Glad it was worth the reduced service and obviously extortionate fees to recoup costs…
Funny how this is always about HS2 and never new roads, which are worse for the environment, at least in terms of pollution.
Nimbys at it again, they really don’t like public transport.
I’ve seen with my own eyes them chop down a veteran Oak tree so they can build a **temporary** car park, not to mention their complete dereliction of duty regarding the ‘surveys’ they make so they can justify lopping down old/er growth woodland.
Ah BBC with the good old Jones Hill Wood picture. Site of many protests, the place where Roald Dahl was inspired to write the Fantastic Mr Fox etc. Except, unfortunately it wasn’t a remnant of some great ice age primeval forest, it was a scratty bit of replanted forest that from a 30 second check on historic mapping and lidar that had clearly been completely pulverised by Victorian chalk quarrying.
Also, another reminder that the Lower Thames Crossing will impact more ancient woodland than the whole HS2 trace.
I’ve work on road projects, they are similar to HS2 in the idea of a long linear asset, both in the design and construction. I cannot describe how much importance we have on preserving and replacing nature.
As an example on a 3.5km bypass we had an underpass, to be used for farm vehicles, but was specifically designed to encourage bats to pass under the road and newts had a protected corridor to use. We had 2 badger crossings and a habitat specifically for Roman Snails. We planted 2 to 3 times the number of trees we cut down and tens of thousands of new shrubs and bushes (although only 20% of these will survive).
If HS2 has undercalculated the impact on nature then its no reason to stop it, just add more mitigation and carry on.
NIMBY organisation objects to infrastructure
More news at 10
No one really cares about a random field, more damage will be done to the environment if people need to drive or fly across the country
From everything I’ve heard from my husband on what goes into reviewing and analysing carbon emissions, biodiversity impact, and offsetting those as much as possible, on every single rail project, I’m sure they’re doing everything they can already!
9 comments
Glad it was worth the reduced service and obviously extortionate fees to recoup costs…
Funny how this is always about HS2 and never new roads, which are worse for the environment, at least in terms of pollution.
Nimbys at it again, they really don’t like public transport.
I’ve seen with my own eyes them chop down a veteran Oak tree so they can build a **temporary** car park, not to mention their complete dereliction of duty regarding the ‘surveys’ they make so they can justify lopping down old/er growth woodland.
Ah BBC with the good old Jones Hill Wood picture. Site of many protests, the place where Roald Dahl was inspired to write the Fantastic Mr Fox etc. Except, unfortunately it wasn’t a remnant of some great ice age primeval forest, it was a scratty bit of replanted forest that from a 30 second check on historic mapping and lidar that had clearly been completely pulverised by Victorian chalk quarrying.
Also, another reminder that the Lower Thames Crossing will impact more ancient woodland than the whole HS2 trace.
I’ve work on road projects, they are similar to HS2 in the idea of a long linear asset, both in the design and construction. I cannot describe how much importance we have on preserving and replacing nature.
As an example on a 3.5km bypass we had an underpass, to be used for farm vehicles, but was specifically designed to encourage bats to pass under the road and newts had a protected corridor to use. We had 2 badger crossings and a habitat specifically for Roman Snails. We planted 2 to 3 times the number of trees we cut down and tens of thousands of new shrubs and bushes (although only 20% of these will survive).
If HS2 has undercalculated the impact on nature then its no reason to stop it, just add more mitigation and carry on.
NIMBY organisation objects to infrastructure
More news at 10
No one really cares about a random field, more damage will be done to the environment if people need to drive or fly across the country
From everything I’ve heard from my husband on what goes into reviewing and analysing carbon emissions, biodiversity impact, and offsetting those as much as possible, on every single rail project, I’m sure they’re doing everything they can already!