Cross-border review of rail network officially launched

23-08-2023 3:06pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121016444#Comment_121016444

Asking for McDowells input on PT spending..... 🤦‍♂️

Economics101 · 23-08-2023 3:38pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121016787#Comment_121016787

Have you read what McMcD wrote? Or are you judging him purely by what his views were a decade or more ago?

Testcard · 23-08-2023 4:15pm

Some of what McDowell wrote in the article was spot on. Especially re the lack of progress on Dart Underground. Shows up the lack of competence at the NTA regarding heavy rail. They are too dependent on consultants who will tell them whatever they are paid to tell them.

Regarding using Hydrogen powered trucks for freight on roads thats pure fantasy as the technology is not there yet

His rehashing of the tired old road versus rail argument lacks credibility. We need both.

Economics101 · 23-08-2023 4:47pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121016782#Comment_121016782

Thanks for a very useful historical explanation of the roles of TII, NTA, etc. I have one problem, however. For major projects you need to co-ordinate decisions. Suppose you are looking at connections from Waterford to Cork and Limerick, where road will be all-important as long as the Waterford-Limerick junction railway is left in its present poor state. If you decide to really develop the rail link, especially for Belview container traffic, then the rail component will increase in importance and this may impact of required road developments. Who co-ordinates these big investment decisions, and how?

If you are looking at LUAS or Metrolink versus competing or complementary road developments, then at least NTA and TII will both be involved. I have a feeling that the assignment of responsibilities in such matters is partly responsible for the excessive use of consultants.

bk · 23-08-2023 5:03pm

Well keep in mind IR is part of CIE and CIE in turn is part of the Department of Transport. So in the end IR, CIE, NTA and TII are all part of the DoT.

In the end it is the DoT and the Minister who makes the decision. Though if you are talking about giving the go ahead to major projects, then that decision is made with the whole government cabinet, as budgeting, etc. would be involved.

"Some of what McDowell wrote in the article was spot on. Especially re the lack of progress on Dart Underground. Shows up the lack of competence at the NTA regarding heavy rail."

They aren't progressing DU at the moment, as they are going with DART+ instead. DU doesn't really make sense with Dart+ can largely do the same.

Irish Rail themselves are the ones developing Dart+ project.

densification · 23-08-2023 5:05pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121017310#Comment_121017310

Dart Underground is not in the current NDP. It's essentially shelved. The 2018 Dart Expansion Options Assessment found that Dart+ via Glasnevin Station, connecting to Metrolink had a much stronger CBA. Ironically, this rail review that he is lambasting puts the Dart inter-connector back into the picture.

It's important to acknowledge that McDowell owns property right next to where the Metrolink would join the Green Line in Ranelagh. He has been writing articles against it for years. Would he support massive disruption and road space re-allocation needed for Luas lines all around the city?

road_high · 23-08-2023 5:09pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121012388#Comment_121012388

Another stupidly located regional airport- it should have been built between letterkenny and Derry for maximum traffic viability and logic. But no

23-08-2023 6:23pm

The recent articles by McDowell and Fitzgearlds in the IT have been well examined below

https://irishcycle.com/2023/08/23/everybody-is-a-rail-fan-but-john-fitzgerald-deserves-sharper-criticism-than-michael-mcdowell/

If you can sum up McDowell’s argument as “I’m a rail fan, but we need more roads”, FitzGerald’s argument can be distilled to “I’m a rail fan, but buses can use motorways anyway and, sure, cars will soon be all-electric anyway”.

serfboard · 23-08-2023 7:41pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121017901#Comment_121017901

The line I like best from that article is this one:

we’re told we are in a climate emergency now but the proposals include a post-2040 network where half the tracks are not electric and there are still sections of the Galway to Dublin line with single track.

cgcsb · 23-08-2023 8:00pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121018221#Comment_121018221

Well if the NTA is applying for permission for additional parking and road widening schemes under the brand 'BusConnects' I think we can safely assume that the climate policy and goals are quite simply a bit of lip service.

The GDA transport strategy contains almost identical proposals to the strategy 20 years ago except its less ambitious. Every iteration of the GDA transport strategy is progressively watered down. First they dropped the multiple luas lines, then they dropped metro west then they dropped DARTu, and built next to nothing in the interval.

marno21 · 23-08-2023 11:29pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121017901#Comment_121017901

This is a clear argument in favour of roads, if the roads will be full of electric cars powered by renewable electricity, where’s the climate argument against them?

ohographite · 24-08-2023 12:02am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019117#Comment_121019117

Electric cars are not the silver bullet. In a situation where everyone travels everywhere by electric car, the demand for electricity will be much higher than the demand in a situation where people sometimes travel by electric car and sometimes on public transport. When the demand for electricity is lower, it is much easier to generate it entirely from carbon neutral sources.

marno21 · 24-08-2023 12:15am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019199#Comment_121019199

Be that as it may, it is Government policy to replace ICE cars with electric cars and to have a zero carbon grid.

24-08-2023 12:18am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019117#Comment_121019117

When your only tool is a hammer every problem looks like a nail

marno21 · 24-08-2023 12:21am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019232#Comment_121019232

No response then

Consonata · 24-08-2023 12:38am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019117#Comment_121019117

Electric cars facilitate more disparate communities which are more inherently carbon intensive than high rise. Just because the energy that the car + semi-detached house recieves is from a windfarm, doesn't mean that the resources required to build said car and house is. Humans living closer together and sharing resources will reduce our carbon burden overall, rather than living in houses in the middle of nowhere because we want to have our cake and eat it.

24-08-2023 2:32am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019240#Comment_121019240

Allow me to rephrase to clarify, you, as the roads forum mod, think roads are the only solution because roads are the only solution for everything on the roads forum because roads are the only solution to every problem raised there. Note, not a dig at you, more your specialised focus clouding things.

I'll be the first to admit there's a lot of rubbish in the rail report but there's good stuff in it too that absolutely should be done. Only issues I have are timelines are too long for the good stuff while some of the nonsense is being prioritised.

However, managing to read it and turn around and say roads are the solution to investment plans for the rail network, well that's a special kind of stupid logic and deserves to be called out. Hence the hammer / nail analogy.

marno21 · 24-08-2023 2:54am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019406#Comment_121019406

To be clear, I am also the mod on the infrastructure forum, which this thread is on. I made a rather lengthy post on this very thread about where roads vs rail spending is needed and why both are needed. I also made the point that the 2:1 ratio of public transport:roads spending in the PfG should actually be more skewed in favour of public transport, as since 2000 most of the big roads projects have been delivered and most of the planned PT projects have not. There is a clear and long standing backlog of public transport projects that NEED to be prioritised (MetroLink, DART+ West, DART+ South West, Cork Commuter Rail, Galway-Oranmore/Athenry, Dublin BusConnects x12, Cork BusConnects, Galway BusConnects). However, we have a tripartite Programme for Government with 2 parties whose voters would generally be in favour of roads investment hold 73 of the seats and one party whose voters don't want roads investment holding 12 of the seats. They got together and agreed a 2:1 ratio, the best ratio in the recent history of the state and a clear win for a party who hold less than 10% of the seats in the Dail. But that's not enough. Instead of working to achieve as much public transport investment in the Government term, the dunce of a Minister is spending his time caught up in battles about trying to cancel small roads projects around the country instead of getting as much positive stuff done in the PT domain as possible.

Most of the issues discussed on the Roads forum are around ongoing projects there. I won't go into a project by project breakdown, but most active roads projects in Ireland are to solve issues that can only be addressed practically with a road upgrade. Most of these projects are outside the 5 cities. Most of the required public transport projects are within or on the outskirts of the 5 cities. This is the difference. Population density outside the 5 cities supports road upgrades, within the 5 cities it does not. (That's not to say there are required projects around the 5 cities to divert traffic from urban streets and to provide for linkages - Cork North Ring, Cork Northern Distributor, Cork Southern Distributor, Limerick Northern Distributor, Galway Ring Road, N3-N4 Link in Dublin etc).

ONE of the takeaways from the rail review (note: not THE TAKEWAY) is that despite the best efforts of spending 36bn on rail lines, there will still be a large proportion of journeys taking place by road. This is not an argument to not go ahead with the rail review's proposals or scrap it, it's an argument that road and rail have different and complimentary requirements and rail investment is not going to address every issue we have and there will still be a requirement for road investment.

The big issue has been the usual suspects (even though I don't follow them they have kept appearing on my Twitter timeline since Mr Musk took over) have been losing the plot at any suggestion of continued (note: continued, not increased) investment in roads alongside the rail review proposals (note: alongside, not instead of).* If the people in favour of increased rail investment actually put effort into fighting for such a cause instead of spending time and energy trying to engage in an unwinnable war on cars and trying to tell people they know what's good for them actually focused on getting increased rail investment they would have a far better net outcome at the end of the day.

Case in point: https://twitter.com/sendboyle/status/1694299483021160509?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

brianc89 · 24-08-2023 6:52am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019425#Comment_121019425

So what you're saying is, while we wait to get planning lined up to spend the 36B identifed in the Rail Review, an additional 24B should be spent right now on roads (M17, M20, M21, N24, M4, M3, M2, M5, GCRR, Cork Northern, Limerick Northern, DOOR)..... sure like, most of these have been talked about for years and plans are already there, right now.

They're GOOD TO GO ...let's just get them built. Why should these plans suffer, or have to wait their turn, while rail takes its finger out of its azz?? That's your point right?

And just to be clear, right now recently completed / ongoing roads projects include Macroom N22, Westport-Castlebar, Dunkettle, N4 Collooney, Listowel bypass, Athy N78. There are also a whole bunch of other projects likely to start soon including bypasses of Slane, Virginia, Carrick on Shannon, Newcastlewest, Abbeyfeale, Tipperary Town, Ardee, Ballybofey/Stranorlar, relief road for Letterkenny, Letterkenny-Lifford upgrade, Port access motorways (Cork-Ringaskiddy, Limerick-Foynes and Oilgate-Rosslare), N5 from Ballaghaderreen to Scramoge.

But yes, your point is very clear. We're not spending enough on roads.

marno21 · 24-08-2023 7:44am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019519#Comment_121019519

I never one said we're not spending enough on roads. What we're spending on roads is about right. But what's actually committed to should be delivered on, both in public transport and roads. They are independent of one another. Obstructing roads projects does not deliver PT projects faster. (Neither does obstructing PT projects deliver roads projects any faster by definition).

I also never said that just because we are spending x on PT we should spend 1/2x on roads. What I said was that both PT and roads projects should go ahead as agreed to.

The list you copied from my post on the roads forum contains the next 10 years worth of roads investment. They should be delivered as such within that timeframe.

I really don't understand what's so difficult to understand here, is it not possible for someone to be in favour of both roads and public transport investment, as outlined in the Programme for Government?

brianc89 · 24-08-2023 8:53am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019594#Comment_121019594

The issue is the level of roads already committed to far outweighs a 2:1 spending ratio in the medium term. Yes, while we wait for rail projects to become shovel ready, there'll be a period of lower spending.

What you're suggesting is we basically build all the roads now (knowledge base exists, easier and quicker to build, many already at advanced planning). The end result (in 10-15years) is that every single road project has been built despite a commitment to 2:1 on public transport. Basically the status quo from the last 50 years.

We run the risk then, if tax revenues have reduced, that public transport projects will be cut cause money was spent on roads.

Status quo.

marno21 · 24-08-2023 8:58am

The issue is the level of roads already committed to far outweighs a 2:1 spending ratio in the medium term. Yes, while we wait for rail projects to become shovel ready, there'll be a period of lower spending.

Are you suggesting that roads projects should be held back until PT projects get through planning?

The 2:1 ratio should be applied multi annually, or over the NDP period. Advance 2 worth of PT projects to 1 worth of roads projects if that's how you think it should be done.

What you're suggesting is we basically build all the roads now (knowledge base exists, easier and quicker to build, many already at advanced planning). The end result (in 10-15years) is that every single road project has been built despite a commitment to 2:1 on public transport. Basically the status quo from the last 50 years.

There are no roads projects which can go ahead in the next 2 years save the N5 Ballaghaderren-Scramoge, and before MetroLink is expected to be shovel ready it may be possible to just about start the M28 and M21. So a max of c. 250m of spending on new roads

There is no reason why roads projects have any bearing on PT funding.

We run the risk then, if tax revenues have reduced, that public transport projects will be cut cause money was spent on roads.

I don't get this logic but there are avenues by which the Minister can accelerate delivery of these projects which he doesn't seem to be exploring. If he really wanted MetroLink delivered he could have done lots of things in the last 3.25 years but I don't see any actions taken.

DoctorPan · 24-08-2023 9:53am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121017310#Comment_121017310

As one of those consultants, there's a fierce shortage of us rail engineers and historically not much career prospects in Irish companys, in my lifetime the major rail projects have been the Greystones and Malahide electrification, reopening of WRC, Luas and the Kildare route project, spread across two distinct camps of Irish Rail and RPA/TII. Not much job security or interesting jobs for a career and terrible for keeping of instituational knowledge.

Hopefully that will change in the coming years, if not there's always European projects.

bk · 24-08-2023 10:44am

I have to say, I agree with Marno. I think folks here need to be realistic about the demographics of Ireland and how much rail can actually achieve.

Look at the Rail review, 36 Billion and only 10% of journeys would be by rail, the other 90% would continue to be by car and thus need to be electrified too.

And BTW that 36bn doesn't include the likely 10+ Billion we will spend on DART+ and Metrolink.

Ireland population is 40% rural and most of that is strung all in one of houses, ribbon development, along every rural road in Ireland. A person who lives 10 minutes drive (30 minutes walk) from their local village or town simply isn't going to use a train when they can just drive and anyway they can't walk to town as their is no footpath!

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we shouldn't invest in rail and public transport, we absolutely should and I agree it should be greater then 2:1. But I believe we need to focus on where rail has the best chance to actually compete with the car, commuting into and around our cities and promoting and developing densification of housing in our cities and in commuter towns (plus reasonable upgrades to Intercity, etc.).

But for most of rural Ireland, the car will unfortunately remain king, roads will continue to be needed and we will absolutely need to electrify cars, trucks and buses on those roads.

ohographite · 24-08-2023 11:35am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019226#Comment_121019226

Electric cars are great, but I really don't think they can make it wrong to invest in rail transport outside of Dublin or Cork (such as intercity rail). My point was that trains (and buses too) can reduce demand for electricity which makes a zero carbon grid more achievable. How is that wrong?

Economics101 · 24-08-2023 11:50am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121019981#Comment_121019981

Very interesting and too true. That's why rail investment need to be a flexible long-term programme, and not just individual big projects (the UK experience is salutary in that regard). I can see us using people from mainland Europe quite a lot initially, and then hopefuly build up indigenous skills.

marno21 · 24-08-2023 11:57am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121020408#Comment_121020408

Indeed, investment in intercity rail will have benefits. But it will also be expensive, and given the funds available it will be a priority case.

Trains and buses can indeed reduce demand for electricity, and are more efficient. But in a market like Ireland, you hit diminishing returns very quickly outside of the 5 cities.

timmyntc · 24-08-2023 12:24pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121020513#Comment_121020513

As of census 22, 30% of population live outside towns and cities. So 70% live inside an urban area - thats a lot of people who could access buses and trains.

As time goes on the % living rurally will decline further too, and the more infrastructure provided to towns and cities, the more sustainable growth will occur there instead.

The ribbon development happened in the first place because car and car infrastructure was promoted above all else - the only way to correct that going forward is to invest in rail and other PT.

bk · 24-08-2023 12:25pm

I'd point at the new Local Link service has done more for the really rural parts of Ireland then any rural rail project.

Flexible mini bus (and larger in places) services running up and down all those rural roads, even door to door service! Suddenly many rural villages that never had public transport or haven't had it in decades.

And of course these sort of services can feed people into the closest town with rail service. So they can help develop rail too.

Unfortunately we can't ignore the reality of Irelands demographics. Unless the government announced tomorrow that they were going to ban all new one off houses and move everyone into urban areas (which of course has zero chance of happening) then we have to be realistic about it and work with the reality on the ground.

bk · 24-08-2023 12:30pm

"As of census 22, 30% of population live outside towns and cities. So 70% live inside an urban area - thats a lot of people who could access buses and trains."

Which is one of the highest percentages in Europe. Most countries in Europe is around 10%. And worse, Irelands rural population tends to be spread out ribbon development. In there European countries the rural population tends to be clustered around small villages and hamlets, rather then our ribbon development.

"As time goes on the % living rurally will decline further too, and the more infrastructure provided to towns and cities, the more sustainable growth will occur there instead."

Except it isn't declining, it has actually gotten much worse over the last 30 to 40 years. Most of the ribbon development has happened during that period. And there is no sign of the government doing anything to stop it.

That is why I'm not convinced rail is some silver bullet solution. It isn't fixing the root cause of the problem and unless the government decides to completely change planning rules, then I don't see it changing.

Cross-border review of rail network officially launched

Comments