Geologists get high-speed look at future transportation

Maskhadov

Geologists get high-speed look at future transportation
Frank McDonald, Environment Editor




High-speed trains will whisk passengers between Dublin, Cork and Belfast in 2050 when the population of Ireland reaches eight million, while some four million "smart" cars will be catered for on automated motorways, it was predicted yesterday.

David Waters, former managing director of Iarnród Éireann and joint chairman of a future think-tank at the Irish Academy of Engineering, also forecast that Dublin's eastern bypass motorway would be built on an embankment along Sandymount Strand.

He told a conference organised by the Institute of Geologists of Ireland (IGI) that this would be unavoidable if houses in Sandymount were to be protected from rising sea levels as a result of climate change; ie the motorway would provide their flood defence.

Mr Waters also predicted that an under-sea tunnel would be built between Rosslare and south Wales, and the Shannon estuary would be developed to cater for ever-larger container ships linked by high-speed freight trains to the heart of Europe via the tunnel.

He said new motorways would become more automated with the aid of Galileo, a European satellite navigation system. This would be linked to an in-car traffic information manager (TIM) enabling motorists to travel on "auto-pilot" at a constant speed.

TIM would pay tolls electronically, and give drivers updates on journey time, weather and likely delays.

Cars would be powered by non-polluting hydrogen fuel cells in 2050. The use of petrol and diesel would be banned because oil would be in such short supply. The world economy would have moved away from fossil fuels as part of the drive to combat climate change.

However, Eddie O'Connor, chief executive of Airtricity, said there was still a long way to go.

"As things stand, we will not meet the targets we have agreed for renewable energy" - 13.2 per cent of production by 2010.

He said Ireland would also fail to meet its target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change, adding that the urgent need to "decarbonise" electricity production was "going to cost a lot of money".

Extolling the virtues of wind power, Mr O'Connor said it was a natural source of energy that emitted no noxious gasses, was fuel free, needed no supply chain and had the potential to "introduce a totally new dimension into energy policy" in Ireland.

IGI president Gareth Jones said rocks were "at the heart of every big infrastructure development". Understanding sub-surface geology was "critical to the delivery of large projects on time and within budget".

He quoted Tim Brick, Dublin City Council's deputy city engineer in charge of the Port Tunnel, as saying that "all civil engineering is a risk; it is not an exact science. The trick is risk management." Central to this was an understanding of rocks and soil.

Seán Finlay, managing director of TES Consulting Engineers, cited the November 2003 landslide in Derrybrien, Co Galway, as an example of a high-profile project - it involved the development of a wind farm - where geological issues became controversial.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2005/1112/1093516952HM5GEOLOGISTSCONF.html


© The Irish Times

Not that we will see any of it but there are some great projects there. Very expensive too :eek:

SeanW

Cars would be powered by non-polluting hydrogen fuel cells in 2050. The use of petrol and diesel would be banned because oil would be in such short supply.

Hydrogen is b******s. It takes more energy to refine it from sources such as water than is created as a result of production. That means for every unit of hydrogen refined, we need well over an equivalent of coal burned, uranium processed etc. It will never happen.

Realistically we're looking at Biodiesel as the best solution we've got to the need to power mobile items such as cars, trucks, and trains. It's totally sustainable and the switch to it can be made much easier by the fact that most diesel engines and facilities can work with it without any/much modification, and that such engines can employ petroleum diesel and biodiesel in any mixture.

Maskhadov

i wonder how much a high speed Cork (via Shannon) Dublin, Belfast, rail line would cost and how much a underground tunnel to Wales from rosslare would cost too ? It wouldnt be too expensive in the future when you consider all the advances that are being made.

Shannon would be a strategic location for Ireland and Europe. Similar to the ports in the Nederlands. It may be of big enough importance to act as a counter balance for Dublin (which will be 2+million by then probably).

The other thing they forgot is the new outer ring road that is being planned. There are some mountains near Wicklow that will stop the new motorway but a tunnel will be needed to complete the C to the N11 or whatever it is.

dowlingm

Well, if Shannon and Foynes were on the same side of the estuary it would be a start

As for Rosslare-Wales tunnel, remember the Chunnel?

1. Estimate tunnel cost
2. Build tunnel
3. Holy crap! It cost that much more???
4. Holy crap! How can revenues be that low?
5. Go bankrupt and screw the creditors.
6. Profit!!!!

Capt'n Midnight

It's longer and IIRC deeper than the chunnel. Also there is no soft chalk to ease through.

Maskhadov

but cant they just use the technique that sits on top of the ocean floor ? its not that deep there and it should be a straightforward job. It looks like it is twice the distance that the Chunnel. Nothing world breaking about that.

At the end of the day, if shipping could offload their goods at shannon somewhere in a deep port and those 40 foot containers could fit on a high speed train there would be enough revenue to eventually pay for the line. The nederlands is stuck for space.

The problem with the chunnel is that there doesnt seem to be a massive amount of freight going between the two capitals. Its more luxury travel AFAIK.

garthv

He said Ireland would also fail to meet its target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change, adding that the urgent need to "decarbonise" electricity production was "going to cost a lot of money".

........
Seriously here, of course its going to cost a lot of money you plank....

Capt'n Midnight

GaRtH_V - attack the post not the poster, don't forget that thw quote wasn't the posters words


High Speed rail - major problem is you have to go through the rail mess that is the UK. - And it would probably be cheaper to build the two tunnels from Japan to Sakhlin (SP) and to the Russian Mainland. Once that starts running the Bearing Strait Bridge looks attractive - maybe twice the distance of an Irish tunnel (will check atlas) and that would mean you could rail stuff from US to EU.

Maskhadov

but doesnt britain seperate H.S.R from the rest of its (crappy) rail network ?? I thought it did. So in effect it would just be like relaying new track and it didnt matter what was there before. The H.S.R would have to go to london though.

The hypotethical tunnel from between Rosslare and south Wales would be far easier to build than any bridge across the baring straights or any japanese tunnel. Its only (Rosslare- Pembroke) 260km and it doesnt freeze half the year and the region doesnt suffer from massive storms.

dowlingm

If Iarnrod Eireann can't be @rsed putting track on Rosslare portside I'm not sure how much of a goer a tunnel would be - especially since the train would still have to change at the Ireland end or use those Talgo bogies, presuming using European gauge (1435mm) for the tunnel for commonality with Chunnel/UK network and not 1600mm.

You are looking at an undersea distance of about 90-100km depending on where landfall is - the longest tunnel currently is half that in all of which only about 25km are undersea. The planners of the Japan-Korea tunnel foresee using existing and artificial islands to break the journey - there's only Tuskar Rock between Rosslare and Fishguard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel#The_longest
http://photo.hankooki.com/gisaphoto/20040816/sian10082004081619402200816g.jpg

Maskhadov

You are forgetting the fact that any HSR in Ireland will be totally seperate from Irish rail lines. So it really doesnt matter what gauge has to be used.

I think it is a lot to do with , how deep the seabed is between Rosslare and Pembroke (or where ever in south wales). What kind of weather conditions affect the region. Plus it would depend a lot on the soil beneath the sea bed and how even the surface bed is(if they were to use the method that floats down the tunnel in sections).

Capt'n Midnight

dowlingm wrote:

You are looking at an undersea distance of about 90-100km depending on where landfall is - the longest tunnel currently is half that in all of which only about 25km are undersea. The planners of the Japan-Korea tunnel foresee using existing and artificial islands to break the journey

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakhalin

The idea of building a fixed link between Sakhalin and the Russian mainland was first mooted in the 1930s. In the 1940s, an abortive attempt was made to link the island via a 10 km long undersea tunnel. The workers supposedly made it almost to the half-way point before the project was abandoned under Nikita Khrushchev. In 2000, the Russian government revived the idea, adding a suggestion that a 40 km long bridge could be constructed between Sakhalin and the Japanese island of Hokkaido, providing Japan with a direct connection to the Euro-Asian railway network. It was claimed that construction work could begin as early as 2001. The idea was received skeptically by the Japanese government and appears to have been shelved, probably permanently, after the cost was estimated at as much as US$50 billion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercontinental_Peace_Bridge
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/jan2004/tunn-j05.shtml

dowlingm

Capn M

I'm not talking about here
http://local.google.com/maps?ll=45.821143,141.778564&spn=3.244035,4.456604&hl=en
I'm talking about here
http://local.google.com/maps?ll=34.170908,129.144287&spn=3.850878,4.456604&hl=en

Lennoxschips

it's all pie in the sky, let's get the existing rail network working properly first

with a bit of investment you could do 150 km/hr on the dublin cork line. as long as it's faster than the car and decent value that's the main thing. we don't need bullet trains or tgv's

David Waters, former managing director of Iarnród Éireann and joint chairman of a future think-tank at the Irish Academy of Engineering, also forecast that Dublin's eastern bypass motorway would be built on an embankment along Sandymount Strand.

It's kind of worrying when a guy who used to be in charge of the railways is advocating building a motorway across Dublin bay. Makes you wonder what kind of decisions he made when he was in charge of the railways.

Maskhadov

i think they can get the existing infastructure up to scratch by 2050 EVEN if the FFailers are in power...

saobh_ie

I spotted the misprint... 2050 should read 2500.

That's science fiction pure and simple. It's simply too far fetched on too short a time scale... I seriously doubt anywhere in the world will see motorways for computer controlled cars... its insanity.

Maskhadov

Europe is building a HSR from Portugal to Estonia, Italy to London FACT. The Nice Turin is under construction at the moment and is costing €20 billion. What will we have ? a few motorways/carparks and a souped up dublin port.

We should be aiming to be bring our infastructure in line with Europe but a tunnel under the irish sea would probably be too much for any irish politican to stomach.

Would a tunnel from N.Ireland to Scotland be cheaper ? Would it be acceptable for the Republic of Ireland ? I think it would be a loss of pride

morlan

2050: Transport 21 finally delivered. TBH

Capt'n Midnight

Maskhadov wrote:

Would a tunnel from N.Ireland to Scotland be cheaper ? Would it be acceptable for the Republic of Ireland ? I think it would be a loss of pride

It would be a lot shorter and not as deep. The shortest link is to the Mull of Kintyre but the you have a huge detour. So Larne instead, but a lot of UXB's and other nasties dumped in the sea there after the war. Great for NI but for us it's an extra few hours up and back down again to get to England ( & Chunnel) where most of the high speed traffic would be to. And there won't be two tunnels.

But how much would Anglesy be worth if it was an hour by train from Dublin City Centre ?

The cost of a ROI to Wales tunnel would probably cost more than linking Japan to Asia. If that were to happen it could lead to a Russia-Alaska link in which case Ireland would not be that interesting for trans-atlantic traffic. So if 110 Million people can't get a tunnel yet then 4 Million will probably have to wait to get one that costs more.

dowlingm

Lennoxchips (bloody mean name is that - I'm starving and 4800km from Lennox's)

Cork-Dublin is supposed to be able to do 150km/h now - it's 150mph is the problem

Maskhadov

Tunnelling will get cheaper though. That is guaranteed. 45 years ago no one would have thought the channel tunnel would go ahead. Who knows what the situation will be like in another 45 years.

Just to point out dowlingm, its irrelevant what speeds the trains can or are going at now. Any H.S.R developments will be an entirely new development and the track will have to be completely segregated

LFCFan

SeanW wrote:

Hydrogen is b******s. It takes more energy to refine it from sources such as water than is created as a result of production. That means for every unit of hydrogen refined, we need well over an equivalent of coal burned, uranium processed etc. It will never happen.

Going by todays Technology it's a non runner but who's to say they won't come up with a cheap and non polluting way to extract Hydrogen in the near future? Who's to say it's not already a possibility. You never know if there are some fuel technologies being sat on by the Oil companies!!

dowlingm

Maskhadov

not really - as you say it's not relevant to judge future developments by current infrastructure, and some HSR technologies do not need completely new alignments but simply more tracks on the same alignment. Building completely new stations is not, I submit, feasible given the size of the communities you are linking and the distance involved. You are talking about billions of euro to construct a route to cut an hour (maybe) off travel time between Cork and Dublin down to 1.5hrs which will still be beaten by Aer Arann (55 mins) and Ryanair (30mins) and which will probably do little or nothing to improve links to Galway, Limerick, Waterford and Kerry.

Maskhadov

I just know the Spanish run their HSR in the center with ordinary rail on the outer two lines. But the rail is segregated... i.e an ordinary loco couldnt go on the HSR lines and vice versa.

Your right about the main stations though. It would have to go through connolly (probably) and Belfast and Cork.

High-speed trains vs. automobiles or airplanes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_speed_rail

There are constraints on the growth of the highway and air travel systems, widely cited as traffic congestion, or capacity limits. Airports have limited capacity to serve passengers during peak travel times, as do highways. High–speed rail, which has potentially very high capacity on its fixed corridors, offers the promise of relieving congestion on the other systems. Prior to World War II conventional passenger rail was the principal means of intercity transport. Passenger rail services have lost their primary role in transport since, due to the small proportion of journeys made by rail.

High–speed rail has the advantage over automobiles in that it can move passengers at speeds far faster than those possible by car, while also avoiding congestion. For journeys that do not connect city centre to city centre, the door to door travel time and the total cost of high–speed rail can be comparable to that of driving, a fact often mentioned by critics of high–speed trains. However, supporters argue that journeys by train are less strenuous and more productive than car journeys.

While high–speed trains generally do not travel as fast as jet aircraft, they have advantages over air travel for relatively short distances. When traveling less than about 650 km (400 mi), the process of checking in and going through security screening at airports, as well as the journey to the airport itself makes the total journey time comparable to HSR. Trains can be boarded more quickly in a central location, eliminating the speed advantage of air travel. Rail lines also permit far greater capacity and frequency of service than what is possible with aircraft.

Its a good clip from wiki .. Rail is the best form of transport over any other.. be it bus, boat, car, aeroplane. Thats why it has (especailly HSR) a massive future even though its very expensive. Personally I would rather take a train than a plane

Victor

Maskhadov wrote:

I just know the Spanish run their HSR in the center with ordinary rail on the outer two lines. But the rail is segregated... i.e an ordinary loco couldnt go on the HSR lines and vice versa.

Spain has its own railway gauge, the HSR is being built to Standard Gauge

Maskhadov

I guess any HSR built would have to be to same specifiction as the rest of Europe's HSR or the whole exercise would be daft.

My main point about the existing rail network and segregation is valid.

Victor

Maskhadov wrote:

45 years ago no one would have thought the channel tunnel would go ahead. Who knows what the situation will be like in another 45 years.

Oddly, someone tried it 100+ years ago.

Chris_533976

High-speed trains will whisk passengers between Dublin, Cork and Belfast in 2050 when the population of Ireland reaches eight million, while some four million "smart" cars will be catered for on automated motorways, it was predicted yesterday.

No there will be no high speed trains between Dublin & Cork in 2050. The same lines will be used, but there will be a few more trains, possibly painted a new colour.

No there wont be smart cars on automated roadways. I reckon in 2050 there will still be a section of single carriageway on the Cork-Dublin route.

No there wont be a tunnel between Rosslare and Wales. Forget it.


Sorry to be negative, but thats the reality here. No forward thinking, just foot dragging, overbudgeting and fixing problems only when they absolutly have to be fixed.

SeanW

How about from Dublin to Holyhead?

Capt'n Midnight

Chris_533976 wrote:

No there wont be smart cars on automated roadways.

lets not forget that in Dubai all new cars have GPS and the UK will be doing this soon.

Technology for cars automatically staying a short distance from the car in front have been around for decades (and tested). The problems are not technical. The main problem is who pays out if there is an accident, and until the car manufacutrere, the insurance companies and the road authorites can sort out that one it ain't going to happen. One of the issues is maintainance of the system in older cars, and interaction with cars without the technology.

The Millau bridge over the River Tarn in the Massif Central mountains is more than 300m (984ft) high - taller even than the country's Eiffel Tower.

Maybe something like this based on used oil rig platforms when the north sea runs dry ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condeep

Maskhadov

Chris_533976 wrote:

No there will be no high speed trains between Dublin & Cork in 2050. The same lines will be used, but there will be a few more trains, possibly painted a new colour.

No there wont be smart cars on automated roadways. I reckon in 2050 there will still be a section of single carriageway on the Cork-Dublin route.

No there wont be a tunnel between Rosslare and Wales. Forget it.


Sorry to be negative, but thats the reality here. No forward thinking, just foot dragging, overbudgeting and fixing problems only when they absolutly have to be fixed.

You dont really know Chris.. its all speculation at the end of the day. We could all be wiped off the face of the earth by 2020.