66% of freight travels by rail in Switzerland, largely powered by green electricity

probe

Quote:

For years, Switzerland has been trying to convince transport firms to move cargo off trucks onto the railways as alpine passages reach saturation.
Part of this strategy has been to combine rail and road transport, but the message is not getting through to hauliers, who are still putting more trucks on the road.

Switzerland is the European champion when it comes to rail transport. In 2005, nearly two thirds of cargo in transit travelled by rail.

In Austria, which has a similar position to Switzerland, trains carried less than a quarter of all goods transported through the country last year. In Europe as a whole, the average is just 16 per cent.

The Swiss result owes much to government efforts: the authorities chose to make the transfer of goods off the road and onto the railways one of the main planks of its transport policy. After voters accepted the so-called Alpine Initiative in 1994, this policy was enshrined in the constitution.

Since then, deeds have followed intentions. The decision to build two new rail tunnels under the Alps is considered proof of this by most observers.

A tax on heavy goods vehicles was introduced, and Bern has actively given its support to road-rail transfers. The Swiss authorities have, for example, paid for shuttle terminals in Germany and Italy.

Combined transport


"We are the pioneers of combined transport in Europe," said Irmtraut Tonndorf, spokeswoman for Hupac, the company that sends trucks and containers through Switzerland by rail.

"The idea was developed in the United States in 1965. We adapted it to our geographical and structural reality."

Hupac says that it has tried since 1967 to introduce regular technical as well as commercial innovations. One example is its Shuttle Net service, which provides non-stop transport across Europe.

"We have also paid close attention to our rolling stock, either by reducing its weight to save energy or by lowering our wagons to carry semi-trailers that would not pass through tunnels otherwise," added Tonndorf.

In 2005, the company loaded 520,000 trucks or containers on its trains, nearly 16 per cent more than the previous year.

The so-called rolling highway, which carries complete trucks through zones where access is difficult or the presence of vehicles is detrimental to the environment, constitutes just five per cent of Hupac's business.

The rest is made up of containers or trailers.

Attractive option


Specialists say combined rail-road transport, especially for containers and trailers, becomes an attractive option for distances over 600 kilometres, and just 300 in the Alps.

"It's true that moving containers and trailers by rail over long distances is a solution for the future," concedes Beat Keiser of the Swiss Road Transport Association. "But you have to admit that it is attractive because of generous government subsidies."

The trouble is that this solution is having trouble keeping up with the growth in goods transport. Despite Hupac's positive results, road transport continues to increase both in Switzerland and abroad.

While road transport represented just over a quarter of the market in 1995, it was over a third in 2005. But this figure has remained stable for three or four years and the number of heavy vehicles crossing the Alps has fallen since 2000.

It is significant that even in Switzerland, where rail transport is heavily backed, trucks are gaining ground. Enough anyway to make some businessmen happy.

"Combined rail-road transport is working, but not in the way everyone planned it," smiles Hans-Ruedi Müller, president of the Swiss Roadbuilders Association.

swissinfo, Marzio Pescia

Unquote

http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/top_news/detail/Getting_cargo_through_the_alpine_bottleneck.html?siteSect=106&sid=7334072

.probe

bk

One point, Switzerland gets 40% of its green power from Nuclear and 55% of it from Hydro.

Since Ireland doesn't have the same hydro resources as Switzerland then we would need to go Nuclear to get the same amount of green energy to power the likes of Luas, DART, etc.

Also rail freight generally has a negative impact on commuter services. Generally speaking it is better for the environment to have a commuter train full of passengers and a few freight lorries on the road, then a slow freight train and hundreds of cars on the road.

Also worth noting

becomes an attractive option for distances over 600 kilometres, and just 300 in the Alps.

Ireland isn't a hilly country, therefore over 600 kms applies and therefore isn't really suitable for Ireland (from Dublin to most places in Ireland is about 300 km).

bonkey

bk wrote:

Also rail freight generally has a negative impact on commuter services.

I disagree. Switzerland also has one of the most-used (per-capita) commuter-rail services in the world, which runs frequently and generally on-time.

On moving here, I laughed at the Swiss who'd look at their watches, check the clock, mutter to themselves and look distressed when the train was 2-3 minutes late. Now I'm one of those people. If there isn't a good reason (like the crazy weather we've been having) then its just not on.

bk

bonkey wrote:

I disagree. Switzerland also has one of the most-used (per-capita) commuter-rail services in the world, which runs frequently and generally on-time.

On moving here, I laughed at the Swiss who'd look at their watches, check the clock, mutter to themselves and look distressed when the train was 2-3 minutes late. Now I'm one of those people. If there isn't a good reason (like the crazy weather we've been having) then its just not on.

Well a major reason why the Dart is so slow and infrequent is because it has to share track with other commuter, intercity and rail freight. If the Dart had a dedicated line it could travel much faster and more frequently.

Anyone interested in rail in Ireland will tell you that the tracks in and around Dublin are already way over congested with commuter services (thus the new Docklands station).

There is absolutely no capacity for rail freight in the Dublin rail region. The only way rail freight could be made to work would be if dedicated lines were built for rail freight. But the cost would be horrendous and given the short distances in Ireland, rail freight is already un-economical without this massive extra cost.

Most people interested in rail have recognised that rail freight is unsuitable for Ireland and is pretty much dead and are instead focusing on commuter services.

probe

While I don’t live in Ireland I often listen to RTE Radio 1 and the traffic news flashes. And pity the poor victims who have to use Irish public transport non-services every day. The number of DART and other railway network failures, leaving commuters stranded is incredible by continental and particularly Swiss standards. Badly run, rubbish infrastructure that has cost zillions to install. Providing the most skeleton, minimalist, non-integrated sick public transport non-system in Europe. People standing waiting all over the place. No duplex (double deck) trains. Each element of the system seems to half-operate in isolation. No network map at each bus stop. No integrated ticketing. No national public transport zone map. Long lines of people waiting to board buses because the ticketing system dates back to the 1900s. No railway stations at airports. No bus stations at airports. No bus stations at railway stations. Almost zero interconnectivity between urban bus systems and rail and “provincial” bus services. Mostly run by “Coras” Iompair Eireann. “Coras” = “system”? Not in Ireland.

Even the newest elements of infrastructure (ie Luas) doesn’t have line numbers (eg L1, L2 etc) to identify it on a universal basis. Same goes for DART and “suburban rail”. No D1, D2, D3 with network-wide maps at each station. Just confused, badly run, mush. Run by morons who have never experienced good public transport in their lives. Not to mention rail freight which is almost down to zero in IRL.

Time to shut down CIE, Irish Rail, Luas, Bus Eireann, Dublin Bus, and the DAA lot. And replace them with an organisation run by people who have spent at least five years living in a country with good public transport (eg Switzerland or Germany)!

.probe

Heinrich

bk wrote:

One point, Switzerland gets 40% of its green power from Nuclear and 55% of it from Hydro.

Since Ireland doesn't have the same hydro resources as Switzerland then we would need to go Nuclear to get the same amount of green energy to power the likes of Luas, DART, etc.

Also rail freight generally has a negative impact on commuter services. Generally speaking it is better for the environment to have a commuter train full of passengers and a few freight lorries on the road, then a slow freight train and hundreds of cars on the road.

Also worth noting Ireland isn't a hilly country, therefore over 600 kms applies and therefore isn't really suitable for Ireland (from Dublin to most places in Ireland is about 300 km).

Wind power? Nuclear? Proper planning? Efficient management?

We seem to trot out the same stale excuses every time rail transport is mentioned. Switzerland is a model for public transport and that could be copied with great effect. Perhaps it is better to overstaff the civil service and parliament rather than put the taxpayers' money to better use. It is better to have frequent, reliable passenger trains and frequent and reliable freight trains than a congested road system.

probe

bk wrote:

from Dublin to most places in Ireland is about 300 km).

There is more to Ireland than just Dublin. Donegal Town to Bantry, for example is about 470km. Most of the 4 million people living in Ireland do not live in Dublin. Notwithstanding this fact, the nation's entire road and rail and air transportation system is centred on Dublin.

Which is really a national problem - and an even bigger problem for Dublin, because the city has been allowed to develop into a super-congested roundabout for the entire country. Resulting in traffic chaos on all networks serving the city.

Causing incredible pollution for Dublin and a waste of energy for the nation, in the process. Not to mention waste of manhours, quality of life for people living in Dublin ....... etc.

.probe

bk

probe wrote:

There is more to Ireland than just Dublin. Donegal Town to Bantry, for example is about 470km. Most of the 4 million people living in Ireland do not live in Dublin. Notwithstanding this fact, the nation's entire road and rail and air transportation system is centred on Dublin.

The reality is that a quarter of the population of Ireland lives in Dublin and 40% lives in the greater Dublin Metropolitan area.

The rest of the population of Ireland is relatively lightly dispersed across the rest of the country, so it does make perfect sense that the majority of freight comes into Dublin as that were at least 40% of it is heading, with the rest dispersed across the rest of the country.

For instance it wouldn't make any sense for freight to arrive in Cork, where only about 10% is headed and then have 40% sent up to Dublin and the rest around the country.

Donegal Town to Bantry at 470km is irrelevant to this conversation as it is still under the 600km mark that makes rail freight economical and anyway who would be sipping lots of freight between these two locations.

I understand the overall point you are trying to make, it just doesn't apply to rail freight and in general I think it is hard to ignore that Dublin is the densest populated area in Ireland.

liberty 2007

Perhaps it's because the people of Sitzerland have more control over how their country is run, then we over ours. (Direct Democracy)

probe

liberty 2007 wrote:

Perhaps it's because the people of Sitzerland have more control over how their country is run, then we over ours. (Direct Democracy)

No doubt about that. Direct democracy is the best way to run a country. Failing that a benign dictatorship!

.probe

bonkey

probe wrote:

No doubt about that. Direct democracy is the best way to run a country.

Living in Switzerland, I can tell you that its far from the ideal system that people crack it up to be.