Indeed it is.PVC King wrote:The issue on MN is the relationship between cost and benefit;
The problem is that we don't know the benefits or the costs, so the discussion is pointless. Describing an alternative route for which we also know neither costs nor benefits doesn't help much.
The metro costs won't be known to anyone until the final bid is made.
The studies predicting the benefits have only been partially released and although the RPA has been updating their estimates regularly to compensate for the changing economy, these updated studies are also unpublished.
Even if we had full disclosure of the benefits and costs in advance it has to be remembered that the predictions are just that and that the calculation of benefits depends on a list of predictions about the long term future of inflation, the future prices of fuel, economic growth curves, European climate change policy.
The benefits study must place a EURO value on improved public health and other intangible benefits that don't fit easily into a sum.
One good thing about these cost benefit studies is that if they're all done consistently it does give you a rough yardstick to compare a set of projects in the same sector. Presumably on this basis, the weaker projects have been discarded: Lucan & Rathfarnham Luas, Metro west, Cherrywood-Bray Luas, WRC...
Underground lines in Dublin including an airport metro were first proposed 35 years ago by the Dublin Rapid Rail Transit Study. We've had plenty of time to consider and refine this proposal and we have many oversight bodies to ensure that it's worthwhile: Dept of finance, C&AG, ABP, Even the EIB has cast its rule over the project and agreed to invest.
The project promoters haven't done a great job given that Transport 21 has generous pr/ branding and advertising budgets. Hence these inane & repetitive discussions that have now leaked from the internet into the public mind.
On the elephant it says "15 Billion"