CH: Moving freight traffic off the roads an onto rail

probe

Switzerland is continually taking measures to force freight traffic to use the rail system rather than roads. The country has to carry large volumes of freight traffic transiting from one point in the EU and other (eg Germany+Benelux+Scandinavia <> Italy, France <> Italy, Austria <> France, etc). When the new 57 km x 2 Gotthard rail tunnel is complete, they will be in a position to force most of this onto the rail network on trains (up to 1.5 km long) capable of carrying 4,000 tonnes of freight at speeds of 120 to 150 km/h. This will take place silently, underground, powered mainly by electricity from hydroelectric sources. Rail freight in Switzerland is 4% cheaper than road freight*.

While these trains will take Ro-Ro freight (trucks driving on and off the train) I suspect that the Swiss initiative is going to make logistics companies and railway operators in the dysfunctional EU wake up to using rail on an end to end basis (eg origin in Germany to destination in Italy and v.v).

Tunnel brochure: http://www.alptransit.ch/pages/img/projekt/The_new_Gotthard_rail_link.pdf

Construction website: http://www.alptransit.ch/pages/e/index.php

Budget: CHF 11.83 bn (EUR 7.3 bn) – the real cost is probably zero for Switzerland, it will be fully recovered from the EU consumer on freight charges, and Switzerland will be left with a zero cost tunnel that can provide high speed rail connections for passengers (250 km/h) between Northern and Southern Switzerland!

* http://www.inboundlogistics.com/articles/features/0305_feature03.shtml

.probe

Húrin

That's good to hear. In countries like ours, blessed with flat terrain, in coming decades we can again use the canals for transporting freight.

Del2005

Isn't there some distance, under 200km I think, where rail freight isn't viable for general transport? And since most places on this Island are less then that away it doesn't make sense to force them off the road.

Canals would be good but again you need long distances to make them usefull.

It's OK for Swizterland to do this as it's all through freight, but you'd be more then doubling the amount of trucks on our roads if we had to do this. One truck to bring to rail head, we wish they'd have proper facilities at our ports to load directly onto carraiges, and then one to unload and bring to destination. While an artic could take several loads and drop off enroute.

probe

Del2005 wrote: »

Isn't there some distance, under 200km I think, where rail freight isn't viable for general transport? And since most places on this Island are less then that away it doesn't make sense to force them off the road.

Canals would be good but again you need long distances to make them usefull.

It's OK for Swizterland to do this as it's all through freight, but you'd be more then doubling the amount of trucks on our roads if we had to do this. One truck to bring to rail head, we wish they'd have proper facilities at our ports to load directly onto carraiges, and then one to unload and bring to destination. While an artic could take several loads and drop off enroute.

So? Ireland is just as "connectable" to the European rail network as Switzerland. All you need is a state of the art port with a rail connection. (Off rail at French port, on boat, off boat at Irish port and on rail, and vice versa). Trucks have to get on and off boats too! With rail container handling it can be largely automated with RFID tags on the containers causing them to be automatically shunted around the place, like barcoded mail in a mechanised sorting office.

Four or five rail freight hubs near key locations in Ireland to bring it to interchange points where road vehicles bring it the "last mile" (or several km) to the final destination, in the case of delivery points off the rail network. Business parks with any heavy industrial stuff should be planned in conjunction with the rail network - both in terms of employee commuting and freight. Swissrail cargo carried 13,37 billion net tonne/km of freight last year. They have 323 delivery points on the rail network, and 89 private delivery points where the customer has their own "railway station" on site. Switzerland is a small country (41,290 km2 - v IRL 70,280). Rail removes 25,000 trucks from Swiss roads.

Every delivery can be tracked minute by minute online by the customer on the web. Ultimately Ireland is going to have to do it, because fuel will skyrocket in price as the global oil reserves are depleted.

Switzerland is already designed from the ground up as a country to operate without the car - in terms of planning, public transport, integration of rail and shopping, rail freight, renewable electricity etc.

One won't get a 100% rail freight solution in any country. However it can be a big part of the solution if planned into the country's infrastructure - and a country without it will be at an increasing disadvantage as hydrocarbon prices move upwards. It is also a far safer way to move goods - and one shouldn't forget that trucks emit far more pollutants than just CO2!

.probe

Overview of CH-sbbcargo system: http://www.sbbcargo.com/en/index/sys_sitemap.htm

bonkey

As you point out, Switzerland was "designed" this way. They have a dense rail network. Ireland doesn't. That's something that Ireland could fix...with maybe 30 or 40 years of investment.

Interestingly, SBB cargo - whom you're singing the praises of - are currently running a loss, and the government are facing increasing pressure for their refusal to sell it to foreign concerns.

Del2005

probe wrote: »

So? Ireland is just as "connectable" to the European rail network as Switzerland. All you need is a state of the art port with a rail connection. (Off rail at French port, on boat, off boat at Irish port and on rail, and vice versa). Trucks have to get on and off boats too! With rail container handling it can be largely automated with RFID tags on the containers causing them to be automatically shunted around the place, like barcoded mail in a mechanised sorting office.

Four or five rail freight hubs near key locations in Ireland to bring it to interchange points where road vehicles bring it the "last mile" (or several km) to the final destination, in the case of delivery points off the rail network. Business parks with any heavy industrial stuff should be planned in conjunction with the rail network - both in terms of employee commuting and freight. Swissrail cargo carried 13,37 billion net tonne/km of freight last year. They have 323 delivery points on the rail network, and 89 private delivery points where the customer has their own "railway station" on site. Switzerland is a small country (41,290 km2 - v IRL 70,280). Rail removes 25,000 trucks from Swiss roads.

Every delivery can be tracked minute by minute online by the customer on the web. Ultimately Ireland is going to have to do it, because fuel will skyrocket in price as the global oil reserves are depleted.

Switzerland is already designed from the ground up as a country to operate without the car - in terms of planning, public transport, integration of rail and shopping, rail freight, renewable electricity etc.

One won't get a 100% rail freight solution in any country. However it can be a big part of the solution if planned into the country's infrastructure - and a country without it will be at an increasing disadvantage as hydrocarbon prices move upwards. It is also a far safer way to move goods - and one shouldn't forget that trucks emit far more pollutants than just CO2!

.probe

Overview of CH-sbbcargo system: http://www.sbbcargo.com/en/index/sys_sitemap.htm

Thats the perfect world, where as we aren't living in one.
Thanks to our goverments inept planning there is no chance we can do this. Hell they even ignored their own gateway towns for large scale redeployment of civil servants. They are trying to move Dublin Port so it can improve but the NIMBY's won't let anything get built.

Also where are we supposed to get the billons of Euro to build all these? The Swiss are using the money they earn by forcing through trucks onto the trains to pay for this, we don't have any trucks travelling through us to somewhere else to pay.

The Swiss have been developed for years and we are only starting now. Again and I think I seen it on this fourm before that rail freight isn't viable for short distances. Most of our freight comes into Dublin and a lot of our industry is around Dublin, so for the majority of our frieght Dublin Port is the last few km.

Don't get me wrong I'd love if we could do this but not any time soon

shoegirl

probe wrote: »

Switzerland is continually taking measures to force freight traffic to use the rail system rather than roads. The country has to carry large volumes of freight traffic transiting from one point in the EU and other (eg Germany+Benelux+Scandinavia <> Italy, France <> Italy, Austria <> France, etc). When the new 57 km x 2 Gotthard rail tunnel is complete, they will be in a position to force most of this onto the rail network on trains (up to 1.5 km long) capable of carrying 4,000 tonnes of freight at speeds of 120 to 150 km/h. This will take place silently, underground, powered mainly by electricity from hydroelectric sources. Rail freight in Switzerland is 4% cheaper than road freight*.

While these trains will take Ro-Ro freight (trucks driving on and off the train) I suspect that the Swiss initiative is going to make logistics companies and railway operators in the dysfunctional EU wake up to using rail on an end to end basis (eg origin in Germany to destination in Italy and v.v).

Tunnel brochure: http://www.alptransit.ch/pages/img/projekt/The_new_Gotthard_rail_link.pdf

Construction website: http://www.alptransit.ch/pages/e/index.php

Budget: CHF 11.83 bn (EUR 7.3 bn) – the real cost is probably zero for Switzerland, it will be fully recovered from the EU consumer on freight charges, and Switzerland will be left with a zero cost tunnel that can provide high speed rail connections for passengers (250 km/h) between Northern and Southern Switzerland!

* http://www.inboundlogistics.com/articles/features/0305_feature03.shtml

.probe

Ireland has been systematically taking freight off rail and onto roads for about ten years now.
Part of the problem is that so much of the rail network is closed, dormant or shared by long/short distance passenger traffic it has become difficult to justify. However you could argue this was deliberately run down as a low priority.

You have to remember that we are only now getting used to the idea that it is neither desireable nor feasible to share short distance and high speed long distance on a single line (i.e. the Belfast enterprise and Cork service sharing with DART and commuter services), never mind frieght.

A lot of the key businesses that did maintain the old freight service closed down, much of the problem was that IE never bothered developing additional business that would have kept these services profitable.

probe

bonkey wrote: »

As you point out, Switzerland was "designed" this way. They have a dense rail network. Ireland doesn't. That's something that Ireland could fix...with maybe 30 or 40 years of investment.

Interestingly, SBB cargo - whom you're singing the praises of - are currently running a loss, and the government are facing increasing pressure for their refusal to sell it to foreign concerns.

So what - the overall SBB rail operation makes a profit! Road freight doesn't make a profit if you add in the total real cost of a national road network. Anyway whether or not it is "profitable" is irrelevant - because the profit is measured on the basis of assigned costs and revenues. There are other costs that are not financially assigned - the costs of pollution nuisance and ill health and accidents caused by trucks etc.

http://mct.sbb.ch/mct/en/konzern_unternehmen/konzern_kennzahlen.htm

.probe

probe

Del2005 wrote: »

Thats the perfect world, where as we aren't living in one.
Thanks to our goverments inept planning there is no chance we can do this. Hell they even ignored their own gateway towns for large scale redeployment of civil servants. They are trying to move Dublin Port so it can improve but the NIMBY's won't let anything get built.

Also where are we supposed to get the billons of Euro to build all these? The Swiss are using the money they earn by forcing through trucks onto the trains to pay for this, we don't have any trucks travelling through us to somewhere else to pay.

The Swiss have been developed for years and we are only starting now. Again and I think I seen it on this fourm before that rail freight isn't viable for short distances. Most of our freight comes into Dublin and a lot of our industry is around Dublin, so for the majority of our frieght Dublin Port is the last few km.

Don't get me wrong I'd love if we could do this but not any time soon

I don't think it is correct to say that "a lot of our industry is around Dublin". Dublin is basically a service area with importers' warehouses. Most of the heavier manufacturing is spread around the country. The existing Dublin port situation is unsustainable, and incapable of expansion.

Most of the exports are to the rest of Europe and come from multi-national companies. An increasing volume of this is not using air freight due to the cost.

A replacement port for Dublin is essential, and this must be on a heavy duty rail connection. You won't create a new rail freight infrastructure overnight. But as one is putting the infrastructural building blocks into place, they need to be working to an overall master plan which covers energy availability and cost trends over the next 50 years, growth in population (forecast to be 6.7 million in 50 years time) - where will these people live and work, etc?

Otherwise the country will just be sleep walking from one crisis to another during the 21st century.

.probe

probe

shoegirl wrote: »

Ireland has been systematically taking freight off rail and onto roads for about ten years now.
Part of the problem is that so much of the rail network is closed, dormant or shared by long/short distance passenger traffic it has become difficult to justify. However you could argue this was deliberately run down as a low priority.

You have to remember that we are only now getting used to the idea that it is neither desireable nor feasible to share short distance and high speed long distance on a single line (i.e. the Belfast enterprise and Cork service sharing with DART and commuter services), never mind frieght.

A lot of the key businesses that did maintain the old freight service closed down, much of the problem was that IE never bothered developing additional business that would have kept these services profitable.

There is no high speed passenger rail service in Ireland - no reason why freight can't move at the same speed as passenger services. While there is a problem sharing suburban rail with inter-city (passenger and freight) on the same pair of tracks, it can be alleviated by installing an additional track in these suburban zones. The Irish rail network is very under utilised at present. The closed / dormant segments of rail can be brought back into use over time as and when required.

Rail map of IRL 1906 http://der.probe.googlepages.com/ie_railmap_1906.jpg

.probe

T Corolla

The good news in relation to ireland on this front is the re-opening of the western rail coridor. This is the railway from Limerick to Clairemorris. Due to the high volume of passengers services on the Hueston line Irish rail is opening up this freight and passengers service by 2014. In 1993 Irish rail carried 3.3 million tonnes of freight in ireland in 2007 the only carried 0.8 million tonnes of freight. Opening this railway maybe the start of lorries been taken off the road and transferred to rail. As you know Norfolf company use the Wesport rail line for transferring goods from Mayo to Dublin. I would like to see the government put pressure on the big oil companies and big retail companies to force them to start transporting goods by rail. Most train station have large yards that could be used to dispatch goods throughout the country. As a kid i can remember oil cement sugarbeet been transported by rail.

bonkey

probe wrote: »

So what - the overall SBB rail operation makes a profit!
Road freight doesn't make a profit if you add in the total real cost of a national road network.

Despite running a profit (some 100-million Francs and change, last year), SBB aren't actually generating enough profit in order to pay for their desired future plans.

The Swiss are currently in a situation where their passenger trains are overcrowded. They are using additional capacity to run a service which the overcrowded passengers are paying for through ticket prices. They need more money, and so want to raise prices on those passengers....in part to increase capacity of the loss-running side of the business.

That is not a sustainable model.


So despite the rosy picture you paint, the reality is that rail-freight in Switzerland is facing serious problems....and thats on a system which - as you point out - was literally designed for this capability.

What are the Irish supposed to do? Pump billions into building up a rail network to carry freight so they can follow the SBB example and steadily lose money from it? I'm sure you'll have politicians queueing up to buy into that.

And lets not forget...we'd need to factor in the cost of additional power-stations to generate the power to run a larger rail-service affordably, unless you're suggesting a massive increase in good-ol' electro-diesel engines.

Anyway whether or not it is "profitable" is irrelevant

You're about to say that if we redefine profitability to a manner that suits you, then its all good, so you clearly see the need for profitability. Arguing that its irrelevant and that its profitable if you look at it in the right light doesn't make sense.

- because the profit is measured on the basis of assigned costs and revenues.
There are other costs that are not financially assigned - the costs of pollution nuisance and ill health and accidents caused by trucks etc.

But, you see, the majority of this freight is simply passing through Switzerland. If you want to get rid of your ill health, you accidents, your congestion, and all the rest of it, you simply make it unattractive for them to come through Switzerland at all.

And why don't the Swiss do that? Because its not profitable to do so.

The reality is that even with the fantastic quality of the Swiss railway system and the lack of restrictions on shipping freight by rail as opposed to road (i.e. you can move it on Sundays, and don't have the ridiculous delays at the likes of the Gotthard tunnel) SBB still can't make it pay its own way.

So you basically seem to be saying that the Irish should pump money into something similar, so that they can then measure its success in terms of something other than the money they will lose as a result.

probe

Comparing Swissrail and CIE’s Irish Rail prices

1cl adult Dublin-Cork (255 km) €86.50

1cl adult Zurich-Geneva (278 km) €82.23

In terms of quality of service, there is no comparison between a 1st class upper deck seat on a Zurich Geneva train (smooth and silent), and Irish Rail’s re-vitalised boneshaker service. Boneshaker because the railway tracks are in such a mess – despite all the “work” done on the line, which was a botched job for the most part.

Abos are much better value in Switzerland because they work on an intelligently designed zone system, allowing the holder to travel on several modes of transport within broad zones rather than point to point. The Irish abo (aka quaintly referred to as a “season ticket”) is generally a point to point thing (ie you can’t roam around zones), usually 2cl only, and generally provides a low level of service. You arrive in Naas or Carlow every night, and have to get in a car, which typically costs money to park, to complete your journey. In CH you get off the train and get into a bus or tram which is synchronised with the arrival of the train, and the cost of the bus or tram is included in the zone based abo ticket system. (Abo is an abbreviation for abonnement – ie a subscription – example you pay €30/mth to your ISP in return for which you can use the internet as much as you like).

Look at the real time departure board for Zurich HB station (preferably during the daytime rather than 4AM) and compare the choice and density of service with that offered by Irish rail!

http://prosurf.sbb.ch/pros/inter/prosurfservlet?TRANSACTION=004&LANGUAGE=e&PBP=ZUE&DIRECTION=2

(You can click on any train number to see it's current station position on the network).

This board does not list all the tram services that connect outside the front doors of the station every minute of the day..

A GA (annual subscription to 99%+ of public transport in Switzerland) allows unlimited use of services for a single annual fee of €1930 2cl adult. A viable replacement for the car. There is no equivalent in Ireland because there is no dense, seamless, end to end network to get you from point A to point B efficiently. Leaving most people in Ireland with no alternative but to buy a car.
Special abo prices for families etc.

http://mct.sbb.ch/mct/en/reisemarkt/abonnemente/ga/general-abo-sortiment/general-abo-einzelpersonen.htm

Network map and system coverage information: http://mct.sbb.ch/mct/en/uebersichtskarte-general-abo.pdf

You can combine shopping and commuting – without having to drive to a shopping mall or village with the RailCity concept at main rail stations.
www.railcity.ch

A list of shops by type (supermarkets, gadget shops, dry cleaners, dentists, banks etc) in Zurich HB station:
In French: http://www.railcity.ch/fr/index/index_zuerich/zuerich_branchenliste.htm
In German: http://www.railcity.ch/index/index_zuerich/zuerich_branchenliste.htm
Integrating shopping and related services with public transport : http://mct.sbb.ch/mct/en/im-railcity-broschuere.pdf
Exhibitions and events taking place at this station to watch while waiting for your train: http://www.railcity.ch/fr/index/index_zuerich/zuerich_news_events.htm

It is no surprise that the trains are getting more crowded at peak time – as more and more people recognise the value of the system. But they are a zillion times less crowded than French trains (most of which are run to reservation only – ie you have to reserve a seat). You never have to reserve a seat on a domestic Swiss train. The lesson for Ireland from this trend is the need to engineer the system to grow in capacity with provision for duplex trains (double deck) – ie capable of 40,000 passengers per hour at peak times on a line providing suburban services.

Bonkey seems to resent paying the Swiss Travel System a few more CHFs to keep all this show on the road? A show which they run is a seamless, professional manner. Rail, trams, buses, boats, funicular rail, and other quirky services. As close as one can get to perfection on this planet.

Moving back to Ireland and freight, I am suggesting that due to the increasing price of oil (which is a certainty within the planning and build timeframe of a rail network modernisation programme), and the increasing population – there is no alternative over the next 20 to 40 years but intensive integrated electric rail for people and goods. Even assuming massive improvements in battery and hydrogen fuel cell technologies, streets clogged with electric cars are just as inefficient as streets clogged with gasoline or diesel alternatives. When they get around to upscaling batteries and fuel cells for trucks to be viable on electric trucks – aside from lower noise – they will be the same old trucks on the roads in terms of physical requirements, and accident rates.

Ireland has the most abundant renewable electric power resources in Europe – it is not the state that will have to roll them out to meet demand. The state just needs to put the framework in place and negotiate the interconnection arrangements with other countries.

Very little road freight moves in France or Spain on the motorways on Sundays. Italy also bans trucks on Sundays. Italy has an appalling rail freight system.

Ireland imports most of the goods it consumes, and exports most of what is produces. Its freight infrastructure has to be integrated with the rest of Europe. Rail vehicles have been going on and off ships for decades in Scandinavia, continuing their journey at either side of the boat connection. The rest of Europe is going to be faced with the same oil price increases - but at least the electric rail infrastructure is in place on the continent - unlike Ireland which has the lowest electrification of any country in Europe, aside from Iceland and Andorra. Neither of which have a rail service - though Iceland is planning a rail link from the capital to the airport. And no doubt it will be electric.

I heard today that someone has got 120,000 verified signatures to call a federal referendum to ban SUVs in Switzerland (they only need 100,000 to get the show on the road). Real democracy in action. However I think they might be better voting to increase the VAT on SUVs from the current 7.6% to say 50%, and leave SUV users with a choice. While car taxes in Switzerland are among the lowest in the world, people use them less because public transport is so good.

.probe

bonkey

probe wrote: »

Bonkey seems to resent paying the Swiss Travel System a few more CHFs to keep all this show on the road?

No, probe. Bonkey is pointing out that you held up a loss-making business as a model for the Irish to aspire to as the future of our freight.

I pointed out that this loss-making enterprise is only possible because its propped up by a profit-making enterprise which is itself about to run short of cash because of plans to meet increasing demand. They can prop up a loss-making service, or they can put the money back into serving the part fo the business which generated the profit. And seeing as you mentioned the SUV issue...don't forget that all it would take is the same level of interest from disgruntled passengers to bring a referendum to try and force the state-owned company to put the money where they wanted it.

Only this week, it was announced that SBB's haulage business would begin looking for foreign partners, to find a model which will allow it to continue. The people running it clearly don't see it as the paragon of virtue that you want to sell it as. They see the problems I see, that are well covered over here.

I don't see how your exhortation of SBBs passenger service is relevant to any of that. You didn't start this thread saying how copying SBBs passenger service would solve Ireland's transport problem. No, you argued that copying the loss-running part of the service is what we should invest massive sums of money in.

probe

bonkey wrote: »

No, probe. Bonkey is pointing out that you held up a loss-making business as a model for the Irish to aspire to as the future of our freight.

I pointed out that this loss-making enterprise is only possible because its propped up by a profit-making enterprise which is itself about to run short of cash because of plans to meet increasing demand. They can prop up a loss-making service, or they can put the money back into serving the part fo the business which generated the profit. And seeing as you mentioned the SUV issue...don't forget that all it would take is the same level of interest from disgruntled passengers to bring a referendum to try and force the state-owned company to put the money where they wanted it.

Only this week, it was announced that SBB's haulage business would begin looking for foreign partners, to find a model which will allow it to continue. The people running it clearly don't see it as the paragon of virtue that you want to sell it as. They see the problems I see, that are well covered over here.

I don't see how your exhortation of SBBs passenger service is relevant to any of that. You didn't start this thread saying how copying SBBs passenger service would solve Ireland's transport problem. No, you argued that copying the loss-running part of the service is what we should invest massive sums of money in.

Yeah sure.... SBB railfreight is a real basket case - their latest results show losses down to about EUR 5 million. This sum would probably buy enough e-voting machines for Cork!

They are obviously looking for partnerships with other freight operators to push more freight traffic over their network. Surely no different to the other Swiss policies of forcing intra-European road freight off the Swiss roads and on to rail? If Danzas operations in Germany (or another big logistics operator) sent more traffic via the SBB network, and gave SBB a chunk of cash to buy into the partnership, I have no doubt the Swiss would be very pleased. Less trucks on the road, and cash to invest on the rail network. Yes please! It might also quieten the Swiss truckers who are shouting for less of SBB freight to be in government ownership.

I can't see any conflict between this and more use of rail freight in Ireland. In fact, it would be preferable if the Irish rail freight system was opened up to the private sector who could set up highly mechanised regional rail freight hubs and run services over the Irish Rail track network. They would do a far better job than the appalling state monopoly in place at present.

.probe

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news_view/article/2008/09/8810/sbb_seeks_freight_partner.html

bonkey

probe wrote: »

Yeah sure.... SBB railfreight is a real basket case - their latest results show losses down to about EUR 5 million. This sum would probably buy enough e-voting machines for Cork!

At least you're now admitting you've backed a loss-maker.

They are obviously looking for partnerships with other freight operators to push more freight traffic over their network.

So, the implication would be that if they can convince other operators moving stuff through Switzerland to carry more on rail, then they can make it profitable.

So, all the Irish will need are those operators who road-freight stuff through Ireland from one country, en-route to another country...which will be tough given that we lack Switzerland's strategic position.

Surely no different to the other Swiss policies of forcing intra-European road freight off the Swiss roads and on to rail?

Absolutely not...but very different to the options available in Ireland, given that we're not the cross-roads of mainland Europe like the Swiss are, and therefore don't have these potential markets available to us.

probe

bonkey wrote: »

At least you're now admitting you've backed a loss-maker.

A €5 million loss by Swissrail freight is immaterial - particularly when passenger services are profitable. You are clutching at straws trying to criticise Swissrail's financial performance.

CIE group lost €321 million last year - mainly because their system is grossly under utilized - due to poor customer service, poorly designed equipment, a lack of integration on all fronts - ticketing, inter-modality, information, journey planning and reservations and bad marketing.

So, the implication would be that if they can convince other operators moving stuff through Switzerland to carry more on rail, then they can make it profitable.

Absolutely. Running a public transport network is essentially a fixed cost business. If I get off a plane at Zurich airport, and take a train journey on SBB costing say €50 - SBB's profit will be up by about €49 as a result. ie the only additional costs they will incur is the 10c processing my debit card payment and perhaps 1 EUR on the additional electricity consumed by me being on the train. All the other costs will be unaffected by my presence on their network.

Swissrail generated over €2 billion in revenues from rail services last year. Compared with about €200 million for Irish rail! Because they get more bums on seats by providing a better, seamless integrated service. Working with other carriers using an integrated fare system that offers the customer a door to door journey package using the same ticket. Switzerland has only about twice the population of IRL.

The same holds for freight. If they can get say a German freight company to dump more traffic on the SBB freight network, the additional revenue gained will flow to the bottom line for the most part.

Map of their cargo network: http://www.sbbcargo.com/en/index/ang_intps.htm

So, all the Irish will need are those operators who road-freight stuff through Ireland from one country, en-route to another country...which will be tough given that we lack Switzerland's strategic position.

Absolutely not...but very different to the options available in Ireland, given that we're not the cross-roads of mainland Europe like the Swiss are, and therefore don't have these potential markets available to us.

Ireland is a Switzerland too in terms of its large (mainly US) multi-national presence, exporting stuff to the rest of Europe. As oil becomes more expensive it will be more important for US multi-national companies to make product close to the market. If Ireland had an integrated efficient rail cargo offering which connected in with a frequent shipping connection to the mainland European railfreight system, it might have a sustainable future in an era of shrinking oil supplies. On top of that it will become equally essential for indigenous exporters. Sending big trucks on long trips from Ireland when oil hits $200 to $500 a barrel will become uneconomic for most types of business. And trucks are labour intensive - one driver can only haul about 40 tonnes. A train driver can haul 4,000 tonnes, powered by renewable energy - rather than rapidly depleating oil reserves.

I know planning and long term strategy are alien for the most part to the Irish mindset - but the country will have to bite the bullet at some stage. And the sooner it does so, the less expensive and simpler it will be to implement.

.probe

http://www.cie.ie/about_us/pdf/CIE%20AR07%20IR%20no%20pics.pdf

bonkey

probe wrote: »

A €5 million loss by Swissrail freight is immaterial - particularly when passenger services are profitable. You are clutching at straws trying to criticise Swissrail's financial performance.

There has been a lot of coverage of the issue over here, up to and including consideration of selling the concern. You can insist all you like that its immaterial, and that the Swiss rail-travelling public will be only too delighted to continue funding the problem. I'm merely pointing out that from where I sit, this is an ongoing issue thats getting plenty of media coverage.

Running a public transport network is essentially a fixed cost business.

And yet, SBB reduced the loss on their freight side from previous years primarily by cutting costs!

If I get off a plane at Zurich airport, and take a train journey on SBB costing say €50 -

That would be non-freight. Why is it that whenever you need to fall back on how brilliant the Swiss sytem is, you pick on the part of the system that I've never disagreed is profitable?

The same holds for freight. If they can get say a German freight company to dump more traffic on the SBB freight network, the additional revenue gained will flow to the bottom line for the most part.

A German freight company would only dump more traffic on the SBB freight network if it were cheaper than not using it. If it were cheaper than not using it, then that would already hold true, and they wouldn't need the type of partners you seem to think they're looking for. If its a question of cutting deals, then they still don't need partners...they just cut costs.

The type of partners that SBB are primarily looking for are those to reduce the costs you say are fixed. They want to reduce running costs, logistics costs, perhaps even maintenance costs...by finding partners who they can form strategic alliances with to share these very costs that you say are fixed.

That, in turn, will allow them to potentially reduce charges, which in turn will allow them to become more competetive.

Ireland is a Switzerland too in terms of its large (mainly US) multi-national presence, exporting stuff to the rest of Europe.

The viability of the Swiss system is because of stuff moving through Switzerland...from (say) Germany to Italy or vice versa. Ireland doesn't offer that sort of facility, because anything landed in Ireland has to go onto a boat at the other side to get off again.

We have imports and exports to ship. We have SFA "throughput". It is exactly this type of transit traffic that makes the Swiss network feasible for freight.

As oil becomes more expensive it will be more important for US multi-national companies to make product close to the market. If Ireland had an integrated efficient rail cargo offering which connected in with a frequent shipping connection to the mainland European railfreight system, it might have a sustainable future in an era of shrinking oil supplies.

So now, on top of the rail network we need to build and the power-generation capability to run it efficiently, we need to attract the business to make it worthwhile, and somehow figure how to have efficient-cost shipping to the mainland...despite the argument being based on the expense of shipping in the first place.

Seriously probe...in your various posts you've made the following points:

- We need the clean power generation
- We need the rail network
- We need new management for the rail network
- If we had all of the above, we might be able to attract business because of rising shipping costs, so that htey can ship from Ireland.

On top of that it will become equally essential for indigenous exporters. Sending big trucks on long trips from Ireland when oil hits $200 to $500 a barrel will become uneconomic for most types of business.

If that economic viewpoint holds true, then nothing we do will make our businesses feasible unless mainland Europe has an equally developed freight-carrying rail network. Of course, if they have that, then the argument that we might be attractive to US to cheaply ship to Europe from falls flat....as it will still be further than shipping from somewhere inside the mainland network....unless you're adding a fleet of renewable, free-to-run ships into our plans too. Of course, if we have those, then again, no-one needs Ireland, cause their free-to-run ships can just ship directly to the mainland.

Ireland could use a rail network primarily for distribution of imports, and for moving exports to coasts. As shipping costs rise, the potential for exporting to the mainland decreases as it becomes more and more expensive to cross the water. Thus, our long-term interests are only in moving inbound and domestic freight. That does not match up with the notion of looking at the Swiss model.

I know planning and long term strategy are alien for the most part to the Irish mindset - but the country will have to bite the bullet at some stage. And the sooner it does so, the less expensive and simpler it will be to implement.

Planning and long-term strategy involve a bit more than pointing at something that someone else does well and saying "we could do that too". It involves looking at the differences, and figuring out whether or not they are actually reasons why the model isn't directly applicable.

Judgement Day

Given the inept management at CIE/IE there is absolutely no hope of attracting freight back onto the rails. There is a 'can't do' policy in CIE/IE that beggars belief! The much trumpeted 'Green' railcars don't even carry Fastrack parcels which are now sent by private road courier services. Even internal IE correspondence for station staff is now sent by these courier services. Imagine a private company acting like that???

Just wait until the multi-million Western Rail Corridor opens - NO Fastrack, NO catering, NO comfort - commuter railcars and the only possible freight traffic will be diverted timber trains and Norfolk Line for as long as that traffic lasts.

For decades CIE/IE have been putting all their freight eggs in too few baskets and with the closure of major customers such as NET, Bell Ferry, Quigley Magnesite and the ending of sugar beet traffic the whole system has collapsed overnight. Gone from being the general carrier for all traffic offering to the carrier of precious little in the space of thirty years - some achievement!
Rail freight and indeed passenger trains are a Cinderella in today's Ireland and to me it's a wonder that the whole nonsense hasn't been abandoned. Tod Andrews said years ago that all CIE's freight could be put in a few trucks and the passengers in a fleet of Greyhound buses - prophetic words?

probe

bonkey wrote: »

And yet, SBB reduced the loss on their freight side from previous years primarily by cutting costs!

You appear to be deliberately going around in circles for some reason, or don’t understand the basic principles of financial engineering. I didn’t say SBB couldn’t reduce costs – I simply said that running a railway is essentially running a business with a huge fixed cost base, and an almost zero cost of adding additional customer traffic. It doesn’t matter if that customer is a passenger (you or I buying a €50 ticket) or a freight customer (eg you or I sending a piece of railcargo from one station to another) costing €50. The point is that the €50 ends up being close to 99% profit, flowing to their bottom line. Making it logical to enter into partnerships that generate new traffic for the network.

So if for the sake of argument Danzas has 200 trucks per night operating between Germany and Italy and they enter into some form of partnership deal with SBB, to put the trunk shipping portion of this freight flow on Swissrail cargo trains at various points in Northern Italy and rail freight it over the same network (see map http://www.sbbcargo.com/en/index/ang_intps.htm) to Germany, Rotterdam and other ports along the North Sea or wherever it is going (and vice versa). Danzas will probably save at least €3,000 per truck per load on fuel, driver’s payroll costs, costs associated with tacograph compliance/dead time or the cost of having a spare driver on hand, tolls, and related expenses (truck maintenance, depreciation etc).

That’s €600,000 a day in savings for the 200 trucks + they have the advantage of being able to move stuff on Sunday in both Switzerland and Italy (which may otherwise have been stuck in the middle of nowhere on Friday/Saturday due to the Sunday truck bans on the road networks. That gives them the best part of €200 million per year to put in the kitty – a tiny portion of which would completely wipe out the Swissrail cargo loss, and give them extra funds to develop the rail system further.

So now, on top of the rail network we need to build and the power-generation capability to run it efficiently, we need to attract the business to make it worthwhile, and somehow figure how to have efficient-cost shipping to the mainland...despite the argument being based on the expense of shipping in the first place.

That is a self-financing private sector job – part of the transition to green energy. Instead of sending billions of € to the Middle East every year for oil, Ireland creates its own energy, keeping the money at home – providing energy at a far cheaper cost per kW (of electricity) than a kW of oil equivalent. The country could also export the surplus electricity.

If that economic viewpoint holds true, then nothing we do will make our businesses feasible unless mainland Europe has an equally developed freight-carrying rail network. Of course, if they have that, then the argument that we might be attractive to US to cheaply ship to Europe from falls flat....as it will still be further than shipping from somewhere inside the mainland network

Continental Europe does have an adequately developed rail freight infrastructure to meet Ireland’s freight interconnectivity requirements.
I’m not talking about turning Ireland into some Rotterdam type trans-shipment point for the USA. There are three obvious markets for a rail-freight platform –

(a) Imports of goods – both for consumption and stuff that is being processed and re-exported. Most cities in Europe don’t allow HGVs into the city – and no doubt Irish cities will follow suit (Dublin has already started in that direction). So you might as well bring the freight by rail from the port to one of six out of town rail/road freight intermodal exchanges for loading on to suitable sized vehicles for delivery to the final destination. If instead you brought the stuff across the country in big trucks, you might well have to transfer it to multiple small vehicles to get access to some urban delivery points.

(b) Exports of goods – produced by both indigenous and MNCs – using the same hub network as (a).

(c) Intra-Ireland freight – again take the stuff to your nearest intermodal hub on the optimum sized vehicle, it gets trunk shipped by rail, and someone else picks it up from the destination hub in a similar manner.
Electric rail freight is very energy efficient because it takes power straight from the grid and converts it into traction power and the rolling resistance on a rail is far lower, therefore more energy efficient than with a rubber wheeled truck on a road.

Ireland could use a rail network primarily for distribution of imports, and for moving exports to coasts. As shipping costs rise, the potential for exporting to the mainland decreases as it becomes more and more expensive to cross the water. Thus, our long-term interests are only in moving inbound and domestic freight. That does not match up with the notion of looking at the Swiss model.

You are assuming that ships will continue to be powered by increasingly expensive and scarce petroleum…… Ships are one of the easiest prospects for hydrogen propulsion because they have space to store the fuel. http://www.soton.ac.uk/ses/news/stories/hydrogenship.html
Ireland could be a hydrogen “filling station” for intercontinental shipping, taking advantage of wind energy being converted into H2 via electrolysis. This provides an additional opportunity to make commercial use of the surplus electricity that could be generated when the wind is blowing well.

Every €1,000,000 worth of electricity exported either via undersea cable or as hydrogen is better for the economy that if Ireland was a large oil producer – because the oil reserves would run out – renewables won’t run out!

The increasing cost and scarcity of oil and natural gas will be a big challenge for geographically isolated countries like Ireland. This needn’t be the case given the country’s large supply of wind and wave energy – which offers the potential to create far more electricity than the country needs. The energy generation and transportation infrastructure will have to be updated to take advantage of this. The insular mindset will have to be changed! Ireland exports most of what it produces and imports most of what it consumes.

The electrified rail system available throughout Continental Europe is an alternative road network, wired for the 21st century and beyond. The more goods and people that use it, the more frequent the service that can be offered. Switzerland has taken this to its logical conclusion – ie previous generations of Swiss have, to be precise. While it is in a completely different location to Ireland, there are many benefits that the Swiss have got from their highly developed rail network that can also be applied in an Ireland with a modernised infrastructure to provide an efficient transport solution that can deal with population increases and hydrocarbon shortages. The Swiss started building their motorway system in the 1950s and stopped in the early 1980s. They have continued to expand their rail networks and services. Ireland started building its motorway system around 2000 (aside from the few km of road in Kildare), and still has done nothing to electrify its national rail service (aside from the tiny DART system). In this respect, Ireland is decades behind the rest of Europe!

The other big lesson for public transport in Ireland from Switzerland is the cost and revenue issue. The more integrated the system becomes, the more people use it. This generates huge margins once fixed costs are covered to fund improvements in services. This becomes a virtuous circle.

You can electrify every car in the country, and this will happen in time – but you will be still left with traffic jams and travel delays and commuter misery.

Mountainous Switzerland would be in a constant state of famine with 8 million people to feed on a few thousand hectares of good arable land, and no indigenous raw materials, if its people had such an insular attitude as the Irish! :-)

.probe

bonkey

probe wrote: »

It doesn’t matter if that customer is a passenger (you or I buying a €50 ticket) or a freight customer (eg you or I sending a piece of railcargo from one station to another) costing €50. The point is that the €50 ends up being close to 99% profit, flowing to their bottom line.

This line of logic would suggest that even the most inept of railway companies...such as CIE for example...couldn't fail but to make a profit. Given that this isn't so, and that even SBB freight are fighting to get back into the black, then it would seem obvious that things are a bit more complex then you suggest.

Indeed, finding highly profitable rail systems is hard. SBB passenger services manage it currently, but are facing massive investment costs in coming years, that they are already warning they do not have the money to meet.

So if for the sake of argument Danzas has 200 trucks per night operating between Germany and Italy and they enter into some form of partnership deal with SBB, to put the trunk shipping portion of this freight flow on Swissrail cargo trains at various points in Northern Italy and rail freight it over the same network (see map http://www.sbbcargo.com/en/index/ang_intps.htm) to Germany, Rotterdam and other ports along the North Sea or wherever it is going (and vice versa). Danzas will probably save at least €3,000 per truck per load on fuel, driver’s payroll costs, costs associated with tacograph compliance/dead time or the cost of having a spare driver on hand, tolls, and related expenses (truck maintenance, depreciation etc).

Why aren't Danzas already doing this, probe? Why do they need SBB to court them? Why are they voluntarily choosing a more expensive way of shipping? I mean...seriously...you seem to be suggesting that teh money is just there to be taken, the only problem is that SBB have to convince stupid people to make obvious cost-cutting.

These are not the partnerships SBB are trying to find to make themselves profitable. They're trying to partner with other rail-freight companies, so that they can combine their logistics, resulting in lower costs, which allows them to reduce charges across the board and be more competetive. If they can tightly couple their rolling stock with that of other operators, they can all use their equipment more efficiently, thus moving more stuff, further, faster, for less money.

I’m not talking about turning Ireland into some Rotterdam type trans-shipment point for the USA.

So you're cutting out a large chunk of the business that SBB relies on in order to be even close to profitable.

The Swiss started building their motorway system in the 1950s and stopped in the early 1980s.

Untrue.

The Basel-Zurich / Biel motorway connection opened only a few years ago.
Work is still continuing to inter-connect the three motorways which come to Biel (Bern, Basel/Zurich, Geneva).
Some of motorways around Bern are being upgraded to include new lanes - an operation one will also find occurring in many other locations in Switzerland, as the urban motorways are becoming as overcrowded as the public rail system at rush-hour.
The Motorstrasse stretch from Biel to Bern is also pencilled for upgrading to motorway, although thats further away.

Thats just stuff in my region, and I've left out some other work which took place in the 90s.

The other big lesson for public transport in Ireland from Switzerland is the cost and revenue issue.

Indeed. The Swiss have invested massive amounts of money, over generations. They spread the cost.

Ireland did not, as we didn't have the money over generations to invest. You, probe, are suggesting that its somehow "cheap" to do all of this in a short term...perhaps within our lifetimes. Reform CIE, modernise the entire railway system, build untold amounts of wind-farm capacity to power it all.

You keep saying that the Swiss system is literally free money (which it isn't, because they're short of cash for new projects as I keep pointing out), but you ignore the cost of investment before payback can even start.

Ireland would have to spend untold billions...and all before it would see any benefit, if a benefit were to be found.

The more integrated the system becomes, the more people use it.

Interestingly, from the Swiss perspective, the system is a morass of non-integration unless you have a GA or some form of end-to-end subscription. For the casual traveller, its completely non integrated....something they've been talking about fixing for years.

probe

bonkey wrote: »

This line of logic would suggest that even the most inept of railway companies...such as CIE for example...couldn't fail but to make a profit. Given that this isn't so, and that even SBB freight are fighting to get back into the black, then it would seem obvious that things are a bit more complex then you suggest.

Indeed, finding highly profitable rail systems is hard. SBB passenger services manage it currently, but are facing massive investment costs in coming years, that they are already warning they do not have the money to meet.

Who says they have to be profitable? People don’t complain about the road networks not being profitable. Quite the opposite in fact if you look at the public outcry at the massive profits made by NTR on the M50 toll racket over the years! Neither does the public want the rail system to make huge losses and be a heavy drain on public finances. There is an expectation of an efficient equilibrium between ticket prices, QoS, and the financial outcome of the railway network operator.

Why aren't Danzas already doing this, probe? Why do they need SBB to court them? Why are they voluntarily choosing a more expensive way of shipping? I mean...seriously...you seem to be suggesting that teh money is just there to be taken, the only problem is that SBB have to convince stupid people to make obvious cost-cutting.

One sees Danzas units being pulled by SBB trains – just as one sees Danzas trucks on the highways. Danzas has an investment in trucking capacity, and presumably the company has an internal cost per tonne/km for various types of load. SBB has its price tariff per tonne/km – ie SBB’s “retail price”. SBB is a state owned railway, and up to recently was not looking publicly for business partners. So there was no reason for Danzas or anyone else to approach SBB with some form of partnership proposal – any more than DHL or UPS might consider approaching CIE to take a shareholding in Irish Rail’s freight operations.

However once the powers that be talk about putting a shareholding / partnership in a country’s railcargo system “in play” – it introduces new options for both sides. There is probably only about a 5% differential between SBB’s retail price per tonne/km and road trucking – because the price is not based on marginal costs of additional new traffic. It is a very different situation if an established trucker comes along with an offer to put an additional n,000,000 tonnes of rail freight on an existing rail network. Because the costs of handling this might be very low – extra wagons hitched on to existing cargo trains, using a little more electricity etc. This is a very opportune moment for this type of arrangement because the substantial increase in diesel prices over the past year which the trucking industry has to deal with – compared with no real change in green electricity prices which SBB has to pay. My bill for hydro electricity/waste to energy hasn’t changed per kW in probably in the last five or six years.

Just look at the main autoroutes and autobahnen - wall to wall with trucks carrying freight from Italy into France, Germany into Switzerland, France to Germany, etc etc. All paying huge bills for diesel. Due to rigor mortis in the public rail networks. This rigor mortis could be repaired by a business-like approach, and partnerships between logistics companies and railway operators. Switzerland is at the forefront of railfreight with twice as much on rail as the rest of the EU. Partnerships will give a growing competitive advantage to rail freight as oil prices skyrocket over time.

As far as Swiss motorways are concerned, you are just nit picking again! The last serious element of the network to be built was the E35 linking Ticino and Italy with Northern Switzerland. Of course they are adding lanes here and there, and they probably have a few gaps to plug in the Biel/Bienne back of beyonds :-) Far more has gone into rail projects of late – eg Rail 2000 http://mct.sbb.ch/mct/en/infra-dienstleistungen/infra-bau/infra-grossprojekte/bahn2000.htm

You keep saying that the Swiss system is literally free money (which it isn't, because they're short of cash for new projects as I keep pointing out), but you ignore the cost of investment before payback can even start.

No I’m not. Twenty years ago, Switzerland had similar rail freight levels compared with France and Germany. They set out on a project to push as much road freight as possible on to rail and have doubled rail’s share of the market in the meantime. The CO2 issue, oil price escalation, road safety, and sustainability strategies generally confirm the wisdom of this action. The payback to a "Danzas" investment in SBB cargo could be very quick in terms of energy and labour cost savings. It would give the pioneer logistics partner who invested in SBB a competitive advantage - so the other majors would have to consider similar arrangements to remain competitive.

Interestingly, from the Swiss perspective, the system is a morass of non-integration unless you have a GA or some form of end-to-end subscription. For the casual traveller, its completely non integrated....something they've been talking about fixing for years.

You keep repeating this mantra! In addition to the GA, one has all sorts of regional and local integrated tickets eg

http://www.zvv.ch/en/tickets/tickets-and-prices/index.html. And one has the equivalent of the GA which is available for 4, 8, 15 and 22 days for people visiting the country http://www.swisstravelsystem.ch/Willkommen.52.0.html?&L=2.

If you are so dissatisfied with the rail set-up in Switzerland, why don’t you move to Ireland or Italy? I guarantee that a few weeks commuting in your car to some over priced suburb in Dublin or Kildare would change your tune very quickly. We’d see a different Bonkey then :-)


.probe

bonkey

probe wrote: »

Who says they have to be profitable? People don’t complain about the road networks not being profitable. Quite the opposite in fact if you look at the public outcry at the massive profits made by NTR on the M50 toll racket over the years! Neither does the public want the rail system to make huge losses and be a heavy drain on public finances. There is an expectation of an efficient equilibrium between ticket prices, QoS, and the financial outcome of the railway network operator.

Well, at least we're both finally agreed that it would be loss-making...thats progress. We can now look at the problem more realistically, and accept that selling a loss-making option to the public is part of the problem. I mean...I'm sure some people would be willing to pay to reduce congestion on the roads, which is one of the theoretical benefits a successful rail-freight business would net them.

SBB is a state owned railway,

Its not any more. I was surprised to read up on that myself...but its not.

But seriously...probe...you can insist all you like that these are the type of partnerships that SBB are "obviously" looking for, but if you go and check up their own stated policy, thats not where they are concentrating. Their problem is not one of finding freight to carry right now.

They are looking to be a major player in the European (or even Eurasian) rail freight system, and that means forming partnerships with other rail-freight carriers. Improved logistics, greater range of destinations, etc. are their current targets. They already have a partnership with SBB passenger services regarding rolling-stock maintenance, as that was more efficient than doing their own.

Switzerland is at the forefront of railfreight with twice as much on rail as the rest of the EU.

Thats mostly because there's these bloody big mountains in the south of the country, and the most efficient way of moving anything through there is by rail. This was as true when A.Escher founded the SKB (now Credit Suisse) to finance his great railway vision (including the Gotthard line) as it is today.

Its aided by the fact that the Swiss get so much of their generating capability for rail effectively for free...thanks to a massive investment in hydro capability over the past number of decades. The cost of hydro is mostly up front...just as with rail tunnels. Once thats paid, you're in gravy.

I know you're a big fan of wind, but thats the same problem...the costs are up front. Ireland doesn't have the decades of investment already put in place to build the system, so they're looking at all of this up-front investment to make the whole thing possible. That doesn't mean its not worth doing, but it certainly means that its not a quick-and-easy win. Thankfully, we don't need (many) of the tunnelling costs that the Swiss faced (and still face).

Partnerships will give a growing competitive advantage to rail freight as oil prices skyrocket over time.

Short-term, yes. Mid-term, the road network will be based on something other than oil. Once that happens, the dynamics shift again, and it becomes a question of which is a better use of electricity. Each has their advantage. Again, this is a factor which has to be considered for Ireland more than Switzerland...as it would take Ireland at least 10-20 years to get a modernisised, electrified rail system, with clean generating capability in place...with all the up-front costs associated with it. Arriving there only to find that the market has cracked the electric-powered-motor problem and that rail still offers no compelling advantage over road despite the high price of oil would effectively mean that all that up-front cost would be far, far harder to recoup.

As far as Swiss motorways are concerned, you are just nit picking again!

No, probe, I'm choosing accuracy over nice-sounding generalisations. The swiss did not stop their motorway-building plans in the 80s. It may be true to say that they havent had any projects as large as some of those in the 80s, but that is not the same thing. The Swiss have constantly worked on their motorways, and are expanding the network to this day and for the forseeable future.

Look - I realise that Switzerland is still one of the best models out there for other nations to aspire to, but no-one is being helped by a rosy, untrue picture of the reality of the Swiss system. I would argue that its more helpful to paint a realistic picture, including where the Swiss are trying to improve because that shows where the best of the best think the future is.

Its unquestionably worth considering what factors are unique to Switzerland, because that has impacts on suitability elsewhere...but it also makes clear what factors are not unique, so that one can better see how to lean from what was done in those areas.

After all, I'm sure you wouldn't see the up-to-7-hour waits that people can suffer at the Gotthard as a model worth copying. Should we pretend that it doesn't exist? Should we point instead to the magnificence of the tunnel and ignore that its woefully inadequate? Should we close our eyes to the reality that its a problem with no good solution...that there is - quite simply - already too much traffic which wants to do that stretch? They're building a new tunnel, sure, but they already know that its not enough to alleviate the problem. Should we do that probe, or should we just point at Switzerland as some sort of perfect solution to all things transport and scoff at those who try to paint a more realistic picture? Should we accept its existence but accept that its a fairly unique problem caused by those rather large hills, and thus one that doesn't really apply to Ireland? If so, should we not then also accept that those self-same hills play a major factor in the attractiveness of rail freight, particularly on the North-South axis?

No I’m not. Twenty years ago, Switzerland had similar rail freight levels compared with France and Germany. They set out on a project to push as much road freight as possible on to rail and have doubled rail’s share of the market in the meantime.

Agreed. They already had the rail network in place, though, with the capacity on the lines to carry the freight. The set out on a project to push off the roads, generally because it meant that the investment in rail they had already made could avoid additional investment in road....they had the foresight to limit congestion by leveraging what they already had as effectively as possible.

This is the investment I'm talking about - the up-front cost of building the rail network in the first place, and the generating capability to power it.

And lets not forget...the Swiss government also played ball by making sure road-based transit faced charges and limitations that the rail system didn't face. The cost of going through Switzerland by road was made less attractive, although not so unattractive that going around Switzerland was preferable. You don't see Ireland's future as a transit point, so some of that doesn't apply.

The payback to a "Danzas" investment in SBB cargo could be very quick in terms of energy and labour cost savings.

But we've already established that a Danzas investment isn't what you see for Ireland. Danzas, in your example, are shipping from an enormous German base, to an enormous Italian market, using Switzerland as a transit-route. In Ireland, all we have is shipping to/from the port. No transit. No Danzas. Imports are limited by the size of our internal market (incomparable to German or Italy), which leaves exports. So to get the massive volume, we need to be a manufacturing center of some sort for a European market...which means we need the whole package...rail to the coast, ship to the mainland/England...rail from there....and we need that cheaper and more time-efficient than simply building on the mainland.

Now sure...the future of ships may not be oil-based, but the future of road transport may not be either. Its by no means a win-win situation that one can just bet the farm on.

You keep repeating this mantra! In addition to the GA, one has all sorts of regional and local integrated tickets eg

probe...all I can do is tell you the truth. The Swiss see their ticketing system as being non-integrated. Its fine if you've a GA. If you're travelling a point-to-point commute, you can get an abo of some sort. If you need freedom within a city, you can get a monthly ticket.

If you're the occasional traveller, who has the occasional need to travel from point A to point B, you will probably end up getting seperate tickets for every different form of transport you take. If you have a point-to-point commuting ticket, and need to go somewhere else, you will need a ticket for each form of transport you take. If you have a city commute and go outside the zones you have a subscription for, you will need a ticket for each form of transport you take.

Now, sure, you can buy things like day-cards...but they're generally more expensive than paying the single costs for a specific journey.

You can think otherwise all you want probe. You can continue to paint the Swiss system as teh model of perfection all you like. I am, again, choosing accuracy over rose-tinted glasses. The Swiss see lack of ticket integration as one of the major things to be fixed with their system. What they have might be light-years above what other have, but the Swiss aren't interested in being "better". They're interested in doing it right...and its currently not right.

If you are so dissatisfied with the rail set-up in Switzerland, why don’t you move to Ireland or Italy?

Who said I was dissatisfied? You seem to have this perspective that because I can see room for improvement, I'm unhappy with what I have. Like the Swiss, probe, I want to see it done right. I know, as well as any other daily commuter here, what is and what is not right in the system. I'm grateful for what I have, but that doesn't mean for one second that I don't want the improvements that could and should be made.

You want Ireland to look at the Swiss and say "we could have that". I want Ireland to look at what the Swiss are aiming for and ask themselves "what, of that, makes sense for us". Thats what it boils down to. I'm willing to point out the flaws in the Swiss system, and the parts that may be problematic for Ireland to copy. You seem to take offence that I'm doing so.

probe

bonkey wrote: »

Well, at least we're both finally agreed that it would be loss-making...thats progress.

The road system has a lot more costs terms of maintenance, financing costs, depreciation, signposting costs, policing costs, health service costs – the loss of around 350 lives per annum + 8,000 people injured, and increased asthma rates and cancer deaths and other problems caused by road traffic pollution. The more traffic (people and freight) that is moved to rail, the less maintenance/wear and tear, accidents, pollution and need for expansion of road capacity. And the more efficient the country would work.

You can get from Zurich Airport to the city centre in 10 minutes by train – and I mean the city centre rather than some Heuston Station type outback location. Geneva Airport to the centre by train is 6 mins. And of course one can also get from these airport railway stations to every other station in the country too without having to use metros or trams or buses or taxis. This gives a huge time saving to millions of people – which you can credit to the real income statement of a properly designed railway system!

Its not any more. I was surprised to read up on that myself...but its not.

SBB is owned by the Swiss Federal Government - exhibit A the SBB Annual report page 76: http://sbb-gb2007.mxm.ch/annualreport.aspx?site=pdf where it states that the Confederation is the sole shareholder. Not a single share listed on the Swiss Stock Market (www.swx.ch).

They are looking to be a major player in the European (or even Eurasian) rail freight system, and that means forming partnerships with other rail-freight carriers. Improved logistics, greater range of destinations, etc. are their current targets. They already have a partnership with SBB passenger services regarding rolling-stock maintenance, as that was more efficient than doing their own.

With the IPO of Deutsche Bahn Mobility Logistics AG in the pipeline, one can see an obvious partnership there. If not them Deutsche Post AG – who owns DHL who in turn owns Danzas.

I know you're a big fan of wind, but thats the same problem...the costs are up front.

There is no shortage of investment money in Ireland for wind electricity generation. The government is blocking “applications” from private investors to install 7,200 MW of wind capacity at the moment.

Short-term, yes. Mid-term, the road network will be based on something other than oil. Once that happens, the dynamics shift again, and it becomes a question of which is a better use of electricity.

Fine you will be back to battery and or H2 electric cars – but a traffic jam of electric cars is just as inefficient as a traffic jam of cars running on liquid fuel. As far as freight is concerned, the energy used to move freight on rails is far less than moving it on rubber tyres in a truck – even if the truck is electric.

Each has their advantage. Again, this is a factor which has to be considered for Ireland more than Switzerland...as it would take Ireland at least 10-20 years to get a modernisised, electrified rail system, with clean generating capability in place...with all the up-front costs associated with it.

I’m not saying Ireland has to Switzerland itself within five years – nor could it. Massive progress could be made with the existing track resources if they were managed more efficiently and electrified in heavy traffic areas initially – with electrification rolling out elsewhere progressively.

No, probe, I'm choosing accuracy over nice-sounding generalisations. The swiss did not stop their motorway-building plans in the 80s. It may be true to say that they havent had any projects as large as some of those in the 80s, but that is not the same thing. The Swiss have constantly worked on their motorways, and are expanding the network to this day and for the forseeable future.

No you are not! You don’t even know who owns SBB! :-) Take a road map of Switzerland in 1997 and another dated 2007, and there would be almost no difference in the motorway coverage. You couldn’t say that about Ireland! Go back to a 1987 Swiss map and compare with 2007 – very little difference too.

If you're the occasional traveller, who has the occasional need to travel from point A to point B, you will probably end up getting seperate tickets for every different form of transport you take. If you have a point-to-point commuting ticket, and need to go somewhere else, you will need a ticket for each form of transport you take. If you have a city commute and go outside the zones you have a subscription for, you will need a ticket for each form of transport you take.

Yes – but at least you have the option with the zone system. You can buy a ticket for one zone* if you have a tiny commute (and you will have to pay any time you want to use public transport outside of that zone. Or at the other end of the scale you can buy all the zones in the country. People buying one off tickets make public transport – particularly buses – a slow means of transport in Ireland – because they have to pay the driver. Nobody has to pay the driver in a Swiss city – everyone is pre-ticketed prior to boarding. All the doors open. People get on and off fast and the vehicle moves off. Any other system is public transport for hackers run by hackers!

Buying integrated tickets for periods of time means that the ticket holder is subscribing to a public transport system – and should get benefits – including having to pay less than the person who uses the system very occasionally (and presumably drives the rest of the time). Most cities with integrated ticketing also offer non-integrated tickets for short one-off journeys.

.probe

*Zone map http://www.zvv.ch/export/sites/default/common-images/content-image-gallery/linien-zonen-pdfs/Tarifzonen_08.pdf the zones are like postal districts rather than the stupid concentric circle zones used in London and some other cities

bonkey

probe wrote: »

The road system has a lot more costs terms of maintenance, financing costs, depreciation, signposting costs, policing costs, health service costs – the loss of around 350 lives per annum + 8,000 people injured, and increased asthma rates and cancer deaths and other problems caused by road traffic pollution.

I've already agreed that if you redefine "cost" in whatever terms suit you, then you can argue that whatever you like is profitable.

Are you trying to go in circles now?

Why can't you just come out and say that you want the Irish to adopt a model which will be a business which involves massive up-front financial investment which it will never recoup because year on year it will run a financial loss....but that you think the fringe benefits will compensate for this.

You can get from Zurich Airport to the city centre in 10 minutes by train – and I mean the city centre rather than some Heuston Station type outback location.

Probe...please...can we leave passenger services out of this? You started a thread about freight traffic, and about how Ireland could model its freight services after that of the SBB freight system....yet time and time again when it comes to showing how good it is, off you go extolling the virtues of the SBB passenger service.

Make up your mind...do you want to discuss the thread you started, or do you want to change topic to discussing rail in general as an alternative to road. And if you're going to do that, then can we leave the Swiss integrated public transport system out of it, unless what you really want to discuss is something else entirely.

Until you decide what it is, I'm going to actually stick to your topic and ignore all your gushing about the wonderfulness of the Swiss public transport system which has nothing to do with it.

SBB is owned by the Swiss Federal Government - exhibit A the SBB Annual report page 76: http://sbb-gb2007.mxm.ch/annualreport.aspx?site=pdf where it states that the Confederation is the sole shareholder.

The Swiss Confederation is not the Swiss Federal Government. You should also note that the only requirement in the charter of SBB is that the Confederation holds a majority of shares. There has been talk in recent months about the possible necessity of having to exercise that option and sell an interest in the company to raise capital for the required expansion costs that I've mentioned.

The current stance is that this is seen as a last resort, and that strategic partnerships and other options will be investigated first.

Fine you will be back to battery and or H2 electric cars – but a traffic jam of electric cars is just as inefficient as a traffic jam of cars running on liquid fuel.

It can use the same clean wind-power that you extoll, which removes the problems like asthma rates, cancer deaths and all the rest that you were banging on about when extolling the wonderfulness of "clean" electric-rail.

In addition, it doesn't require another massive upgrade. Irish roads need the upgrade regardless of whether anything gets done with rail. Putting rail refurbishment on the cards as well means paying masses more. Indeed, other than perhaps some of the physical rail, you pretty-much need to start from scratch. A lot of disused track will need replacing, and track currently in use will need vast improvement if you want it to carry frequent large volumes of traffic that its not carrying. The entire management system will need to be replaced, and the entire thing electrified.

You say that some 7,000 MW of wind generation has been blocked in Ireland. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you're supplying a figure for total theoretical capacity, rather than actual average expected capacity, which at a generous average of 30% would be 2350 MW. And as I've pointed out in another thread, you still need a solution for when the wind isn't blowing. You can't brown-out a good chunk of the country just because its a calm day, nor can you stop the trains, so you still need additional base-load capacity either nationally or via inter-connect to supply the same amount. Swiss rail consume some 2300 GW/h per year, with their trains consuming some 80% of that. Now....sure...Ireland won't have anything like the Swiss network, but

I’m not saying Ireland has to Switzerland itself within five years – nor could it. Massive progress could be made with the existing track resources if they were managed more efficiently and electrified in heavy traffic areas initially – with electrification rolling out elsewhere progressively.

How much time, and how much money. You go on about the rising costs of oil, so you need to have it all in place before our economy suffers the collapse your rising costs imply will happen, and that rail can help avoid.

Time and money, probe...thats what its all about. My opinion is it will cost too much, would take too long, and will never deliver.

The Swiss have their rail around for a long time...long enough for business to base itself near rail lines. Ireland doesn't have that, so either we build loads new rail, or we expect business to up and move, or we require them to have trucking fleets capable of moving everything anyway....albeit over a shorter distance.

So we need to allow for that too.

So how long before it all comes together? If we start today, do we reap non-financial benefits in 10 years? 20? 50? And how much do we pay out before then? How much of that investment do we write off to the feel-good non-monetary "profit" that you say is so important? Where do we get the money from?

No you are not! You don’t even know who owns SBB! :-)

I know that the Swiss Confederation is not the Swiss Federal Government, as you claim:)

I also know that the current structure of the company allows them the freedom to sell anything below half of SBB...something they couldn't have done while it was state-owned-and-run. I'm sure you're aware of the difference between the someone owning the company and someone being the sole shareholder with the freedom to hold shares.

Take a road map of Switzerland in 1997 and another dated 2007, and there would be almost no difference in the motorway coverage. You couldn’t say that about Ireland!

I never claimed otherwise, probe, and I never made any claim about Ireland.

Seriously....I pointed out that your claim that work stopped at the end of the 80s was wrong. You're now trying to plamas your way to saying that when you said "stopped" you really meant something like "scaled back because they had done the major jobs".

As I've pointed out, I'm favour accuracy where you prefer sweeping statements which paint a rosier picture. When you take that approach, then of course Ireland will be completely* saved** by copying the perfect*** Swiss rail freight**** system, and all at a cheap***** price.

* may not mean "completely"
** may not mean "saved"
*** may not mean "perfect"
**** may not mean "freight"
***** may not mean "cheap"

probe

If I may say so, bonky, you are being a bit “schizophrenic” :-). You criticise the absence of one off trip integrated tickets in your neck of the woods – (which obviously has nothing to do with freight) – yet you selectively criticise my postings any time I attempt to show the benefits of the Swiss rail system for passengers. “Die bahn” is a single infrastructure, whether it is used by passengers or freight. In the same way as the phone system can carry voice, data, IP traffic, faxes, video, etc.

As far as the ownership of Swissrail is concerned, it is 100% owned by the Confederation of Switzerland, country code CH (ISO 3166) – and not by private interests, sovereign wealth funds, etc. In the same context you might argue that Irish Rail is not owned by the Irish Government – you are wasting peoples’ time nitpicking – irrelevant nitpicking in the context of a this forum. While the Swiss authorities may decide to dispose of some of this shareholding at some future point in time, this has not taken place – and no doubt will probably require a public vote on the matter!

All I’m trying to do is point out the need for a flexible “grand plan” for the next 40 years or so to deal with (a) the increase in the population of Ireland in general and Dublin and other urban areas in particular; (b) the increase in road traffic driven by the population increase and increase in people’s incomes and travelling needs (c) the increase in freight traffic both in relation to the domestic market and imports and exports of all kinds to the rest of Europe. (d) The finite reserves of oil, and the increasing cost of energy generally.


The country has been sleepwalking in terms of infrastructural planning and design for the past 20 years. The need for increasing the capacity and scale of infrastructural systems is largely ignored. Airports, the M50, urban roads, Luas systems, etc take ages to implement, and are typically running at full capacity from the moment a new project opens for service. New road bridges over railway lines have been built with no height allowance for electrification or duplex trains.

Public transport operates at its most economic when it is heavily used by both passengers and freight – because the high fixed costs of maintaining the system are amortized over far more units of usage (people or freight tonne km). You get more people on a public transport system by integrating it with other public transport systems both in terms of timing of services, integration of ticketing and information services.

Rail freight operations in state monopoly ownership have stagnated. Decades ago, I seem to recall that CIE had a substantial road freight service – as well as rail freight. There is no reason why the state should be operating a road freight service in competition with the private sector. Equally, why shouldn’t the rail network be exploited by systematically opening it up to services operated by the private sector? This is one of the reasons behind the establishment of Deutsche Bahn Mobility and Logistics AG – a company with a planned stock market listing to run passenger and rail freight services – while keeping the track and station infrastructure in government ownership. The Swiss can see this happening across the border and hence the debate on how it might be applied in their country. If freight is open and efficiently run in terms of mechanised rail freight hub management and tracking systems, it can be part of a future-proof system for the next several generations. The same automated rail freight hub technology can be applied at ports to move freight units on and off ships – be they oil or H2 powered, integrated into the rail network.

La Poste is being set-up for privatisation in France, and no doubt a French version of SNCF Mobility and Logistics SA will be born in time which will lead to an increased use of rail freight in France too. Ireland is not an island – it is part of a European logistics system. Infrastructure and labour costs have been the main limiting factors. Labour costs can be managed by better management of immigration and taking a more serious approach to professional work training. Infrastructure has to be holistically planned on a long term basis – to provide a flexible, scalable range of options depending on the actual changes is economic patterns which are impossible to forecast 40 years in advance.

Your participation in this thread has been somewhat negative, and I have difficulty understanding why you waste so much time with this aspect of your contribution. If you have something functional to contribute to the thought patterns by all means post them – but please no more nit picking :-)

.probe