Chancellor Rishi Sunak has used his spending review speech to set out the next stages of government investment into infrastructure.
In his statement delivered in Parliament yesterday (November 25) Sunak promised to ‘deliver on the priorities of the British people’, with a ‘once-in-a-generation’ investment in the UK’s infrastructure.
Over £2bn will be invested into keeping transport arteries open, which includes subsidising the country’s rail networks, with plans to upgrade railways, as well as implement new cycle lanes and over 800 zero emissions buses.
The government’s new National Infrastructure Strategy was published yesterday, supported by a new UK Infrastructure Bank, which will be established with headquarters in the North of England beginning Spring 2021.
Sunak pledges to ‘get things done’ with £22bn R&D budget
PM maps out Britain’s Green Industrial Revolution
Colin Wood, chief executive for Europe at AECOM, commented: “What we need to see between now and the Chancellor’s next fiscal statement are the details and decisions that are buried in the National Infrastructure strategy. How is procurement going to change for the better, details on changes to the Green Book, how is the infrastructure bank going to work and confirmation and swift adoption of key recommendations such as the integrated rail plan.”
Sunak set out a funding budget for research & development of ‘almost £15bn’, stating that the country is becoming a ‘scientific superpower’.
A new Levelling Up Fund worth £4bn was also revealed, which will be managed jointly by the Treasury, the Department of Transport and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, in order to take a ‘new holistic, place-based approach to the needs of local areas.’
Tom Bridges, UK Cities advisory leader and Leeds office leader at Arup, said: “The £4bn levelling up fund is good news for towns and cities, particularly for those hit hard by Covid-19 restrictions. We will have to wait and see for the detail, and we think Mayors, combined authorities and councils will have an important role in working with MPs on the plans for how it is spent.”
Welcoming the infrastructure strategy, Donald Morrison, People & Places Solutions senior vice president Europe at Jacobs said: “It’s good to see a long-term, sustainable, infrastructure strategy – not just for our industry, but for rebalancing the economy as a whole. Creating social value is vital for levelling up.
“We must attach outcome-focused goals to all infrastructure funding promises. Now is the time to ‘think think think’ before we ‘build build build’ to make sure we’re designing infrastructure that will be of long-term benefit to all of us all economically, environmentally and socially.”
Call me cynical about this, well yes I think one has to be. Whatever crumbs are used to fix & improve the infrastructure are pitiful and with the fervent chumocracy some of this money will end up in the Bahamas and other territories.
The Infrastructure Plan is well worth going through in detail. At a first glance it is a “Parson’s Egg” with many good intentions mixed with some very muddled thinking. The basic issue is that, while the report gives lip-service to the “Green Book” , which is meant to ensure all investments are carefully thought out in terms of cost /benefit many of the proposed investments are more virtue signalling rather than evaluated projects. For example, the proposed CCS investment of £ 1b is said to aim to remove 10 Mt CO2 /y from the atmosphere by 2030: the benefit of this is that the world-wide human CO2 emissions would fall by 10/2,500 (i.e 0.4%) if implemented this year, but by even less by 2030: this cannot be a good investment against any logical cost / benefit assessment; especially when we are likely to be importing more goods from the high CO2 economies whose energy costs are so much lower.
However, the plan is a good step forward and well worth spending some time on as it will effect engineering very significantly.
Missing :
– District heating DH in urban areas. Re-purpose LP low pressure gas mains for DH return. Use MW water sourced heat pumps on HV grid, backup 5ookW renewable gas/hydrogen/fuel at elec substations for infill.
– Trams in urban areas on main routes. Use UK Ultra Light Rail trams and prefab for quick track install. Overhead lightweight and/or battery + quick charge station or backup renewable gas/fuel.
– Community renewable energy
Wasted :
– SMR dead end
– Roads to no were
Oh dear! The well known ‘Once in a generation’ quote! What happens if we need more, or the world moves on and changes! Does it mean between parliaments, referenda’, births and deaths, 20 years or even 40 years as one politician recently considered. What does he mean by generation? Not that I am knocking the welcome investment but beware politicians making promises. We know how that works.
It all helps but, as another paid up cynic, can I please point out that what we really, really need is proper targeted investment that helps the country, helps the economy and backed up with a proper plan so that progress and benefits can be measured and so that money isn’t wasted. This is not that.
This sounds a lot but consider, ‘Over’ £2bn for: keeping transport arteries open; subsidising the country’s rail networks; upgrade railways; implement new cycle lanes; and, over 800 zero emissions buses. And, how much is actually new money ?
Now put this in context of, over £100bn for HS2 (and counting) and 12bn for a failed Track and Trace App.
And, reality check: current cost of an EV Bus is approx. £340,000 with the buses’ batteries needing to be replaced every six years at a cost of £150,000 [1]. So:
340,000 + 150,000/6 x 800 = £292mn (or nearly 15% of the budget).
Also, no specific mention of upgrading the currently failing electrical infrastructure. How are we going to run all these new electrical devices without a functioning generation capability ?
[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-49374665#:~:text=Electric%20buses%20produce%20no%20emissions,of%20buying%20the%20vehicles%20new.
I’m afraid that I’m with Another Steve regarding these pronouncements. On the news today I saw a massive transformer being transferred from Slovenia to Tilbury: the UK made their own a few years ago . Lip service is paid to job-creation, little mention is made of the export of jobs that has steadily increased, mainly to the EU. Re-shoring is a pipe-dream only unless some politician arrives who can break the circle of financial cronyism that dominates the UK.
Another bout of grandstanding from HMG possibly?
Not too much in here about a water grid which has been endlessly discussed for decades. Ditto some practical approaches on railway electrification (the whole network for a fraction of HS2?, proper separated cycle paths and not just an outburst of white paint. Light rail, trams and trolley buses in cities. The latter would last a lot longer than the 800 zero emission (please define what this means) buses mentioned in dispatches.
Making more of existing infrastructure (road, rail and water) might not be glamorous but could prove a very cost effective way of improving transport activities. De-bottlenecking and encouraging off peak travel (stick & carrot) could also help.. None of this would appeal of course to benighted politicians who increasingly seem to want to dress up in hi-vis jackets and sport .hard hats
The idea of “levelling up” is good and perhaps it would be a good idea to have a National Infrastructure to boost growth and productivity across the whole of uk. Perhaps the “UK Infrastructure Bank” will be located in the North, away from the influence of well-off Metropolises – say Teeside or Berwick (more rural and more Northern England); that would assist the NIC in appreciating what sort of infrastructure is needed for levelling-up (especially transport).
I looked at the “National Infrastructure Strategy” link. And I went straight to the important part ; the Conclusion.
This it somewhat disappointing. Much of it talks about forthcoming strategies that will describe certain issues (rather than major points of the document). The rest of the conclusion talks about the “National Infrastructure Commission” (NIC) and how they will recommend the technologies required (is this something they are able to do?).
And the report indicates that NIC report ‘Anticipate, React, Recover: Resilient infrastructure systems’, is needed because:- “The current public health situation has shown that unpredictable ‘black swan’ events can and do happen,..” Given the precedents of the Black Death and Spanish Flu this statement is some what worrying (and what are SAGE and COBRA there for?) in understanding resilient and robust infrastructure.
However.
On ploughing through the rest of the report I did find some good things there – though worry that, like an Escher Etching, there may be some significant gaps. These gaps need to be addressed as they will require research and development for them to be bridged.
Where is the hydrogen to be stored? And for what purpose (eg heating or transport)? As it could be of benefit to the wind industry.
What will lorries be powered by – as, as said, remaining on diesel defeats the idea of being “green”; batteries are unlikely so if switch to hydrogen will it be internal combustion (gas turbines?) or fuel cell? And what R&D is required? If this does not happen then this allows, paradoxically, for longer use of diesel cars…
There is a section on network reform. But it does not address pressing problems we are now seeing with power shortage warnings (& infrastructure reliability) .Who will be responsible for getting more reliable power -especially if use of EV & electric heating grow the demand? And energy storage does not seem to get a mention.
The commitment to nuclear power is beneficial in providing some, but most likely inadequate, surety of power availability. But no mention of how such infrastructure may be built more speedily – and affordably.
Though restoring those railways destroyed by Beeching would be a welcome lift to many rural economies (and, I hope, not forgetting those cut by Brabra Castle) it is unclear if these will facilitate local freight or if additional roads will be required to boost these aspects of economies and if appropriate inter-model technologies will be developed.