Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Allocations, Diagrams & Timetables' started by raildude, 22 Nov 2011.
Full story here:
Some long journey!
From the article, this caught my eye:
"Highland Council had asked that the authority make sure people living close to the railway that would be used to be consulted."
Probably a journalistic misquote, and I know it is HC, but not sure of the practicality of consulting people (everyone) close to the railway, "oh look dear we have had a letter from the Scotrail telling us what trains are running this week".
If it was going by road would they consult people (a far more problematic alternative)?
What if people say no?
Or is it just political posturing by HC?
This (the absurd insistence from Highland Council) is the problem that any expansion of nucular generating capacity would face; people get so hysterically paranoid about the Dangers of Nucular Power, when no one is ever bothered about power stations using cheap imported "coal" from India or Russia. (Even Friends of the Earth, who are utterly pointless).
What's Alex Salmon's stance on Nucular power, by the way? Does he just take the kneejerk "No Nukes here!" populist attutude, or might he actually have given the matter some thought?
Is no-one lese thinking that the consultation with locals could just to be to make sure that loud locomotives aren't running at night removing materials?
Presumably they could also transport it by boat? In anycase, as BR proved in the 80s, there is no danger from transporting a nuclear flask by train, or presumably by road. However the locals certainly wouldn't like it being transported by road as they only do about 20mph, and no there is no risk from terrorists
I wonder if they will do any work to improve the railhead at Thurso?
The station is pretty much in the town centre and I would have thought that it might be desirable to establish a separate loading facility just out of town.
I would imagine they would move it by road to Georgemas where there is already a loading/unloading facility.
He promised "no nuclear in Scotland", despite it being a reserved matter, because planning is a devolved issue and the Scottish Government can take override any planning decision made by a local authority.
Quietly, he's very happy we have Sellafield. Any new nuclear development in Scotland on the scale of a reprocessing plant would destroy and SNP majority in the area for the foreseeable future. However, back in 2007 Jack McConnell (the then Scottish Labour leader) said that an advantage of the union was access to Sellafield. Salmond came back with his press office toting McConnell as a man who said the union was good because we could dump nuclear waste there.
Salmond, however, said "Scotland must take responsibility for the share of nuclear waste it has created.
In the, rather unlikely, event of independence, I am fairly certain that nuclear waste will continue to travel to Sellafield.
Wouldn't Dounray have been rail served when operational anyway ?
No, everything came in by road eventually. Some materials would have come by sea to Scrabster or Invergordon. The runway on site was still functional into the 90's when the site stopped producing electricity, however this would have more likley brought people and small goods to site. The roads in the area were improved to allow access for heavy and oversized loads to Dounreay from the South.
Fuel came in by road and waste to be reprocessed was brought in by sea to Gills Bay
Thanks for the info. I'm guessing that must have been quite a rare arrangement for the UK.
Nope, fuel is safe enough to come in trucks, and does so across the UK, and fuel for reprocessing is brought to Cumbria by Pacific Nuclear Traffic from time to time
I assume these services would be run by DRS 37's? Or might we see some 20's in the Highlands?
Tractors, there's already a DRS Depot at Inverness which has them on snow-clearing and sheds for Tesco jobs