Grayling Out - Shapps In

[Western Lord]

You wouldn't need much of a shift to end up with a 3 way coalition between Labour, SNP & Lib Dems.

Such a coalition would be, shall we say, constitutionally problematic bearing in mind that the SNP's policy is to have no MPs at Westminster!

 

[hexagon789]

Such a coalition would be, shall we say, constitutionally problematic bearing in mind that the SNP's policy is to have no MPs at Westminster!

And based on recent polls, I'm not convinced the arithmetic adds up either

 

[Oliver]

Battery technology is a law of diminishing returns. There is only so much energy you can store in batteries per kilogram in weight of the battery itself. Roger Ford had an excellent breakdown of the physics in a recent MR mag. You need to use a certain percentage of the energy stored in the battery to accelerate its own weight. Overhead wires you have no such problem! The only issue you face is maintaining the voltage drop in the wires when you get increasing amounts of trains drawing more current. But more feeder stations from the grid solve that! Once sensible standards are put in place so that don't have to build structures that you could moor cruise liners to then costs become more reasonable.

There was an interesting article about the design of the soon to be released electric MINI. The MINI design chief was saying that the sweet spot for electric cars is 150 - 180 miles of battery power. Any less and people won't buy them, any more and the weight and cost makes them inefficient and too costly. Future battery technology may increase that range, but there will always be a trade off between range, weight and cost.

 

[ashkeba]

We seem to be drifting off topic with all this talk of wires Vs bi-mode Vs hydrogens Vs battery.
That said, I'm actually surprised there isn't a thread about what the Net zero carbon emissions target for 2040 means for the railways and electrification.

Indeed. Do we have any idea of Shapps's views on these controversies from his past comments? The main line in his area is ECML so already electrified but has some diesel-under-wire pollution. Nowhere near HS2 and has voted in favour but was he following orders or is he a strong supporter?

 

[takno]

Such a coalition would be, shall we say, constitutionally problematic bearing in mind that the SNP's policy is to have no MPs at Westminster!

Lots of parties have a policy of getting rid of the house of lords but still have Lords. Only Sinn Feinn have a policy of not working within the system that currently exists while it exists. The SNP's policy is that Scotland should be allowed another vote on independence. Nothing about that makes it constitutionally difficult for them to be in government.

Frankly the main issue with it right now is that the LibDems have categorically ruled out working with Corbyn, and Labour don't look keen to get rid of him.

 

[Western Lord]

Lots of parties have a policy of getting rid of the house of lords but still have Lords. Only Sinn Feinn have a policy of not working within the system that currently exists while it exists. The SNP's policy is that Scotland should be allowed another vote on independence. Nothing about that makes it constitutionally difficult for them to be in government.

Frankly the main issue with it right now is that the LibDems have categorically ruled out working with Corbyn, and Labour don't look keen to get rid of him.

The SNP's policy is for Scotland to be independent. It would be campaigning in a referendum for Scotland to be independent and have no MPs at Westminster, thus one of the parties of government would be actively campaigning not to be in government. I call that constitutionally problematic.

 

[AM9]

The SNP's policy is for Scotland to be independent. It would be campaigning in a referendum for Scotland to be independent and have no MPs at Westminster, thus one of the parties of government would be actively campaigning not to be in government. I call that constitutionally problematic.

No more than UKIP, The Brexit Party and leavers from Labour and the Conservatives campaigning to be MEPs.

 

[Western Lord]

No more than UKIP, The Brexit Party and leavers from Labour and the Conservatives campaigning to be MEPs.

Nothing like the same thing, MEPs do not form part of a government.

 

[takno]

The SNP's policy is for Scotland to be independent. It would be campaigning in a referendum for Scotland to be independent and have no MPs at Westminster, thus one of the parties of government would be actively campaigning not to be in government. I call that constitutionally problematic.

The rest of the UK would need another election post Scottish independence. That would be sensible thing to do regardless of whether the SNP were part of the government though. Doesn't strike me as an important factor either way.

 

[Western Lord]

The rest of the UK would need another election post Scottish independence. That would be sensible thing to do regardless of whether the SNP were part of the government though. Doesn't strike me as an important factor either way.

The sole objective of the SNP joining a coalition government would be to engineer that government's demise. You don't see a problem with that?

 

[takno]

The sole objective of the SNP joining a coalition government would be to engineer that government's demise. You don't see a problem with that?

Well, it's not an accurate statement of the SNP's purpose for a start. They do have a reasonably comprehensive set of policy positions and are more than capable of making a valid and useful contribution to the government of the whole UK. It's just that one of their main policy planks is to have a referendum on whether they can leave. I'm frankly a bit mystified as to why you think this is an issue. I appreciate you may not get as much coverage of the SNP as we do in Scotland, but even as a Labour party member who is exceptionally unlikely to vote for them I'd have to say that they are a serious political party and not the single-issue pressure group you are painting them to be. Hell, on the back of the last couple of days I'd say that Boris is far more of a single issue zealot

 

[MarkyT]

Sorry, didn't mean to suggest that battery trains couldn't get up to line speed - they are certainly a good choice for impossible gaps. I'm just more concerned that with diesel hybrids you have to have the full weight and cost installed to do even a mile off the wires, so the economic case for filling a gap of 30 miles further up the track is less. For battery-backed trains, if you can reduce the unpowered section down to 1 or 2 miles you can remove all but a small number of the expensive heavy battery packs, so the case for electrifying the 30 mile section further down the track is much stronger

That's exactly the kind of 'alchemy' I was suggesting. To me the Cardiff Valleys electrification is possibly the most interesting electrification project underway in the UK at the moment. The use of OHLE/battery trains there doesn't preclude further electrification on the NR controlled infrastructure that the tram-trains and FLIRTs will use. I hope that once the new Valleys team has demonstrated they can plan and implement cost effective electrification, they will be let loose by NR and TfW on the VOG, Maesteg, Ebbw Vale routes, the main line to Swansea...and beyond. The big prize possible with Swansea, along with Oxford and Bristol electrification, would be to allow the gen sets on a large proportion of the GWR IET fleet to be removed. I would say that within the remaining life of the fleet, there's a good chance of that happening. As others have said the problem is not the intrinsic expense of electrification, but that of a particular difficult project that must never be allowed to become the benchmark for all future projects. I say it again, bi-modes provide the interim pragmatic measure to enable the electrification to proceed further without all the dependencies of the initial scheme, and when new wires are energised anywhere en route it is always the time to raise the pantographs and switch off the diesels through the section, as this will save (somebody) some money and probably improve performance. When under the wires there is clearly a weight disadvantage in having to lug the diesels and fuel tanks or batteries around, but that doesn't seem to impact much on the cl. 80x acceleration which is stunning in my (admittedly limited) experience, as the OHLE supply is able to reliably deliver the power required, and once the train up to line speed then the extra weight has little effect on the energy used for cruising, especially on level track.

 

[The Ham]

The sole objective of the SNP joining a coalition government would be to engineer that government's demise. You don't see a problem with that?

In which case it would be a matter for the next parliament, which there would need to be the case anyway as the political makeup of the parliament would change regardless if they were in government or not.

 

[edwin_m]

Nowadays, it's as fair and watertight as DfT can make it. Still, there are always going to be judgement calls and likely someone will feel aggrieved. I doubt whether any competitive tender can get around that. I can't see that as the root of all the problems with UK Rail.

Recent events have shown that DfT either doesn't understand how risk transfer works or chooses to ignore it. Trying to get the private sector to accept an open-ended pensions risk is either going to have them either refuse or put a massive allowance into the price to cover it. Over the longer term it's pretty clear to me that having franchise take the revenue risk isn't delivering value for money to the government either.

Well, it's not an accurate statement of the SNP's purpose for a start. They do have a reasonably comprehensive set of policy positions and are more than capable of making a valid and useful contribution to the government of the whole UK. It's just that one of their main policy planks is to have a referendum on whether they can leave. I'm frankly a bit mystified as to why you think this is an issue. I appreciate you may not get as much coverage of the SNP as we do in Scotland, but even as a Labour party member who is exceptionally unlikely to vote for them I'd have to say that they are a serious political party and not the single-issue pressure group you are painting them to be. Hell, on the back of the last couple of days I'd say that Boris is far more of a single issue zealot

I'd say the SNP is looking a good deal more coherent, competent and united than either of the larger parties and is doing a fairly creditable job of running Scotland (with the proviso I don't live there so am metaphorically looking at the green grass over the other side of Hadrian's wall). Having been there when it didn't happen in 1979 I'm inclined to be opposed to independence but I can absolutely see why anyone in Scotland would support it as a way to break away from the current ** struggles to find printable word **. And the Tories are doing more to make it happen than the SNP.

 

[Western Lord]

Well, it's not an accurate statement of the SNP's purpose for a start. They do have a reasonably comprehensive set of policy positions and are more than capable of making a valid and useful contribution to the government of the whole UK. It's just that one of their main policy planks is to have a referendum on whether they can leave. I'm frankly a bit mystified as to why you think this is an issue. I appreciate you may not get as much coverage of the SNP as we do in Scotland, but even as a Labour party member who is exceptionally unlikely to vote for them I'd have to say that they are a serious political party and not the single-issue pressure group you are painting them to be. Hell, on the back of the last couple of days I'd say that Boris is far more of a single issue zealot

In a UK context, of course the SNP is a single issue party. They want Scotland to be independent. The idea that they would be making meaningful contributions to a UK coalition government is laughable. They would be working for their objective of Scottish independence, which would inevitably lead to the end of the government of which they were part. The SNP has no interest in a UK government which governs Scotland, they want independence and to be free of Westminster.

 

[jfisher21]

I guess the snp would be more interested in confidence and supply (like the current dup deal) rather than a full coalition!

 

[takno]

In a UK context, of course the SNP is a single issue party. They want Scotland to be independent. The idea that they would be making meaningful contributions to a UK coalition government is laughable. They would be working for their objective of Scottish independence, which would inevitably lead to the end of the government of which they were part. The SNP has no interest in a UK government which governs Scotland, they want independence and to be free of Westminster.

I don't suppose you read their manifesto in 2017. It's quite long and only about 2 pages of it are dedicated to independence. Inevitably it focuses a lot on issues that are particularly relevant in Scotland, or in the Scottish impact of wider issues, but that's perfectly normal and doesn't affect their ability to perform in a coalition government. They obviously couldn't be more than very junior partners anyway, since they have a ceiling of less than 60 MPs, and a government needs over 300, so they wouldn't exactly be driving policy.

David Cameron may have made some absurd comparisons in 2015 between a Labour/SNP "coalition of chaos" and the "strength and stability" of his government. That's hardly played out well though, and unless you bought into that garbage then there really was never an issue here

 

[hwl]

We seem to be drifting off topic with all this talk of wires Vs bi-mode Vs hydrogens Vs battery.
That said, I'm actually surprised there isn't a thread about what the Net zero carbon emissions target for 2040 means for the railways and electrification.

By 2050 not 2040 for zero net emissions.
The 2040 issue is no diesel only powered traction...

 

[GRALISTAIR]

If the very first thing he says is that he is going to reinstate all the electrification schemes Grayling cancelled I will be willing to give him some slack, else he is no better than Grayling was, and Grayling was an utter disaster. Sod all this hydrogen and bi-mode nonsense, get the bloody wires up.

yes sir indeed

 

[ashkeba]

Lots of parties have a policy of getting rid of the house of lords but still have Lords. Only Sinn Feinn have a policy of not working within the system that currently exists while it exists.

Do they really? I thought it was just that they won't swear or affirm allegiance to the monarch, which seems perfectly logical for Republicans. What's Sinn Fein's non participation policy exactly, then?

 

[takno]

Do they really? I thought it was just that they won't swear or affirm allegiance to the monarch, which seems perfectly logical for Republicans. What's Sinn Fein's non participation policy exactly, then?

Their MPs don't sit. I'm aware that it's because they won't swear allegiance to the crown, but the effect in practice is that they don't participate, and couldn't really form a meaningful part of government. It's a situation very different from the SNP or plaid

 

[ashkeba]

Their MPs don't sit. I'm aware that it's because they won't swear allegiance to the crown, but the effect in practice is that they don't participate, and couldn't really form a meaningful part of government. It's a situation very different from the SNP or plaid

They still stand for election, use their constituency and Westminster offices, lobby ministers and so on. In other words, they participate as far as they are permitted to do so while the other parties refuse to grant freedom of political belief about monarchy to those taking seats in the house.

 

[pt_mad]

By 2050 not 2040 for zero net emissions.
The 2040 issue is no diesel only powered traction...

Quite. And surprisingly there's no thread relating to this yet it's a really serious issue and one in which the railway will pay a vital part.

 

[HSTEd]

There's no problem theoretically starting and getting up to linespeed under a moderately sized battery, just in repeating that exercise many times and sustaining prolonged high speed running. You could get to the point, say where only 10% of a route remained unwired, when battery storage alone could suffice to cover the gaps. What I'm suggesting is that while in the process of achieving that, operators could still save fuel and engine hours by exploiting new sections of wiring as they are gradually energised.

But you won't get an expansion of electrification because the network effect would be dead.
If bi-modes can really deliver what is claimed I'm afraid there will be very little additional electrification.

Almost everything with the traffic density to justify electrification without the network effect is electrified or already committed to be electrified, using the current 25kV scheme costs and the treasury capital return assumptions.

 

[hwl]

Quite. And surprisingly there's no thread relating to this yet it's a really serious issue and one in which the railway will pay a vital part.

Probably because those of us dealing with it spend enough time on it already and don't want to spend even more time on the forum on it!

 

[swt_passenger]

Quite. And surprisingly there's no thread relating to this yet it's a really serious issue and one in which the railway will pay a vital part.

[2040]
No single thread that I can find but it has appeared many times in other threads about rolling stock replacement...

 

[Journeyman]

In a UK context, of course the SNP is a single issue party. They want Scotland to be independent. The idea that they would be making meaningful contributions to a UK coalition government is laughable. They would be working for their objective of Scottish independence, which would inevitably lead to the end of the government of which they were part. The SNP has no interest in a UK government which governs Scotland, they want independence and to be free of Westminster.

Absolutely, and as far as I can tell, they will do whatever they consider necessary to garner support to that end, regardless of any particular principles. They love presenting themselves as a liberal social democratic party, because that's the way the political wind is blowing in Scotland and those are the people they need to attract to the cause of independence, so they're trying to woo them. If it suddenly became apparent that being an authoritarian hard-right party would serve the quest for independence better, they'd adopt that position in a heartbeat.

I really can't trust a party so ideologically committed to something regardless of whether it's a good idea or not. I'm an Englishman who has lived in Scotland for nearly ten years, and instinctively I'm opposed to inserting a border between where I live now and where I was born, but I also really don't think the supposed advantages are worth the downsides - very much like Brexit. It feels like independence, which is permanent and will have very serious and potentially damaging effects for some time, is being presented as a solution to a temporary problem in the form of a bad government. Yes, Scotland didn't vote for Brexit, but we don't even know if it's going to happen yet. Going for independence now feels like burning your house down because there's a spider in the bath.

 

[urbophile]

The SNP has no interest in a UK government which governs Scotland, they want independence and to be free of Westminster.

The previous government, and even more this one it seems, has no interest in the welfare of Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales. The only MPs that do represent every party but the Conservatives.

 

[urbophile]

Almost everything with the traffic density to justify electrification without the network effect is electrified or already committed to be electrified, using the current 25kV scheme costs and the treasury capital return assumptions.

Transpennine? Midland Main Line?

 

[HSTEd]

Transpennine? Midland Main Line?

The section of the Midland Main Line with the highest traffic density is either electrified or very soon will be.
How much traffic actually is there north of Kettering? Especially given that with current practice you would have to electrify four tracks to get it.

And whilst TPE has a lot of trains, they are all rather short and light.