navitron
 
Renewable Energy and Sustainability Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Anyone wishing to register as a new member on the forum is strongly recommended to use a "proper" email address - following recent spam/hack attempts on the forum, all security is set to "high", and "disposable" email addresses like Gmail, Yahoo and Hotmail tend to be viewed with suspicion, and the application rejected if there is any doubt whatsoever
 
Recent Articles: Navitron Partners With Solax to Help Create A More Sustainable Future | Navitron Calls for Increased Carbon Footprint Reduction In Light of Earth Overshoot Day | A plea from The David School - Issue 18
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: France’s solar road was not a success.  (Read 1051 times)
Nickel2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1727


Method mixed with Madness


« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2019, 04:12:54 PM »

Despite being a rail enthusiast, I agree with you entirely that HS2 is a total waste of time and money.
Ordinary people will never use it, business people will take a plane if they are 'important' enough.
Smart is the new stupid.
Definitely Not Good.
 fume
Logged

1.140kW mono south-facing at 49*
EpEver 4210A at 24v
24V 400 Ah battery. (4x200Ah FLA)
EpEver STI1000-24-230 pure sine inverter
Of course it'll work. (It hasn't caught fire yet).
todthedog
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4235



« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2019, 07:46:57 PM »

Totally agree with Biff and Rogeriko.
A total waste of money.
Logged

'In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act'
phoooby
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 570


« Reply #17 on: October 20, 2019, 11:05:45 PM »

Bit of thread drift.

I think the HS2 budget would be better spent on electrifying more of the network and maybe increasing speeds marginally with track improvements. I dont know what improvements could be made in terms of speed but even increasing form 125 to 140-150 mph with newer rolling stock would be worth it and undoubtedly cheaper than HS2. I'm sure I heard or read somewhere than HS2 costs would be much less if they just brought the speed down to TGV levels of 180 mph.

Electrifying most of the mainline and commuter network really needs doing anyway to cut FF use, so might as well crack on with it now. Just think of all that steel to keep the steel industry busy for many years making overhead gantry's.

Going by the current time schedule, by the time HS2 is finished in 2030 ish, there will probably be short haul electric flight within sight which will kill the market for high speed rail leaving the UK with another costly white elephant.
Logged

10.2kw Solar Edge PV. Tesla PW2, Myenergi Zappi and Eddi
Nissan Leaf 24 (gone)
Tesla Model S
Nissan env-200
88k ev miles and rising
6kw WBS
dan_b
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4152


WWW
« Reply #18 on: October 21, 2019, 09:51:35 AM »

New rail capacity is clearly needed.
HS2 would be a good way of adding new capacity, particularly on long distance inter-city - London to Scotland via a Birmingham and Manchester makes perfect sense.
But it has definitely suffered from mission creep, overcomplex design, doesn't actually deliver London to Scotland and is extremely costly. 
A large amount of the budget is due to the sheer amount of tunneling that has been added in because of environmental/ noise concerns, but then there is also a huge additional cost for the 250mph line speed aim.  If it were built around current TGV 200mph line speed designs, it would be far cheaper, and given the distances between stops, would not really have a significant impact on scheduled journey times.
Logged

3.06kWp SolarEdge system with a split array:
2.18kWp 10x South facing, plus 4x West facing 880W

Mk1 ImmerSUN DHW diverter
4kW PowerVault Battery

Tesla Model 3 Long Range
Nickel2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1727


Method mixed with Madness


« Reply #19 on: October 21, 2019, 05:18:32 PM »

I was discussing HS2 with my sister's hubby the other week concerning the cost of the project. He is a retired materials manager for Balfour-Beatty and has been foundation design authority responsible for many road and rail projects both here and abroad. He explained to me that one of the major costs of any major transport infrastructure project is the soil structure beneath the ground surface.
It's all way over my head/under my feet, but it's something like this: For a 100 mph railway the soil must be stabilised to a minimum depth of 4 metres; for a 200 mph railway the pressure front is active a lot lower, so they would need to stabilise the soil to a typical depth of 20+ metres.
That is a huge cost to be undertaken before any of the sub-base or formation is even begun.
Failure to stabilise results in localized soil liquefaction, (like wot happens with earthquakes, or dabbling your toes on damp sand), causing failure of the formation, mis-alignment of track, etc with subsequent costly delays and repairs.
There was a whole raft of other stuff he told me about, but he is a road/rail soil engineer, I am an electronics engineer, and my brain got clogged in a short space of time.
As for high-speed bridge foundations, that is another kettle of fish!
My idea of foundations is dig hole, pour concrete, build whatever on top, and be glad we don't have earthquakes here.
(My house was built on a flood-plane 115 years ago; the old maps say 'liable to flooding, not suitable for building'. The railway at the bottom of the garden has wobbled the the whole lot into the ground with every passing train; My wshop stands on a 7.25 cubic metres slab that wobbles when a lorry goes past on the bypass 200 M away.
Sorry about the ramble, got carried away. Roll Eyes
Logged

1.140kW mono south-facing at 49*
EpEver 4210A at 24v
24V 400 Ah battery. (4x200Ah FLA)
EpEver STI1000-24-230 pure sine inverter
Of course it'll work. (It hasn't caught fire yet).
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!