A9 dualling

[DB617]

Problem is, you ask for a rigid system of economic assessment to go on for each project, and you get BCR, which is frequently used to kill off trunk projects that would be massively beneficial for a local area but perhaps not 'economically viable' as they require disproportionate investment. I suppose this is one of those. But unknown benefits often crop up, and the attractiveness of an area based in improved transport links cannot be quantified.

Case locally to me, the Welsh Government handed my county £25 million to straighten a dangerous and narrow S2 road between Barry and the A48, turning it into a DMRB 60mph link road and diverting traffic away from the distributor roads through the town. Kind of like a bypass but using existing routes. It's not heavily trafficked by economically important vehicles like HGVs at present, but it's shaved enough time and risk off journeys that people in West Barry and the Southern Vale are now enjoying much better JTR and freedom of movement in and out, including to the M4, Cardiff, Cowbridge and Bridgend. I can almost guarantee you the project was BCR negative, especially considering the crucial continuation to M4 J34 was a jewel in someone's eye when the scheme was going through the WelTAG process.

Be careful what you wish for. You might just get it.

[tommym8]

I'm pretty sure that the same cost/benefit analysis would have been done in the 50's in respect of building the motorway network. Is there anyone on here who believes that this was a costly mistake?

[cb a1]

A frustrated driver attempts a risky overtake, causes a collision, and a 12-hour investigation (and full closure of the A9) follows.

How can that not be said to have financial impacts?? Add up the number of (repeated) occurrences and it could turn fiscal too.

I agree with Jackal. I should not have used the term fiscal benefit earlier - that was very lax language.

The fiscal benefits of transport schemes are calculated but are only small proportion of the benefits arising from a transport scheme. If we only took fiscal benefits of transport interventions our road network would still look like it did in 1950.

[jackal]

[tips hat]

[Euan]

Apparently the A9 and A96 upgrade projects are under review:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-49905164

There could be growing pressure for the 2025 deadline to remain realistic, or potentially just political pressure as has been suggested upthread.

[Berk]

Apparently the A9 and A96 upgrade projects are under review:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-49905164

There could be growing pressure for the 2025 deadline to remain realistic, or potentially just political pressure as has been suggested upthread.

Unfortunately that isn’t the latest information available:

Scotland's infrastructure secretary has insisted that upgrading the A9 road is not incompatible with climate targets. Michael Matheson said the £3bn project was vital to the economies of the areas it serves.

Speaking on the BBC's Good Morning Scotland programme, he denied that projects such as upgrading the A9 road, were incompatible with the net zero target.

"Even in looking to reduce our carbon output we will always have to have - in moving to a zero carbon economy - we'll always have to have good road infrastructure," he said.

[A9NWIL]

Apparently the A9 and A96 upgrade projects are under review:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland- ... s-49905164

There could be growing pressure for the 2025 deadline to remain realistic, or potentially just political pressure as has been suggested upthread.

Unfortunately that isn’t the latest information available:

Scotland's infrastructure secretary has insisted that upgrading the A9 road is not incompatible with climate targets. Michael Matheson said the £3bn project was vital to the economies of the areas it serves.

Speaking on the BBC's Good Morning Scotland programme, he denied that projects such as upgrading the A9 road, were incompatible with the net zero target.

"Even in looking to reduce our carbon output we will always have to have - in moving to a zero carbon economy - we'll always have to have good road infrastructure," he said.

I hope they convince people, Im sure the people living in the highlands will be grateful of an upgraded A9 Perth to Inverness route.
Perhaps they need sweeteners for the Greens? a program to get Scots to upgrade vehicles to electric or alternative greener fuels, eg hydrogen ect wouldnt go amiss. Not everyone would need to upgrade, but encouraging those living near the upgraded road would be a start.

[A9Dan]

Looking at the report referenced by the BBC article (from the Infrastructure Commission for Scotland), it says on page 108

When new/upgraded road capacity (such as bypasses) is deemed necessary it must be as part of a package of interventions that includes a broadly equal reduction in road capacity for private vehicles on the existing network.

Considering the A9 upgrade will be mostly online, I don't see where the equivalent reduction in road capacity could come from.

[orudge]

Perhaps they need sweeteners for the Greens? a program to get Scots to upgrade vehicles to electric or alternative greener fuels, eg hydrogen ect wouldnt go amiss. Not everyone would need to upgrade, but encouraging those living near the upgraded road would be a start.

Without intending to get too political on a B&IR thread (this may end up needing to be split off), many Green supporters oppose private car ownership full stop, even if they are electric. (Of course, the manufacturing of electric cars isn't particularly 'green', and electricity generation in the UK still involves fossil fuels, though less so in Scotland.) Plus of course you'll have opposition to 'concreting over the countryside' (understandably).

[DaStreetsweep]

Considering the A9 upgrade will be mostly online, I don't see where the equivalent reduction in road capacity could come from.

Do we know which of the sections are mainly, or at least partly, offline?

[Altnabreac]

Considering the A9 upgrade will be mostly online, I don't see where the equivalent reduction in road capacity could come from.

Do we know which of the sections are mainly, or at least partly, offline?

Pretty much none at the moment as far as I can see.

Possibly Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing will end up including some depending on the option chosen.

Spey Crossing at Kingussie looks likely to involve removing the existing carriageway but I think ends up building again on the same alignment.

[Bertiebus]

(Of course, the manufacturing of electric cars isn't particularly 'green', and electricity generation in the UK still involves fossil fuels, though less so in Scotland.)

However, the means needed to generate so-called 'green' electricity - predominantly wind turbines and solar panels - requires vast amounts of steel, copper, plastic, aluminium and paint... manufacturing all of which is extremely environmentally unfriendly.

This is an inconvenient truth that, bizarrely, almost everybody on the planet seems happy to overlook.

Then there's the transport of components to site, diesel cranes to erect them and so on. Somebody once said that any form of 'electrification' doesn't remove pollution, it just moves it elsewhere. They had a point...

[HughMann]

(Of course, the manufacturing of electric cars isn't particularly 'green', and electricity generation in the UK still involves fossil fuels, though less so in Scotland.)

However, the means needed to generate so-called 'green' electricity - predominantly wind turbines and solar panels - requires vast amounts of steel, copper, plastic, aluminium and paint... manufacturing all of which is extremely environmentally unfriendly.

This is an inconvenient truth that, bizarrely, almost everybody on the planet seems happy to overlook.

Then there's the transport of components to site, diesel cranes to erect them and so on. Somebody once said that any form of 'electrification' doesn't remove pollution, it just moves it elsewhere. They had a point...

And that's all before you get to the Sulphur hexafluoride

[Phil]

(Of course, the manufacturing of electric cars isn't particularly 'green', and electricity generation in the UK still involves fossil fuels, though less so in Scotland.)

However, the means needed to generate so-called 'green' electricity - predominantly wind turbines and solar panels - requires vast amounts of steel, copper, plastic, aluminium and paint... manufacturing all of which is extremely environmentally unfriendly.

This is an inconvenient truth that, bizarrely, almost everybody on the planet seems happy to overlook.

Then there's the transport of components to site, diesel cranes to erect them and so on. Somebody once said that any form of 'electrification' doesn't remove pollution, it just moves it elsewhere. They had a point...

Yes and no.

For example burning coal in a power station to create electricity to power heaters is a lot better environmentally speaking than thousands of individual open coal fires even when building of the plant and the transmission network is taken into account because in said power plant you can scientifically control things like oxygen levels and crush the coal into a fine powder all of which ensures the cleanest and most efficient burn possible thus getting maximum energy out of each bit of coal and the minimum of waste (which obviously includes waste heat, etc - not just ash).

Internal combustion engines although subject to continuous improvement over the decades still suffer from the fact that by its very nature a moving vehicle cannot ever be as efficient as a similarly high tech large fixed energy plant with far less 'variables'.

Now obviously that doesn't mean electrification is a miracle cure (or indeed always practical) - but it is still pretty green as it were when you compare it to having lots of small inefficient local power sources.

[Altnabreac]

A few updates.
Dalraddy to Slochd
Network Rail objections withdrawn and 1 day of PLI cancelled but CNPA persisting with their objection on the NMU routes. Looks like at least 1 day (possibly 2 days) of hearing sessions will be required.
Killiecrankie to Glen Garry
The PLI was held in January 2020 and is now complete. Lots of objections but many on similar issues regarding battlefield setting.
Dalwhinnie to Crubenmore
Report has been issued to Scottish Ministers by the DPEA 15 January 2020.

Scheme by scheme updates:

Complete
A9 Kincraig - Dalraddy (September 2017)

Under Construction
A9 Luncarty - Pass of Birnam (February 2019)

Contract Let
none

Procurement Underway
none

Made Orders Published
none

Decision issued
A9 Glen Garry to Dalwhinnie (June 2019) https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=119863

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) report with Ministers
A9 Pitlochry to Killiecrankie (September 2019) https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=119865
2 objections (1 statutory landowner, 1 non-statutory) dealt with by written submission.
A9 Tomatin to Moy (October 2019) https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?id=120174
Most objections withdrawn and hearing cancelled, remaining objections dealt with by written submissions.
A9 Dalwhinnie to Crubenmore (January 2020) https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=120011
Most objections withdrawn and hearing cancelled, remaining objections dealt with by written submissions.

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) report being written
A9 Tay Crossing to Ballinluig (December 2019) - https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=120312
Most objections withdrawn and hearing cancelled, remaining objections dealt with by written submissions.
A9 Killiecrankie to Glen Garry (January 2020) - https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?ID=120283
PLI sessions complete January 2020.

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) Hearing sessions date set
A9 Dalraddy to Slochd (9-10 March 2020) - https://www.dpea.scotland.gov.uk/CaseDe ... ?id=120503
40+ objections. Hearing dates set for March 2020.

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) pre-inquiry meeting occurred
None

Public Local Inquiry (PLI) ordered
None

Draft Orders published - Exhibition held
A9 Crubenmore to Kincraig (October 2018) - https://www.transport.gov.scot/publicat ... -dualling/
Likely to be some serious objections especially around Insh Marshes viaduct from RSPB.

DMRB Stage 3 exhibition held (Interim detailed design consultation)
none

DMRB Stage 2 (Preferred Route) designs published
none

Pre Stage 2 Route Design Options exhibition
A9 Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing (May 2019)- https://www.transport.gov.scot/news/dro ... g-options/

Construction Time Estimates:
Luncarty - Pass of Birnam - 22 months
Tay Crossing to Ballinluig 2 - 2.5 years
Pitlochry to Killiecrankie 3 - 3.5 years
Killiecrankie to Glen Garry 3 - 3.5 years
Glen Garry to Dalwhinnie and Dalwhinnie to Crubenmore 3 - 3.5 years
Crubenmore - Kincraig 3.5 years
Dalraddy to Slochd 4.5 years
Tomatin to Moy 2.5 - 3 years

[Altnabreac]

Inverness Courier has an interesting article on the A9 dualling:
Scottish Government transport minister Michael Matheson tells Highland business leaders and politicians government is still "committed" to A9 and A96 dualling projects
https://www.inverness-courier.co.uk/new ... ng-190470/

The letter outlines the Scottish Government's commitment for the A9 and the A96 along with rail improvements.

While stating that the Scottish Government "needs to balance the extensive changes required to meet a target of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions with its duty to ensure that Scotland has a high-quality transport system that meets the needs of all our population" transport secretary Michael Matheson also says the government is "committed" to dualling both roads – along with upgrade works to the Highland Main Line and improvements to the Aberdeen to Inverness rail line.

"Development work on the remaining nine sections (of the A9) is well under way and we are currently reviewing procurement options to bring forward the remainder of the programme," he said.

Looks a pretty firm commitment to the dualling although notably no confirmation in the letter of meeting the 2025 timescale. Also notable that the dualling commitments are presented alongside the rail improvements and I expect to see more emphasis on this dual commitment in future. It still seems likely to me that it will be the timescale that will slip rather than the commitment itself.

[B9127]

Just because you don't build decent roads dualled or not does not mean the traffic volume will decrease - there are somewhere around 37 million vehicles on the roads in the UK so if everyone embraces the electric future there will still be 37 million vehicles on the road ergo the road capacity is still required to suit the volume

[Truvelo]

Pass of Birnam to Tay Crossing - is the at-grade roundabout still the preferred option?

[KeithW]

Yes and no.

For example burning coal in a power station to create electricity to power heaters is a lot better environmentally speaking than thousands of individual open coal fires even when building of the plant and the transmission network is taken into account because in said power plant you can scientifically control things like oxygen levels and crush the coal into a fine powder all of which ensures the cleanest and most efficient burn possible thus getting maximum energy out of each bit of coal and the minimum of waste (which obviously includes waste heat, etc - not just ash).

Internal combustion engines although subject to continuous improvement over the decades still suffer from the fact that by its very nature a moving vehicle cannot ever be as efficient as a similarly high tech large fixed energy plant with far less 'variables'.

Now obviously that doesn't mean electrification is a miracle cure (or indeed always practical) - but it is still pretty green as it were when you compare it to having lots of small inefficient local power sources.

Even greener if you are looking at combined cycle gas turbine power stations which are not only more efficient than a simple steam system but as they are burning CH4 produce lower CO2 emissions and negligible particulates. Of course if you want zero emissions you should be pushing for more nuclear power stations, A new PWR at Torness B would be a good start. The big problem with current renewables is that you effectively need fossil fuelled plant on hot standby for those times the wind doesnt blow and solar power is negligble. In the last month wind power delivered has varied between 1 and 12 GW. On the windless days this meant had to turn the on tap for coal again. The coal will quickly go away but it will be replaced by gas powered plants in the short to medium term.

One promising development for the future is the small modular nuclear power station. Essentially all the components can be built and tested off site, trucked in assembled and commisioned. Rolls Royce who have a lot of experience with nuclear power systems on submarines have a design in development where they are looking at a 2 year construction time for a 440 MW station.

the Chinese are building their first SMR and the Russians are already one design in service which is based on the reactor they used in their nuclear powered icebreakers. At the moment the OKBM Afrikantov Russian venture has a clear lead with 2 in service and they are gearing up for several more. The Chinese ACP-100. isn't far behind.

Build a SMR station halfway up the A9 and that can power your charging points, You could even put cables over the road at suitable points to recharge HGV's on the move.

One interesting variant is the US/Japanese Hitachi Prism reactor who is designed to use spent nuclear fuel and surplus plutonium obtained from decommissioned nuclear weapons. In a conventional reactor only 5% of the fissile material is used before the fuel rod is replaced. In the UK we reprocess UK and Japanese spent nuclear fuel but the US does not do this and stores it. This would serve 2 purposes, generate zero carbon emission electricity and reduce the stock of surplus plutonium. Personally I am a little dubious as it uses molten sodium as a coolant as did the Dounreay fast breeder but I could be convinced.

[KeithW]

And that's all before you get to the Sulphur hexafluoride

I should be a little careful about this article as the data was supplied by Eaton which does not use sulphur hexafluoride in its breakers and stands to gain by hyping it up. The most likely alternate design ironically uses CO2 The main thing these gases do is prevent arcing when the breaker is thrown open. One way the SF6 risk could be reduced dramatically is by requiring them to be installed in sealed chambers fitted with an SF6 scrubbers as has been done in Taiwan.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/fi ... f04_lu.pdf

Traditionally oil filled circuit breakers were used but these can be a fire/explosion hazard and the oil degrades in service.