£20bn less than existing plans for HS2 & HS3.
Improves 94% of journeys and reduces journey time by an average of 40%.
Saves 600 million tonnes of CO2 and avoids the Chilterns AONB.
Improves regional rail across the UK and integrates with the existing rail infrastructure.
“HS2 modelling is shocking, biased and bonkers.”
Margaret Hodge, Chair, Public Accounts Committee
“No economic case for HS2... it will destroy jobs and force businesses to close.”
Institute of Economic Affairs
WATCH OUR VIDEO
2. What makes HSUK at least 25% cheaper to construct than HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail combined?
There are several reasons for HSUK’s massively lower construction costs:
HSUK’s more efficient ‘spine and spur’ configuration links far more communities, and requires a shorter length of new construction.
HSUK’s design for generally lower maximum speeds allows it to follow existing transport corridors (such as the M1) where construction costs are lower. Sites are more accessible, requirements for environmental protection are lower and the topography is more favourable, requiring fewer tunnels and viaducts.
By contrast, the design of HS2’s infrastructure for future 400km/h operation (which would make it the fastest railway in the world) has introduced huge and unnecessary costs.
HS2’s 400km/h design standard has dictated intrusive and controversial rural routes (such as the proposed route through the Chilterns AONB) where access is poor, environmental mitigation costs are high and the topography is difficult, requiring unprecedented lengths of tunnel and viaduct.
These issues are summarised in the HSUK Cost Challenge.