NI to Scotland tunnel?

JasonStatham

[URL] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/14/rail-bosses-revive-plan-to-build-tunnel-from-scotland-to-northern-ireland [/URL]

Will this have any implications for Brexit? Is it even possible. I thought there was a load of WW2 ordinance down there.

I thought you were a pretty good swimmer anyway?

jmlad2020

Bring it on I say. UK government foots the bill and it benefits our Island.

NIMAN

Will never happen.

suicide_circus

This has reptilian fingerprints all over it

as was said about the bridge,about as much econmic sense as building a luas in dingle



The UK might not even exist,by time it gets built....with the scots spoiling for independance

osarusan

Followed by Scottish independence and Irish reunification?

Will never happen.

Atlantic Dawn

What would the demand be? The ferries and cargo shops are managing fine with the current demand.

Panthro

Anything less than hypersonic highway I'm not interested.
I'm not sure what it is but its what I want.
Tunnel.
So 90s man.

HBC08

Will never happen of course but it costs nothing for Boris to throw a bone to the unionists.

bilbot79

Could help Unionist perception of superiority of esteem. No bad thing.

Donald Trump

Build a big wall across the sea and let them walk across the top.

I love walls

Five Eighth

Donald Trump wrote: »

Build a big wall across the sea and let them walk across the top.

I love walls

Could they build it so that they could jump the pillars?

Didn't Boris de pfeffel spend loads of taxpayers dosh on some kind of garden bridge in London that was never built?

retalivity

It'll never happen, but this bit speaks volumes

A new rail connection between Carlisle and Stranraer would be needed and the width of railway track in Ireland may need to be altered, the proposal said.

"You lads, change your entire infrastructure because we may or may not look to connect with it. Sometime. In the future. Maybe."

Sparko

Probably a bunch of Tory donors who can charge a fortune in consulting fees.

It’ll happen one day.

If they start planning and surveying now it could take 20 years before any actual work takes place, but it will happen.

retalivity

retalivity wrote: »

It'll never happen, but this bit speaks volumes



"You lads, change your entire infrastructure because we may or may not look to connect with it. Sometime. In the future. Maybe."

Even if that got sorted out the DUP will insist on imperial and SF will want metric measurements

Donald Trump

Aegir wrote: »

It’ll happen one day.

If they start planning and surveying now it could take 20 years before any actual work takes place, but it will happen.

In 20 years they'll possibly have autonomous drones that can fly 24/7 in almost all weather.

Unless they want to put some kind of hyperloop in!




Although if it takes 20 years to get it off the ground, independent Scotland might not bother building it . They might be more interested in putting their own one in to the continent

astrofool

We should let him build it, and then when it's a couple of months to completion, hold the unification referendum, free billion dollar fast link to an independent Scotland.

Mad_maxx

ive heard worse ideas

Tyrone212

Germany and Denmark are doing something similar. It is only 11 miles and won't be finished until 2029. This would be over 20 miles and some in the British media are presenting it as a way to bypass the protocol. I mean how thick are they? If they started it tomorrow it would probably be 10 years minimum(I'm being overly optimistic)at the very least to complete.

RandomViewer

BAM have the tender in , they are saying they'll have it built third week of January 2122 unless there's extras

Darc19

April fools Day has started early this year.

Usual Boris bluster and some eejits in Scotland and NI will actually believe it.

Reality will set in at some point

RandomViewer

Tyrone212 wrote: »

Germany and Denmark are doing something similar. It is only 11 miles and won't be finished until 2029. This would be over 20 miles and some in the British media are presenting it as a way to bypass the protocol. I mean how thick are they? If they started it tomorrow it would probably be 10 years minimum(I'm being overly optimistic)at the very least to complete.

Channel tunnell is 50k and they built that in 5 years in the 1980s

Harry Palmr

A tunnel between an island of 7 million and a country of 5.5 million costing 50 billion somethings. Just take a ferry.

John Doe1

It will be a grand piece of infrastructure for the Celtic Union to inherit.:P

dd973

This is claptrap, like Boris Johnson's Thames Garden Bridge, N.G.H, Not Going to Happen.

McMurphy

RandomViewer wrote: »

BAM have the tender in , they are saying they'll have it built third week of January 2122 unless there's extras

Brilliant.

Donald Trump

dd973 wrote: »

This is claptrap, like Boris Johnson's Thames Garden Bridge, N.G.H, Not Going to Happen.

The eejit just wants to throw out random things in the hope that eventually one of them would be done in 100 years and he can somehow be given credit for being some kind of visionary

This isn’t Boris saying this, it’s the rail planners.

Fossil fuels are only going to get more and more expensive and development of alternative powered planes and ships seems to be somewhat lacking at the moment.

Gatling

Oddly enough it could make sense ,

I'm surprised the idea of tunnel to Scotland and a second from Dublin to hollyhead ,to allow freight and people to travel from here to Europe and vice versa via the channel tunnel ,
Yes it would be an expensive project but one which could be beneficial in the long run .

deandean

Not worth it.
Forget about it.
Mainly since it became uneconomic for Irish people to import a used car from GB.

RandomViewer

Aegir wrote: »

This isn’t Boris saying this, it’s the rail planners.

Fossil fuels are only going to get more and more expensive and development of alternative powered planes and ships seems to be somewhat lacking at the moment.

Hydrogen paste looks like a possible replacement
https://newatlas.com/energy/powerpaste-hydrogen-fuel-paste/

Polar101

Just to put things into perspective, the length of this new tunnel would be the same as the Channel Tunnel (which is world's 3rd longest railway tunnel). That cost about £8.5 billion in today's money.

While this is a better plan that the Boris Bridge, and might actually be possible to build - how realistic is it financially? Not very, seems to be the obvious answer.

Donald Trump

Five Eighth wrote: »

Could they build it so that they could jump the pillars?

Didn't Boris de pfeffel spend loads of taxpayers dosh on some kind of garden bridge in London that was never built?

Maybe he could just two two big pillars, one on each side, and an oul' zipline between them

jmlad2020

Sure the IRA would blow it up anyways. They would need to make it Terrorist proof adding a few more Billion to it. Not feasible really.

Imagine spending all that money on something only to be ruined in a day.

Tyrone212

RandomViewer wrote: »

Channel tunnell is 50k and they built that in 5 years in the 1980s

Yeah but it only serves trains. This is supposed to be road and train so a much bigger operation.

statesaver

Foreign country wants to build a tunnel, why should we care ?

gozunda

Darc19 wrote: »

April fools Day has started early this year.

Usual Boris bluster and some eejits in Scotland and NI will actually believe it.

Reality will set in at some point

I've heard the Scunnel (Scottish/ Northern Ireland Tunnel) would help facilitate the annual migration of the Haggis from the mountain regions of Scotland to the Antrim Hills.

To date the poor wee buggers have to swim across - braving the dangerous currents between Scotland and Northern Ireland. Many are sadly drowned during this annual migration

I'd give it a thumbs up if even just to help save the lives of these much maligned creatures

OneEightSeven

The sea there is about 150 meters deep; whereas, it's 50 meters deep between England and France, so the tunnelling costs will be higher. It took 13 years for the Channel Tunnel to turn a profit and that's with 14 - 18 million passengers and 18 to 20 million tonnes for freight a year. You would have to massively increase the population density on each side of the coast to make this viable.

If I was a Unionist on either side of the sea, I would be offended by this feeble attempt to persuade me the English and the Tory's care about Northern Ireland and Scotland. You also have to wonder why the Tory's and the English bother with the Union, the Tory's would have won a majority in 2010 if Scotland was independent and Northern Ireland drains about £13bn a year from the UK's tax money.

John Doe1

John Doe1 wrote: »

It will be a grand piece of infrastructure for the Celtic Union to inherit.:P

Would you be happy to inherit the related debt?

bob mcbob

OneEightSeven wrote: »

The sea there is about 150 meters deep; whereas, it's 50 meters deep between England and France, so the tunnelling costs will be higher. It took 13 years for the Channel Tunnel to turn a profit and that's with 14 - 18 million passengers and 18 to 20 million tonnes for freight a year. You would have to massively increase the population density on each side of the coast to make this viable.

If I was a Unionist on either side of the sea, I would be offended by this feeble attempt to persuade me the English and the Tory's care about Northern Ireland and Scotland. You also have to wonder why the Tory's and the English bother with the Union, the Tory's would have won a majority in 2010 if Scotland was independent and Northern Ireland drains about £13bn a year from the UK's tax money.

Not that this is ever going to happen but let's pretend.

The rock between Dover and Calais is mainly chalk so relatively soft.
There was a lot of volcanic activity around that area in the past so the rock is likely to be hard igneous rocks. Not a geological expert but that should make tunnelling a wee bit tricky.

Still why let reality get in the way of political posturing.

trashcan

Donald Trump wrote: »

Maybe he could just two two big pillars, one on each side, and an oul' zipline between them

Arlene, Sammy or Gregory to test it out.

Big Ears

OneEightSeven wrote: »

The sea there is about 150 meters deep; whereas, it's 50 meters deep between England and France, so the tunnelling costs will be higher. It took 13 years for the Channel Tunnel to turn a profit and that's with 14 - 18 million passengers and 18 to 20 million tonnes for freight a year. You would have to massively increase the population density on each side of the coast to make this viable.

If I was a Unionist on either side of the sea, I would be offended by this feeble attempt to persuade me the English and the Tory's care about Northern Ireland and Scotland. You also have to wonder why the Tory's and the English bother with the Union, the Tory's would have won a majority in 2010 if Scotland was independent and Northern Ireland drains about £13bn a year from the UK's tax money.

There's no question that financially it just doesn't add up, and if you want to appease the people of North Ireland/Scotland you'd be better spending £5-10bn in each on infrastructure and jobs creation.

It is most likely bluster from Boris, however this is the country who recently voted and implemented Brexit and this is a man who'd love to stroke his own ego with a major infrastructural project being nicknamed after in, and being achieved in his time in power.
For those reasons while it would make no sense, and still seems unlikely, it is actually possible it could happen.

If it were to happen, It would require large improvements in rail on both sides to make the rail aspect any use, and people would have to change trains upon arrival to the other side.
The potential of driving between Belfast and Glasgow in 3 hours is appealing, and as we move more towards electric cars, being able to drive between Scotland and Northern Ireland would be a much greener way to travel than flying.
Ignoring the environmental impact of creating the tunnel in the first place that is

It probably won't happen, but seeing as it'd be Britain's money and not Ireland's, I hope they splurge on it anyway.

bob mcbob

It seems even some Tory MP's believe this proposal is nonsense

Conservative MP Simon Hoare, chairman of the Northern Ireland Select Committee, yesterday dismissed the idea of an undersea tunnel as fanciful and said the government's focus should be on making the protocol work.

"The trains could be pulled by an inexhaustible herd of Unicorns overseen by stern, officious dodos," he tweeted.

"A PushmePullYou could be the senior guard and Puff the Magic Dragon the inspector. Let’s concentrate on making the protocol work and put the hallucinogenics down."

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19090665.put-hallucinogenics-down-prospect-undersea-tunnel-scotland-northern-ireland-debunked/

RandomViewer

Wicklow to Wales would make more sense,

LXFlyer

RandomViewer wrote: »

Wicklow to Wales would make more sense,

Ah yes, but that doesn't reinforce the Union which is what this bluster is all about.

gctest50

OneEightSeven wrote: »

The sea there is about 150 meters deep; whereas, it's 50 meters deep between England and France, so the tunnelling costs will be higher...........

Build a Submerged Floating Tunnel ?

Calahonda52

gctest50 wrote: »

Build a Submerged Floating Tunnel ?

WWII munition dump, including chemical weapons on sea floor

VinLieger

OneEightSeven wrote: »

The sea there is about 150 meters deep; whereas, it's 50 meters deep between England and France, so the tunnelling costs will be higher. It took 13 years for the Channel Tunnel to turn a profit and that's with 14 - 18 million passengers and 18 to 20 million tonnes for freight a year. You would have to massively increase the population density on each side of the coast to make this viable.

If I was a Unionist on either side of the sea, I would be offended by this feeble attempt to persuade me the English and the Tory's care about Northern Ireland and Scotland. You also have to wonder why the Tory's and the English bother with the Union, the Tory's would have won a majority in 2010 if Scotland was independent and Northern Ireland drains about £13bn a year from the UK's tax money.

Actually a straight shot between Larne and Stranraer can get as deep as 240 metres, so 4 times as deep as the euro tunnel

Aegir wrote: »

This isn’t Boris saying this, it’s the rail planners.

Fossil fuels are only going to get more and more expensive and development of alternative powered planes and ships seems to be somewhat lacking at the moment.

Ahh aegir the eternal union optimist.

So your trusting the rail planners who don't know what the hell they will be digging through and cant send anything down to check due to all the munitions that make the bridge impossible. Also this is absolutely coming from Boris as a distraction and it will never ever be built.

blanch152

RandomViewer wrote: »

Wicklow to Wales would make more sense,

The problem with Ireland/Wales is that at the most reasonable points, either Dublin/Holyhead or Rosslare/Fishguard, the sea depth is over 100m and the distance is over 90km.

Arklow to Bardsey Island is shorter and the sea less deep, but the onward road and rail connections are far worse.