Tuesday, January 10, 2012

High-speed rail in Britain: Full steam ahead | The Economist

Saves all of 45 minutes on a trip from London to Birmingham.  This has got to be a disaster.

The government says the line could carry up to 26,000 people an hour and deliver benefits of £47 billion over the course of 60 years. But The Economist has not been impressed and editorialised against the plans back in September on the grounds that high-speed railways benefits rich regions and individuals at the expense of poorer ones, and their costs sap funding from humbler but more efficient schemes.

High-speed rail in Britain: Full steam ahead | The Economist


Matt said...

It seems a waste to me to focus on this particular part of the country.

The high-speed rail network needs, as a priority, to go to much further places such as Bristol, Cardiff, Leeds, Liverpool Manchester, Sheffield, Glasgow and Edinburgh.

There also needs to be better roads between Manchester across the pennines to Sheffield, Nottingham, Hull etc.

I am not against investment in infrastructure, but it doesn't seem thought-through.

We also still have the issue of widescale car pollution and no major electric / hybrid solutions coming through due to poor investment in infrastructure to support them...

Bill Baar said...

It doesn't look very smart. I don't know the UK geography very well. What's been suggested for the midwest doesn't look wise considering the numerous other projects that could be done instead. Chicago has a massive number of bridges that need to be raised to accomdate modern size trucks.