Midsomer Norton road bridge.

I'd suggest a good way to 'prove yourself' would be to seperate the restoration of Midford as a reflection of the past (which i doubt anyone objects to, certainly not me) with the confused and illogical idea that Peak Oil will somehow lead to a rebuilt S&D - an idea thats already been comprehensively debunked on this forum, and which other S&D groups seem unwilling to be associated with.

Chris

 

If you wish to ignore the idea of peak oil, that's fine. But at the end of the day the New S&D are railway enthusiasts, have secured two stations and are in the process of restoring them, and are looking at actively fundraising towards line restoration. Why is any of that a problem?

I don't know how many of you have tried to get from Radstock into Bath in the morning rush hour. It's a complete nightmare. A rail service from MSN through Radstock, stopping at "Peasedown Parkway" and then winding down the valley to stop somewhere in Bath (there's probably room to connect to the Great Western at Oldfield Park, with a possibility for a terminus station at the Waste Transfer Station nearby which I understand is to be taken out of use soon) would be a massive success, and would be a huge boost to the S&D. There is plenty of room in the RADCO car park for park and ride, and with a van for cycles the whole thing would take a huge number of cars off the road. Even without peak oil that is a laudable plan. In addition it would give the much wanted mainline connection and would mean that the S&D would again be able to run steam engines down one of the most picturesque stretches of railway in the country.

 

If you have a look at what i've said before you'll see that im not ignoring Peak Oil, quite the opposite, and thats why im concerned with the message being given out by the 'New S&D'. There seems little concern or interest in the economic and social effects, instead its like someone has picked up a book about the subject and skipped to the section which suggests railways will be a more cost effective form of transport, and then jumped to the conclusion that it justifies the massively expensive rebuilding of their favourite old line.

...except it doesnt - as has already been discussed on this forum before the economic benefit will never outweight the financial cost because people on the route will likely have access to a car, bus or taxi, however they are powered. While some disused railways have a good business case even now, the S&D will never be one.

-----

Here's the previous thread, the last reply from mendipsengineman before dissapearing is on page 15 where he laughably calls sceptics 'backward thinking doom mongerers' for not believing we'll go back to living without cars and making rural railway lines viable again! Are you the same person, Dave?

Chris

 

Aghh! I'm falling into the trap! I don't want to turn this thread into one about the 'New S&D' but I can't help myself!
My biggest problem with the 'New S&D' is not their arguements but their intellectual arrogance in expressing them. I can't see 30 years into the future and so I will never say 'never' about some or other section of the S&D re-opening. After all, in 1810 could I have predicted the growth in railways by 1840?
However, looking around the Country there are several more schemes that are smaller, easier, and cheaper to reinstate (for example the SELRAP Skipton-Colne link) but even they seem to be many years away, and their business case is far stronger. Completing the link from Northallerton through Hawes to the Settle and Carlisle is another. Chris' comment below about someone picking up a book and skipping to the section that best suits is spot on and whilst the second and third order effects of peak oil remain unknown it doesn't do the cause any good by slagging of the heritage sector who have achieved so much in the last decades as mere "puffer lovers" (as we are known by the latest 'New S&D' post).
It's a shame because in preserving what they can of the line and at least keeping the case for reinstating the S&D alive they are doing some good and there is many a success story today that began with a majority disbelieving that they could do it. Time will tell, but in the interim the 'New S&D' dismissal of the heritage sector (heritage-led regeneration has done a hell of a lot for many rural and urban areas) does it no favours.

 

There is no reason to suggest that a rebuilt S&D could not be a vital link in the UK's 21st Century transport network. Especially if it forms part of a through route from the Midlands etc. The original "Bath Extension" was, of course, almost the ruin of the original company but things have moved on. Of course, at the moment, the travelling public are more concerned with the hike in fares and we all know its going to be an awful year for pretty well everyone. I'm with Ralph as I too believe that the future is too uncertain which can make both Christopher 125's comments and those of the new S&D appear arrogant. I say, appear, as its a matter of interpretation. For myself, I'm very impressed with what people have done thus far with the S&D and I'm sure that, as more of the line is saved, the impetus to save and rebuild even more will be forthcoming. However, I'm under no illusion that public money will be freely available!

 

Oh yes, for anyone who hasnt seen here's the latest post from the new S&D blog.

To be honest Ralph, i wouldnt mind so much if they werent railway enthusiasts with links to other preservation schemes because at least it wouldnt reflect so bad on our hobby and it might explain why they cant grasp why rebuilding the line will never have a viable business case. As it turns out, there are people so in love with a railway that they'll happily overlook the conflict and human suffering of a potentially horrendous global event, and instead concentrate on the fantasy that it will bring some of those scenes from the camera of Ivo Peters back to life.

I find it quite bizarre that people who seemingly believe in Peak Oil so much are not trying to educate people on the possible effects to the economy, food production, global politics and even the potential for warfare... but trying to convince them that a meandering rural railway will be rebuilt "sympathetic both to the history of the route and to the countryside it runs through".

Chris

 

I think one of the differences between the New S&D and general Peak Oil theorists is that we are generally not of the catastrophist persuasion, but believe that a managed switch from fossil fuel to non-fossil fuel energy and the consequent switch from road to rail will enable us to continue living in a reasonably civilized and mobile society. Local railways carrying all our freight and passenger traffic will be essential to this process. The reason I support the New S&D is that they are restoring MY local route, and not trying to change the whole world (except perhaps by example). By concentrating on a tiny part of the solution they will help to make it happen.

Personally I've read most of the stuff on Peak Oil and dismiss most of it as American Hollywood-leaning fantasy, with a nasty misanthropic streak. I'm surprised that by not embracing the peak oil mainstream and by being 100% realistic the New S&D is still vilified in some quarters.

Perhaps in reality this is a proxy battle between non-catastrophists and catastrophists? I know which side I'm on!

 

The New S&D does not denigrate the heritage section at all. And it wasn't us that used the term 'puffer lovers' - it was clearly stated in the post that this was a cruel term. I've been called it myself when I was working at Midsomer Norton.

The heritage section is VITAL to restoration of our railways and they have done a fantastic job of keeping rail alive. The New S&D will, to all intents and purposes, be a part of teh heritage movement for many years yet. We have no illusions about that. We use volunteer labour at all levels, and the Midford restoration has to be about as heritage as you can get!

There's no difference between us and the heritage sector - our membership is about 95% purely heritage based. You won't find us knocking the sector as we'll be knocking ourselves.

There's just too much misinformation out there, and I wonder who it really serves?

 

The New S&D firmly believe that real stations with buildings, staff etc will be more attractive to the travelling public than unstaffed bus shelters. Restoring Midford to its 1950s appearance is not only economically more viable but also will encourage future steam operators to use their locos on the route as the infrastructure will not jar.

The New S&D is as much about the past as the future, and in reality the same can be said of all the S&D groups.

 

We're just waiting to be invited in. I don't think we've completed our apprenticeship yet - which is fair enough.

 

Great, but how will using the S&D be so much cheaper and easier for local people and businesses than using the road network? Either oil will become more expensive over time, making alternatives such as electric and hydrogen vehicles more viable for transport as is currently happening, or worldwide events will lead to a much sharper increase, bringing all sorts of economic and social problems that will make a long term rebuild of the S&D irrelevant as the short term shock will move people and businesses elsewhere.

If you can describe a timeline of events then at least i'll have some idea of the logic involved - at the moment im baffled.

Chris

 

A read through the blog can give a lot of information, but I'm happy to repeat it!

Bear in mind that none of us can know the future precisely, although a lot of things will definitely happen the timeline can vary.

Peak Oil is a bit of a misnomer - peak energy would perhaps be a better description. The old expectation that somehow cars (no one has yet suggested it seriously for lorries) will gently switch to electricity or hydrogen totally ignores the fact that the extra energy would need to be generated. You perhaps have more faith in renewables than I do, but remember just a few years ago it was seriously being suggested that biofuels would be used. No one suggests that now. Almost immediately there was pressure on farmland and fuel prices, and this was at tiny levels of development.

Re electric cars/hydrogen the reality is that the UK is already forecasting power cuts in the future if generating capacity is allowed to continue to fall. It's a mass media generated sop that this can 'solve' the energy problem - it's non-science for the unthinking man in the pub. Remember economics is not taught to kids in this country, and is a mystery to most.

The simple fact is that fossil fuels were a once in an aeon easy and cheap form of energy, but we've burnt our way through a lot of it, and upwards price pressure is already rearing its ugly head. ALL alternatives will cost more, if they can be found.

But the daft thing is technology to move people and freight cheaply and efficiently already exists, and using the right power generation (ie wood burning steam, wind/solar along a linear footprint) could well make it almost eternal and obviously sustainable. Rail is at least 4 times as energy-efficient as road transport, electric power is even more efficient (I've seen up to 25 times more). Locomotives can draw their power from external sources (wires, stubs, conductor rails etc) rather than having to carry their own fuel. None of this energy-saving technology can be applied to roads - any moves in that direction will always favour rail over road.

As to roads as the price of fuel and maintenance increase, and as supply of fuel becomes less dependable, and perhaps resources are misallocated to providing, for example, hydrogen and battery changing or charging facilities, the majority of people that no longer have access to private transport will begin to refuse to pay taxes (or refuse to vote for parties that support road). Road maintenance will begin to falter, kids will be brought up to expect never to own a car, and the roads will probably collapse much faster than any of us expect.

Rail will have to take over. The current network is already experiencing capacity restraints. Most of the Beeching cuts will be reversed, new routes will open, there'll be a boom in tramway construction and industrial lines and more and more private/pension fund investment will switch to rail construction and operation.

What happens in the wider world none of us can predict. The peak oilers generally prefer the apocalyptic view, the technologists seem to think that some new technology will come along, the greens hope everything collapses so they can force their worldview on the rest of us, the man in the street just wants to keep his family fed.

I just happen to believe that humans are incredibly resourceful and that none of the above 'alternatives' has to happen if we prepare early enough.

I've no idea why such a view should attract such vilification, particularly from fellow railway enthusiasts, but I can absolutely guarantee that I'll always struggle for the return of the S&D and that the New S&D and its sister groups at Shillingstone and Midsomer Norton will go from strength to strength.

 

Surely people who live out in the sticks who are finding it increasingly difficult to afford a private car, and businesses that arent competitive because of the increasing cost of road transport, will move? After all, a large number of people dont live or work near an existing or even disused line and so wont have any choice. With the existing railway network needing to cope with a vast number of extra journeys, transport costs spiralling and urban centres growing and becoming more congested any money available will surely go to HS2-type projects connecting up major conurbations.

...quite aside from all this ignoring the advances that'll be prompted by increasing fuel costs, and the massive economic and social unrest all this would cause, i still dont see how it justifies the rebuilding of a cross country line that doesnt go through anywhere with much industry or population relative to the vast cost of building and operating the line.

Even if i went with everything you've written above, with rural and cross-country lines being rebuilt, the vast cost and poor business case for the S&D is going to put it a long way down the list of potential reopenings - making it so far in the future that the road network will, by your own admission, have fallen apart presumably leaving virtually no industry and very few people along the line.

Chris

 

Oh dear we are getting a bit off topic again. Lets recap a little. Silver Street bridge can be replaced at considerable cost, I would suggest rather less than the £6m origionally posted. (The GCR gap is costed at Network Rail benchmark rates at less than £15m for 500m of embankment, two major bridges et all).
Sustrans scheme from Midsomer to Radstock has been designed to make provision for a single track line.So Radstock is possible in the future. Going south once you get rid of the infill again is possible, but missing bridges, at least one house present loads of problems.
For anybody wanting an idea of the state of bridges etc over the whole route can I suggest you get hold of Tim Deacons book :Somerset and Dorset , The Aftermath of the Beeching Axe. ISBN0860935272 / 9780860935278 / 0-86093-527-2
Although fifteen years old apart from a facinating read details all the bridges and condition then are detailed.

So lets all support the trust at Midsomer with donations and volunteers to comlete up to the infill. Then we can seriously look at relaying a more substantial length of the S and D based on Midsomer Norton this will be a stepping stone to greater things.
Just visualise a 7F coming up the bank from Radstock. Now that would get the punters in. Pipedream, no its perfectly possible.

 

Panther replied on the S&D blog, so i'll quote his reply below.

I dont think capacity on any of the routes between Bath and the south coast is constrained by anything more than short trains and rationalised infrastructure, which dont require anything like the cost of rebuilding the S&D to sort out.

Regarding the towns and villages along the line, your reference to Wimborne and Ringwood shows how ropey the argument is - they dont need the S&D to be reconnected to the rail network, and they wont help the business case of the S&D mainline either way. Besides, as i said in my previous post if it needs the road network to fall apart and private cars to be too expensive to use reguarly if at all for the S&D to be viable then there wont be any people or businesses to serve by the time it was rebuilt - as far as i can tell its perhaps the most fundamental flaw with the whole 'New S&D' idea and one yet to be addressed.

For the record, i dont believe in some apocalyptic post-oil world, i just cant see how an increase in the price of petrol and diesel wont lead to battery, hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles becoming more widespread even if this leads to an increase in transport costs, but even that wont help rural railways - it will mean people and companies will relocate to larger and better connected towns and cities to reduce costs.

That said, if i do give you the benefit of the doubt and people stop driving their own cars, how do you think the existing rail network will cope? How could a billion pounds, or even half a billion pounds, even be available let alone justified to get people between Bath and Bournemouth quicker and connect up a few towns and villages, when a large proportion of the countries commuters cant get to work? When any infrastructure out in the countryside, be it powerlines, gas pipelines, water mains etc require people on horseback to repair them?

To summarise, vehicles are history; the road network has crumbled; everyone's using a bicycle or horses to get about and move things... yet the economy has survived intact, the existing railway network massively expanded, and the S&D rebuilt with respect to its past history so that we can watch special steam excursions go over it.

Really?

Chris

 

If we move to hydrogen or electric powered vehicles, the power to either charge the batteries or make the hydrogen has to come from somewhere.

70% of our electricity comes from fossil fuels.

So the problem is not that we'll run out of oil, but that we will run out of energy, full stop.

Trains are much more efficient at moving people than cars or buses, and much better at moving freight than trucks, so we would be better able to make use of energy by running trains than with road vehicles.

Again, wholly aside from the peak oil debate, if you look at a map of the roads:

http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.220647,-1.691895&spn=2.353389,7.064209&z=7

You can see that there are no good quality North/South roads between the M5 and the A34. It's impossible to build a motorway or even improve the A-roads to D/C standards because of the terrain. But the trackbed exists for a rail mainline that would open up all of the towns that currently cannot enjoy industrial growth due to poor transit links along the route for investment.

 

"Remember economics is not taught to kids in this country, and is a mystery to most."I can assure you that all 3 of my children were taught economics at GCSE level and, in the case of 2 of them, at A level. I was not taught economics at school but that's my problem!

Anyway, back to Midsomer Norton Siver Street bridge. Any news on whether the local authority is on side with the proposed reinstatement of the bridge? I would imagine that there might be planning issues or, as its a reinstatement, are there "grandfather rights?"

 

Twaddle !!!

There's plenty of open countryside and farmland in the west country to build new highways should they be deemed necessary by government.

Chris

 

Dave, im not sure what you mean - fossil fuels have always been running out since we started burning them. However, while demand for cheap oil is at risk of exceeding supply in the near future there is plenty of cheap coal left around the world, however undesirable using it is.

Im afraid this idea that due to rail being more energy efficient it will usurp road transport only makes sense when it can directly replace it - as few people outside towns and cities either live or work near either a current or former station this makes rail completely impractical. While i can see the appeal of 'Lark Rise to Evercreech Junction', you are never going to see a horse and cart leaving the station with Tesco's on the side.

I still dont see how you get from increasing fuel prices making the road network redundant, to a rebuilt S&D - the implications of the former on both people and businesses in rural areas can only destroy the business case for the latter.

Chris