When I was 11, my English teacher gave us all a newspaper clipping to teach us about persuasive writing. The article was about High Speed 2 (HS2), the UK’s proposal for a new highspeed railway line. The line will cut through people's homes and carve up ancient woodlands, destroying both livelihoods and ecosystems in its wake. I remember asking my teacher if “this was actually going to happen”. Nine years later, and it's worse than I ever could have imagined.
After a last review of the costs, HS2 was definitively approved this year, 11 years after it was first proposed. Construction was given the greenlight in April. Britain might need to update its rail network – most of it dates back to the Victorian era, while most of Western Europe is already well-connected with highspeed rail links. Before we built HS1, which connects London to the Channel Tunnel, you could feel trains crossing the Channel from Paris slow down as they reached the British border. Highspeed rail might be necessary. However, HS2 is being carried out with total disregard for the environment.
The HS2 website states, “HS2 is a state-of-the-art, high-speed line critical for the UK’s low carbon transport future.” A big part of the argument behind HS2 is its supposed long-term environmental benefits, producing seven times less carbon than the equivalent car journey. Interestingly though, in 2012, the government faced five judicial review cases regarding the negative impact of HS2 on the environment.
The latest (rejected) legal challenge to HS2 was also environmental. The government last reviewed the environmental impact of HS2 in 2013, before the UK had agreed to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. Chris Packham, behind this latest challenge, claims that the most recent review of HS2 did not fully evaluate the impact of HS2’s emissions.
He also adds that building HS2 will result in the destruction of “almost 700 wildlife sites, including about 100 ancient woodlands”. HS2 argues that “only” 62 woodlands will be affected.
HS2 proposes moving the woodlands' soil to other places in order to preserve their ecosystems. This idea has been declared fundamentally flawed by ecologists, who argue that there is little evidence to suggest that this so-called ecological translocation will actually work. HS2 is also being criticised for felling the woods too early – doing so at a time which increases damage to the ecosystem and will increase the likelihood that the translocation will fail. Dr. Mark Everard has called the translocation charade a “smokescreen for destruction and recreation."
Meanwhile, a last-minute plea to save a 250-year-old pear tree, set to be felled to clear the way for HS2, fell on deaf ears, as the tree was felled last week. This after just last month a 300-year-old oak was felled to clear the path for a new road.
Cubbington Pear Tree - Frances Wilmot/Tree of the Year
HS2 is hiding behind a façade of environmentalism. They claim HS2 will reduce the UK’s carbon footprint in the long term. They claim that they can recreate ancient woodlands in different places. A child could tell you that that won’t work. You cannot regenerate ancient woodlands (which, by the way, date back from before 1600), you cannot move ancient trees. Their blatant disregard for the ecosystem is destroying habitats and beauty spots. And for what? Britain may need highspeed rail, but not like this.
This article was originally written for TheLatest.com
