this was interesting reading in today's DCN Lloyds list
Brian Nye sees big things in rail future
An electrified Sydney-Melbourne rail link could form part of Australia's fight against climate change.
The Federal Government had asked the Australasian Railway Association (ARA) to study the cost of such a project, its chief executive, Brian Nye, told the ARA's Attraction and Retention in Rail conference in Sydney this morning (Thursday, May 1),
While Mr Nye did not comment on the outcomes of the study, he said the very fact the Government had asked was a sign of the times.
Climate and the environment would play a huge part in Government policy when it came to infrastructure and the Rudd Government had already expressed intentions to invest in the industry, he said.
Competition and the emergence of new players to the rail freight industry were also in Australia's future.
“We will see in Australia a total change in climate – you will have the two big class one railways, Pacific National and Queensland Rail, but you'll see a lot more as the years go by,” Mr Nye said.
These new start-up rail companies would completely change the rail industry in Australia, he said.
The inland rail link between Melbourne and Brisbane was scheduled for completion in 2019 and a direct freight line through Sydney was also on the table, he said.
He warned that rail freight between the three capitals on the eastern coast was at 8% and falling.
Mr Nye expressed concern at the skills shortage and the stiff competition the industry faced from the mining and construction sectors.
Companies would not only have to look overseas for foreign workers to fill the gaps, but would also have to change their images to make rail more appealing to school leavers and graduates.
In a recent study of year 12 students conducted by the ARA, not one student had expressed an interest in a career in rail, he said.
feats don't fail me now!!!!!
i blow my nose at you you sons of a silly person
kuldalaiChief CommissionerJoined: Jan 14, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 8, 2009
One would think the priorities would be complete duplication , then build much bigger freight tonnages that would then perhaps justify the massive investment required in electrification .
With potentail standardization of the Victorian bg Nth Eastern line from Seymour to Albury; only Seymour - Sunshine and Albury - Junee require duplication which would easily be within funding by Government.
The gas emissions saved by getting a huge volume of freight off the Hume and onto rail would be a huge saving in emissions in the first place .
Pollies forget that electric traction uses clean electricity generated by generally polluting coal fired power stations . (NIMBY effect again ?)
Australia has huge reserves of natural gas that can be liquified and also used to fire gas turbine locos that are less polluting than diesels, and probably less polluting than electricity sourced from coal fired power stations.
SafetyOfficerJunior Train ControllerJoined: Aug 07, 2006 Last Visited: Oct 7, 2008 Location: Albury
An electrified Sydney-Melbourne rail link could form part of Australia's fight against climate change.
Try putting the corridor in the best possible condition first, double line all the way, and eliminate the curves. that alone would save fuel.
MEASWELL wrote:
The Federal Government had asked the Australasian Railway Association (ARA) to study the cost of such a project, its chief executive, Brian Nye, told the ARA's Attraction and Retention in Rail conference in Sydney this morning (Thursday, May 1)
Thats like asking a russian what australian car should i buy.
MEASWELL wrote:
While Mr Nye did not comment on the outcomes of the study, he said the very fact the Government had asked was a sign of the times.
The government has no idea what is best for this corridor, look at the good they did for the NSWGR from the 70's forward. they are showing that they will think about thinking of doing something.
MEASWELL wrote:
Climate and the environment would play a huge part in Government policy when it came to infrastructure and the Rudd Government had already expressed intentions to invest in the industry, he said.
10 extra freight trains a day each way between Melbs and Bris will eliminate all trucks on the hume and pacific highway.... how much fuel is the railways wasting again?
MEASWELL wrote:
Competition and the emergence of new players to the rail freight industry were also in Australia's future.
Nice, another company for pacific national to buy, assimilate and add to their collective.
MEASWELL wrote:
“We will see in Australia a total change in climate – you will have the two big class one railways, Pacific National and Queensland Rail, but you'll see a lot more as the years go by,” Mr Nye said.
Absolute rubbish, locomotives are at a premium now.... were is all this new rolling stock coming from? chinas redundant steam fleet? (not a bad idea really! oh sorry.... climate change!)
MEASWELL wrote:
These new start-up rail companies would completely change the rail industry in Australia, he said.
Not going to bother, people have tried and failed.
MEASWELL wrote:
The inland rail link between Melbourne and Brisbane was scheduled for completion in 2019 and a direct freight line through Sydney was also on the table, he said.
How bout bring the existing corridor to 100% capability before building a new corridor for 4 trains a day?
MEASWELL wrote:
Mr Nye expressed concern at the skills shortage and the stiff competition the industry faced from the mining and construction sectors.
How bout all the really skilled up rail workers made redundant over the last 30 years, amazing they were never asked to pass on their skill before they left......
MEASWELL wrote:
Companies would not only have to look overseas for foreign workers to fill the gaps, but would also have to change their images to make rail more appealing to school leavers and graduates.
We already are.... bloody poms.
MEASWELL wrote:
In a recent study of year 12 students conducted by the ARA, not one student had expressed an interest in a career in rail, he said.
they cant do drugs or be a binge drinker...... no wonder!
Unforgiven.
awsgc24Minister for RailwaysJoined: Feb 18, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 8, 2009 Location: Sydney, NSW
Suggest leaving diesels between Sydney and Melbourne until all issues like loop lengths, duplication, grade easing, curve easing and double stacking resolved.
It is noted that Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser promised this electrification in the 1980s.
derekmortonChief Train ControllerJoined: May 11, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009 Location: DVR Eltham, Vic
Thinking outside the square a bit, what about some electro-diesels like the BR 72? class. Then you only need wire the steeply graded bits and leave the rest for diesel traction. Useful when the OHW power fail. Also complicated yards can be left unwired. Allows the line to be wired in drips and drabs.
RiccardoMinister for RailwaysJoined: Aug 20, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 5, 2009 Location: Elsewhere
Well given that the East Coast of Australia is rapidly running out of electricity
as no one will build any new Power Stations, one might wonder just how all these new electric trains will be powered.
The only viable CO2 free Base Load Power Stations that currently exist are
Nukes which are banned in Australia.
FieldShunt74Chief CommissionerJoined: Nov 06, 2004 Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
Well given that the East Coast of Australia is rapidly running out of electricity
as no one will build any new Power Stations, one might wonder just how all these new electric trains will be powered.
It's not like oil is getting cheaper or more plentiful either though, is it? We're looking at an energy crisis all round. Now that should favour rail as the more efficient land transport option. We probably won't ever run out of oil as such, it'll just become too expensive to burn, first for personal use, then for road haulage and eventually for rail. When this happens, there will still be means of generating electricity. The price of electricity will go up too, of course, but that will only make the current 'poor relations' like wind, solar and geothermal more viable. Those emerging techs will mature, become more efficient and affordable and at some point meet the price of coal fired power going the other way.
Diesel's still cheaper for freight haulage, lets work on the track alignment now, while it only costs (say) $100 an hour to run an earth mover. Lets not wait until that goes up to $1000 an hour.
CS2905Locomotive FiremanJoined: Apr 02, 2008 Last Visited: Dec 24, 2008 Location: Canberra, ACT
Maybe I should've used a different emoticon. I'm more anti than pro, but what I think about it makes no difference. What I was getting at is that regardless of the outcome of the last federal election, at some point in the future it may happen anyway, whether we like it or not.
DraffaChief Train ControllerJoined: Apr 11, 2005 Last Visited: Dec 29, 2008
Pollies forget that electric traction uses clean electricity generated by generally polluting coal fired power stations . (NIMBY effect again ?)
Firstly, electricity can be generated by a variety of methods. Yes, predominantly, electricity here in Oz is generated by Coal power plants, but that's no guarantee of future generation capacity.
Secondly, moving freight from diesel trucks to diesel trains to electric trains is in the order of some 16-20 times more efficient.
There's an economy of scale at work in the human factor as well. A train with 100 containers is equal to 50 B Double trucks, but only requires 1 driver (when does the TWU weigh into the debate? ; ) ).
MDAssistant CommissionerJoined: Dec 10, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 8, 2009 Location: Canbera
Trains can unfortunately only take freight to and from rail terminals.
Sadly, thats not where the customers of freight want it to go.
Once you add in the costs of the double handling and the delays caused by having to load and unload the trains it doesnt matter a hoot how efficient the rail part of the journey is.
The trucking industry, no matter how you may hate it delivers the goods to
and from the customers premises directly.
FieldShunt74Chief CommissionerJoined: Nov 06, 2004 Last Visited: Jan 9, 2009
Trains can unfortunately only take freight to and from rail terminals.
Sadly, thats not where the customers of freight want it to go.
Once you add in the costs of the double handling and the delays caused by having to load and unload the trains it doesnt matter a hoot how efficient the rail part of the journey is.
The trucking industry, no matter how you may hate it delivers the goods to
and from the customers premises directly.
It depends what model you use. Before containerisation took off everyone still got their freight. Single carloads and private sidings worked for a long time and could work again if the need was great enough.
mjjaSir Nigel GresleyJoined: Jan 13, 2003 Last Visited: Jan 7, 2009 Location: Mount Waverley, Melbourne
We're not arguing the advantages of rail over road for linehaul, we're arguing whether electrification of a badly designed railway between the two biggest cities in Australia is a good idea.
Electrification allows you to trade lower running costs and some environmental benefits for higher capital costs. You spend money on copper wire, you save money on diesel.
However I agree that before we consider electrification we should spend some serious money on improving the alignment and capacity of the line.
Also, I think we should probably make a new Australian standard for pantograph height - allowing for double stacked containers under the wires. That would be 8m from the rail to the wire.
Happy Gunzelling and remember, "Go by rail!"
Michael Angelico
President, Smart Passengers Inc
(My opinions are my own unless specifically stated.)
You cannot post new threads in this forum You cannot reply to threads in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
