Sir, – Progress is currently being made on the Helsinki to Tallinn rail tunnel, with China’s Touchstone Capital pledging €15 billion to the scheme, which the Finnish government estimated to cost in the region of €20 billion during a feasibility study in 2018.
Should England’s HS2 high-speed railway ever make it to Manchester, and if our Government actually means what is says about reducing Ireland’s CO2 emissions, I believe we should begin planning an Irish Sea tunnel.
In theory, assuming the line between the Holyhead end of a tunnel and both northern branches of the proposed HS2 near Crewe were upgraded to the standard of HS2, and an operating speed limit similar to that seen in the Channel Tunnel was in place, a train could depart Dublin and be in Manchester or Liverpool in an hour, in Birmingham in less than an hour and a half, or London in two hours.
In 2018, 4.9 million people flew between Dublin and the London airports, and 985,000 flew on the Manchester route, and 927,000 flew on the Birmingham route, and 384,000 on the Liverpool route, which when combined, totals approximately 7.2 million journeys.
Studies have led EU policymakers to believe that high-speed rail in Europe is generally competitive over travel distances of between 200 and 500 km, with journeys lasting up to four hours.
This theory is supported by the model split seen between the following cities – Paris-London: rail 81 per cent, air 17 per cent; Madrid-Seville: rail 83 per cent, air 27 per cent; and Paris-Brussels: rail 95 per cent, air 5 per cent.
We could potentially expect 5.8 million passengers per annum to defect to rail in the event that the tunnel was built. Taking the average capacity of an Aer Lingus A320 and a Ryanair 737 (about 181 per aircraft), that would equate to 31,956 flights per annum, or a reduction of almost a million tonnes of CO2.
With EU policy seemingly wanting to move people from aircraft to trains, how can we ignore the busiest air route in Europe? – Yours, etc,
MARC
SWEENEY,
East Wall,
Dublin 3.