We are Green Party members who support electrified high-speed rail to help deliver a zero-carbon future for the UK. Unofficial.
https://t.co/P6fvjzib3p
How does #HS2 deliver those things? How, for example, will it improve local rail services?
Some people seem to think HS2 is about “knocking 35 minutes off London to Birmingham”. But there's much more to it than that... 2/n
Oct 12, 2020 • 5 tweets • 3 min read
We've seen a lot of evidence over conference week and today that @TheGreenParty is still some way from being able to discuss #HS2 constructively, based on a good understanding of what it offers as well as what it costs. The party's policy on high speed rail remains confused. /1
We say again: we are Party members who support #HS2 because it furthers the Green agenda rather than hinders it. We are happy to explain this case to any other member, including senior party figures, if asked. We aren't shills, trolls, astroturfers or trainspotters. /2
Oct 3, 2020 • 12 tweets • 7 min read
We know many very committed Greens are involved in these protests against #HS2, concerned about the loss of habitat and woodland - we respect their dedication. But they’re protesting about the wrong thing - the real enemy is the #RIS2 roads programme. /1
Unlike #RIS2, #HS2 is an investment in a low-CO2 future. It may not look like it now during construction, but the tree loss and upheaval we see is going to be paid back over decades because of how it helps the shift from high-CO2 cars and planes to low-CO2 travel. /2
Sep 26, 2020 • 25 tweets • 10 min read
We often hear from Greens, including very senior ones, that #HS2 is a climate disaster because it won’t be CO2-neutral for a long time. “120 years!” is quoted, “HS2’s own figures!”. One big problem with this: it isn’t true. Let’s take a look at HS2 and CO2... /1
HS2’s official position is that after 60 years #HS2 will either be slightly CO2-negative (if construction doesn’t improve its CO2 efficiency) or slightly CO2-positive (if it does). (The Oakervee review covers this: assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl… - sections 5.30 to 5.37) /2
Jul 18, 2020 • 18 tweets • 4 min read
There has been a call to cancel #HS2 and use the money on more immediate needs like properly funding the NHS or buying everyone a bike. We all want the NHS to be funded - but it doesn't work that way: in fact we'd be worse off. A thread to explain why... /1
We Greens believe in borrowing to invest. Our 2019 manifesto proposed £94bn, to be invested in the national grid, energy storage, renewable electricity, home insulation, R&D, railways, cycle paths, electric vehicle infrastructure and so on (greenparty.org.uk/assets/files/E… p85) /2.
Jul 15, 2020 • 19 tweets • 6 min read
Some Greens are worried about how HS2's drilling and tunnelling into the chalk below its route might affect drinking water and chalk streams such as the River Misbourne. It's a challenge, but they needn't be too alarmed. A thread on piles and tunnels ... /1
We'll start with a disclaimer - we're not water or geology experts, so we're open to correction if anything we say here turns out to be wrong. /2
Jul 14, 2020 • 12 tweets • 3 min read
One of the criticisms of #HS2 is that because it's so fast, it uses up much more energy than normal trains - so Greens should push for lower speed railways. There is just enough truth in this to make it plausible, but it's not the whole story. A thread to explain why... /1
For sure, if you run a train twice as fast, it needs nearly four times as much energy to maintain speed. (check out Davis Equation if you want to know more. Aerodynamic resistance, that dominates at high speeds, goes up by the square of the speed). However .... /2
Jul 11, 2020 • 21 tweets • 6 min read
We keep coming across some misunderstandings from Greens about what #HS2 is, where it goes , what it's for and how much it costs. So here's a thread dealing with a few. /1
Let's start with where it goes. "Just 20 minutes quicker to Birmingham", people say. Nope: on the day that #HS2 starts, in 2029, its trains will also serve Liverpool, Manchester and Glasgow. Here's the service pattern for day 1. Each line = one train per hour both ways: /2
May 25, 2020 • 8 tweets • 3 min read
Some Greens object to #HS2 because they’ve heard that it will stimulate air travel: after all, it’s supported by, and has stations near, Birmingham and Manchester airports. Of course we Greens want much less air travel, not more, so how can we support HS2? A thread. /1
It's bogus. HS2 is not all about airports. Three reasons why. Firstly, the argument puts cart before horse. It’s like saying scrap the Tube because Heathrow wanted it to go there. Of course airports want better transport links to them - and of course they prefer low-CO2 modes. /2
May 17, 2020 • 4 tweets • 4 min read
We support #HS2 because it's a vital investment in our zero-CO2 future. That doesn't mean we agree with the way @HS2ltd and @transportgovuk have been managing it. The Transport Select Committee have reported on its recent consultation on #HS2 (here: committees.parliament.uk/publications/1…). /1
They say managers have been secretive and civil servants not up-front with Parliament. It's not clear @HS2ltd have the skills they need. We say it is vital that a project as important as #HS2 is managed in the public interest, is transparent and is properly scrutinised. /2
May 14, 2020 • 12 tweets • 4 min read
We say demand for rail travel will grow in future. Why? This thread explains./1
Our Green travel strategy for a zero-CO2 world involves: 1 reducing total travel; 2 moving fully to sustainable modes of travel; 3 integrating sustainable modes so multi-mode journeys are easy (Objectives: TR011 policy.greenparty.org.uk/tr.html#TR011). So why will rail travel increase? /2
May 6, 2020 • 12 tweets • 4 min read
As Greens we share with all our party colleagues a huge respect for the natural world and a love of our country's woodland and the wildlife it supports. We mourn the loss of ancient woodland wherever it happens. HS2 sadly causes the loss of some of this woodland. /1
However, one of the reasons why we've set up this group is all the fake news about HS2's environmental impact, some echoed by prominent people who should know better. The debate should be based in fact and a sense of proportion. So a thread about HS2 and woodland... /2
May 4, 2020 • 18 tweets • 9 min read
We are @TheGreenParty members, some elected, some not, who think we should support HS2 because it has a big role in a low-CO2 sustainable transport network for the UK in the 2030s and beyond. HS2 supports our sustainable transport goals, nationally and locally. /1
We think the GP’s position is politically harmful and short-sighted: it puts us at odds with other GPs in Europe and with our own policy, at the same time aligning us with the IEA, TPA, UKIP and other fringe groups with no interest in sustainability. /2
