Leading engineers have suggested that ‘flaws’ in the analysis of the High Speed 2 (HS2) proposal might result in the project producing ‘more, not less, carbon dioxide’.
Questions concerning the high speed and therefore high energy consumption of the trains, the number of tunnels and assumptions on the number of people switching from air travel, could mean that carbon emissions per journey would increase in comparison to current levels.
The warning, from the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET), follows the deadline on Friday 29 July for the Government’s consultation on the proposed HS2 and its recommended route from London to the West Midlands.
Paul Davies, Head of Policy at the IET, said:
“We believe we have uncovered a number of flaws in the proposals, some of which question the claim that HS2, as proposed, will reduce carbon emissions.
“The case for HS2 relies on a number of assumptions made within the proposal. Some of these are flawed, for example not considering the effects of aerodynamic drag from environmental mitigation measures such as tunnels, which could lead to an increase in carbon emissions.”
The IET, Europe’s largest body of engineers warns that ‘greater clarity is urgently needed’ to properly evaluate the costs and benefits of the proposals. But as the proposal stands, it leaves ‘serious questions unanswered’.
The body said other areas for concern include:
- No service levels for the West Coast Main Line after the completion of Phase 1 have been provided. Such an assessment would indicate the number of new platforms which would be required for a redeveloped Euston station.
- The comparators used in the economic analysis are inconsistent and do not represent the best realistic alternatives against which HS2 should have been judged.
- No economic analysis has been provided for the link to High Speed 1.
It really is time for the Government to show that it’s listening to what voters are saying and either scrap this hare-brained high speed rail project altogether – or at least shelve it until its proponents really can prove that it’s in the national interest… They’ve singularly failed to do that so far.
The greatest factor concerning HS2 and its CO2 emmissions, is the manner of the electricity generation; by using todays generation figures you ignore the projected figures for low CO2 generation in 10 – 20 years time when HS2 will be operational. Common sense suggests that nuclear power is the best mid-term source of low CO2 rail electricity.
As for aerodynamic drag in tunnels this is a trade off between tunnel size / venting (and thus construction costs) and train speed; running trains slower in tunnels will reduce the drag. Hopefully people will realise that tunnelling solely for asthetic reasons will cause increased CO2 emisssions and imposes unnecessary costs on the project.