Taralga bauxite

 
  3l diesel

Hi All,
Over a period of some years, there has been confirmation of some 50M tonnes of bauxite in the Taralga and Mt Rae areas
http://www.australianbauxite.com.au/site_folders/232/File/ASX%20Releases/30%20metres%20True%20Thickness%20Bauxite%20confirmed%20at%20Taralga%20NSW.pdf


If mined, it would be railed to Port Kembla for export. Presumably, parts of the old Crookwell branch might be rebuilt. I don't know how the Wollondilly River bridge might fare with 25t axle loads though...! Has anyone more recent information on this project, as some announcements and comments do seem to stretch back some time.

Sponsored advertisement

  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
Good information. Would this be considered export  or for domestic use ?  If the product was for domestic use the inland railway might be an option for transport North.
  johnboy Chief Commissioner

Location: Up the road from Gulgong
The production company plans to export 100% via Port Kembla:

"The Goulburn project is favourably located with the port of Port Kembla at a distance of about 180km, but this distance can be reduced to about 150km by construction of a connecting road directly to Marulan. Goulburn is connected to Port Kembla with heavy-duty rail (distance 145km) so that one option is to load bauxite on rail."
  Fred Scuttle Junior Train Controller

Location: Point Clare, NSW
So - by road to Marulan, and then rail to Port Kembla. Sounds good - unless some bean-counter comes up with a costing that trucking all the way is more "cost-effective".
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Is this a recent post?  The press announcement says its from 2012, but there are no years showing in the post date/time on the posts!



In any case, to add my thoughts (even if belatedly!):

Are there sufficient paths available down to Pt Kembla?

According to NSWrail.net (thanks Rolfe), not much remains of the Taralga branch:

http://www.nswrail.net/lines/show.php?name=NSW:taralga

But the Crookwell line is still there:

http://www.nswrail.net/lines/show.php?name=NSW:crookwell

I wonder what the cost of upgrading would be to a point on the Crookwell line to train it all?


Also, this is the same company that decided to use TasRail to move its product to port, even though it was a short distance to port.
  awsgc24 Minister for Railways

Location: Sydney
Are there sufficient paths available down to Pt Kembla?
jamesbushell.au

Pathing would depend on crossing loop lengths, which are fairly short between Dombarton and Moss Vale, 650m.

When CTC was installed, existing loops were at least lengthened from ~400m, and closed loops at say Calwalla re-established.

There are now enough loops, but some/all should be lengthened again.
  johnboy Chief Commissioner

Location: Up the road from Gulgong
The Crookwell line would be an entire re-build (if it was appropate), plus require re-direction of trains at Goulburn would make it a slow process of moving the goods. Building a connecting road from the Taragala road across to the Hume/main line would be more cost effective as the State would bear some of the costs of a road, where a rail line would be 100% costs on the mining operation.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
The Crookwell line would be an entire re-build (if it was appropate), plus require re-direction of trains at Goulburn would make it a slow process of moving the goods. Building a connecting road from the Taragala road across to the Hume/main line would be more cost effective as the State would bear some of the costs of a road, where a rail line would be 100% costs on the mining operation.
johnboy
I don't think it is fait acompli that the rail line would be 100% imposed on the operator.  The state would do a benefit cost analysis and go with the overall cheaper option.  However it will depend on wether they consider the financial or overall economic benefits as the line in the sand.  If they looked at the overall economic benefits it would be a higher chance of getting government funding rather than financial.

What do you mean about 'require re-direction of trains at Goulburn'?
  bevans Site Admin

Location: Melbourne, Australia
50M tonnes is a hell of a lot of product.  A probable $30m investment from the company and $30m from the NSW Government (cheaper than road maintenance) would be a lot better than trucks down that way.  The roads in that area are barely goat tracks when I was there last.

The mine life would be what 20+ years?
  johnboy Chief Commissioner

Location: Up the road from Gulgong
The Crookwell line would be an entire re-build (if it was appropate), plus require re-direction of trains at Goulburn would make it a slow process of moving the goods. Building a connecting road from the Taragala road across to the Hume/main line would be more cost effective as the State would bear some of the costs of a road, where a rail line would be 100% costs on the mining operation.
I don't think it is fait acompli that the rail line would be 100% imposed on the operator.  The state would do a benefit cost analysis and go with the overall cheaper option.  However it will depend on wether they consider the financial or overall economic benefits as the line in the sand.  If they looked at the overall economic benefits it would be a higher chance of getting government funding rather than financial.

What do you mean about 'require re-direction of trains at Goulburn'?
jamesbushell.au
Whilst the State may take benefit of a train line, they no longer have to bear the costs. Example is the current project under consideration for Alkane Mines south of Dubbo. Whilst the old Molong line goes right past the proposed loader, Alkane were up for 100% of the costs of upgrading/rebuilding the line to Dubbo.

As for Goulburn, the current line Crookwell line comes into Goulburn heading 'down', or southbound. Just means locos will have change ends, or 'redirect', as there is no triangle.
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
The Crookwell line would be an entire re-build (if it was appropate), plus require re-direction of trains at Goulburn would make it a slow process of moving the goods. Building a connecting road from the Taragala road across to the Hume/main line would be more cost effective as the State would bear some of the costs of a road, where a rail line would be 100% costs on the mining operation.
I don't think it is fait acompli that the rail line would be 100% imposed on the operator.  The state would do a benefit cost analysis and go with the overall cheaper option.  However it will depend on wether they consider the financial or overall economic benefits as the line in the sand.  If they looked at the overall economic benefits it would be a higher chance of getting government funding rather than financial.

What do you mean about 'require re-direction of trains at Goulburn'?
Whilst the State may take benefit of a train line, they no longer have to bear the costs. Example is the current project under consideration for Alkane Mines south of Dubbo. Whilst the old Molong line goes right past the proposed loader, Alkane were up for 100% of the costs of upgrading/rebuilding the line to Dubbo.

As for Goulburn, the current line Crookwell line comes into Goulburn heading 'down', or southbound. Just means locos will have change ends, or 'redirect', as there is no triangle.
johnboy
Interesting precedent there for Alkane.  The precedent is quite different from Inland Rail it seems.

I imagine if they do use rail, they would probably install a triangle in the upgrade process.  Thanks for the info!
  Lockspike Deputy Commissioner

50M tonnes is a hell of a lot of product.  A probable $30m investment from the company and $30m from the NSW Government (cheaper than road maintenance) would be a lot better than trucks down that way.  The roads in that area are barely goat tracks when I was there last.

The mine life would be what 20+ years?
bevans
The road from the mine area through Taralga to Marulan is in parts, not much better than a literal goat truck; lotta' bucks to rebuild it to a standard suitable for heavy traffic.

The cheapest option is for the company to pay for some road upgrading and truck the product into Goulburn for loading onto rail. This will not be popular with the locals, but when it comes to Big Money, the concerns of the local people is of little importance.

My favoured option is to rebuild the railway from Kenmore - Roslyn - mine area. A "desktop survey" revealed that it would be physically easy to build a cutoff just North of the racecourse across to Murray's Flats providing a facing junction with the Main South.
Unfortunately, rebuilding the railway would be the most expensive option.
  Sulla1 Chief Commissioner

In the most recent Queensland experience, Cockatoo Coal and Aurizon have opted to road haul 3.5-million tonnes of coal per annum 70km to a new load out at Moura rather than re-open the 71km Baralaba branch from Earlsfield. The economics needed to reopen a branchline now means very big tonnes have to be available.
  Albert Chief Commissioner

The Taralga site has since been put on ice. Australian Bauxite decided to put their efforts into a site in QLD.
  Fred Scuttle Junior Train Controller

Location: Point Clare, NSW
Judging by recent developments, I'd say it won't be the only mining project to be put "on ice" in the months to come . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . nothing to see here, folks, move along . . . . . . . . .
  c3526blue Deputy Commissioner

Location: in the cuckoos nest
Judging by recent developments, I'd say it won't be the only mining project to be put "on ice" in the months to come . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . nothing to see here, folks, move along . . . . . . . . .
Fred Scuttle
.................until the price of bauxite/alumina/aluminium goes through the roof again.  That is the problem with minerals developments.  Boom/bust or profit/loss, over and over again.........  What a waste of capital and resources!!

Happy prognosticating,

John
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
Thanks for the clarification.  Hence my comments about a 2012 announcement....
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
If mined, it would be railed to Port Kembla for export. Presumably, parts of the old Crookwell branch might be rebuilt. I don't know how the Wollondilly River bridge might fare with 25t axle loads though...! Has anyone more recent information on this project, as some announcements and comments do seem to stretch back some time.
3l diesel

One wonders if @Aurzion may be interested in this traffic as Lance has already indicated at their AGM they are looking for other business outside of coal for obvious reasons.
  gordon_s1942 Chief Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
I wouldnt hold my breath about building a Triangle to 'redirect' trains in the appropriate direction as without B/Vans today, all they would gain is about 30 minutes and if the timetabling isnt critical, why bother?
I cite the still in place junction out around Dubbo that a triangle or connection would reduce the time it takes a train to 'change Direction' but it along with its old Safeworking system, is still in place.

Isnt part of the Crookwell Branch used by a Rail Tourism group?
  johnboy Chief Commissioner

Location: Up the road from Gulgong
I wouldnt hold my breath about building a Triangle to 'redirect' trains in the appropriate direction as without B/Vans today, all they would gain is about 30 minutes and if the timetabling isnt critical, why bother?
I cite the still in place junction out around Dubbo that a triangle or connection would reduce the time it takes a train to 'change Direction' but it along with its old Safeworking system, is still in place.

Isnt part of the Crookwell Branch used by a Rail Tourism group?
gordon_s1942
There is a heritage group formed at Crookwell itself and they are working on doing up the tracks at that end. At this stage they have no rolling stock (except gang equipment which they have done up)and having a lot of issues with rail access/Level Crossing interface which is a a state-wide issue. They did have permission/access to run trikes at the Goulburn end near the gaol and did so some time ago.

12 months ago the Upper Lachlan Shire (Crookwell) and the Goulburn Malawee Councils invested into the Rail Trail program even with the recommendation that the lines are to be lifted, ballast to be compacted with a 3m wide pathway for 54 km. They are expecting about a $10m bill for the conversion.

Even with if/when this mine goes ahead, I doubt they will use any part of this line. The report states the road construction to the main Southern line would be approprate.
  johnboy Chief Commissioner

Location: Up the road from Gulgong
BTW: The Feasabilty maps are located here:
http://www.gcrt.org.au/GCRT_FeasibilityMAR2015(Lr%20Maps).pdf
  james.au Chief Commissioner

Location: Sydney, NSW
If mined, it would be railed to Port Kembla for export. Presumably, parts of the old Crookwell branch might be rebuilt. I don't know how the Wollondilly River bridge might fare with 25t axle loads though...! Has anyone more recent information on this project, as some announcements and comments do seem to stretch back some time.

One wonders if @Aurzion may be interested in this traffic as Lance has already indicated at their AGM they are looking for other business outside of coal for obvious reasons.
x31
There has to be a mine first to generate traffic for anyone to be interested!
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
I wouldnt hold my breath about building a Triangle to 'redirect' trains in the appropriate direction as without B/Vans today, all they would gain is about 30 minutes and if the timetabling isnt critical, why bother?
I cite the still in place junction out around Dubbo that a triangle or connection would reduce the time it takes a train to 'change Direction' but it along with its old Safeworking system, is still in place.

Isnt part of the Crookwell Branch used by a Rail Tourism group?
There is a heritage group formed at Crookwell itself and they are working on doing up the tracks at that end. At this stage they have no rolling stock (except gang equipment which they have done up)and having a lot of issues with rail access/Level Crossing interface which is a a state-wide issue. They did have permission/access to run trikes at the Goulburn end near the gaol and did so some time ago.

12 months ago the Upper Lachlan Shire (Crookwell) and the Goulburn Malawee Councils invested into the Rail Trail program even with the recommendation that the lines are to be lifted, ballast to be compacted with a 3m wide pathway for 54 km. They are expecting about a $10m bill for the conversion.
johnboy

Would the line cost more than $10m to bring back into service for the mine access as even $20m would bring revenue to the network and remove longer distance heavy truck movements which do expensive damage to road networks.

To understand the economics:

1. What is the road upgrade cost for the trucks?
2. What is the line upgrade cost (over and above the $10m for the rail trail)
3. What is the mine life?
4. What is the potential for other traffic on the line
  johnboy Chief Commissioner

Location: Up the road from Gulgong
To understand the economics:

1. What is the road upgrade cost for the trucks?
2. What is the line upgrade cost (over and above the $10m for the rail trail)
3. What is the mine life?
4. What is the potential for other traffic on the line
x31
1: Good question. To compare with the Alkane developlment south of Dubbo, they opted for the road upgrade as the majority of the costs will be covered by the State Governent
2) Compared to the Alkane Dubbo-Molong proposal, it could be $50m+
3) Up to 50 years, minimum 15 years (as per report)
4) Nothing else worthy for train transport in that area
  gordon_s1942 Chief Commissioner

Location: Central Tablelands of NSW
Not knowing much about anything but I wonder why do 'they' want to mine Bauxite there with all its 'Start Up Needs' when there is/was the mine and all the facilities at Weipa which is also closer to China or where ever the ore is shipped for processing ??
But of course, depending on subsidies,funding,tax'es, brown nosing and back patting, its ignore whats there and start anew.

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Beta4Me, bevans, james.au, Rad, RTT_Rules, wurx, x31

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.