The problem with Australia's freight railways
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 авг 2024
- Australia seems like the perfect place to make great use of freight railways - so why doesn't it?
Support my KoFi! ko-fi.com/city...
When it comes to bulk comodities (things like iron ore or grain) Australia does great at moving them by rail, but when it comes to non-bulk commodities the story doesn't look as good.
In this video I unpack what led to Australia not making the most out of cargo trains - and also look at some the plans to turn that around.
Also, to celebrate reaching the 10k subscriber milestone, stick around to the end for a special Q+A segment!
We need more nation wide rail projects and more awareness for the benefits of rail over other forms of transport. Especially to combat tax dodging air lines.
While I agree 100%, assuming politics continues to get in the way of large projects, we could get a long way with a regular and constant series of small projects. What we should have been doing for the last seventy years is extending various passing loops, one at a time, until they reaches the next one. This would create areas where passing freights would only need to slow instead of stopping. Over time, we would end up with many kilometers of dual track, growing year by year.
Its so nice seeing an Aussie urbanist/public transport channel here, so many are European or North American. Love what you put out.
The answer to Australia's lack of trains and rail...is more trains and rail.
We have to get serious about removing some of the enormous problems of the legacy rail network, WA+VIC (and to a lesser extent SA, more on that in a second) have fairly high average rail speeds due to the relative flatness of most of those state; but NSW and QLD have some INCREDIBLY shit track from the steam days that needs to be completely bypassed in order for rail to be more competitive. Inland Rail is part of the solution if it actually makes it all the way to Brisbane which isn't looking great. A separate HSR system with its own dedicated tracks between Newcastle, Wollongong and Canberra would allow more capacity for freight on the existing tracks in this corridor, but the alignments themselves are largely crap.
The Adelaide Hills remains a big problem as it prevents double-stacking of freight trains from running between VIC-SA-WA or VIC-SA-NT directly, is incredibly slow and winding which is uncompetitive for SA regional passenger rail to the Hills, Mount Barker & Murray Bridge.
@@kyletopfer7818 Don't get me started on the Adelaide Hills. The fact that there is no passenger train to Mt. Barker and Murray Bridge is well into political farce territory, an improved freight corridor would be helpful also.
Solution for the Adelaide hills has been proposed- bypass them! But no one will stump up the cash! Also a link from Crystalbrook to Morgan to the Victorian border then splitting near Mildura then on to Hay to the north east & Melbourne to the south east would directly link Adelaide to Sydney & Brisbane and Perth to Melbourne
@@kenfowler1980 Whilst an Adelaide Hills bypass would solve the freight issue and then the Belair line could be returned to double-tracked which would improve speeds a little bit and frequency a lot, that doesn't solve the issue of passenger transport to the fast-growing Adelaide Hills-Mount Barker-Murray Bridge area. Using the current alignment even if electrified you would struggle to have a remotely competitive travel time. We shouldn't shy away from tunnelling where it is necessary (same as Sydney-Gosford, Sydney-Wollongong, Brisbane-Toowoomba: you are going to need serious tunnels to bring train speeds up to being competitive), we should just get on and do it.
@@kyletopfer7818 Good luck trying to tunnel in those areas around Sydney which have been heavily mined.
look at mt gambier and millicent where almost all of australias toilet paper is made, they stopped using the freight lines which they need to re open today
Yes we do need more freight trains. But governments do not have the guts to give them separate tracks from metro or regional passenger trains. In fact governments need to untangle almost all of our train network to separate them out.
I know in Sydney we are trying to create a separate freight network. They have upgraded the port link, added another intermodal facility in Moore bank, added a third track to some corridors, and they’re getting ready to build a freight corridor to the new airport
Congratulations on 10,000 subscribers! Definitely would be keen to do a collab sometime in the future ;)
I was actually talking to a mate about the rail network in NW Western Australia this morning. The network up there is huge and surprisingly complex. It’s really part of why WA iron ore is so competitive - WA invested in great logistics to keep the ore price competitive and attractive. WA does minerals very intelligently and is now able to export that knowledge too.
WA didn't invest in it. The mining companies did and that is why those rail networks are isolated from the main network and even each other.
They’re all private railways. The west Australian government didn’t build them
Same goes for the transmission line there about
Same goes for the transmission line there about
Here in South Australia all our rail is privatised besides the federal line, this has resulted in almost ALL rural lines getting neglected and closed, also mix in our grain handling being owned by a Canadian company means it is the perfect poo sandwich.
Basically almost everything has been shut down because you have lines not being maintained so hauling grain is slower also many silos are not being maintained either so they also closed and I am certain various large trucking companies have the governments ear.
But it creates this fallacy of "saving money" but when you have hundreds of thousands of tons being hauled by an ongoing stream of B-doubles this very quickly roots the roads which in turn have to be repaired and resurfaced again and again, but most of these roads where built to handle trucks from the 1950s at best going to a local silo of freight facility not 100s of KMs to a larger bunker for example.
Speaking of the Murrayville line, the SA Mallee was upgraded to standard gauge in the 1990s up until the border but like I mentioned was so poorly maintained that Vertera decided to no longer use trains in 2015 and as I mentioned the roads went to poo very fast. But what is so daft is you now have a no mans land of broad gauge between Pinnaroo and Murrayville and many cases trucks haul from a lot of that area in Victoria and before MV by semis to get grain to Port Adelaide when a train stopping along the way is logistically better?!?
But somehow all this is apparently economical and makes sense??
An unusual challenge our freight has is that (in the capital cities) it has to compete with our suburban passenger rail systems for track space, which are increasingly trying to operate metro esq services.
In the absence of proper inner city metros, our suburban trains basically perform the transit role a metro service would for most the capital cities. The suburban networks are increasingly pushing for higher all day frequencies due to this. Problem is, in a lot of place these services share track paths with freight. When you are trying to run a minimum 4tph, fitting in slower, longer freight trains becomes difficult, especially if there are any at grade crossings involved. Given the frequencies of the inner city passenger services, trying to run rail freight through Australia's capital cities during peak hour would be the equivalent of trying to run freight through the London Underground or NY subway.
When it's a choice between higher passenger service frequencies or allowing track space for freight, passenger services have always been prioritises, which is arguably fair, but what is absent is the investment necessary to accommodate freight in a network rapidly running out of space for it.
Brisbane has huge issues here, with freight practically being locked out of the rail network during peak periods. It's still possible to move freight around in between the peaks, but there are a lot of major at grade crossings that will only become harder to manage as the push for better all day frequencies on the passenger serviced increases.
Sydney invested a lot of money over the past 2 decades building a dedicated freight corridor to ensure their most of their freight trains had 24/7 access to track paths not utilised by the passenger services. They've set up a clear, dedicated freight path from the port through to western Sydney (along the Syd-Melb rail corridor) which i believe is free of any at grade crossings with the suburban rail network. Unfortunately freight from the north and south is still forced to share tracks with suburban services.
Melbourne has a few freight only rail links that help it manouver freight trains in and out of the city, but there are still some frieght services that have to share corridors with the suburban passanger trains. Most notable of which being a freight service that serves the region of Gispland. This service has to run through the CBD to get to Melbourne's major freight terminals and port facilities. This means it must cross the 6 track viaduct between Flinders St and Southern Cross stations, in amongst the heavy traffic from Melbourne's suburban services. Finding space for those movements must be a scheduling nightmare.
Tamworth NSW now also has a fully functioning intermodal freight hub in the suburb of Westdale NSW which is run by QUBE logistics and has 3 freight trains per week on Monday, Wednesday and Friday
Agreed, museum station is the most interesting on the sydney network retaining much of its original decor and design.
I love the minties advertising at museum. Probably the last advertising for the venerable product in all of OZ.
Having said that. I haven’t used museum for 20 years so maybe the ads are no longer there.
As I am typing this down I can hear a freight train go past my house LOL. This video is very true.
It's Koosh chel, and I love your videos and face. 😊
Great content and a really interesting Q&A. If you ever do more, I’d love to know what your favourite global transport networks are and which you think would be good to use as models for future expansions in Australian cities.
loved hearing you unscripted, you’re a natural! definitely consider more off-the-cuff content in future :) and congrats on 10k!
Yeah Brisbane metro is a BRT.
And I suspect it’s going to confuse the granny out of all foreign visitors during the Olympics as Cross River Rail is likely to look far more like a metro to foreign eyes.
Apologies in advance.😊
Would love to see you playing cities skylines 2 on the channel tbh.
Enjoyed watching your city trains
Yes please - vid on Perth's MetroNet would be great.
Great clip. Particularly liked linking the concept of more manufacturing as a driver (no pun intended) for more, and more diversified, rail freight.
Something that might be worthwhile for individual treatment is freight lines within cities.
The South Sydney Freight Line (SSFL) is an example. We don't hear enough about freight and in some ways it is even more important to our lives and livelihoods than passenger rail.
For example, compare the intense discussion about the various Metros in Sydney, with the almost complete silence about the proposed Western Sydney Freight Line, that will run out very close to the Western Sydney Airport Metro. Apparently 80% of the containers that arrive at Botany by sea end up in Western Sydney.
As for high speed passenger rail I sometimes think that railfan's are their own worst enemy. For example:
(i) Any use of 25v AC power for trains in Sydney is often trashed for standardisation reasons (even when they don't apply); yet it is a far cheaper system, and that sort of power supply is virtually a requirement for HSR.
(ii) HSR projects are often promoted as one huge project, like Sydney to Melbourne. In comparison, the 4 lane motorway over the same route was not delivered that way. It was done in little chunks, each of which had its own value for people, and generated support for them in the general community. Rail should look at improving 'key chunks', places where upgrading a bad section gives a disproportionately good result that makes people crave more. For example, start with a straighter route than the current winding and slow Menangle to Mittagong section, bringing noticeably faster services to and through the southern highlands.
(iii) We often idolise HSR networks in places that are not good models for ourselves. For example, SE Australia is more similar to Scandinavia in size, population and population distribution. They are a more relevant model than say Japan with its much larger population and smaller area (and also ignore that most of its trains are still very modest narrow gauge passenger trains serving rural areas.)
(iv) Not enough understand transport economics. It's not useful to just "want" more trains. There needs to be sound cases made and supported for where and how particular projects really make sense, and understanding where they simply do not.
@@tacitdionysus3220 correct! Long distances, electrify the freight network using that abundant clean energy we have or if it ever happens nuclear ( never will happen). Sensibly spaced intermodal terminals & decentralisation of the major capital cities
High speed trains in Europe eg. French TGV can operate on 3 or 4 different voltages, so if we ever get it here that can be done, if necessary.
@@user-mb3dx3nn5c Absolutely, that’s quite common, but it’s only using 1500v dc when going through old systems in suburban areas. For long distance you need a high voltage AC system where 25v AC is the usual standard today ( Europe also has older AC systems with other voltages.
It’s not so much about the train as about the power supply system characteristics. For example the overhead wiring and infrastructure (apart from the number of insulators) is lighter (higher voltage has lower amperage for same power) and you only need about 20 to 25% the number of supply transformers as the power transmits better over longer distances. That is what makes it substantially cheaper for the same performance and why newer systems like Perth and Brisbane use it.
Here's the thing.
Progressively upgrade Sydney-Melbourne (plus Canberra branch) to 200km/hr standard, progressivel add in Sydney-Brisbane and Melbourne-Adelaide. (Electified or not depending on how battery and hydrogen technology go over the next 10 years ).
Run fast but not HST trains during the day - affordable 5 hr city to city would take a big chunk of air traffic backed up by lots of reagional services.
At night the line converts to lower speeds and carries freight, piggy-back trucks like the channel tunnel, and sleeper trains.
All affordable and deliverable in reasonable time frames and provides the widest benefit.
Why would freight companies fuck around putting trucks on a train and having to work to a timetable when a driver can pick up and deliver freight door to door?
Trucks go on the channel tunnel 24 hours a day.
@@user-rc8oy1nm1d We are going to have to do something to decarbonise long distance road transport and that's one way of doing it. The charging is what will make it happen. If it is cheaper and faster and needs less fuel and wages and wear and tear on the vehicles, they'll do it.
i know this is a reupload citymoose
you cant hide it
Haha… there was a small error in the original one!
Congrats on the 10K!
If you do want to see a moose, maybe after London you should take the (slightly) "long way home" and ride the rails across Canada.
Y'know what would be bonkers? Developing a transport hub system for Australia. Minor lines between major cities directly, with a hub somewhere centralised that deals with higher throughput. The goal being that you could take stuff off a boat in Sydney and send it direct to Melbourne or Brisbane, but for Adelaide, Darwin, or Perth it goes through the central hub. That means you could have a single train loaded with three cities worth of freight, that then gets fed out into the relevant locations. Each capital acting as a hub for other places within the state.
It wouldn't have to be Sydney, it could be whichever has the best port potential for international trade.
I think the reason quite a few people ask if you're "AI generated" or a real person is because the majority of communication is done through body language like movement of hands etc but when your camera is so close to you and cuts off your arms, watching just your head move while you talk is a bit strange.
It makes me wish that Artificial intelligence software were more regulated.
That inland route should of gone through shepparton, but they decided to go through albury Wodonga then swing out to follow the Newell hwy adding a extra 200km to the route
We have to get serious about removing some of the enormous problems of the legacy rail network, WA+VIC (and to a lesser extent SA, more on that in a second) have fairly high average rail speeds due to the relative flatness of most of those state; but NSW and QLD have some INCREDIBLY shit track from the steam days that needs to be completely bypassed in order for rail to be more competitive. TAS seems to do alright but desperately needs more funding.
Inland Rail is part of the solution if it actually makes it all the way to Brisbane which isn't looking great. A separate HSR system with its own dedicated tracks between Newcastle, Wollongong and Canberra would allow more capacity for freight on the existing tracks in this corridor, but the alignments themselves are largely crap. Completing the Maldon-Dombarton link and extension of the electrification to make it sensible for freight to use more electric traction might contribute more to the necessary shift.
The Adelaide Hills remains a big problem as it prevents double-stacking of freight trains from running between VIC-SA-WA or VIC-SA-NT directly, is incredibly slow and winding which is uncompetitive for SA regional passenger rail to the Hills, Mount Barker & Murray Bridge.
What are your thoughts on the port dock extension in Adelaide? And would you make any videos on Adelaide? As recently the government said theyre starting scoping studies into extending the network
There are better times ahead for rail in Australia, but geez the progress sure is slow. We don't need Japanese-style HSR between our major cities, just moderate improvements to get the max speeds up to 200 km/h. We can achieve this just be straightening out the steam-era sections of curved track. Do it section by section and watch travel times come down year by year. Sydney to Canberra would be a great start. Knock 1 hour or 90 minutes off that travel time, make the trains run every 30 minutes, add wifi and there'd be pretty much no market for Canberra to Sydney flights, and unless you specifically need to take your own car to the other city, no reason to drive either.
The break of gauge issue in Australia has attracted far too much negative press, so much that it has become a distracting truism that makes most researchers waste a lot of documentary time, going over the same stale ground. The position is a lot simpler and more fascinating if the politics is diminished to irrelevance and the practicalities considered as prime.
The railway author John Knowles is authoritative about this.
Queensland sensibly chose 3’6” gauge because her railways were dedicated to hauling primary produce from inland to one of her port cities up the coast. The distances were vast, the population was small, materials were costly, all the locomotives and rolling stock had to be made, not imported and the landscape is surprisingly hilly for a place so flat. So it made sense for Queensland to build lighter infrastructure using a smaller gauge that allows tighter curves and lower axle loads.
Sydney/NSW is 4’81/2” gauge because of the Pacific connections to US railway developments. Sydney was not the easiest port to get to by sail from England. The NSW colony struggled and nearly died a few times in the first fifty years. Sydney did not get the best of the English second-wave developments and settlers, the southern states did. As the Americans traded more and more in the Pacific in iron-hulled ships, Sydney tended to look more in that direction for the newest, best and cheapest.
Adelaide and Melbourne, both founded later than Sydney, chose Broad Guage because that was considered the pinnacle technology of the day, with the best potential, by the squatocratic overlords who dominated the destiny of the oldest and most heavily English-settled areas where the most preposterously snobby anti-colonial attitudes became most encrusted. Mostly the push to standardise was driven by NSW, who wanted what was best for them, which meant least costly. She wanted open access to the growing southern markets on behalf of all the imports she could sell there.
Right about Queensland's (and Tasmania's) narrow gauge reasons, wrong about the others. It was actually a straight bureaucratic stuff up generated by the months long lags communicating with the Board of Trade in the UK (who had to approve the choice of gauge) and the respective nationalities of the first NSW Chief Engineer and his successor (4.8.5" is Standard Gauge used in Britain, 5'3" is Irish Gauge). Google the name F.W.Sheilds. Once the first lines were being built local politicians were naturally quick to find arguments why "their" gauge was better than the other colony's.
Trains are rad.
Australia needs to upgrade the rails, ties, and subgrade, to handle heavier axle loads. No need to go to Pilbara standards, just enough so that modern locomotives can carry full fuel tanks.
City of Stirling's trackless trams trial recently got praised and they won an award. A paper talking about the trial will be released in the next month or so. It would be good to hear the Moose's take on it.
And a comparison with real trams.
@@Myrtone To be honest railed trams wouldn't be suitable for that route to Scarborough. I think trackless trams would be more likely to cover larger distances than railed trams. For some Australian cities they need to be looking at heavy rail due to the long distances. Tram tracks running 20km or more is a big ask for cities, but can be valid. It just becomes more attractive to run trackless trams.
@@BDub2024 More attractive to run buses? That is what trackless "trams" actually are. Real trams have greater capacity and can also use alternatives to street running that road vehicles (such as buses) cannot. Buses need paving, trams do not, they can run on open ballast track, grassed track and a host of other types of reserved track. A road dedicated absolutely to buses is still a paved road, not reserved tram track.
@@Myrtone trackless trams could carry double the amount or more per vehicle. Mind you, there are link buses. But you do need a vehicle that can carry people a large distance with a lot of people on each vehicle. Anyway, its only the local governments pushing for it. The State govt don't appear that enthusiastic.
@@BDub2024 Link buses? This comment of yours is garbled. Real trams have steel wheels on steel rails and thus higher axle load limits and so more capacity. Did you note that trams also don't need the paving? Perhaps a consideration where there is space for reserved track
Yes us gunzels need more to film
The East Coast neds a relatively high speed roll on roll off train that most probably leaves on demand when it is loaded. Trailers on and off without prime movers and the trailers hooked up to a prime mover at the destination city. Anyone who has any knowledge of the transport industry would back the idea of a 5 hour trip city to city and the efficiencies it would achieve.
Australian politicians have worked out that lots of haulage semitrailers on the road means more taxation, more money for the government
But it also means lots of damage to road surfaces very quickly, requiring frequent repair work. So, it's actually costing them more money than it's bringing in. But because the different departments aren't connected, they don't seem to have fully figured this out yet.
You should probably mention the trucking union too. I'd say they've probably had some implication in blocking freight rail development. You know "without trucks, Australia stops" BS
It's not bullshit, there are vast areas of Australia where rail will never be viable.
As for the TWU, the amount of road freight is growing than the industry can keep up with, competition from rail is the least of their concerns.
Truck and freight rail actually help each other at least as much as they compete since containerisation (historically containers were invented by a trucking company to fit with rail, not ships). A good mainline freight service results in greatly INCREASED shorthaul trucking to distribute the goods from a railhead. It is only some longhaul routes they actually compete.
Even if you halved the time from Sydney to Melbourne pallatised freight would still go by trucks.
You need an overnight Japanese SC maglev container train to replace trucks and planes through the day.
Can't talk about it on railpage anymore? 😂
Good work man~!
Our rail system used to be bigger but back in the 80s political decisions were made to move a lot of freight to the road network. That lead to the closure of many freight and some passenger lines in NSW and Victoria. This was a mistake obviously but we have yet to get a government with the determination to start the process of rebuilding rail.
Would you kindly look into the Iron Boomerang?
The issue is neoliberalism. Where I grew we used to get a freight train go through now and again but Beattie and Bligh sold off QR’s freight business. Then non profitable and less profitable lines closed down.
Also look at Kennett’s disastrous privatisation of railways in Victoria. Lines were closed meaning less freight going by rail.
if man made climate change was an actual issue the gov would ban city to city road freight and have it transported by rail but of coarse the gov would lose far too much tax and registration income if they did that.
You answer your own question. You can move intercity cargo with lower carbon emitted by sea and ports are already used for exports. Iron ore and raw materials dont need faster rail, they need cheaper rail. Container rail cargo traffic is low between inter city because trucks can drop off in between for extra revenue and business. Its people using cars and people flying between the cities that need better rail. Even die hard Australian road fans face gridlock cities, so suburban rail is getting long long overdue cash(and it gets votes). Air traffic is as much a factor of distance and speed than pure speed. If planes were much slower, airplanes would still work. Qantas likes it very lucrative (at least as long as there is volume traffic), air routes between the biggest cities. This makes up for the more competitive long haul airlines and weak internal transit alternatives and competition. Night rail sleeper routes dont really work (bar landscape tourists) if you can be in your destination city even with airport checkin delays.
I find it amazing that even the most basic refining of raw materials in the source country for more profit is not done in Australia. It seems a no brainer. It leaves 90% of the raw material profits to China for a commodity that has no shelf life (like wheat)
Not sorry, Canberra \m/
I don't think using rail is actually more economical than trucks, unless you have low-value, low-priority container or bulk freight where the trains can actually go to the origin and destination warehouses, factories and ships. Otherwise, the cost of warehouse-truck-railyard-train-journey-railyard-truck-warehouse is more than the door to door warehouse-truck-warehouse offered by truck transport. Plus, your freight and truck spend most of the time sitting in the railyard waiting to be unloaded or loaded. I know this with some authority, having written container-handling software for V/Line's South Dynon rail-yard.
But we need to decarbonise the freight industry. Obviously most things can't go by rail, but anything that can, should.
@@guy8968 Then a lot more thought and planning is required than has been exhibited in the new Inland Rail project. No-one knows where it will go or what it is for. If it was for freight between Melbourne and Brisbane, ships would be cheaper and can be loaded and unloaded more quickly. Rail gantries can only span 5 containers (if there are 5 rail-lines in the yard) without moving along the rails and they move VERY SLOWLY. A marine Portainer can access hundreds of containers without moving so have much greater throughput.
Surely this is a solvable problem though, the efficiency and cost of truck-railyard and railyard-truck would plummet if there was significant investment. I can't imagine anything easier than a factory in the sticks dropping off a container at the local railyard and having it travel by rail to the sea port and onwards.
But modern road transport does not go door to door - unless you are a massive customer( like Woolworths) most freight is picked up by one truck consolidated & cross docked loaded onto a HPV ( B double/ triple/ road train) delivered to another storage facility then sent out on another truck
Piggy back trains like like the Channel Tunnel are a solution. Keep the door-to-door advantages of trucks but make the long intercity stretches more efficient and lower carbon.
Spread out??? Near 90% live near the coast.
When do you reckon high speed rail from Melbourne to Sydney will be built?
Never.
Just like the inland fail lol
I was serious
I was trying to guess where your accent was from...
Not the onlyfans isn’t coming 😭
The problem with Australian freight railways is that they are Australian. Make of that what you will. My opinion.
Folks that say Australia needs more rail just have no understanding of the environment of the bush.
45 to 50 degree heat for months on end means thousands of klm of warped lines and next year it gets washed away when the wet season dumps hundreds of millimetres in a single day across hundreds of klm.
It’s bad enough having to repair hundreds of klm of roads every year let alone a rail system.
Let’s build billion dollar infrastructure that has to be repaired or replaced every few years just to service a few outback towns.
Now ya thinking😂.
Rail can handle 50 degree days no problem if it's built right.
You have the exact same accent as @Mrwhosetheboss what's up with that?
Rail freight will never be successful because it’s too efficient. Government is far happier living off the tax dollars that the road freight industry generates. Trucks, buy tyres, pay rego, employ
mechanics, accountants, buy
fuel new trucks trailers etc. You get my drift. I’m positive that the horse has already bolted. Rail freight carries around 2% of freight between Melbourne and Sydney. Check out the number of truck next time you travel on the Hume.
Australia's inland rail project will NEVER happen. The overall cost just keeps escalating to an unreasonable amount of money. Also any government won't see it as a vote winner
it's already well into construction having started 6 years ago
@@frizzy60 it’s only the Queensland section that’s causing problem NIMBYS
@@kenfowler1980 Without that section the whole idea is pointless.