The Strategic Rail Review will consider how the rail network on the island can improve sustainable connectivity between major cities, enhance regional accessibility including to the North West and support balanced regional development.
Mullingar - Portadown is entirely along the historical alignment. Its not a new alignment, and would not require massive engineering works or anything else. This is all covered in the document. Have you read it?
Overhead electricals and substations is incredibly expensive. The price for that is not at all surprising.
Wait, a fairly easy electrification and dual-tracking of the existing line between Portarlington and Galway, about 140km, would cost 800-1300m.
The brand new Portadown - Mullingar alignment, 130km measured on Google Maps with a couple of straight lines but likely much longer if looking at realistic route, would cost 1,100 - 1,600m. Thats full route land purchase, all engineering works (which would be enormous as the geography of that route is extremely difficult (its all drumlins and lakes, the only flat parts are underwater), lots of environmental surveys and monitoring, new stations serving towns which have no remaining historic alignment, etc.
Am I reading that right? If so, these costings have no credibility.
Where on earth did you get £17 billion from ?? It cost £290 million - still dear but a couple of orders of magnitude lower!
Cork-Mallow is a definite bottleneck of the future and there's no consideration in the Review that I can see in relation to that.
Thanks that is a fantastic article that helps answer some of my questions. I actually don't think it rules out Hydrogen at all, but it does bring up other options.
While the cost of operating hydrogen powered trains is higher then overhead electric, that isn't really surprising. The question would be how the higher operating cost compares to the high upfront capital cost of electrification. Keep at mind, according to the rail report, we are talking about €1.6 billion to just electrify the Cork to Dublin line. That will buy you a lot of extra hydrogen.
Havign said that this report brings up another option, battery hybrids. Could we get away with spending less on electrificatino by building just islands of electrified sections and have hybrid battery trains charge up on those sections. Perhaps it could bring that electrification bill far down.
Is there that much conflict between what's proposed and what would be in urban rail scope? Yes I think there's a couple conflicts that I think I can see (I could be wrong).
I think the Cork line towards Mallow will get very messy before too long because of the competing needs of intercity/urban. An hourly high-speed Dublin service will get stuck behind a 15-minute Cork/Kilbarry/Monard/Blarney/Mallow commuter service, but maybe they have considered this. It looks like a gap in the document, because they don't have them listed as "upgrades planned" or "capacity constrained".
They mention a tram/light rail to Carrigaline via Mahon on page 60, but nobody previously has proposed this and frankly I don't think it will happen. Later in the same document (page 66) they acknowledge that it "would be very costly and disruptive" to bring freight on that exact same route and they correctly dismiss it out of hand. It's doable, just that it's not realistic. Maybe not an important gap, but it's a gap.
I think Limerick Shannon rail line would need an overhaul to be effective as a commuter line, whereas this document just builds on the existing Limerick system. The existing system doesn't work for commuters. That looks like a gap.
Hydrogen: I am told that using electricity from wind, etc to produce "Green" hydrogen costs about 30% of the inputted electrical energy. So providing prices reflect costs, that is a huge initial advantage for electric power. Then electric trains can feed energy back into the system through dynamic braking.
Hydrogen has to be compressed to at least 300Bar for use in vehicles. You don't get those kinds of pressure vessels cheap. Personally I would not like to be near them.
Germany. 5 already in service, currently replacing 15 Diesel trains on a line:
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/coradia-ilint-hydrogen-trains/index.html
Caltrains in California have ordered 29, starting to enter service next year.
France has ordered dozens, coming into service in 2025.
Keep in mind, that we aren't even planning to start electrification until 2040, plenty of time to see how these projects go, the real costs and do a proper comparison with full electrification.
Hydrogen has the massive benefit that there is no capital cost in terms of system wide infrastructure like overhead lines. However they do require specialised refuelling stations and generating stations. Generating hydrogen through electrolysis is expensive and very power intensive. Almost certainly the long term operational cost is significantly higher than battery/OHLE.
Where are there actual hydrogen powered trains in use? Announcements alone doesn't mean something is taking the market by storm.
"Yes, the catenary and electrical substations etc are expensive. But you reap a big benefit in energy efficiency, operation costs, the reliability of a proven technology, reliability and simplicity relative to hybrids."
But would the operating savings really add up to the multiple billions that electrification would require?
I believe that generally speaking you need rail lines that are much busier then ours to justify the cost of electrification.
Hydrogen powered intercity trains seem to be tkaing the rail market by storm at the moment. Lots of countries looking into using it or have already placed orders. I'd like to see a full break down and CBA of Hydrogen powered trains versus electrification.
@bk
That list is a very good start. For the sake of completeness I’d round it out with the out of scope stuff because splitting out commuter in such a small integrated system makes no sense, so DART+, Cork Commuter, Cork-Limerick improvements per the M20 report but not the direct route. And I’d spend the rest of the money further improving connectivity in central/greater Dublin (Metro/Luas expansion etc) and sorting out or replacing Conolly/Docklands/Spencer Dock properly for the long term. And separately, I’d look for tactical opportunities like other low hanging fruit and quick return mini-projects rather than mega projects and big new builds.
"Battery is not feasible for 200kmh at intercity distances, electric is only option really."
Wrong, hydrogen powered trains are also an option and seem to be maturing quickly.
Look at Caltrains in California, they have recently placed a big order for 25 hydrogen powered intercity trains. First will enter service next year, they plan on completing the full transition by 2035. They have 800km range between refuels.
"Other than the east west tunnel madness - is there that much conflict in whats proposed vs what would be in urban rail scope?"
Well that madness is the largest part of this plan.
But really the question would be would it be better to spend this amount of money on this package of projects or spending the same on extra Metro and commuter rail projects?
Yes, the catenary and electrical substations etc are expensive. But you reap a big benefit in energy efficiency, operation costs, the reliability of a proven technology, reliability and simplicity relative to hybrids.
Also many electrification projects include large sums for track rationalisation, which is not necessarily specific to electrification. As for rolling stock, is existing stock is life expired, its probably cheaper to replace it with electric as opposed to hybrid.
Battery is not feasible for 200kmh at intercity distances, electric is only option really.
I agree a full rail review at all levels would be great, but would also be so massive in scope itd never get done. You can put together entire reviews just for GDA, another for Cork, then one combined for LMK/GWY/WAT. That on top of all the national network stuff would never see the light of day, it would be too much.
Other than the east west tunnel madness - is there that much conflict in whats proposed vs what would be in urban rail scope?
The 200km/h project on it's own get a ratio of only 0.9. While 300km/h got a ratio of 0.5
It is only the entire 36 billion project that get a ratio of 1:1, but we all know that won't happen.
As for what I'd spend it on? Commuter and mass transit. Rail into and around our cities. That is where we would get the most benefit, that is how we take the maximum numbers of cars off our roads.
I know that isn't the focus of this report and not what you asked, but this is why I feel this report looks so poor. I feel like we needed a rail review that realistically covered all rail services (including light rail, Metro and commuter rail).
Within the scope of this project, these are the major parts I would do:
I'm sure there are more good parts, but these jump out at me.
I'm speaking rhetorically, not about you personally.
Once again, separately Iarnród Éireann have only just secured EU funding to examine the feasibility of four tracking the Northern Line
That study will answer that question.
@timmyntc
For cutting all intercity travel times by 30%+ I'd be more than happy with a CBA of 1:1.
I think we would all be happy with this one - and I don't see anybody arguing it. But that's not when the problem is, it's all the other nonsense that got lumped in.
@Deedsie
...and freight from the area to other locations throughout the region and beyond.
It's always interesting when the freight thing gets thrown in at the end of a post. Almost always a sign of a very weak argument. Rail freight has almost reached zero in this country, for many reasons, most of them pretty logical. Reversing this and achieving a significant shift from road freight to rail freight such that a you'd get to 30% 40% or 50% would be a mammoth task, requiring investment that would make the Arup guesstimates in the current review look cheap. The cost of rail infrastructure (tracks, trains, etc) would be a small part of what's required as you would rebuild transport and logistics across the island from the ground up - warehouses, last mile, logistics systems and integration - the cost would be eye-watering as you would be replacing/replicating a hundred or more years of road infrastructure, distribution infrastructure, etc etc.
But let's leave all that aside for a minute. Can you give me 5 practical real world examples of rail freight that would work, practically and economically, in Counties Limerick and Clare. You can throw in Tipp as well if you think it helps your argument.
Urban/commuter rail is not in scope of this document.
Realistically, what else do you spend the money on nationally? Upgrading the M7/M8 to autobahn status?
I am from Nenagh, I used to work there. I know many others who do work there. No one is doing that journey on a train five days a week but work patterns have changed. People work hybrid models at home and in the office. And if it could save families needing a second car you better believe people would take that option if trains were reliable and frequent.
But you conveniently excluded the other example I mentioned of Ennis and its surrounds. Wouldnt that be a far more likely commute for people by train or even from Colbert, Moyross, Cratloe, Bunratty, Sixmilebridge. And also for people from Shannon and freight from the area to other locations throughout the region and beyond.
The focus is on urban projects though this is a sci-fi document, Bus Connects and DART+ are actually months away from breaking ground, provided that ABP ceases creating a roadblock for them
@hans aus dtschl
You are absolutely correct. Running through trains from say Cork to Dublin Airport sounds great, but it's nonsense in practice and would cause IIR immense operational problems. Lets look at it:
First option; a current 7 carriage Mark IV trainset that runs from Cork to Heuston decants its Heuston passengers, and the reverses out of Heuston and takes whatever route is now available to to get to Dublin airport. You now have a very expensive mainline trainset playing Choo Choo train around Dublin's busy core network, to take maybe 20, 30, 40 passengers to Dublin Airport. And of course it has to travel back again. So this scarce and expensive resource wastes 2 hours and significantly reduces the availability of trainsets for mainline Cork-Dublin use.
The alternative is to start running little trains from Cork direct to Dublin Airport, bypassing Heuston. So IIR is now going into direct competition with the Aircoaches of this world. And I think we all know exactly how that would work out. And the taxpayers of this country are spending billions to facilitate it.
A metro connection from central Dublin to the Airport makes a lot of sense. A coach from Heuston to the Airport makes sense. Integrated solutions from various points around Dublin to the Airport make sense. Dragging intercity trains along a spur to Collinstown is daft.
Another idea that should have been left on a beermat in the pub. And another serious knock to the credibility of this report.
I’ve read the report in full and I hate to say it, but the CBA’s are actually pretty bad!
On their own, most of the projects have a CBA ratio less than 1. Only by combining them all into one big package, could then come up with a CBA ratio of 1. Which is only ok, really not great.
But the real problem is that we all know this entire package won’t be delivered as one project like that. That instead many of the projects will have to be re-examined individually and with a CBA less then 1, most won’t pass muster.
This is the fundamental catch.
Southern services to Dublin terminate at Heuston, which has no through-running and poor connection to commuter services. You can take the Southern Services around the outside of the city between Cellbridge and Dunboyne and on towards the airport, but you'll inconvenience most of the current passengers by doing so.
There's a fundamental conflict between the needs of national rail and commuter rail, and this document doesn't "work" because commuter rail is out of scope. A big piece of the picture is missing.
Have you read the report? There are estimated costings per "project" and estimated net gain for the economy.
The report mentions why certain options were considered and others were not, cost-benefit is the #1 factor underpinning these decisions. As a high level review its obviously not forensically costed beyond the 100s of millions level of detail, but to say none of it has seen a CBA is false.
Read the report in full, whats posted on thread here is morsels of the full thing.
Dublin AIrport rail to the City via the Maynooth line at Blanchardstown? Crazy idea: the Maynooht line will be running at capacity before long. Do you want to 4-track that? Furthermore it a really roundabout route.
This is an unfinanced plan that has a 27 year timeline where none of the proposals have come anywhere near a CBA. It's not in anyway forward planning.
