The news is that the government has given the go-ahead for construction work on Highspeed 2 to start, even though much of the country is still in lockdown. There are a lot of people quite vociferous that this is not a good time to start, and some arguing that this is a good time to drop the whole HS2 project.
Well there is an argument for HS2 that it will free up more space for rail freight, which is a good thing. And I'm more of a fan of HS3 (which if it ever happens, will be at such a future date that it will do me personally no good). But those are discussions for another day.
What I wanted to do is discuss is why one factor in this decision is rather unexpected, and an example of the interconnectedness and complexity of our economy. Yes, starting work keeps some people in jobs and keeps some money flowing in the economy and it is probably better to get some building done for that money rather than pay people 80% to be furloughed. And yes, it is a big project so might as well get started. And yes, having started people will be reluctant to stop because of the sunk cost fallacy. But I'm not thinking of any of those.
Not starting HS2 now might have an impact on the NHS and our fight against Covid-19. How so?
Well, when we start the construction work we will need concrete - which means that the cement kilns need to be kept going when otherwise they might shut down because of low demand. And if you know about cement kilns, they are not as quick and easy to shut down and start up as a gas fire. But we need to look further down the supply chain. Cement kilns use a lot of fuel. Where do they get it from? They use a variety of sources, but one of them is re-processed chemicals that where originally used in the pharmaceutical industry as solvents. These can be reprocessed to some extent but they can also be blended up as fuel for cement kilns. What do we do with them if they aren't sent there? There are only 3 choices - storage, incineration, and shutting the pharmaceutical production. Storage capacity is not huge, there isn't enough incineration capacity, and it has to go somewhere if you produce it. So, you say - build more storage. Why? We don't need it when the virus is over. Burn it - well we'd love to have more incinerators, because we are already at maximum capacity, but do you want one in your backyard? And building incinerators is quick and easy compared to the process for getting permits. So, if there is nowhere to dispose of the waste (short term), the option left is to close pharmaceutical production - which is obviously not ideal during a pandemic.
So, starting work on HS2 keeps the kilns fired up using fuel from the pharmaceutical industries, which helps the NHS. A complex web... isn't it?
Showing posts with label HS2. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HS2. Show all posts
Thursday, 16 April 2020
Tuesday, 29 January 2013
HS2
This is not a blog with particularly much thought behind it (are any of them you may well ask), but I am in favour of High Speed 2.
It will make little to no difference to my working life, as even if it arrives on time I should be on track for retirement (pardon the pun).
That this is a the first major investment in new train lines north of London for nearly a century shows how little we as a country have responded to the changes in behaviour and interconnectedness over that time. I rarely work within walking distance of my house (apart from when I am working from my office), and the motorways are increasingly full at all times of day and in all weathers. So we use the trains.
2 and a bit hours to London is not bad but 1 and a bit hours is better. I find it difficult to grasp that people value their own time so little that they dont want to save 2 hours on the round trip. Obviously they are made of hardier stuff than me, and are never resort to thinking "Oh its too much trouble", as I do.
Are there better things to spend the money on? Possibly. That is a choice and decision that a lot of people have opinions about - mostly of the "spend it on this thing I know about" variety. In fact HS2 may be one of those things. Meanwhile Thameslink and CrossRail will cost about the same and are hardly on people's radar.
Should we protect the countryside? Oh please. We are not as a nation rich enough that we can afford to have a perfectly landscaped environment everywhere. No nation is. So again there are choices, and sometimes perfectly nice places will need to have train lines, wind turbines or electricity pilons (or all 3) in order that the country as a whole benefits. And a damaged view is not the same as a broken leg - take pictures and photoshop them if you must.
Then there are the usual "it will never work" voices, that I hoped would have been at least slowed down by the Olympics.
Personally I think the Birmingham -Manchester line should go on at full speed to Glasgow. That would do wonders for both Scotland and places on the way such as Carlisle and Preston.
Will it really benefit the North? There are arguments both ways, but I think it is better to have improved infrastructure than not.
In the meantime it will create employment and economic impact, and at the end of it we will be able to travel that much more easily and quickly.
In short, I'm in favour.
It will make little to no difference to my working life, as even if it arrives on time I should be on track for retirement (pardon the pun).
That this is a the first major investment in new train lines north of London for nearly a century shows how little we as a country have responded to the changes in behaviour and interconnectedness over that time. I rarely work within walking distance of my house (apart from when I am working from my office), and the motorways are increasingly full at all times of day and in all weathers. So we use the trains.
2 and a bit hours to London is not bad but 1 and a bit hours is better. I find it difficult to grasp that people value their own time so little that they dont want to save 2 hours on the round trip. Obviously they are made of hardier stuff than me, and are never resort to thinking "Oh its too much trouble", as I do.
Are there better things to spend the money on? Possibly. That is a choice and decision that a lot of people have opinions about - mostly of the "spend it on this thing I know about" variety. In fact HS2 may be one of those things. Meanwhile Thameslink and CrossRail will cost about the same and are hardly on people's radar.
Should we protect the countryside? Oh please. We are not as a nation rich enough that we can afford to have a perfectly landscaped environment everywhere. No nation is. So again there are choices, and sometimes perfectly nice places will need to have train lines, wind turbines or electricity pilons (or all 3) in order that the country as a whole benefits. And a damaged view is not the same as a broken leg - take pictures and photoshop them if you must.
Then there are the usual "it will never work" voices, that I hoped would have been at least slowed down by the Olympics.
Personally I think the Birmingham -Manchester line should go on at full speed to Glasgow. That would do wonders for both Scotland and places on the way such as Carlisle and Preston.
Will it really benefit the North? There are arguments both ways, but I think it is better to have improved infrastructure than not.
In the meantime it will create employment and economic impact, and at the end of it we will be able to travel that much more easily and quickly.
In short, I'm in favour.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
