Posted 14th December 2011 | 8 Comments
New High Speed rail plans unveiled for Scotland
THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT has unveiled its vision for a new High Speed project today, which sets out a plan for a line starting from Scotland rather than London.
The idea has been welcomed on both sides of the border.
High Speed campaigning group Greengauge21 described the new plan as 'enormously encouraging'.
Greengauge21 director Julie Mills said: "They have identified clearly the potential benefits of high-speed rail in boosting the economy through better connections between our great cities.
“Greengauge 21 has always been clear that the transport and economic case for building a cross-border high-speed rail link between Scotland and England is very strong. We are very pleased to see that our analysis has been built on by the Scottish Partnership Group to demonstrate that building high-speed rail from Scotland has an even stronger case than building the first stages of HS2 from London.”
The report points out that a High Speed line linking Scotland and London would reduce journey times to under three hours, which is said to be the critical point at which air becomes less attractive than rail.
The pressure group Transform Scotland also greeted the plan with enthusiasm.
Spokesman Paul Tetlow said: "We support the case for high speed rail links from England to Scotland. This could bring about significant modal shifts from the car and the plane to the train.
"Anglo-Scottish high-speed rail services could help us meet important environmental targets by knocking out carbon-intensive short-haul flights.
"The clear challenges posed by climate change and depleting world oil supplies means that we need to improve both capacity and journey times by rail. We need rail investment as climate change targets start to bite and oil becomes more scarce and more expensive.
"The existing rail network does not have the capacity for the growth that will be required in the future for journeys from Scotland to London, the Midlands and the North of England. New lines and upgrades to existing routes are clearly required. "
Reader Comments:
Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.
Gordon Black, Bainbridge Island, USA
While there might be looming capacity issues between Birmingham and London, the time savings to be gained by a journey on a high speed line versus the current speed of service is still relatively modest. Also, given that rail only really competes with car travel for this trip whereas air is rail's competitor for a Glasgow/Edinburgh to London trip, there is merit in thinking that a investment to speed up the northern end of the Scotland-England route will have greater carbon emission and time benefits than an initial investment between London and Birmingham. Not to say that one should preclude the other but it is worth thinking of inverting the traditional way that major projects in the UK are considered - perhaps this suggestion is worth further consideration in terms of overall benefits (environmental, economic, financial, social).
Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, England
Well I'm sorry but I think that's a stupid idea! If you have 100 miles of high speed line at the London end or the Scotland end, you get exactly the same time savings.
This just strikes me as the Scottish Government trying to boost Scotland, without considering the big picture. We are still a UNITED Kingdom.
So if you replace a 20mph line with a 200mph line you get the same time saving if you had repaced a 100mph line with a 200mph!! Me thinks not.
The reality is the lines in Northern England and South of Scotland are far slower than in the south of England and so building a line south from Scotland will give a greater time saving because of the more restricted lines it will be replacing. However cost may be higher given the different terrain to be found in that part of the country with a need for tunnels for practical purposes rather than for NIMBYS who you want to vote for you. Perhaps these extra costs of tunnels in the Chilterns should be funded by a supplementary council tax in this area?
Robert Hamling, London, United Kingdon
Here is an out the box idea. How about constructing a fast mono rail service between London and Edinburgh and London and Glasgow using lanes of the A1/M1 and M4/M6. 'If you build it they will come'. Think how many cars you could take off the road and how quick the service would be. The hard infrastructure is already there (dramatically reducing cost) and new technologies can be used making the service faster, more efficient and cheaper for Joe Public. This would also take pressure off the older slower lines and free more of their schedule up for freight. I am sure that if you offered the franchise to build and run said operation to Richard Branson he would bite your hand off. Also it would not require the bulldozing of the country side so happy greenies. Win, win, win for everyone!
jbzoom, mumbai, india
Do both - let the Scots build from Glasgow and Edinburgh to Preston or Leeds and join up with HS2
HH, Bham
English Welsh Irish Scots will ALL use HS2 whichever country it is in.
HS2 should be complete network and far better we start building in as many places as possible. HS2Scotland has BCR over 5 and improves case for HS2
Peter Davidson, Alderley Edge, NW.England
Maybe I've misunderstood the details of this strategy but this announcement was made by the Scottish Govt (not a Whitehall based Minister) and relates to plans to construct a High Speed Line south from Scotland to link up to HS2 - the announcement doesn't say where from but one can only assume the starting point must be Glasgow, Edinburgh or a combination of both (linked up in some fashion)
So if this interpretation is correct, it has zip all effect directly upon HS2, which will still proceed from London to Birmingham in phase 1 and onwards to Leeds and Manchester during phase 2. This outcome would presumably bring completion of a North-South UK wide network, linking at least; London, SE.England, West Midlands, East Midlands, Yorks Humber, NW.England, NE.England and Scotland, that much closer?
This seems eminently sensible to me (not a stupid idea at all?) - this is not an alternative to the existing HS2 strategy - it's a complementary addition!
Alex, UK
Well I'm sorry but I think that's a stupid idea!
If you have 100 miles of high speed line at the London end or the Scotland end, you get exactly the same time savings.
So the only consideration is line capacity. Both the WCML and ECML are under far heavier strain at the London end. You need the capacity there to benefit everyone along the route, all the way to Scotland!
This just strikes me as the Scottish Government trying to boost Scotland, without considering the big picture. We are still a UNITED Kingdom and HS2 will need funding from everyone. Let's do what's best for the masses, not your electorate!
Geoff Steel, Northampton, United Kingdom
I say, let the Scottish Government run with HS2 rather than Whitehall. After all most of the new lines that have been re-opened recently have happened north of the border and there seems to be a greater impetus in getting projects underway and completed.