High speed rail infrastructure and development

¶ … High Speed Rail

With greater economic and population growth, there is crowding issues on existing rail lines, poor journey times, areas that have been neglected with existing rail ways, and a greater carbon issue. In efforts to reduce the CO2 emissions, the government has encouraged less car usage, less air travel usage, and more train travel. In these efforts a new high speed rail line has been proposed.

The proposed High Speed Two project is intended to reduce CO2 emissions and provide measures to accommodate future growth in the train travel industry. By reducing road usage and air usage, the train travel produces less CO2 emissions to further harm the environment. The HS2 project is designed to operate with existing lines to produce greater capacity and efficiency in services to new and local users.

The HS2 (London-West Midlands) project case alone will provide 13 billion more in benefits than the cost in benefits to users and wider economic benefits. With the new high speed rail, passengers can enjoy reduced crowding with greater end to end journey times and reach destinations in a timelier manner. The reduction in carbon emissions from train travel will enable the government to meet goals concerning a low carbon future.

Chapter 1: Introduction

There has been a growing trend in rail way use over the last decade. It is forecasted by 2026 that train travel will increase three to four times what it is at present (Anon., 2010). Passenger numbers have increased 50% and freight numbers have increased 40% (Anon., 2009). This has caused an overcrowding problem on existing trains and railways where some passengers may not reach their destinations in a timely manner. The growth in travel has stemmed from economic and population growth. Transportation has been making major contributions to the CO2 emissions problem with a 24% of the total in 2007 (Anon., 2010). The government has encouraged less car usage and a clear desire to transfer air travel and long distance travel to train services.

Chapter 2: Hypothesis

A growing trend of passengers in the last decade demonstrates our need for a high speed rail. By having a new high speed rail, we will have less traffic and air pollution and less environmental impacts due to its fuel along the London and West Midlands. Plus passengers would reach their destination in much less time.

Chapter 3: Summary of Articles

Some studies are opposed to a new high speed rail because of the high costs that taxpayers would have to pay and feel there are more sufficient measures of reducing waste in business process. Others feel there are higher benefits than actual costs when all measures are compared. The financial analysis shows higher benefits than costs with some benefits that cannot be measured.

Chapter 4: Arguments in Favor

The High Speed Two project permits restructuring and extensions of existing services (Anon., 2011). One of the benefits of HS2 is the effective reuse of capacity. It would allow new and local passengers and new freight trains to operate as well as all services to operate without constraints. HS2 would allow for expansion of services on existing and future rail without higher frequencies and connections to places previously neglected. Services that have been lost can be regained with HS2. Revision of existing timetables would allow for expansion with a reduction of road usage and carbon emission.

The West Coast Main Line, between London and West Midlands, could reach its capacity by mid-2020s, even after upgrade (Anon., 2009). Increasing the non-carbon energy generation will increase energy efficiency with a new high speed rail line. A new high speed rail would provide increased capacity to relieve overcrowding through longer trains and provide faster, more efficient, services. The HS2 has the capacity to deliver valuable economic, environmental, and social benefits by providing additional capacity, reducing overcrowding and predictable end to end journey times, support for housing and population growth, and improving links to key international gateways.

Chapter 5: Arguments Opposed

The challenge in making substantial improvements is to increase ease and convenience without adding infracture cost and increase in the CO2 emissions problem. "There is a need to prioritize provision of greater capacity and to ensure that solutions are ranked in order of cost effective means" (Anon., 2011). Although, there is a need to do away with waste in business processes and provide greater capacity utilization. Timetables need to be reviewed for increase in frequency. Infractures can be done to provide longer trains to help reduce the overcrowding.

These changes alone will not be sufficient for future forecasted growth. Train lengthening on existing lines only shows 20% more seats, which is not enough to meet the forecasted growth and will lead to significantly increased overcrowding (Anon., 2011). There is also the issue of CO2 emissions. These changes do not sufficiently reduce the impacts to the environment concerning CO2 emission.

Summary

The debt for HS2 peaks at 32 billion with the noncash benefits still substantial and account for 100% as real GDP payback (Anon., 2010). Although, the numbers included concerning the treatment of Heathrow are deemed as unrealistic because the business case is undeterminable. Taking in consideration of direct benefits and non-benefits to users, wider economic benefits, and economic and social benefits from land use changes, the HS2 (London-West Midland) case alone is expected to bring 15 billion to the National Economy with 11 billion benefitting business customers and four billion benefitting wider economic benefits at a total cost of two billion at 2009 prices (Anon., 2011). HS2 (London-West Midland) will benefit individuals in journey time savings, reduced crowding, and improved reliability. The Benefit Cost ratio was calculated at 2.0:1. Benefits that cannot be measured include the impacts that influence where people choose to live and work, business locations, leisure, and reductions in accidents, noise, and air quality from reduced road traffic.

It is predicted, "HS2 will lead to a reduction in CO2 emissions of 15MTCO2.e over the lifetime of the project" (Anon., 2012). The effects in carbon benefits from HS2 can be increased with wider public policy as well as the way HS2 is configured and operated. These operational changes are greater than the cost embedded in construction. The pace of change in the nation's electrical power can be restored with the reduced carbon effects that lead to a low carbon future.