The £100m bat shed

[Taunton]

She also did some time in the EA and was constantly in tears at how ignorant of and uninterested in, the environment everyone there seemed to be and how utterly pointless (yet grotesquely expensive) everything they did was.

Don't get me started on how the EA ruined the flood protection on the Somerset Levels (including impacting the Castle Cary to Taunton line) when they managed to get responsibility for this, throwing away 200 years of experience and actually selling off the silt dredgers for the drainage channels (to Netherlands, who were very pleased to receive such equipment on the cheap, but thought we must be mad), all apparently to "save the habitat" of the water voles, which were a particular hangup of one senior officer.

 

[stuu]

Purely in the interests of accuracy I will point out the original DLR rolling stock did not "last" 4 years, but was changed over because a change of government policy allowed a tunnelled extension to Bank, which the original cars without end doors were prohibited from using. They were sold to Essen in Germany, where they have run faultlessly ever since. Some are still around there, and I wonder if they are actually going to outlast the DLR cars bought to replace them.


Only the BRICKBATS flying around the banking headquarters there

And?

That doesn't alter the fact that the original DLR was massively under spec and had literally billions spent getting it to where it needed to be, so the original budget is a pointless comparison for anything

 

[corfield]

And?

That doesn't alter the fact that the original DLR was massively under spec and had literally billions spent getting it to where it needed to be, so the original budget is a pointless comparison for anything

And?

Doesn’t change that once they’d got the scheme through and built it the rest followed because it was clearly worth further investment from what it was delivering (“reinforce success”!) and we have a very good network that has continued to deliver.

In contrast, HS2 style gold plating from the outset hasn’t worked and the thing is really starting to resemble an albino pachyderm that has dragged down the entire concept of new rail lines making us fall even further behind others.


Going back to the point, it’s not so much that a 1km long, Xm wide bespoke structure muchly argued about and sitting over a 200mph railway cost 100M - but that the entire thing occurred at all.

100M on “may or may not help some bats”, which are basically everywhere (I have one that attends my town centre backyard and have always had them in gardens) is just insane, which was the HS2 chap’s point. Especially as it seems Bucks Council’s “anti” position came from believing it wasn’t needed.

 

[jfowkes]

100M on “may or may not help some bats”, which are basically everywhere (I have one that attends my town centre backyard and have always had them in gardens)

The tunnel is not to just protect bats in general, it's a particular species of bat (Bechstein's bat), which are classified as "near threatened" as a species.
Natural England made a statement on the tunnel and it's necessity:

There has been inaccurate coverage about Natural England’s involvement in the development of HS2's bat tunnel.

Natural England has not required HS2 Ltd to build the reported structure, or any other structure, nor advised on the design or costs. The need for the structure was identified by HS2 Ltd more than 10 years ago, following extensive surveying of bat populations by its own ecologists in the vicinity of Sheephouse Wood.

HS2 has an obligation throughout the whole route to abide by legislation that exists to protect nature. Natural England and HS2 have a team that work closely together to ensure that this duty is observed, so the rail line can be completed without harming important wildlife.

Natural England was consulted by HS2 on whether the proposal designed to mitigate the impact of the railway on rare and protected bats was sufficient to comply with environmental law - we advised that it was.

It is for HS2 Ltd to make choices, consider risks and factor in costs when deciding how to comply with environmental law - that could be by choosing a route which avoids species and sites protected for nature or by investing in mitigations to limit the harm when the route passes through sensitive sites.

Bechstein’s bats are a highly protected species across Europe. They are one of the world's rarest bat species, with fewer than ten estimated breeding colonies in in the whole of England. There is ample evidence - despite claims made to the contrary - that they are at risk of colliding with high-speed trains.

We are facing a nature crisis with 1 in 6 species in the UK now facing extinction. That is why development must be sustainable and work alongside nature recovery to protect our natural environment for the future.

 

[tspaul26]

Going back to the point, it’s not so much that a 1km long, Xm wide bespoke structure muchly argued about and sitting over a 200mph railway cost 100M - but that the entire thing occurred at all.

100M on “may or may not help some bats”, which are basically everywhere (I have one that attends my town centre backyard and have always had them in gardens) is just insane, which was the HS2 chap’s point. Especially as it seems Bucks Council’s “anti” position came from believing it wasn’t needed.

The works package isn’t limited to the bat tunnel.

It also includes inter alia:

• Some fairly significant earthworks (cutting, embankment, &c.)
• Retaining walls
• Two new bridges
• Three culverts
• Sundry PROW and watercourse diversions
• Drainage

In other words, the £100m price tag covers a lot of ‘stuff’ that would have to be built anyway even if the bat tunnel was omitted.

 

[themiller]

The works package isn’t limited to the bat tunnel.

It also includes inter alia:

• Some fairly significant earthworks (cutting, embankment, &c.)
• Retaining walls
• Two new bridges
• Three culverts
• Sundry PROW and watercourse diversions
• Drainage

In other words, the £100m price tag covers a lot of ‘stuff’ that would have to be built anyway even if the bat tunnel was omitted.

So how much is for the bay cave that would have been avoided if the bats weren’t regarded as ‘near threatened’?

 

[Hophead]

As a slight digression, I was wondering if news of the cost of this structure has reached mainstream media? Because if it has, and they've not used the headline "Bat Shed Crazy", I will be extremely disappointed, to say the least.

 

[swt_passenger]

As a slight digression, I was wondering if news of the cost of this structure has reached mainstream media? Because if it has, and they've not used the headline "Bat Shed Crazy", I will be extremely disappointed, to say the least.

It’s reached the Guardian (post#1) and the Times, that I’ve seen. Their headlines will disappoint you though…

 

[Egg Centric]

I've no idea whether the structure itself is cheap for what it is. I see the question as irrelevant and actually a bit of a red herring. The real question is whether it's worth spending £100m (or even £10m) to save some bats and to me the answer is so blindingly obvious no that it points to a real issue with planning in this country. I hope labour have the balls to sort it out.

 

[Energy]

It’s reached the Guardian (post#1) and the Times, that I’ve seen. Their headlines will disappoint you though…

It unfortunately made it to GBNews with the presenter exclaiming how many hospitals could have been built with the £100m… clearly showing his expertise as £100m is barely enough for a small hospital.

 

[stuu]

I've no idea whether the structure itself is cheap for what it is. I see the question as irrelevant and actually a bit of a red herring. The real question is whether it's worth spending £100m (or even £10m) to save some bats and to me the answer is so blindingly obvious no that it points to a real issue with planning in this country. I hope labour have the balls to sort it out.

Don't you think we have destroyed enough nature already?

 

[Mogster]

Don't you think we have destroyed enough nature already?

Yes. But pragmatically I’d suggest that if you asked UK conservationists how they’d prefer to spend £100mn of public money it wouldn’t be on building this structure.

The root cause appears to be Buckinghamshire council being a pain in the arse. HS2 is a nationally important infrastructure project. Local concerns should be reviewed but council planning departments need to be overruled in these cases just so things can actually move forward.

 

[Falcon1200]

I was wondering if news of the cost of this structure has reached mainstream media?

It has been on the BBC News website since Thursday;

Bat safety barrier will cost £100m, says HS2 chairman

Sir Jon Thompson tells a conference there is "no evidence high-speed trains interfere with bats".

www.bbc.co.uk

Bat safety barrier will cost £100m - HS2 chairman​

Personally I applaud Sir Jon Thompson for attempting to show one of the reasons why HS2 is costing so much.

 

[BlueLeanie]

What's the real reason for building a 1km long Faraday cage in the middle of the Buckinghamshire countryside?

Is there some kind of bunker, military, or research facility underneath or nearby?

 

[tspaul26]

It’s for the bats in the woods to fly over without being hit by passing trains.

There is no bunker or other facility.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

It unfortunately made it to GBNews with the presenter exclaiming how many hospitals could have been built with the £100m… clearly showing his expertise as £100m is barely enough for a small hospital.

Most people in the country would prefer a small hospital to a home for bats. How many homes for people could be built for £100 million?

 

[tspaul26]

Most people in the country would prefer a small hospital to a home for bats. How many homes for people could be built for £100 million?

Well, they’re in luck because no home for bats is being built anyway.

 

[Mogster]

Surely bats, with their sensitive hearing, would avoid an oncoming train? There doesn’t seem to be any evidence that bats are killed by trains. There is evidence that carrion killed by trains attracts raptors leading to raptor deaths, but bats?

As well as being expensive this thing is surely causing more general environmental damage when being built?

 

[bahnause]

It looks like the need for this tunnel (or any alternative) was identified by the HS2 project 10 years ago. Quite a bit of gaslighting going on here by the looks of it:

Natural England role in High Speed 2

There has been inaccurate coverage about Natural England’s involvement in the development of HS2's bat tunnel. Natural England has not required HS2 Ltd to build the reported structure, or any other structure, nor advised on the design or costs. The …

naturalengland.blog.gov.uk

Natural England has not required HS2 Ltd to build the reported structure, or any other structure, nor advised on the design or costs. The need for the structure was identified by HS2 Ltd more than 10 years ago, following extensive surveying of bat populations by its own ecologists in the vicinity of Sheephouse Wood.

 

[renegademaster]

Don't you think we have destroyed enough nature already?

"We" largely being Celts in the bronze age, the country has got substantially more wild in a steady trend since the end of the 19th century

 

[jfowkes]

Surely bats, with their sensitive hearing, would avoid an oncoming train? There doesn’t seem to be any evidence that bats are killed by trains. There is evidence that carrion killed by trains attracts raptors leading to raptor deaths, but bats?

As well as being expensive this thing is surely causing more general environmental damage when being built?

Bat senses didn't evolve to cope with 360kph objects. Many birds are killed in airstrikes when the aircraft was perfectly visible because the animal just doesn't correctly perceive the threat.

And there's evidence that bats are adversely affected by roads, it's not unreasonable to assume that a high frequency high speed rail line would also have negative effects.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320718315702

To summarise that paper:

Major roads have important negative effects on insectivorous bat activity

• Major roads affect activity in five of the thirteen studied taxa.
• Low-flying species are more affected than those that fly in the open.
• Road impacts may be due to road kills, traffic disturbance and ruptured connectivity.

 

[BlueLeanie]

It looks like the need for this tunnel (or any alternative) was identified by the HS2 project 10 years ago. Quite a bit of gaslighting going on here by the looks of it:

Natural England role in High Speed 2

There has been inaccurate coverage about Natural England’s involvement in the development of HS2's bat tunnel. Natural England has not required HS2 Ltd to build the reported structure, or any other structure, nor advised on the design or costs. The …

naturalengland.blog.gov.uk

Sounds more like "slopey-shoulders" to me.

Too many NGOs and Government bodies desperately trying to justify their existence, then suddenly getting all shifty and uncomfortable when someone puts a price on their influence.

£100M would probably pay for a 6.1km extension from Verney Junction to Buckingham, along with a new curve. Have a much bigger environmental influence than a bat wing.

All day service via Aylesbury to London. Morning and evening peak services to Oxford and Milton Keynes.

 

[jfowkes]

the country has got substantially more wild in a steady trend since the end of the 19th century

Evidence for that? Environmental charities and organisations are screaming about the lack of biodiversity and habitat loss in the UK.

 

[renegademaster]

Evidence for that? Environmental charities and organisations are screaming about the lack of biodiversity and habitat loss in the UK.

Forestry in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[jfowkes]

Forestry in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I'm not sure an increase in the amount of forested woodland is enough to claim that the UK is "more wild". It's covered in more forest, sure. And if you read the "threats" section of that article, it's not in great shape.
But if "wild" has any worthwhile definition, it should surely include many more habitats than forests (grasslands, marshlands, hedgerows, rivers/lakes/seas etc.).

 

[renegademaster]

surely include many more habitats than forests (grasslands, marshlands, hedgerows, rivers/lakes/seas etc.).

Forests are the natural state of the UK and would be what land would revert too of left alone . All the other habitats you mentioned are results of human intervention

 

[jfowkes]

Forests are the natural state of the UK and would be what land would revert too of left alone . All the other habitats you mentioned are results of human intervention

Ok, fine, I can see that being a sensible definition of "wild". I'd argue it's not a very useful one for the purposes of discussing biodiversity and environment today.

 

[renegademaster]

Ok, fine, I can see that being a sensible definition of "wild". I'd argue it's not a very useful one for the purposes of discussing biodiversity and environment today.

Theirs certainly less land being used for monocrop farming nowdays and a lot more grassland. The government pays farmers to let their land lay fallow. A lot more wetland as well since land reclamation became unfashionable.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Surely bats, with their sensitive hearing, would avoid an oncoming train? There doesn’t seem to be any evidence that bats are killed by trains. There is evidence that carrion killed by trains attracts raptors leading to raptor deaths, but bats?

As well as being expensive this thing is surely causing more general environmental damage when being built?

This reminds me of the "bat bridges" which are occasionally installed over new road projects and consist of cables suspended over the carriageway to encourage bats to fly above the height of the tallest LGVs.
From a few articles I've seen recently, the necessity and effectiveness of such structures is being questioned by some bat behaviour specialists, but if you're involved in providing components for the structures it isn't likely to be in your interest to pay much attention.

 

[swt_passenger]

This reminds me of the "bat bridges" which are occasionally installed over new road projects and consist of cables suspended over the carriageway to encourage bats to fly above the height of the tallest LGVs.
From a few articles I've seen recently, the necessity and effectiveness of such structures is being questioned by some bat behaviour specialists, but if you're involved in providing components for the structures it isn't likely to be in your interest to pay much attention.

Post #3 had a video about this…