Why is Electrification in England progressing much slower ?

[YourMum666]

Had a read of the new civil engineer blog this morning and in 2022 only 2.2km of track was electrified nationally, which is less than 1% of the expected amount which totals to about 448km annually. In Scotland electrification seems to be happening at a much more consistent rate with more miles going up. At this rate of progress the full uk network will not be electrified fully until 2090, meaning that we are 40 years behind the 2050 goal. What could be causing electrification of our railways to slow down

Concerns raised over rail electrification pace with only 2.2km of track added in last year | New Civil Engineer

The transport body has set a target of electrifying 448km of track a year but hasn’t come close to reaching that target once in ten years. Of the track

www.newcivilengineer.com

 

[themiller]

Is this a case of terminology being misunderstood? It’s likely that the NCE reporter meant 2.2km energised rather than wired.

 

[YourMum666]

Is this a case of terminology being misunderstood? It’s likely that the NCE reporter meant 2.2km energised rather than wired.

He stated electrified, and he was talking about the King’s cross remodelling. But you might be right

 

[GRALISTAIR]

What could be causing electrification of our railways to slow down?

3 things are needed for any project to start/continue/go quickly.

1) Time
2) Money
3) Political will

I suggest number 3 is most important. We have seen repeatedly, when there is necessity or political will, money can be found.

Of course, I know I am over-simplifying, but I like simple where possible.

 

[YourMum666]

3 things are needed for any project to start/continue/go quickly.

1) Time
2) Money
3) Political will

I suggest number 3 is most important. We have seen repeatedly, when there is necessity or political will, money can be found.

Of course, I know I am over-simplifying, but I like simple where possible.

I totally agree, i find it quite appalling that infrastructural developments that benefit the common commuter have so much political tension behind them

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There are two major projects in progress in England (MML and TRU) totalling something like 150 route miles, but they are not fully designed, and it takes time to evaluate the cost/benefit of each route option.
TRU also needs a lot of route work done across the Pennines before the wiring starts (3/4-tracking, resignalling, station rebuilds etc).
There's actually re-electrification going on out of St Pancras to support faster electric trains (125mph rather than the Thameslink 100mph).
HS2 will also be electrified when built, and where HS2 goes will dictate what happens to the existing network in many cases, especially in the north.
But we are still suffering from the cost-overrun of the GW and NW projects in the last decade, and the DfT belief that bi-modes could deliver improvements more quickly and cheaper.

 

[YourMum666]

There are two major projects in progress in England (MML and TRU) totalling something like 150 route miles, but they are not fully designed, and it takes time to evaluate the cost/benefit of each route option.
TRU also needs a lot of route work done across the Pennines before the wiring starts (3/4-tracking, resignalling, station rebuilds etc).
There's actually re-electrification going on out of St Pancras to support faster electric trains (125mph rather than the Thameslink 100mph).
HS2 will also be electrified when built, and where HS2 goes will dictate what happens to the existing network in many cases, especially in the north.
But we are still suffering from the cost-overrun of the GW and NW projects in the last decade, and the DfT belief that bi-modes could deliver improvements more quickly and cheaper.

what about EWR , not really been following it. is it due for electrification

 

[swt_passenger]

what about EWR , not really been following it. is it due for electrification

No. Has been asked about regularly in these forums, but the only gesture towards future electrification is that any new bridges are clear for wiring. However most of the existing bridges are not being cleared…

 

[Trainbike46]

what about EWR , not really been following it. is it due for electrification

EWR is to be delivered as a diesel railway according to current plans, unfortunately

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

what about EWR , not really been following it. is it due for electrification

No. It will be diesel worked (there are no wires at Oxford yet, either, as the extension from Didcot was canned).

 

[GRALISTAIR]

HS2 will also be electrified when built, and where HS2 goes will dictate what happens to the existing network in many cases, especially in the north.

And of course, next year's figures will include Crossrail which is new from the start and totally electrified throughout. So, figures will show an increase in total route miles and STK - Single track kilometres and total electrified miles resulting in an increased percentage of electrified railways.

 

[YourMum666]

No. It will be diesel worked (there are no wires at Oxford yet, either, as the extension from Didcot was canned).

Such a shortsighted thing to do, eventually the railway will end up being electrified at double the cost it would take to electrify it as it’s being built

 

[Foxhunter]

3 things are needed for any project to start/continue/go quickly.

1) Time
2) Money
3) Political will

4) Confidence in the supplier by the purchaser

When GWML style cost overruns, and Crossrail style delays, stop happening, then the taps will be turned on. HS2, MML and TRU are perfect opportunities to demonstrate that lessons have been learned.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

4) Confidence in the supplier by the purchaser

When GWML style cost overruns, and Crossrail style delays, stop happening, then the taps will be turned on. HS2, MML and TRU are perfect opportunities to demonstrate that lessons have been learned.

I agree but still think that 4) is intrinsically linked to 3)

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Such a shortsighted thing to do, eventually the railway will end up being electrified at double the cost it would take to electrify it as it’s being built

You may be right, but EWR is not Crossrail and high future usage is not guaranteed.
Future use as part of the "electric spine" died a death several years ago.
Bletchley-Bedford also complicates things because it is a very awkward line to work, and has no wiring plan.
Bicester-Oxford is already built (without wires).
It makes sense for a diesel TOC (probably Chiltern) to operate the initial EWR service.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

When GWML style cost overruns, and Crossrail style delays, stop happening, then the taps will be turned on. HS2, MML and TRU are perfect opportunities to demonstrate that lessons have been learned.

GOBLIN also had its share of horrendous issues. Manchester to Preston cost per mile was greater than GWML iirc

 

[Class 170101]

I'd be interested in comparisions in electrification costs between England and Scotland.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'd be interested in comparisions in electrification costs between England and Scotland.

about the same.

Edinburgh - Glasgow was rather higher than GWML when normalised.

 

[zwk500]

It makes sense for a diesel TOC (probably Chiltern) to operate the initial EWR service.

Isn't it confirmed it'll be WMR from Bletchley with 196s?

 

[Southsider]

I don’t think Scotland can be held up as a great example. As pointed out above, the costs are no better than England. Pace of delivery is nothing to write home about either. My local line (Glasgow Central to East Kilbride) was scheduled for electrification but has been pushed down the pecking order with Barrhead now being done first. The structural clearance work is done, most of the OLE masts are in place and wiring has started yet it is scheduled to take until December to complete the remaining six, double track miles and begin to run services. Not exactly an ambitious programme.

 

[Annetts key]

about the same.

Edinburgh - Glasgow was rather higher than GWML when normalised.

What! You can’t say that! The GWML OHL was supposed to be equivalent to pouring dumper trucks worth of money into a hole filled with kerosene and then setting fire to it!

And now you are calling it ‘cheap’

(For those who don’t get my sense of humour, treat all the above as a leg-pull…)

 

[Skymonster]

The pro-rail / pro-electrification lobby amazes me - always calling for more major electrification schemes, always wanting more add-ons and infills. There’s already massive investment going into rail, not least of which is the huge cost of HS2. And yet they want more - they don’t seem to be able to grasp the idea that the country can‘t afford it, at least not at the moment. There are other projects in the UK that need investment too, but there’s only a finite budget. Never mind all the climate-change clap-trap, rhetoric and pseudo-commitments - THE COUNTRY CAN’T AFFORD GRANDIOSE SCHEMES such as yet more electrification right now, and probably won’t be able to do so for at least the next decade. One of the main reasons why I was pleased to see BoJo go was that I hoped his successor would take a more realistic approach to what this country could afford, as opposed to BoJo’s approach of signing up for whatever he felt would allow him to grandstand on the world stage.Clearly the jury is still out on our current PM, but at least he’s a financier rather than a showman, which is step in the right direction given the current dire economic climate.

 

[YourMum666]

The pro-rail / pro-electrification lobby amazes me - always calling for more major electrification schemes, always wanting more add-ons and infills. There’s already massive investment going into rail, not least of which is the huge cost of HS2. And yet they want more - they don’t seem to be able to grasp the idea that the country can‘t afford it, at least not at the moment. There are other projects in the UK that need investment too, but there’s only a finite budget. Never mind all the climate-change clap-trap, rhetoric and pseudo-commitments - THE COUNTRY CAN’T AFFORD GRANDIOSE SCHEMES such as yet more electrification right now, and probably won’t be able to do so for at least the next decade. One of the main reasons why I was pleased to see BoJo go was that I hoped his successor would take a more realistic approach to what this country could afford, as opposed to BoJo’s approach of signing up for whatever he felt would allow him to grandstand on the world stage.Clearly the jury is still out on our current PM, but at least he’s a financier rather than a showman, which is step in the right direction given the current dire economic climate.

Hs2 is slowly becoming a half baked project, eastern leg scrapped and unpredictability of the future of the line

 

[Annetts key]

but there’s only a finite budget.

Not for countries that have their own central banks there isn’t. And stock markets and currency traders generally speaking like investment in long lasting infrastructure. So generally don’t get concerned when countries borrow to fund infrastructure projects.

Do OHL electrification schemes cost lots of money up front? Yes, obviously. The advantages are a reduction in diesel use and hence emissions from the engines of diesel trains. Electric trains are more energy efficient. But most importantly, the costs of maintaining both the trains and the track are reduced. So there will be longer term savings overall.

Note that a lay person may not understand why track maintenance costs are lower. It’s because electric trains cause less wear and tear, and less damage to both the rails, sleepers and formation, because they don’t have to carry diesel engines and fuel tanks around.

Okay, I know HST 125 trains no longer run at 125 mph on the GWML to London. But the shock and vibrations as the leading power car of a train travelled over either rail joints (fishplated) or S&C (point work) at speed was considerable. Although less visible, the same forces applied for plain line track as well.

IMHO, part of the reason that the GWML OHL project costs increased so much, is that they were trying to run before they could walk, the idea was a fast rapid construction system. Unfortunately it was quickly found that the planned pace was not practical. Hence it all went a bit pear-shaped.

 

[YourMum666]

Not for countries that have their own central banks there isn’t. And stock markets and currency traders generally speaking like investment in long lasting infrastructure. So generally don’t get concerned when countries borrow to fund infrastructure projects.

Do OHL electrification schemes cost lots of money up front? Yes, obviously. The advantages are a reduction in diesel use and hence emissions from the engines of diesel trains. Electric trains are more energy efficient. But most importantly, the costs of maintaining both the trains and the track are reduced. So there will be longer term savings overall.

Note that a lay person may not understand why track maintenance costs are lower. It’s because electric trains cause less wear and tear, and less damage to both the rails, sleepers and formation, because they don’t have to carry diesel engines and fuel tanks around.

Okay, I know HST 125 trains no longer run at 125 mph on the GWML to London. But the shock and vibrations as the leading power car of a train travelled over either rail joints (fishplated) or S&C (point work) at speed was considerable. Although less visible, the same forces applied for plain line track as well.

IMHO, part of the reason that the GWML OHL project costs increased so much, is that they were trying to run before they could walk, the idea was a fast rapid construction system. Unfortunately it was quickly found that the planned pace was not practical. Hence it all went a bit pear-shaped.

great point

 

[zwk500]

Not for countries that have their own central banks there isn’t.

A central bank isn't a *completely* free license to print money - the country is still part of the international economy and Sterling is still a global reserve currency so 'printing free money' so to speak would have serious long-term financial and economic consequences.
That being said, the UK treasury is generally seen as one of the safest bets you can make and so the cost of borrowing on Gilt-edged Bonds is fairly cheap and more importantly stable.

IMHO, part of the reason that the GWML OHL project costs increased so much, is that they were trying to run before they could walk, the idea was a fast rapid construction system. Unfortunately it was quickly found that the planned pace was not practical. Hence it all went a bit pear-shaped.

Another big reason was that they worked from plans that turned out to be inaccurate or outdated. They'd go to drill a pile and find some signalling cable that shouldn't have been there and so forth. Similar issues affected Manchester-Preston with old mine workings, I believe.

 

[Annetts key]

A central bank isn't a *completely* free license to print money

Of course not. Otherwise inflation goes completely bonkers. Any borrowing has to be done carefully. I was not suggesting otherwise.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I agree but still think that 4) is intrinsically linked to 3)

When costs are realistic and delivery is timely then political will will follow

 

[Brubulus]

When costs are realistic and delivery is timely then political will will follow

Costs are only going to be realistic once there is the political will to do more than a one-time project. I can see the MML being comparatively affordable compared to other projects given the amount of work, especially if they get around to tendering the later phases as soon as it reaches Wigston.

 

[zwk500]

When costs are realistic and delivery is timely then political will will follow

This is not necessarily the case. OLE is politically contentious for visual impact in many areas. However the inverse is certainly true - political will disappears if the costs are rising.