Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Hs2 Costs Up Just Add £10Bn

Recommended Posts

Grauniad

You're slacking. No link.

Anyway, before anyone wonders, the reason for the increase is NIMBYs - the proposed route has had to be severely modified with diversions and much longer tunnels to appease "rural" protesters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grauniad

You're slacking. No link.

Anyway, before anyone wonders, the reason for the increase is NIMBYs - the proposed route has had to be severely modified with diversions and much longer tunnels to appease "rural" protesters.

As a fan of HS2 I can't say I'm happy about this.

However worth pointing out that 12.7 bn of this is "contingency"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grauniad

You're slacking. No link.

Anyway, before anyone wonders, the reason for the increase is NIMBYs - the proposed route has had to be severely modified with diversions and much longer tunnels to appease "rural" protesters.

Including a "tunnel under the M6".

Perhaps before this they had envisaged a level crossing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was always going to cost more than the imaginary figure dreamed up to even suggest it might be a good idea. Blaming NIMBY is too easy. Just another govt vanity project ******-up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Including a "tunnel under the M6".

Perhaps before this they had envisaged a level crossing!

The original plan was for the tracks to go under the large M6 viaduct. However, detailed engineering work suggested this would be difficult for reasons of flood defence and existing infrastructure, and the building works would cause excessive disruption to nearby roads and residents.

A new route was proposed that would run along side existing and abandoned rail routes next to the M6. However, the route that the track would have to take would have brought the line too close to "local community facilities including the local schools’ playing fields and social clubs including Bromford Residents’ Club and Bromford Neighbourhood Office." The tunnel was chosen as it would avoid the "loss" of these amenities.

Edited by ChumpusRex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a fan of HS2 I can't say I'm happy about this.

However worth pointing out that 12.7 bn of this is "contingency"

They picked all the numbers out of their arses. If it happens it'll probably be twice the cost of these estimates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just absurdly expensive.

While I was living in Germany, the brand new Cologne to Frankfurt high-speed line was opened: 177 km, maximum speed 300 km/h. I've travelled on it a few times. On the new ICE 3 trains, you can stand at the front and look through the glass over the driver's shoulder. It's like riding on a roller-coaster, flashing though and over countless tunnels and bridges. Total journey time: 62 minutes, and a damn sight cheaper than travel in the UK. Total construction cost according to Deutsche Bahn: 6 billion euros.

Why does a UK line of roughly the same specification have to cost 8 times as much?

Edit: At the latest estimate!!

Edit: Ah, sorry. Only half of that is for the London - Birmingham line. Mind you, that part is still 4 times as expensive as the German equivalent.

Edited by snowflux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just absurdly expensive.

While I was living in Germany, the brand new Cologne to Frankfurt high-speed line was opened: 177 km, maximum speed 300 km/h. I've travelled on it a few times. On the new ICE 3 trains, you can stand at the front and look through the glass over the driver's shoulder. It's like riding on a roller-coaster, flashing though and over countless tunnels and bridges. Total journey time: 62 minutes, and a damn sight cheaper than travel in the UK. Total construction cost according to Deutsche Bahn: 6 billion euros.

Why does a UK line of roughly the same specification have to cost 8 times as much?

Edit: At the latest estimate!!

Edit: Ah, sorry. Only half of that is for the London - Birmingham line. Mind you, that part is still 4 times as expensive as the German equivalent.

The London-Birmingham segment is to be expected to cost £22 bn; so about 4.5x the cost of the german line. Of that 22, about £6 bn is provision for cost over-runs; i.e. the line is expected to cost £16 bn, if everything goes to plan; though in a project of this size, that would be rather wishful thinking.

The big, big costs are land (£1bn), Upgrades to Euston station (£1bn), Birmingham and Channel-Tunnel interchange stations (£0.7 bn), Environmental work (£0.3bn), Tunnelling through London and the Chilterns and Birmingham (£2.5bn). It's only then that we get into the mere trifles - cost of track (£0.5 bn); rail laying cost (£0.5 bn); signalling and power instllation (£0.25 bn), etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The London-Birmingham segment is to be expected to cost £22 bn; so about 4.5x the cost of the german line. Of that 22, about £6 bn is provision for cost over-runs; i.e. the line is expected to cost £16 bn, if everything goes to plan; though in a project of this size, that would be rather wishful thinking.

The big, big costs are land (£1bn), Upgrades to Euston station (£1bn), Birmingham and Channel-Tunnel interchange stations (£0.7 bn), Environmental work (£0.3bn), Tunnelling through London and the Chilterns and Birmingham (£2.5bn). It's only then that we get into the mere trifles - cost of track (£0.5 bn); rail laying cost (£0.5 bn); signalling and power instllation (£0.25 bn), etc.

Cheers for that. However, the costs you're itemised still only account for £6.75bn of the £16bn (without overruns) cost. There's still a lot of money unaccounted for!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll never happen. Might make its way to Heathrow, but that'll be about it.

It will go ahead as its purpose is to channel cash even more efficiently from the regions to scam central, aka London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original plan was for the tracks to go under the large M6 viaduct. However, detailed engineering work suggested this would be difficult for reasons of flood defence and existing infrastructure, and the building works would cause excessive disruption to nearby roads and residents.

A new route was proposed that would run along side existing and abandoned rail routes next to the M6. However, the route that the track would have to take would have brought the line too close to "local community facilities including the local schools’ playing fields and social clubs including Bromford Residents’ Club and Bromford Neighbourhood Office." The tunnel was chosen as it would avoid the "loss" of these amenities.

So they didn't realise it was a flood area then originally?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's only then that we get into the mere trifles - cost of track (£0.5 bn); rail laying cost (£0.5 bn); signalling and power instllation (£0.25 bn), etc.

Could they not just dig up the old track and replace. During Christmas or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they didn't realise it was a flood area then originally?

They did. The plan was to move the river out of the way and shore up the flood defence, as this would avoid the need for expensive tunnelling and minimise the encroachment onto residential areas.

However, this plan had serious local objection due to severe disruptio to traffic on nearby roads. More detailed survey work also identified some unforseen problems which would have made the groundwork more difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they didn't realise it was a flood area then originally?

Well, in fairness, it wasn't flooded the day they went and had a quick look at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every Cockney wants a fast (expensive) trip to Birmingham? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would rather see the money spent converting the south east from third rail electrification to overhead lines. It is significantly more efficient and the existing power supplies can not keep up with demand leading to many problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The London-Birmingham segment is to be expected to cost £22 bn; so about 4.5x the cost of the german line. Of that 22, about £6 bn is provision for cost over-runs; i.e. the line is expected to cost £16 bn, if everything goes to plan; though in a project of this size, that would be rather wishful thinking.

The big, big costs are land (£1bn), Upgrades to Euston station (£1bn), Birmingham and Channel-Tunnel interchange stations (£0.7 bn), Environmental work (£0.3bn), Tunnelling through London and the Chilterns and Birmingham (£2.5bn). It's only then that we get into the mere trifles - cost of track (£0.5 bn); rail laying cost (£0.5 bn); signalling and power instllation (£0.25 bn), etc.

Maybe I'm showing my ignorance, but how can upgrading a single existing station (Euston) cost £1bn, when buying and laying the track for 100s of miles costs roughly the same?

Or is the cost for Euston because they plan a massive redevelopment of the whole neighbourhood (like what they're doing around King's X/St Pancras) and they've tagged this capital expenditure onto HS2 (so that the whole country funds it) rather than simply telling London "it's yours, you pay for it"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would rather see the money spent converting the south east from third rail electrification to overhead lines. It is significantly more efficient and the existing power supplies can not keep up with demand leading to many problems.

I'd have thought that the inconvenience of that would be pretty catastrophic. There's no way of doing the conversion without closing lines to do it. Power supplies should be upgradeable I'd have thought though and some diesels could be run so not every train is putting pressure on the available power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm showing my ignorance, but how can upgrading a single existing station (Euston) cost £1bn, when buying and laying the track for 100s of miles costs roughly the same?

Because building a massive trains station in central london is an expensive thing to do. Whilst laying miles of track in the open countryside isn't.

I'd have thought that the inconvenience of that would be pretty catastrophic. There's no way of doing the conversion without closing lines to do it.

Why? It's been done before...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23744619

The HS2 high-speed rail project could cost more than £80bn - almost double the current estimated cost of £42.6bn, a free-market think tank has said.

The Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA) expects lobbying by local councils for extra infrastructure and design changes will inflate the cost.

It wants HS2 to be scrapped and the money spent on other transport schemes.

GDP Kerching!

No surprise that the cost estimates keep going up.

Doubling the figure is always a good way to go!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No surprise that the cost estimates keep going up.

Doubling the figure is always a good way to go!

Why stop there. :rolleyes:

My mum says the route will end up costing £1 trillion pounds. Let's take her numbers as a reason to cancel it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly certain a British space mission to Mars including the establishment of manned permanent colony would cost less than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 244 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.