Polidicks

• The UK government has greenlit the construction of HS2, a £33 billion high-speed rail line between the south and the north of England. • The first phase - London to Birmingham, is scheduled to open in 2026, while phase two, a fork to Manchester and Leeds, should be running by 2033. It may be extended to Scotland at a later date. • HS2 will approximately halve journey times between the cities. 22.5 miles of tunnelling has been added to the plans for phase one, as it runs through an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. • A high-speed rail link across England has been on the cards for decades; HS1, the Channel Tunnel rail link, was finally finished in 2007. [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16478954[/url] [TABLE][TR][TD][quote][b]A £33bn high-speed rail network has been given the go-ahead by the government, despite strong opposition.[/b] Phase one of HS2, between London and Birmingham, should be running by 2026, later extending to northern England. [url=http://www.dft.gov.uk/news/statements/greening-20120110]Transport Secretary Justine Greening has announced extra tunnelling along the 140-mile (225km) first phase[/url] in response to environmental concerns. She said it would create "jobs, growth and prosperity", but critics dispute projected benefits of up to £47bn. Ms Greening called the line "the most significant transport infrastructure project since the building of the motorways". The London to Birmingham link would be followed by a second phase of Y-shaped track reaching Manchester and Leeds by about 2033, she said. A consultation on the second phase will begin in early 2014, with a final route chosen by the end of that year. Travelling at speeds of up to 250mph, passengers will be able to commute from Birmingham to London in 45 minutes, reducing the journey time by almost half from one hour and 24 minutes. A Birmingham to Leeds journey will be reduced from two hours to 57 minutes and a Manchester to London journey from two hours and eight minutes to one hour and eight minutes. Connections to existing lines should then cut journey times between London, and Edinburgh and Glasgow, to three-and-a-half hours. The first phase of HS2 will include a connection to Europe via the Channel Tunnel. On completion of HS2 the network will include a direct link to Heathrow. "By following in the footsteps of the 19th Century railway pioneers, the government is signalling its commitment to providing 21st Century infrastructure and connections - laying the groundwork for long-term, sustainable economic growth," said Ms Greening. The government estimates that the project could eventually result in 9 million road journeys and 4.5 million journeys by plane instead being taken by train every year. "HS2 is therefore an important part of transport's low-carbon future," Ms Greening said. There had been almost 55,000 responses to the consultation process on the project, which clearly "generates strong feelings, both in favour and against the scheme", the minister said. She pledged a commitment to "developing a network with the lowest feasible impacts on local communities and the natural environment". "I have been mindful that we must safeguard the natural environment as far as possible, both for the benefit of those enjoying our beautiful countryside today and for future generations." Revisions to the route had halved the number of homes at risk, as well as reducing by a third the number due to experience increased noise, she said. [b]The route's key sticking points[/b] [img]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/uk/11/hs2_map/img/uk_rail_highspeed2_624.jpg?cachebuster=cb00000001[/img] Changes to the plans, Ms Greening said, also meant that "more than half the route will now be mitigated by tunnel or cutting", including: • A longer tunnel through the Chiltern Hills from Little Missenden, Buckinghamshire, to the M25 • A new 2.75-mile (4km) tunnel to avoid impacts on communities in Ruislip, north-west London • A longer covered cutting, known as a green tunnel, past Chipping Warden and Aston le Walls in Northamptonshire • A curve in the route to avoid heritage sites around Edgcote, Northants • Longer green tunnels at Wendover and South Heath, Bucks The Department for Transport said that 22.5 miles of the first phase would now be enclosed in tunnels or green tunnels - up from 14.5 miles for the route that went to consultation - and a further 56.5 miles of cuttings would significantly reduce "visual and noise impact". A green tunnel is essentially a deep cutting with a tube put into it, over which grass, trees and soil are placed. It is not as deep as a normal tunnel, and it is much cheaper to construct. Conservative MP for Chesham and Amersham, Cheryl Gillan, who had threatened to quit over HS2, welcomed the proposed changes to the project. "I have arranged to meet with the transport secretary to ensure that any ultimate decisions on the project and on any route do as little damage as possible to our environment and our local communities," she said in a statement. [b]'Wealthy few'[/b] Protest groups formed to oppose the scheme say the planned route crosses an area of outstanding natural beauty and it will damage the environment. Adam Thomas, whose home in the Chiltern hills will make way for the rail route, said: "We're going to lose our home which we've spent so long building for ourselves. But I feel more sorry in a way for the country because it's such a colossal waste of money and it is genuinely is not needed." Opponents have also challenged the government's economic argument, suggesting the costs will be greater while the economic benefits will be lower than forecast, and that the business case for HS2 is based on an overly-optimistic prediction of growth in demand for long-distance train travel. "There is no business case, no environmental case and there is no money to pay for it," said Stop HS2 campaign co-ordinator Joe Rukin. "It's a white elephant of monumental proportions and you could deliver more benefits to more people more quickly for less money by investing in the current rail infrastructure." Craig Bennett, director of policy and campaigns at Friends of the Earth, said: "We need to revolutionise travel away from roads and planes, but pumping £32bn into high-speed travel for the wealthy few while ordinary commuters suffer is not the answer. "High-speed rail has a role to play in developing a greener, faster transport system, but current plans won't do enough to cut emissions overall - ministers should prioritise spending on improving local train and bus services instead." However, the plan would be welcomed by "businesses up and down the country", said John Longworth, director general of the British Chambers of Commerce. "Britain cannot continue to 'make do and mend' when it comes to its substandard infrastructure. Fundamentally, our global competitiveness is at stake," he said. Stephen Joseph, chief executive of Campaign for Better Transport, said: "We're pleased to see the government investing in rail, rather than roads and aviation, and acting on some of the local environmental concerns surrounding HS2." But he went on: "The process for deciding on the London-Birmingham part of HS2 has been too narrow and people feel left out. "In consulting on the lines north of Birmingham, the government needs to involve people earlier with greater discussion of alternative options, including ways rail investment can support low-carbon growth in the communities served, and also how any new lines will integrate with existing networks and improve local as well as long-distance transport."[/quote][/TD][TD="align:right"][img]http://imgkk.com/i/_-v6.png[/img][/TD][/TR][/TABLE]

Our country really needs this, the trains are bloody terrible.

We need more carriages on the London Underground, if anything.

The one from the south east to London's really good. It only takes like 45 mins from Folkestone to London, as opposed to an hour and a half or so. The trains are really nice, too.

This is right through my local area, at first I was against it (countryside etc) but after moving to uni I think its a good idea, It'll get me home faster.

[QUOTE=MildlyMad;34145703]This is right through my local area, at first I was against it (countryside etc) but after moving to uni I think its a good idea, It'll get me home faster.[/QUOTE] [quote]The first phase - London to Birmingham, is scheduled to open in 2026, while phase two, a fork to Manchester and Leeds, should be running by 2033. It may be extended to Scotland at a later date.[/quote] unless you're still in university in 2026, I doubt you'll get much benefit from it in the way you expect

I wish we had something like this in the US.

While we're on the subject, hurry up and renationalise the railways. We know someone is going to do it eventually

oh noes, a single train running through the countryside, this will surely ruin everyones lives

[QUOTE=smurfy;34145883]While we're on the subject, hurry up and renationalise the railways. We know someone is going to do it eventually[/QUOTE] This - the government can build all the high speed railways it wants, it's not going to stop rail companies fucking us over. Maybe we can renationlise the buses at the same time. Also, I remember reading in Private Eye that were other options, such as developing track around London, that'd speed up trains going to and from London by removing congestion from main lines, for much less.

[QUOTE=scotland1;34145990]oh noes, a single train running through the countryside, this will surely ruin everyones lives[/QUOTE] damn [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIMBY#BANANA]BANANAs[/url]

by the time its finished a return to Birmingham from Londons going to cost £300 anyway.

[QUOTE=Camundongo;34146115]This - the government can build all the high speed railways it wants, it's not going to stop rail companies fucking us over. Maybe we can renationlise the buses at the same time. Also, I remember reading in Private Eye that were other options, such as developing track around London, that'd speed up trains going to and from London by removing congestion from main lines, for much less.[/QUOTE] The current system is probably the stupidest, most expensive way you could do it. The government does the costly job of maintaining the tracks, while private companies get to run services and collect ticket fees

Trains always looked good in the countryside. They coincide together fine.

[QUOTE=The mouse;34145594]Our country really needs this, the trains are bloody terrible.[/QUOTE] They aren't bad, but they are bloody expensive.

Why does it take 14 years to build a railway line?

[QUOTE=Harry3;34146144]by the time its finished a return to Birmingham from Londons going to cost £300 anyway.[/QUOTE] I have just found out I can get a cheaper return ticket to Aberdeen from Portsmouth than from London to Birmingham. (Admittedly, that's using an offpeak ticket to Aberdeen, but considering it's five times the distance....)

[QUOTE=Coffee;34146262]Why does it take 14 years to build a railway line?[/QUOTE] It's fucking huge, and they've got to build miles of tunnels HS1, which you can see on the map is far shorter, took 10 years

[QUOTE=Coffee;34146262]Why does it take 14 years to build a railway line?[/QUOTE] You have to ask this because other countries are building things like this a lot quicker. I am glad they are going ahead with it, its desperately needed and people should not bitch and moan about it. Its the reason why the UK has such a shit rail network compared to Europe. I mean look at like France or Belgium their highspeed lines run in dead straight lines from point to point so people can get around fast.

[QUOTE=Coffee;34146262]Why does it take 14 years to build a railway line?[/QUOTE] Because lots of tunnels.

[QUOTE=Shocky;34146512]Because lots of tunnels.[/QUOTE] But it was going to take 14 years before the tunnels were even considered. Its probably due to 11 years of paperwork they will have to complete.

[QUOTE=Shocky;34146512]Because lots of tunnels.[/QUOTE] Because stupid fucking environmentalists.

[QUOTE=scotland1;34146536]Because stupid fucking environmentalists.[/QUOTE] Ironically the tunnels aren't green at all - there's more air resistance in them, so the trains have to work harder, so they generate more carbon dioxide.

[QUOTE=Camundongo;34146572]Ironically the tunnels aren't green at all - there's more air resistance in them, so the trains have to work harder, so they generate more carbon dioxide.[/QUOTE] And of course all the equipment for digging them aren't exactly environmentally friendly.

[QUOTE=AnEvilGuy;34146580]And of course all the equipment for digging them aren't exactly environmentally friendly.[/QUOTE] All that noisy construction work will disturb the poor animals!

it's pretty funny how environmentalists have managed to stick it to the government by forcing an option that is worse for the environment in just about every way proof that country planning councils aren't real "environmentalists" at all

Firstly, why don't they just make 95% of it in underground tunnels instead of shitting up the landscape? (A poster above mentioned some science stuff which I can fathom, so ok that's fair enough.) Secondly, why does it stop at Birmingham/Leeds, why not send one to Edinburgh through Newcastle, or Glasgow through Carlisle?

[QUOTE=Clunj;34146998]Firstly, why don't they just make 95% of it in underground tunnels instead of shitting up the landscape. Secondly, why does it stop at Birmingham/Leeds, why not send one to Edinburgh through Newcastle, or Glasgow through Carlisle?[/QUOTE] This is just HS2 Phase 1. I think phase 2 goes up to Manchester, there's probably more planned after that. The entire highspeed rail network for the UK has been planned for ages but it keeps hitting blocks.

[QUOTE=Clunj;34146998]Firstly, why don't they just make 95% of it in underground tunnels instead of shitting up the landscape? (A poster above mentioned some science stuff which I can fathom, so ok that's fair enough.) Secondly, why does it stop at Birmingham/Leeds, why not send one to Edinburgh through Newcastle, or Glasgow through Carlisle?[/QUOTE] The air resistance is greater, so trains are less efficient, the costs are gargantuan regarding digging it, the air inside it has to be circulated, there is a higher risk of fire and fires are more dangerous underground and many more issues. They're very nice when going relatively slowly for short distances, but aren't effective for long distances.

[QUOTE=Jsm;34147018]This is just HS2 Phase 1. I think phase 2 goes up to Manchester, there's probably more planned after that. The entire highspeed rail network for the UK has been planned for ages but it keeps hitting blocks.[/QUOTE] Still seems a bit daft. Bring together the entire country or segregate the north even more. Can they not just move the Scotland border to below Middlesborough, that way when they kick Scotland out the UK I won't have to suffer any more stupid tory decisions.