Lord Glentoran wrote: » Your emotive language says a lot about how brittle the anti rail position is. For everyone else, Google shadow tolls on the M3.
Greaney wrote: » Just because you say it, doesn't make it true!!https://connachttribune.ie/western-rail-corridor-user-numbers-exceed-expectations/
donvito99 wrote: » So less than a full complement of coach passengers, on average
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » It's a joke. Not only would a coach service be far cheaper to run, the environmental impact would be less.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » There's no planet where it makes environmental sense to run a diesel train for an average of 39 passengers.
end of the road wrote: » it does make sense when 1. 39 is only the average and is not the exact. there are plenty of full trains on the wrc. 2. the train keeps people from going back to their cars and has potential to have it's numbers grown.
westtip wrote: » Of those 39 how many are fare paying passengers? How many are using the travel pass? If the line between the two largest urban areas in the West/midwest can only muster up 39 passengers per train what are the expected numbers of a train passing through a few small towns? Oh my head is getting tired.
Lord Glentoran wrote: » Google shadow tolls on the M3.
Del.Monte wrote: » It's a potentially useful link line that was run into the ground by CIE and should have never closed in the first place. I have no vested interest in seeing it reopened as I have it ticked off - in both directions - many times but believe that it should be reopened and properly operated. CIE don't feature in any real future for the line in my opinion.
ohographite wrote: » I'll admit you have a point here. Even though the train would be running anyway from Limerick to Ennis and from Athenry to Galway,(which lowers the environmental impact of journeys made from either of these sections to the new section and beyond) I would say the Ennis-Athenry section just about fails to lower greenhouse gas emissions. However, I am in support of electrifying this railway, which, while expensive, would make environmental sense as an alternative to keeping diesel trains running on it.
tom1ie wrote: » Close it and replace it with an efficient frequent bus service.
tom1ie wrote: » Close it and replace it with an efficient frequent bus service. The population density's are not there to support it. As for electrifying it, save the money and divert the money to a metro system in Dublin.
donvito99 wrote: » Wouldn't a Galway commuter service using the stock presently wasted running North of Ennis have a far greater environmental impact?
Ubbquittious wrote: » This thread still filled with people hatin' the WRC? just like 10 years ago.
Last Stop wrote: » You could hardly class it as a roaring success in those 10 years could you?
ohographite wrote: » I'm not denying it was off to a bad start, but it's been doing better in more recent years. Currently it is doing all right patronage-wise compared to Ennis-Limerick, or Manulla-Ballina, neither of which have really been threatened with closure.
ohographite wrote: » However, I am in support of electrifying this railway, which, while expensive, would make environmental sense as an alternative to keeping diesel trains running on it.
Last Stop wrote: » When you consider the passengers numbers that the reopening of the Navan line for example would have achieved, people are right to be complaining
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » Ah here. Electrification costs a fortune, it's very much worth it on busy lines, but crazy on ones which are barely used. .
Last Stop wrote: » Where has the WRC been threatened with closure? If people are giving out its because of the massive capital cost of reopening the line which has extremely low passenger numbers. When you consider the passengers numbers that the reopening of the Navan line for example would have achieved, people are right to be complaining
ohographite wrote: » What exactly makes it crazy? I am aware electrification costs a fortune, but I still think it's worth it for all of Ireland's rail network, because it would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Last Stop wrote: » The biggest cost is not the actual electrification but the rolling stock. How could you justify buying a fleet of brand new rolling stock for a single track railway for 39 people? You’d be better off buying them a Tesla each if you want to reduce greenhouse gases
Last Stop wrote: » You’d be better off buying them a Tesla each if you want to reduce greenhouse gases
ohographite wrote: » The batteries of electric cars have a negative environmental impact because of the mining of toxic materials necessary to make them, and that's why public transport is still necessary to make our travelling habits more sustainable, even when all private cars are electric.
L1011 wrote: » I actually tried this. One five year out of date result comes up, along with 9 completely unconnected articles. You are so badly informed about what you have latched on to as a conspiracy you don't even know how to direct people to the info on it. They're called "capacity payments", if that helps you find stuff.
cdaly_ wrote: » Don't forget also that electric private cars are still emitting greenhouse gases, just not on the roadside. Instead the emissions are back at the generating station.
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » Ah here. Electrification costs a fortune, it's very much worth it on busy lines, but crazy on ones which are barely used. You touch on an issue here that is important. The WRC extension can effectively only be built if it attracts European funding, and this albeit unlikely scenario can only come to pass if the project is electrified. However the only way that a political decision to open a line north of Athenry can ever be made is if it can use some old rolling stock from replacements on busier lines, so in effect it can only happen in the context of full electrification nationally. So the railway campaigners seeking to have trains on this closed line should really start with a campaign to electrify the entire network.