From The Telegraph, 20 July 1813:
More than 1,000 of Britain’s most important wildlife habitats and dozens of ancient woodlands will be directly affected by the proposals to lay down 8,000 miles of track between England's towns and cities.
Official documents also disclose that tens of thousands of acres of valuable farm land - already scarred beyond recognition with canals and cart tracks - will be lost and more than 1,000 buildings are to be demolished.
Conservationists and other campaigners reacted angrily to the figures, which were buried in a mass of Railway Acts passed without fanfare by Parliament.
They are the fullest assessment of the environmental impact of the newfangled 'steam locomotives'. Until now only the impact of the first railway using these contraptions, from Pen-y-darren ironworks to Abercynon, had been fully detailed.
The railways are backed by both Houses of Parliament, with Lord Liverpool, the Prime Minister, and other senior Cabinet ministers arguing that railways suitable for steam locomotives will transform Britain’s “economic geography”.
Merry Christmas smiles
2 hours ago
7 comments:
is this deja vu all over again?
Shouldn't that be the 1829 version of the Telegraph? He.
Do you know what, they are talking about speeds of at least 30 mph or perhaps 50 mph! Why does anyone need to go that fast? I mean all sorts of bad thing could happen. Anyway they could just re-build Darlington 5 miles nearer to Stockton for the same cost...
50mph? surely you'd suffocate at that speed.
Let's get that coal burning again.
B - So my Great Aunt says..
G, I'm sure you asked that before.
IH, I checked, they'd started building railways 200 years ago, by 1829 they'd half finished.
L, B, correct. Anything faster than horse and cart is lethal, and even horse and cart is dangerously and unnaturally fast. Walking speed is safest.
JH, yes i forgot to mention the irreparable damage from burning coal, which triggered the Great Imperial Warming of the late Victorian age.
Post a Comment