When will the penny drop that we cannot keep building large roads?

GT89

bk wrote:

Yes, I was thinking that or EV trains.

In the short term, it seems they will cascade existing Diesel trains from around Dublin to these other services as the new Dart+ trains arrive.

However in the long term, as those trains age and require replacement, they will then need to think about the next step.

Full electrification is one option. But as you say Hydrogen trains or Battery EV are also possibilities.

Overhead wires would be better than battery or hydrogen train. More power and no need. I'd say i will be long time before batteries capable of powering an eight car train will be developed and battery ranges for long distance intercity might be an issue too. Trains that can charge off OHLE would be good for example if Dublin to Cork was electrified trains could switch to battery mode if going to Tralee or Limerick for example.

Also considering most developed countries have overhead wires anyway EV rolling stock may be difficult to get and any EV trains aimed at the European Market would likely be targeted at rural services for example 1 or 2 car units. There are very few disadvantages to electrification bar the initial cost.

cgcsb

cgcsb wrote: »

Remember, compared to Ireland these are basically second world countries.

Comedy Gold. Keep it up.

monument

monument wrote: »

It seems the penny isn’t dropping with a lot of people that continuing to build an unsustainable transport system isn’t compatible with acting on climate change — car use alone amounts to ~13% of Ireland’s carbon emissions, then there’s build and maintenance, poor land use etc.

Meanwhile, it's said off-line and on boards.ie etc that anything to do with rail is a white elephant -- it's like an echo of that Sunday Independent article from before the Dart opened calling the Dart a white elephant and saying it would be cheaper to pay for taxis for everybody.

EDITED: I should stress that I think rail is only a part of the sustainable transport mix -- my point about is how jarring it is that people have no problem with laods of dual carriageways to towns start calling rail in city a white elephant.

The next generation of Electric vehicles(cars and buses and even scooters) kills most of your arguments. Autonomous vehicles will make great and efficient use of these roads you object to and will be super safe.

So look at it that we are planning ahead and building the infrastructure for these green machines which aren’t far away. The heavy slow and inflexible train could again begin to become a dinosaur. If you want to go from Tralee to Dublin, don’t mind your 200kph train that departs from a station 100ks away, jump into your autonomous car set your destination, relax and using decent roads you get direct to your destination refreshed.

GT89

Mayo_fan wrote: »

The next generation of Electric vehicles(cars and buses and even scooters) kills most of your arguments. Autonomous vehicles will make great and efficient use of these roads you object to and will be super safe.

So look at it that we are planning ahead and building the infrastructure for these green machines which aren’t far away. The heavy slow and inflexible train could again begin to become a dinosaur. If you want to go from Tralee to Dublin, don’t mind your 200kph train that departs from a station 100ks away, jump into your autonomous car set your destination, relax and using decent roads you get direct to your destination refreshed.

Electric cars are still cars. They still create congestion which trains and buses with proper bus priority measures do not suffer from. The same kind of backwards thinking was dominant in the 1950s.

GT89

GT89 wrote: »

Electric cars are still cars. They still create congestion which trains and buses with proper bus priority measures do not suffer from. The same kind of backwards thinking was dominant in the 1950s.

Are you expecting congestion on inter-urban multi-lane routes in sparsely populated Ireland?

buffalo

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you expecting congestion on inter-urban multi-lane routes in sparsely populated Ireland?

If Ireland is so sparsely populated that there's no congestion on inter-urban routes, why do we need multi-lane roads?

buffalo

buffalo wrote: »

If Ireland is so sparsely populated that there's no congestion on inter-urban routes, why do we need multi-lane roads?

Because lorries and coaches are limited to 100kmph.

buffalo

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because lorries and coaches are limited to 100kmph.

They can be overtaken with ease on these traffic-free roads, no?

buffalo

buffalo wrote: »

They can be overtaken with ease on these traffic-free roads, no?

A two lane road with traffic travelling in opposite directions doesn't allow safe travel at 120 or 130kmph (or higher) based on jurisdiction.

end of the road

Mayo_fan wrote: »

The next generation of Electric vehicles(cars and buses and even scooters) kills most of your arguments. Autonomous vehicles will make great and efficient use of these roads you object to and will be super safe.

So look at it that we are planning ahead and building the infrastructure for these green machines which aren’t far away. The heavy slow and inflexible train could again begin to become a dinosaur. If you want to go from Tralee to Dublin, don’t mind your 200kph train that departs from a station 100ks away, jump into your autonomous car set your destination, relax and using decent roads you get direct to your destination refreshed.

they don't actually kill any of their arguments at all, in fact they strengthen them in some sense.
the efficiency won't be enough such that we will be able to keep up the over dependence we have on road transport, not to mention that they aren't green machines, as unless we power them with 100% clean energy which isn't possible to do, then they are simply transferring the polution elsewhere, but to a more concentrated area.
certainly they will be far far better then diesel and petrol cars, but the fact remains that a more sustainable form of transport in the form of rail based solutions will be needed and electric and autonomous vehicles won't get us out of that reality, perhapse what they will do is allow some road space to be given over to things like cycling, or even green spaces.
it doesn't matter how good the car will get, rail based transport will be here to stay.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

Are you expecting congestion on inter-urban multi-lane routes in sparsely populated Ireland?

if it's there now, it will be then as well, just a bit less perhapse.
if it's not there now, and would be less with autonomous vehicles, then it's an argument to take away some of that road space for other uses.

Deleted User wrote: »

Because lorries and coaches are limited to 100kmph.

which could be an argument to cut the speed limits for cars to the same.
requires less over taking and less lanes as everyone is at the same speed anyway.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

which could be an argument to cut the speed limits for cars to the same.
requires less over taking and less lanes as everyone is at the same speed anyway.

It appears you wish to cripple a superior technology as you realise that rail can't compete on a level playing field. High speed rail is OK for you but constructing an environment in which vehicles can travel at higher speeds then reduce their speed once they reach urban areas and then deliver a final coup-de-grace of delivering the passenger to their own door is not desirable.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

not to mention that they aren't green machines, as unless we power them with 100% clean energy which isn't possible to do, then they are simply transferring the polution elsewhere, but to a more concentrated area.

My EV is powered entirely from electricity generated from renewable sources.
I feel you are using the environment as a spurious excuse to discount a superior method of transport.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

It appears you wish to cripple a superior technology as you realise that rail can't compete on a level playing field. High speed rail is OK for you but constructing an environment in which vehicles can travel at higher speeds then reduce their speed once they reach urban areas and then deliver a final coup-de-grace of delivering the passenger to their own door is not desirable.

a "supperior" technology that requires a serious amount of space to cater to, requires a serious amount of cost, and which our dependence on is becoming unaffordible and unsustainable.
so i want us to cut our dependence on it a bit, cut what we spend on it, where possible look to take some of the space we are using to give over to other uses, if not now, then when the claimed efficiencies of autonomous vehicles are realized.
by the way, given i use it, it's not in my interest to cripple it, but the good news is that cutting speeds won't cripple it.

Deleted User wrote: »

My EV is powered entirely from electricity generated from renewable sources.
I feel you are using the environment as a spurious excuse to discount a superior method of transport.

you might think it is powered using 100% renewable sources, but the reality is if you are connecting to the grid at any stage to charge it, then it's not ultimately 100% powered by renewable sources.
that's fine, but realistically it doesn't change the fact that cutting down road usage a bit remains a good idea, for cost and space reasons mainly.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

a "supperior" technology that requires a serious amount of space to cater to, requires a serious amount of cost, and which our dependence on is becoming unaffordible and unsustainable.



so i want us to cut our dependence on it a bit, cut what we spend on it, where possible look to take some of the space we are using to give over to other uses, if not now, then when the claimed efficiencies of autonomous vehicles are realized.








you might think it is powered using 100% renewable sources, but the reality is if you are connecting to the grid at any stage to charge it, then it's not ultimately 100% powered by renewable sources.
that's fine, but realistically it doesn't change the fact that cutting down road usage a bit remains a good idea, for cost and space reasons mainly.

You can't be argued with as you are wedded to your beliefs. You have an established pattern of following and proselytizing your beliefs rather than approaching discussions with fact based arguments.
The rest of us can see the huge utility that a good intercity road network delivers to the Citizens of a state in terms of safety, convenience and economic growth. The chargers that I charge at are powered by renewable electricity. I can't account for each individual electron that is stored in my battery as that is impossible but I assure you that the providers are providing electricity from renewable sources and my preference to consume electricity from renewable sources drives adoption of renewable energy in the national grid.
Modern cars are safer than ever. My car has lane keeping assist, adaptive cruise control, pedestrian collision avoidance systems to name but a few of a multitude of passive and active safety systems. It takes me where I wish to go hygienically in comfort, safety and in near silence while emitting no emissions.
Why would you seek to deny that to others by channeling investment to an inferior form of transport.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

You can't be argued with as you are wedded to your beliefs. You have an established pattern of following and proselytizing your beliefs rather than approaching discussions with fact based arguments.
The rest of us can see the huge utility that a good intercity road network delivers to the Citizens of a state in terms of safety, convenience and economic growth. The chargers that I charge at are powered by renewable electricity. I can't account for each individual electron that is stored in my battery as that is impossible but I assure you that the providers are providing electricity from renewable sources and my preference to consume electricity from renewable sources drives adoption of renewable energy in the national grid.
Modern cars are safer than ever. My car has lane keeping assist, adaptive cruise control, pedestrian collision avoidance systems to name but a few of a multitude of passive and active safety systems. It takes me where I wish to go hygienically in comfort, safety and in near silence while emitting no emissions.
Why would you seek to deny that to others by channeling investment to an inferior form of transport.

there is an inter city motorway network and then there is beyond an inter city motor way network which we have.
that costs money, and given road gets in real terms the majority of the transport funding and at quite a high percentage then it probably needs to, to say that cutting down usage of road to benefit those who have no option what soever to use it and so we can avoid giving more and more space over to it is absolutely quite right to be suggested.
otherwise we are going to end up with so much motor way we won't be able to maintain it all and things get worse for everybody which is ridiculous.
cutting road spend and investing in other more beneficial things is not denying anyone anything, the motor way network is in place and isn't going to be shut down and nor should it be. but if autonomous vehicles are so efficient as claimed, then the amount of space and thus investment won't need to be as much and there may be space available to give back to the people.

BrokenArrows

Impressive public transport is the only way to reduce car usage.

Irelands public transport is shockingly bad, but thats because of our population.

People expect a country of 4.5 million to be able to provide good pubic transport and for those companies to still turn a profit. Its not going to happen.

The government need to accept that they need to improve transport links. Rail, Bus, Trams, even metro systems in places like dublin and also accept that its a loss making venture and not expect it to be profitable.

Its 2.5 hours from Galway to Dublin by train. Its 2-2.5 hours by car (while obeying the speed limits). I know which choice id make and that would be by car.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

otherwise we are going to end up with so much motor way we won't be able to maintain it all and things get worse for everybody which is ridiculous.

Motorway surface once laid to standards with adequate drainage and in mild climates such as one experiences in Ireland need to be resurfaced every 25 or more years. the operators of PPP schemes in Ireland based their projections on not needing to renew road surfaces before the projects were handed back to the state.

BrokenArrows

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Its 2.5 hours from Galway to Dublin by train. Its 2-2.5 hours by car (while obeying the speed limits). I know which choice id make and that would be by car.

I'd actually take Express Coach on those accursed Motorways which EOTR dislikes so much in preference to Train as it is less expensive, more reliable and a generally more pleasurable experience than the Train.
EOTR neglects to mention that once good motorways become available then Coach services become viable and undermine the customer base for Train services.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Motorway surface once laid to standards with adequate drainage and in mild climates such as one experiences in Ireland need to be resurfaced every 25 or more years. the operators of PPP schemes in Ireland based their projections on not needing to renew road surfaces before the projects were handed back to the state.

I think they actually have to put a new surface down just before handing back so effectively we won't need to surface a motorway for the first 50 years

EOTR, you've just thanked the last post. Does that mean that you acknowledge the benefits of a funding model which takes the burden off the state for provision of infrastructure; a model which wouldn't be so easily implementable for rail especially as privatisation of rail elsewhere has been so unsuccessful.

A regular high speed rail link serving the linking the City of Galway with Dublin City might be of great benefit to the people of Galway City but isn't of much benefit to the remaining 98.5% of the population whose taxes have paid for that link. I suppose this could be mitigated somewhat by stopping at towns along the way but then it ceases to be high speed rail.
Or do we build high speed rail links to every town in the Country over the size of 10,000 people where each km of track costs exactly as much as a km of track on that high speed rail link to Galway.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

EOTR, you've just thanked the last post. Does that mean that you acknowledge the benefits of a funding model which takes the burden off the state for provision of infrastructure; a model which wouldn't be so easily implementable for rail especially as privatisation of rail elsewhere has been so unsuccessful.

no, i just happen to believe that what the poster stated is possibly correct.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

no, i just happen to believe that what the poster stated is possibly correct.

OK. what credible funding model have you got for High Speed Rail or any Rail solution for that matter other than higher taxes.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

A regular high speed rail link serving the linking the City of Galway with Dublin City might be of great benefit to the people of Galway City but isn't of much benefit to the remaining 98.5% of the population whose taxes have paid for that link. I suppose this could be mitigated somewhat by stopping at towns along the way but then it ceases to be high speed rail.
Or do we build high speed rail links to every town in the Country over the size of 10,000 people where each km of track costs exactly as much as a km of track on that high speed rail link to Galway.

that's no different to anything anywhere, a new hospital in cork for example would be no good to someone in cavan even though they have helped to pay for it.
once my tax is contributed to the pot, i know it will go to services in other parts of the country that i won't benefit from, that is just life.
true high speed rail isn't going to happen in ireland so it's irrelevant
.

GT89

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Impressive public transport is the only way to reduce car usage.

Irelands public transport is shockingly bad, but thats because of our population.

People expect a country of 4.5 million to be able to provide good pubic transport and for those companies to still turn a profit. Its not going to happen.

The government need to accept that they need to improve transport links. Rail, Bus, Trams, even metro systems in places like dublin and also accept that its a loss making venture and not expect it to be profitable.

Its 2.5 hours from Galway to Dublin by train. Its 2-2.5 hours by car (while obeying the speed limits). I know which choice id make and that would be by car.

I don't think it is that awful. For example I think Dublin Bus for example has improved dramatically over the last 10 years. I can't think of many city bus operations in Europe that provide WiFi and USB ports for passengers on standard services.

I actually think public transport in Dublin is quite good I don't have a problem with it. I'm never waiting more than 15 mins for a bus on the route that serves which I think is quite good. I do agree that there is a lack of rail infrastructure in Dublin a Metro would be great. Outside Dublin I would agree that public transport is fairly piss poor.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

OK. what credible funding model have you got for High Speed Rail or any Rail solution for that matter other than higher taxes.

rail in the great scheme of infrastructure is actually quite cheap, so no need for higher taxes.
forget about true high speed rail, it ain't happening.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

rail in the great scheme of infrastructure is actually quite cheap, so no need for higher taxes.
forget about true high speed rail, it ain't happening.

Do you think these optimistic 13 year old calculations from a group who can't be mistaken for anything else but a vested interest group have reduced in the meantime?
http://www.railusers.ie/transport21/costs.php#drp

...and all done without additional taxation and not at the expense of any other necessities.

My criticism of you remains that you proselytize your beliefs and facts are disregarded as inconvenient.

monument

Mayo_fan wrote: »

The next generation of Electric vehicles(cars and buses and even scooters) kills most of your arguments. Autonomous vehicles will make great and efficient use of these roads you object to and will be super safe.

So look at it that we are planning ahead and building the infrastructure for these green machines which aren’t far away. The heavy slow and inflexible train could again begin to become a dinosaur. If you want to go from Tralee to Dublin, don’t mind your 200kph train that departs from a station 100ks away, jump into your autonomous car set your destination, relax and using decent roads you get direct to your destination refreshed.

Will we not all be zooming around by Hyperloop?

I see a picture of cars in a traffic jam which they could have probably avoided if they had used navigation software with traffic updates.
I see a picture of cars in a traffic jam which was for all i know caused by a collision that would have been avoided if the cars had been fitted with automatic emergency braking which from 2022 is standard on all new vehicles.
I see a picture of cars in a traffic jam which was for all I know caused by a breakdown which is highly unlikely to happen when cars are powered by electric motors.