One Train = 24 Lorries Taken off the Roads

sligoliner

irish Rail are hauling timber trains again:

http://groups.msn.com/IrishRailwayNews/pastandpresent.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=3202

They did everything in their power to pull out of railfreight and kill this kind of movement (and nearly did).


More on Irish Rail and their atitutde to the environment:

http://www.platform11.org/untapped.html
http://www.platform11.org/freight.html
http://www.platform11.org/slide4.html

Typedef

sligoliner mass transport infrastructure is good and yes transporting goods by rail is certainly safer in that it takes traffic off the roads.

Quite a few of those links are bang on about Irish rail's management. I'm not in a position to comment on that, what I will say is that Yes platform 11 wants to have the Western corridor re-opened, this seems to be the single issue platform 11 is built around with ancillary issues appended to appeal to a wider audience.

http://www.irlgov.ie/debates-02/s20Nov/Sect5.htm

I don't mean to be rude however, with 970 million extra pumped into hospitals this year, beds are 'still' closing. A campaign has been on since 1979 to re-open the Western Corridor, but, since the demand in passenger terms is not there, the corridor has remained closed.

If there was bundles of money in the national budget to go around then fine, I'd say, sure, maybe opening the Western corridor could be considered, but, unless such an opening can be economically viable, the country simply can't afford to supplement such a move, which is why, the corridor has been closed for the last 23 years.

Get over it.

Keeks

But how many lorries are currently travelling between sligo and limerick? If the western corridor was reopended would it really be used?

At the end of the day it comes down to economics. There is just not the demand for the service to make it commercially viable.

DeVore

Why dont you request a community for Platform11 and then you wont be seen as overloading this board with Platform11 stuff.

DeV.

Keeks

I'd hardly call one post overloading:)

DadaKopf

I'm not so sure how efficient rail haulage actually is compared with road haulage. There's an implicit assumption that rail freight would necessarily be more efficient and cost effective. I don't see the direct connection - onloading and offloading times in a country this small might make freight transport more inefficient, not less. That is, of course, until such a time when traffic congestion here is so chronic that nobody can go faster than 25 mph. Of course, it would benefit *everyone*, not just the hauliers and businessmen, for freight to move off the roads.

The problem is incentive. Why should businesses have to (most likely) pay extra to use trains *and then* a truck to transport those goods to their destination? Undercutting rail costs to attract business would be death for the rail company and it's unlikely the union of truckdrivers or whatever would allow higher taxes on their business to force freight off the roads.

I think a nodal system is best but in a country this small, I think we need a third option - neither a road solution (BUILD MORE ROADS!) or a rail solution (BUILD MORE TRACKS!). I haven't a clue what that could be.

Victor

Originally posted by DadaKopf
I'm not so sure how efficient rail haulage actually is compared with road haulage. There's an implicit assumption that rail freight would necessarily be more efficient and cost effective. I don't see the direct connection - onloading and offloading times in a country this small might make freight transport more inefficient, not less.

A balance needs to be struck. One goods train needs 1-2 staff (driver + guard) against well 1-2 staff per truck. The problem in this country is that so much industry is dispersed in smaller towns with poor access that is uneconomic to upgrade.

Ideally, all railheads and main stations would have depots that would be linked to ports by regular services. Ironicly, there may be too many ports for each of them to have a aviable service. At the moment too many trucks make individual journeys to deliver a container / trailer to the port and then return for / with another trailer. If things could be managed better that truck would only have to operate from railhead to factory.

Fuel wise a loaded train is much more efficient than the equivalent number of loaded trucks (less friction and wind drag.).

DadaKopf

Exactly. Maybe the government should get advice from German army logistics experts. They're always good with that sort of thing.

bizmark

perhapes you should for one second consider those 27 trucker,s their familys and maybe even the whole truck company................It,s all well and good sitting in your chair crying about rail transport it,s not your ass on the line after all:rolleyes:

Snowball

Originally posted by bizmark
perhapes you should for one second consider those 27 trucker,s their familys and maybe even the whole truck company................It,s all well and good sitting in your chair crying about rail transport it,s not your ass on the line after all:rolleyes:

Right! Ok, so since we are over populating the world and ****ing it up, we should just continue. That’s the best solution I have ever herd. Now why did I not think of that?

bizmark

lol you really thing YOU can do anything about it ? ........ please m8

.I guess you know notting about Truck engines and the Euro regs on them? well let,s put it this way one 14 liter truck produce,s less crap that a average family desiel engine car. and that was only with Euro 3 engines 2 + year,s ago

so why dont you go bitch at them or at lest learn something about truck,s and what your complaning about before you come back with a smart arse remark

plus the world has gone though this climit changes all the time ALL THE TIME.what really make,s you think its all because of us? other than a bunch of contradicting evidence .Plus the plan fact the the last 10,000 year,s of stable climit has been a exception NOT the rule might open your eye,s. BUT of course the easy option is to panic and blame every thing not "natural" lol.

Typedef

What are you talking about?

Most governments recognise the need to reduce Greenhouse gas emissions, so as to assuage Global warming.

CO2, Methane, Nitros Oxide and CFC are Greenhouse gases that are produced by man in exponential amounts.

The warmest years on record have been in the last 20 years, which 'just happens' to coincide with an exponential increase in man caused Greenhouse gas emissions and a Global rise in trace Greenhouse gases.

How much evidence do the sceptics need on this issue?

Victor

Originally posted by bizmark
perhapes you should for one second consider those 27 trucker,s their familys and maybe even the whole truck company................It,s all well and good sitting in your chair crying about rail transport it,s not your ass on the line after all:rolleyes:

Say your driver earn €1,000 per week. So one train driver can do the work of 24 truckers (you say 27). The same income is generated getting the goods from A to B. Therefore your drivers can still earn €1,000 a week doing nothing. Rather than actually doing nothing, they can do seomthign worthwhile for themselves / their families / the country.

Kalina

What kind of train engine do you think would be able to pull a load of timber equivalent to that of 24 trucks? An artic truck with a 40ft trailer can carry maybe 30 tonnes of timber so an engine would need to be able to haul 24 times that (around 700 tonnes) Iaranrod Eireanns engines can't do it, I've seen them hitched up to 12 60ft freight carraiges of timber and struggling to even get out of the station. Often 2 engines have to hitch up to the load (depending on the type and weight of the timber) to transport it. So it obviously cost's the rail company more to run 2 engines.
Also, as DadaKopf has pointed out, efficiency is lost in the onloading and offloading times. The loads going out of the stations are too small and too few and far between which the whole operation less viable. Short runs in and out of stations costs the truck drivers more on diesel and so does working the crane to load and offload the timber.
Apparently the rates in the timber business have plunged recently and a lot of timber haulage companies have downsized or closed. It doesn't make financial sense for the rail companies to get involved in timber haulage again cos there is no money to be made. I can't see the trucks losing their place as the main means of timber transport in this country.

bizmark

The same income is generated getting the goods from A to B. Therefore your drivers can still earn €1,000 a week doing nothing. Rather than actually doing nothing, they can do seomthign worthwhile for themselves / their families / the country.

ah victor what the hell did you mean their? to me that read like the rambleings of a mad man no offence .... if you mean that the driver will get the same for going 5 miles as they would for 300 then your wrong depending on the company of course. Also what is the point of putting a train on the track,s clameing to take 24-27 trucks from the roads when you still need them to move timber from the depo ??????

secondly if your saying trucker do notting have you ever been in a truck? spent 18 hour,s in one ? Driven one ? have the skill it take,s to drive a 50-60 foot long 50 ton truck with out wipeing out around 30 car,s ?

of course victor i might of gotten the word end of that agrument :ninja:

Thirdly THEIR IS NO WAY the rail serves in this country can do anything like the trucks can .................... the best thing people can hope for is the fast delevery of hydro engines (dont hold your breath though)

anyway either way this wont effect us as it.s the plastic factory,s in cork city/county we go to and their is no rail for mile,s around

ps... im still right about the emision testing of trucks btw 14 liter truck = less carbon etc released into the air than a average desile famaily car

Kalina

Originally posted by bizmark
if you mean that the driver will get the same for going 5 miles as they would for 300 then your wrong depending on the company of course.

A lot of companies pay their drivers by the mile rather than by the hour so short runs to railway stations with more time taken up loading and off loading isn't feasible for trucking companies and drivers.

Victor

Originally posted by bizmark
ah victor what the hell did you mean their? to me that read like the rambleings of a mad man no offence

O_o thanks

Originally posted by bizmark
Also what is the point of putting a train on the track,s clameing to take 24-27 trucks from the roads when you still need them to move timber from the depo ??????

I know it doesn't work in every scenario, but it does work in Some scenarios, e.g. IE have just got a contract to move timber from Mayo (and somewhere else) to Waterford port. Rail cargo works best with low handling, longer distances and adequate infrastructure.

Hence oil is transported by rail, not road to Sligo from Dublin. It is easy to handle (by pump), heavy and operating between two fixed points.

Originally posted by bizmark
secondly if your saying trucker do notting have you ever been in a truck? spent 18 hour,s in one ? Driven one ? have the skill it take,s to drive a 50-60 foot long 50 ton truck with out wipeing out around 30 car,s ?

I am not saying truckers do nothing. I'm saying in that particular example, there would be the same amount of wealth created, so they wouldn't have to do anything.

In the Sligo oil example, you only have one driver (admittedly you also have mechanics, signallers etc.) compared to maybe a dozen plus drivers (plus mechanics, road maintenance personnel, traffic cops, etc.) to transport the same oil by truck.

Originally posted by bizmark
Thirdly THEIR IS NO WAY the rail serves in this country can do anything like the trucks can .................... the best thing people can hope for is the fast delevery of hydro engines (dont hold your breath though)

Likewise there are certain things that trains can do that trucks can't.

bizmark

Oh i agree their are something trains are vastly better at transporting than truck,s of that their is no aguemnet ........ ie i really would perfere to see 1000 tons of oil/gas or nuke wast transported by a train with less risk of it going bang.

though truck,s are better at more than they are bad at be it large 50 ton trucks or small 7.5 ton city trucks their.s pritty much one for every job ........... not only that but they support more job,s

train,s on the other hand do one job transporting Very large load,s a long distences to a ready made unloading bay in the factory etc or else they still need truck,s

Victor

Originally posted by bizmark
not only that but they support more job,s

In this way 'supporting more jobs' invariably means doing the job more expensively, less competitively and less environmentally safely.

It's like saying spraying graffitti keeps council workers in jobs - it doesn't, it just means the worker is doing a un-nice job to get back to where we started when they could be doing something to improve the enivronment.

bizmark

i see your point

but you can make that agument for useing computer.s / tv,s blablabla............ they need power power need,s a power plant they need hunderds of staff to look after them and they release a lot of carbon etc

but even at that we still cant get rid of them because their use overrides their negitive vaules............however we can replace them with cleaner power (kinda like replaceing truck engines with hydro engines in around 6-12 year,s) while still retaining the majorty of job,s