Cross-border review of rail network officially launched

Cookiemunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120903795#Comment_120903795

A few passing loops isn't going resolve the issue of the line being a meandering 18th century alignment with low speed limits and multiple crossings, a section of which floods regularly, closing the line and having to enter and reverse out of Limerick and Athenry. Without a new alignment 2 hours from Cork to Galway is never going to happen.

bk

“If we want to retain, we electrify, and if we electrify we get the significant time savings we want.”

You keep saying this, but electrification isn’t the only option. Battery Hybrid with partial electrification and/or hydrogen are also options to meet the same net 0 goals.

And it isn’t just me saying that, if you watch the earlier posted video of the presentation by the IR Director of Capital Investment who is in charge of all this, he readily admits that they are also looking into battery hybrid and hydrogen options for many of the lines.

Yes from the presentation, they seem to currently favour AC overhead for the main intercity lines, at least for now. Though for all the branch lines and even the Sligo line, they are looking at the battery hybrid and hydrogen options.

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904190#Comment_120904190

I agree, however current battery tech will only allow for 80km off OHL's with recharging stations. They're planning that for the Dart Coastal north line because the planning system will likely slow down the electrification order. Dublin-Sligo will likely be the only one that they'll be considering running Hydrogen on, if not that then they'll need to electrify to at least Mullingar

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904076#Comment_120904076

Re-doubling a formerly doubled railway line should not need PP or a RO.

Does a county council need PP to change the paint on a road to divide the existing road into more or less lanes? No.

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904189#Comment_120904189

If this was re-built in 2005, are max speeds still low?

How low?

Cookiemunster

What has current battery tech got to do with trains that will be purchased 10/15/20 years from now? It's improving all the time and you will be able to go a lot further than 80km by then.

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904231#Comment_120904231

Because they aren't buying the trains 10/15/20 years from now. They're buying them now, and planning based on speculated battery innovations would be bananas.

Cookiemunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904224#Comment_120904224

Max speed is 80kmph, but a low as 40kmph in sections.

Hibernicis

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904224#Comment_120904224

It follows the original trackbed, with little change. Some challenging gradients and curves, and clutch of level crossings. The original construction was to a much lower specification than the mainlines, and the limitations were replicated when it was relaid.

bk

"I agree, however current battery tech will only allow for 80km off OHL's with recharging stations. They're planning that for the Dart Coastal north line because the planning system will likely slow down the electrification order. Dublin-Sligo will likely be the only one that they'll be considering running Hydrogen on, if not that then they'll need to electrify to at least Mullingar"

Keep in mind this plan is to run over the next 25 years. Battery tech is likely to advance during that time. What is 80km today, might by 100/120/200km in 25 years time.

15 years ago, the first Hybrid double deckers were introduced in London they had a 2kwh battery. Today the Wrightbus full EV Double Deckers have a 450kwh battery!

BTW According to this plan, they want to electrify Dublin to Belfast/Cork/Limerick/Galway/Waterford/Mullingar. The rest would be other tech.

The cost of this plan in 2021 numbers is 7 billion.

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904243#Comment_120904243

No they aren't! They are buying the new DART fleet now, but not intercity fleet.

With the exception of the Enterprise, there are decades of use left in the intercity fleet.

With the Enterprise they are looking at Trimode trains, Diesel + Battery + DC for today, with the Diesel swapped out for AC (so AC + Battery + DC) once the Belfast AC line wiring is done.

Frankly if it is a success, I could see the same fudge being rolled out on the other intercity lines too.

Consonata

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904317#Comment_120904317

They're only doing that fudge because they've left themselves with no other option because the wiring wasn't done! Like ideally we would have done the AC wiring a decade ago so we don't have to deal with dual modal/tri-modal rolling stock. This way has led to us wasting so much cash. Things which we can avoid if we plan ahead with electrification now.

The cost of this plan in 2021 numbers is 7 billion.

Given the value prop. of this plan, this seems like incredibly good value?

timmyntc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904293#Comment_120904293

Across 25 years it would cost 27.6bn for the republic. Just over 1bn per annum, 1% of govt spending. Less than that as time goes on and govt spending and revenues increase.

bk

"They're only doing that fudge because they've left themselves with no other option because the wiring wasn't done! Like ideally we would have done the AC wiring a decade ago so we don't have to deal with dual modal/tri-modal rolling stock. This way has led to us wasting so much cash. Things which we can avoid if we plan ahead with electrification now."

They didn't do it, because the government didn't have the money for it and the CBA sucked for it. We do have some money now, but the CBA is still pretty poor. There is little evidence the government has much interest in spending this money on electrification, so I suspect they will continue to fudge it.

BTW The plan has most of the electrification not happening until 2040 to 2050, plenty of time for battery tech to continue to develop.

"Given the value prop. of this plan, this seems like incredibly good value?"

What value prop? I really don't see it. It is just turning Diesel trains into electric ones, there isn't some great passenger benefit to this. And from a greenhouse emissions perspective, the same money spent on other projects could have greater outcomes.

"Across 25 years it would cost 27.6bn for the republic. Just over 1bn per annum, 1% of govt spending. Less than that as time goes on and govt spending and revenues increase."

How? It is 32 billion per this report in 2021 money, rising to 36 billion in todays money, I'm sure it will continue to rise. Plus a lot of the estimates seem to be back of the envelope, I'm sure it will be more when it comes to it.

But also think of how many Metro lines we could build with 36 billion. That would take far more cars off the road and be of a far greater benefit then this plan.

namloc1980

Cork Dublin electrification is estimated at €1.6bn and that's without any speed improvement works on the line which are estimated at a further €0.8bn. And throw in another few hundred million for rolling stock. Call me cynical but no Irish government is going to put that sort of money into the rail network.

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904461#Comment_120904461

If the rolling stock has to be replaced anyhow (life-expired) that is not a cost of electrification, just a cost of having any rail service from Dublin to Cork. As for €800m for speed improvements (200kph?) you could probably get some significant improve,emts for a smaller spend. In any event, electric traction will lower journey times (better acceleration and performance on gradients).

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904255#Comment_120904255

Those speeds should be mph, not kph. Irish Rail uses old-fashioned miles for rail operations. The Strategic Rail review uses Metric, which may cause confusion.

Hibernicis

@Geuze Re-doubling a formerly doubled railway line should not need PP or a RO.

You might think that, but it may well do. The Midleton double tracking project is with ABP crawling through the full Railway Order process following the Strategic Infrastructure Development (SID) procedure as though it were a new line. This involves an Environmental Impact Assessment, Appropriate Assessment etc, It's slightly different, in that this is doubling a line that was always a single line, whereas Killonan Junction to Limerick Junction is re-doubling a line that was previously doubled but reduced to a single line. However it's not as straightforward as it sounds, as the existing single line which was relaid in recent decades may need to be lifted and moved to one side. It will also most likely involve bridge strengthening, level crossing renewal etc and on this basis may need to go through the full planning process. I know that IIR got a Senior Counsel's opinion on the need for a Railway Order in the case of Glouthane-Midleton, and you'd assume that they will do the same this time. Incidentally, work on doubling Limerick-Limerick junction has commenced. Not shovel in the ground work, but an assessment to determine the best way forward. In Iarnrod Eireann's words in Nov 2022 :

Limerick to Limerick Junction: increasing capacity for train services

The existing single-track sections of the 35km route between Limerick and Limerick Junction – approximately 80% of the route - restrict capacity for services and lead to increased waiting time on the line. The initial phase of the project will review options to enhance capacity on the route. It is anticipated that double tracking of the entire line could be required, and this shall be assessed, along with a range of alternative options and solutions to increase capacity and meet the objectives, which shall be determined as the project progresses.

The assessment is being undertaken by Atkins and the results are/were due in the first half of 2023.

It's fair to say however that the reinstatement of the Foynes Line for Freight use appears to be proceeding without the need for a Railway Order. It would be great if the Killonan-Limerick Junction project could go this way as well, as it eliminates a 2/3 year delay.

Cookiemunster

The Foynes to Limerick line didn't need planning as it's basically just renewing the old line. They have had to apply for planning for some things though, such as raising the track and bridge at Adare station.

brianc89

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120903601#Comment_120903601

It's not that crazy. Cork to LJ could be 200km/h (30mins). LJ to Limerick could be 20mins with double track. Then 1hr 10mins to Galway (120km) is not unrealistic with level crossing removals, passing loops and some double track.

Geuze

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120904255#Comment_120904255

Max speed between Athenry and Limerick is 80 kph / 50mph.

Is this true?

LC should make no difference. Keep going at same speed.

brianc89

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120905884#Comment_120905884

Yep! It's pretty appalling.

At best it takes 2hrs. That's 60km/h average speed, and that's assuming it doesn't wait 15 to 20 minutes in Ennis or Gort for a passing train.

It also has to change direction in Athenry but I think that only takes 5 minutes.

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120905884#Comment_120905884

No; see my previous post. Line speed Athenry-Ennis is 80 Miles per hour (not Kilometers per hour). Line speed Ennis-Limerick is 50 mph. Irish Rail line speeds are old-fashioned mph. A look at the Network Statement will confirm this.

Trouble is that there are lots of short restrictions which are well below the overall line speed.

ohographite

I really don't like the comments made by the Taoiseach that the All-Island Rail Review strengthens the case for roads, if he is implying that the review should be ignored or mostly ignored. I know he pointed out that the vast majority of journeys would still be made by road even if every action recommended in the review is taken, but I still don't think that is a good reason to invest in roads more than railways. This is because the world is in a climate emergency. I wouldn't go as far as saying that road investment should stop. I do think, however, that there should be much more investment in improving public transport than improving roads, and the money spent on improving and building railways (of course only railways that would actually help stop the climate crisis) should be more than the money spent on improving and building roads, because car usage will need to decrease to stop the climate crisis (well, a decrease in car usage would at least help stopping the climate crisis). So it's only fair that in a climate emergency, railways that can help stop the climate crisis should get more investment than roads that contribute to the climate crisis

I have heard people on this forum say that road investment improves public transport, because roads are used by buses as well as cars, but I disagree because improved roads make cars faster as much as they make buses faster, so I see no reason to believe that they would make more people travel by bus instead of by car. Bus lanes are an exception because they stop buses getting caught in traffic jams, so they can make buses faster than cars. That brings me to another argument I hear to defend investing in roads more than in railways (or public transport in general), which is that if everyone had electric cars, there would be no problem with cars. I disagree with this argument as well, for two main reasons. The first reason is that I would definitely say that having everyone travel by private electric car would use up much more electricity than having some people travelling by private electric car and others travelling by public transport. It is important to reduce demand for electricity, because the lower demand for electricity is, the easier it will be to stop using fossil fuels and generate electricity entirely from sources that emit no greenhouse gases. The second reason why car usage should decrease even if electric cars become the norm is that traffic congestion would still be a problem if car usage stayed the same.

Do I think that it would be crazy not to implement everything in this All-Island Rail Review by 2050? No, I definitely do not. There might be several actions recommended by the review that would not help to stop the climate crisis, so I definitely don't think that such actions should be given priority. I think the most important thing recommended by the review is the replacement of the whole diesel-powered train fleet with electric and hydrogen-powered trains, and electrification of some of the network, but any steps that would help stop the climate crisis, whether they are improvements to the existing rail network, or extensions to the rail network, are also very important and should be done.

brianc89

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120906046#Comment_120906046

Another reason why electric cars are not the ultimate solution - is the shear limitation of resources. The rare earth minerals needed to build batteries cause extensive damage to the environment and are already extremely expensive.

Widespread private electric car ownership is not plausible with 8Billion people living on Earth.

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120906046#Comment_120906046

You are totally wrong in your interpretation of the Taoiseach's remarks. He quoted the Report itself in stating that if delivered in full the Rail share of freight would be 10% and passengers 6%, He also stood by the 2:1 ratio of Public Transport to Road investment agreed in the programme for government. Bad and congested roads are in no-one's interest.

Attitudes like this guarantee a total wipeout of the Greens in the next election, especially away from the chattering classes on the DART and the Green Line LUAS.

CatInABox

Indeed, for the greens this is actually counter productive I think. They'd be much better off coming up with "deals" for roads, where they could say we'd support this road if it was climate neutral or positive. The only way to make some of these projects could hit that standard would be to include major works in the cities around that road.

For example, the recently rejected M6 ring road could get green support if the plan included pedestrianisation of the city centre, with a huge expansion of bus lanes. The M20 would be the same, with work in Cork and Limerick, along with a few of the larger towns along the route. That way the works would be part and parcel of the projects, as a lot of people don't believe the government or councils when they say we need this new motorway before we can do any other improvements to active/public transport.

Regardless of whether the greens actually take this route, I think it's the only way that road projects will survive judicial review from here on out. As soon as the legal realities set in, ABP dropped the M6 without a moments hesitation. I'd bet that they're extremely aware of the Climate Action Plan now.

namloc1980

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120905863#Comment_120905863

It's just under 100km from Cork to Limerick Junction. To do it in 30 minutes you'd have to be pretty much going the full 200kmh all the way which ignores stopping at Mallow and ignores that the approach to Cork in particular is pretty twisty and not capable of those speeds. Throw in the future commuter rail frequency of 10-15 minutes between Cork and Mallow and you have a bottleneck and reduced speed there.

There is no chance that Cork to Limerick Junction will be 30 minutes and equally zero chance Cork to Galway can be done in 2 hours.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120906877#Comment_120906877

Many have said similar in relation to the GCRR including myself.

But I'd go further in saying that if the following was done first it's very likely there would be no need for it at all

Carrot

• Full network of bus lanes, bus priority at junctions, sub 10 min frequency on all routes, additional routes, expanded scheduling
• Full network of Protected bike lanes and protected junctions, increasing volume of bike parking throughout the city, dozen more bike share stations plus proper maintenance of same
• Pedestrian priority at all crossing points4(green crossing light within 5 seconds), permeability measures everywhere, massive expansion of pedestrianised streets in the city centre

Stick

• Congestion charges
• No on street parking
• Workplace parking levies
• No through route through the city

And so on

Do those and the car is no longer the most convenient option and there would be huge modal shift.

At that point there would be little need for a ring road

ohographite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120906503#Comment_120906503

Attitudes like what? The belief that investments in railways that would help stop the climate crisis should(for the time being) be made more than investments in roads that would result in an escalation of the climate crisis? I don't understand what you mean when you say "attitudes like this."

Cookiemunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120907245#Comment_120907245

The Program for Government already states a spend of 2:1 in favour of PT over roads. We still need roads to be built. The problem is that the Greens don't want any road building.

And as other have said commuter rail, which it seems isn't included in this report, is far more important to getting people out of cars than intercity.

ohographite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120907368#Comment_120907368

I didn't say that road building needs to stop. I also knew that the Program for Government says that public transport should get twice as much investment as roads, but I think that is the least the government should be doing, because there is a climate emergency. If I had to pick just one of either investment in commuter rail or investment in intercity and regional rail, I would choose commuter rail because I agree that it would take more cars off the road, but I think that there should be investment in both.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120907368#Comment_120907368

The problem is that the Greens don't want any road building.

Not necessarily true. There are projects which should not be built because there are better options but there are others which should be built.

hans aus dtschl

There of course should be investment in both commuter and intercity. The problem is that this latest rail plan is sort of ignoring the fact that some of the biggest problems with the intercity network are the integration into it (bus, train, tram, bike). I am 100% in favour of electrification of the intercity network, but even then don't see how that's a comparable priority to actually getting people onto the intercity network. Getting bums on seats allows a lot more emissions reductions and surely comes as a much higher priority.

I guess what I'm saying is that investing in the commuter network IS fundamentally an investment in the intercity network.

Obviously we need better frequency, speed and hours of service on the intercity network, but do we really need to electrify most lines at a similar priority? I'm not a rail expert so I could be totally wrong but I see that as being a reasonably "small" gain. Similarly expanding to some of the smaller towns mentioned, or freight: these seem like small gains for big money.

Something not mentioned much in the report is the development of the node-points of the network. They just sub all that out to "others" too. For Kent Station, the intercity trains should surely be moved East to the straight section of the line, removing the curve and removing intercity trains from the constrained two tracks. There should be coaches and city buses properly integrated, and the car parks should all move to the East of the site. This is all "out of scope" too.

TLDR: what I'm saying is that most of the bits that would appear to be be most helpful to intercity rail seem to be "outside scope".

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120907245#Comment_120907245

Attitudes like "roads bad, rail good". I agree with the "rail good" bit, subject to proper project evaluation. But the seemingly unqualified negative attitude to roads is political suicide.

serfboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120906503#Comment_120906503

The Green Party had 12 TDs elected at the last election. Apart from the Dublin constituencies (Bay South, Central, Fingal, Rathdown, West and Dun Laoghaire) and Wicklow, their TDs were elected in Carlow-Kilkenny, Waterford and Limerick City. So they were already "wiped out" in 20 counties at the last election. They're not in the slightest bit bothered if the N17 (Curry to Collooney) or the M20 don't get built since they don't get any votes from the affected areas.

ohographite

Again, I never said that road investment should stop. I only said that for the time being, railway investment that helps stop the climate crisis should be made more.

Cookiemunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120908069#Comment_120908069

And that's the plan with Metrolink and DART+. Everything mentioned in this review is at least a decade away.

We have ready to go road projects being held up now by Ryan. And that's straight from the head of TII. Projects that will remove cars from towns, reduce congestion and reduce accidents.

Cookiemunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120907980#Comment_120907980

That's mainly true, but the M20 is in Limerick and Brian Leddins seat will be in a lot of danger come the next GE. There's also the fact that the Greens are regularly polling at 3-4% now compared to the 7% the got at the last GE. It's not just rural roads that are going to affect them at the next GE.

timmyntc

Arent there enough threads to moan about the greens already?

Ireland trains

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120907866#Comment_120907866

I think that the attitude in Ireland for decades has been the opposite of what you’re describing. While certain projects such as the M20 are likely needed, many such as the GCRR are a colossal waste of money. It’s probably unfair to call negative attitudes to roads “unqualified” considering the huge damage cars do to our health through emmissions, tyre pollution and crashes.

bk

I've noticed over the years that certain "rail fans" keep trotting out the line that we need to build certain rail lines to fight the "climate crisis".

As if we should ignore if the project actually makes sense, anyone will actually use it, if it actually has a realistic Cost Benefit Analysis and how much GHE it will actually save and if the same investment elsewhere might not have even greater benefits.

Don't get me wrong, we should absolutely invest in rail, but the "climate crisis" doesn't justify every crazy rail idea someone comes up with!

Look at this report, even if we spend the 36 Billion on this project. 94% of journeys will still be by car and 90% of freight will still be by road. We will continue to need roads and we will need to convert all those cars and trucks to EV.

That is the simple unfortunate reality of our extremely rural and dispersed population.

I'm not saying we shouldn't invest in intercity, but I continue to believe that the best invesment in rail we can make is in commuter rail, DART, Metro, Luas. Getting people into and around our cities. That is where the most demand is and that is where you can get the most people out of their cars.

Ronald Binge Redux

The mass rail closures in Northern Ireland that caused the 'rail gap' were political, not economic decisions. Any implementation of any part of this plan will be a political one as well.

ohographite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120909137#Comment_120909137

In all fairness, I clearly stated in a previous post that the review may be recommending some projects that would not help to stop the climate crisis, and that I did not feel strongly about any such projects.

ohographite

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120908310#Comment_120908310

Good. I think that's the right approach, and I just hope it is sustained at least until transport in Ireland is sustainable.

pigtown

So now that the review is published has there been any indication of what the next step is? Is it just a case of let Irish make the case for each project as the budgets are prepared?

bk

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120911862#Comment_120911862

It will sit on a shelf and nothing will happen.

That isn’t entirely true, I suspect some projects from it will happen, some will have to at least partly with fleet renewals. But the plan in entirety certainly won’t happen and frankly I’d be pleasantly surprised if 50% happens.

Id say IR will gradually and quietly put forward individual projects to government over the years.

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120911862#Comment_120911862

I should have thought that would be obvious: they will have an assessment of the review, followed by a strategic implementation plan, followed by a review of the initial review as it will then be 8 years out of date, followed by a consultants' report on individual project priorities, followed by a steering committee to oversee implementation, followed by a strategic re-assessment, followed by ......zzzzz

And we will not have got to the process of getting a Rail Order, or decisions by the relevant planning authority, or judicial review.

😎

cgcsb

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120911862#Comment_120911862

2 or 3 of the most critical parts will be built in 2050 and that's it. 👌

Either that or we'll see a fundamental shift in the way the country is run. But most likely the former.

Geuze

Can anybody tell me how many IE capital infrastructure projects are actually under construction today?

I have a feeling the answer is none, but I want to be wrong.