It releases quite a lot of carbon dioxide per tonne cement clinker yes.
As for an alignment,yes. It's simple,cancel HS2 from Old Oak Common to Euston with provision for future extension if needed. Build Old Oak Common with connecting surface lines at the end to the WCML and GWML. As OOK, is already underground I believe, there is no additional expenditure incurred on OOC. Build HS2 Phase 1 from London to Birmingham entirely in tunnel except for areas where it follows an existing or current railway alignment/surrounding railway land where it shall be above ground with landscaping to mitigate noise and light pollution issues for the local residents and environment. Build HS2 Phase 2, future projected extensions to Scotland and all future separate HS lines including HS3/NPR and,in the long-term, a high speed line paralleling the ECML, to the same specifications. Cost-benefit ratio is irrelevant as the cost of such HS lines could be offset against a reduction in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions induced due to modal shift from more heavily greenhouse-gas emitting modes of transport such as private car and air to high-speed rail.
So you're saying that they can't build on new bits of land so that it takes the straightest path, but it's okay to build on land where a previous line once was? The argument gymnastics is impressive.
And you know that HS2 will transplant all that soil to a suitable site as near as possible, plant news trees in it and then plant 4ha of new trees for each 1ha of trees removed?
If it's the environment you care about then I'm surprised you haven'd fact checked the actual quantities, when according to Ian Walmsley the actual amount of ancient woodland to be destroyed by HS2 Phase 1 is less than 10 hectares - say one average sized field, which is a lot less than many housing and road schemes which do not attract the same Chiltern based Nimby hostility. Building the entire length in tunnel will push costs up even more for no environmental benefit - unless you also agree to bury the M40 as well.
Yes it is "acceptable". That silly dogmatic approach in a dynamic economy is not only unnecessary but unworkable. You cannot just blow a whistle and stop the evolution of our landscape as of right now. The world we see is not how it was 100 1,000 or 10,000 years ago and unless you propose euthanising the population back to middle ages levels you can't expect our requirements to stand still either.
The opportunity for more Pendo lenghtening as now passes due to crash reg changes.
I've repeated many times on this forum that my opinion on p15/16 has changed. I was against it when it threatened to demolish an historic pub. Now that the pub is secured, I'm in favour.
Yes there is a demonstrable case for HS2, but it does help to read it rather than deny its existence. https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/the-strategic-case-for-hs2. If you want an "independent" view (although it's strange that people against HS2 regard groups with names like "StopHS2" as being independent!) you can try this. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...s-financial-benefit-controversy-a8937936.html
It's only the southern part of the corridor; even that is disputed; if it is a problem, just build new platforms and/or stop trains at other places other than Euston. Very easy.
How does adding new platforms increase capacity when you cannot fit any more trains on the lines that get to them?
Like a new line to an additional terminus... somewhere like OOC, perhaps? I wonder how we could do that, or how we could then maximise the number of trains feeding in to the 2 termini, when the current lines are ftb?
)
Two (possibly three) more magical words: double-decker trains.
Sorry, I thought everyone was being facetious?! Must find that irony punctuation mark on my keyboard...
We can use more of the large supply of brownfield land we have-we've already gone too far ripping up our countryside with motorways and ribbon development-we have the chance to stop now.
No environmental benefit-the destruction of lots of people's homes and woodlands and open countryside when there is an alternative. All the property that had to be bought can be sold now to fund it.