Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

08-01-2021 08:11PM

I've spent the last few hours reading through these and I have to say, they slaughtered the case for the WRC to bits and I mean slaughtered it!

Looking at the JASPERS report, its a similar story but they also look at it from a EU context.

Regarding the chances of inclusion in TENB-T or funding from the EIB, they had this to say

First some background info

10. TEN-T and Financing aspects

10.1 The Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) describes a Europe-wide network of rail, road, inland waterway and maritime shipping corridors, as well as significant ports, airports and railroad terminals. The ultimate objective is to close gaps, remove bottlenecks and technical barriers across Europe, as well as to strengthen social, economic and territorial cohesion in the EU. The TEN-T policy defines two main objectives:
Completion of the Core Network by 2030; and

Completion of the Comprehensive Network by 2050 .

10.2 The Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) for Transport is the funding instrument of the TEN-T policy, as defined mainly by the TEN-T Guidelines according with the Regulation (EU) 1315/2013. As such, CEF funding is directed towards investments in the Core and the Comprehensive Networks through regular calls for proposals. During the period 2014-2019, CEF Transport awarded €23.3 billion in grants to co-finance projects of common interest.

Now they're review of the WRC in the context of TEN-T where they say its is unlikely to ever get a penny as its not on the TEN-T network and even if there was a way to say that it is, it would be so far down the list of projects eligible for funding that the pot of money would be exhausted before they got that far down the list.

10.3 Examining the TEN-T policy, it is evident that the Western Rail Corridor is not located on the Core or Comprehensive network. Nevertheless, the TEN-T guidelines are currently under revision, and there may be a case for including the Western Rail Corridor in the Comprehensive Network through a legislative process involving the European Commission, Parliament and Council. Such inclusion would require a robust argument for the strategic nature of the corridor and its contribution to TEN-T policy.

10.4 Even as part of the Comprehensive Network, the European added value of the current project would still need to be demonstrated, which would require an elaboration of its strategic role in providing connectivity to nodes of the Core Network. It is noted that the award of grants through CEF is subject to a competitive evaluation, and traditionally there is a significant oversubscription of available funding. As such, the probability of being selected in a competitive call cannot be considered as high in the absence of such a case.

As for EIB funding, their review would fall under the scope of the project assessment as would EY's report which would pretty much ensure that it wouldn't get a red cent from the EU

10.5 In the context of lending from EU Financing Institutions (most notably EIB), the project selection process is subject to technical reviews of the project documentation, examining the financial and economic case, as well as general project need, scope, risks and impacts. It is likely that during such review that the issues noted throughout this note would be highlighted, and would influence the final decision. We consider that that gaining support for
project financing of the proposal in its current form would be a challenge.

Both reports go on and on in a similar vein basically quashing every potential avenue that one could argue for.

I've read many reports such as these over the last 25 years and I've never seen a project take such a hammering.

westtip · 08-01-2021 08:18PM

Its over Dacor will they have the courage to accept or are we going to see a Trump like attitude.

Its all over now baby blue.

eastwest · 09-01-2021 11:04AM

Says it all
'the reports in full show that the weak case is reinforced under every area of scrutiny, including freight.'

https://www.con-telegraph.ie/2021/01/08/rail-reports-end-western-rail-corridor-as-viable-option-claims-greenway-group/

eastwest · 09-01-2021 11:10AM

The case for rail is actually even worse than the EY report suggests.
If you look at the detail, they appear to have added in the population numbers for Athenry when calculating demand numbers.
It's not just dead in the water, it's nowhere near the lake.

Pete_Cavan · 09-01-2021 12:31PM

eastwest wrote: »

The case for rail is actually even worse than the EY report suggests.
If you look at the detail, they appear to have added in the population numbers for Athenry when calculating demand numbers.
It's not just dead in the water, it's nowhere near the lake.

Surprised they didn't lump in passengers from Oranmore like they do for WRC Phase 1.

eastwest · 09-01-2021 12:49PM

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Surprised they didn't lump in passengers from Oranmore like they do for WRC Phase 1.

That's what is effectively being teed up, to use the existing traffic between Athenry and Galway as part of a case for Claremorris-Athenry, but it clearly won't fool the likes of Jaspers.
The date of the report is interesting, June 2020. We know for a fact that the report was originally delivered to Ross in late 2019, and that the detail was in possession of some rail lobbyists very soon thereafter. Leaks in other directions were just not happening, apart from a few strong hints as much as a year back that proved accurate in hindsight.
So, what changed between October and June? Why was this report dated in June 2020? Was the report sent back to EY with an instruction to try and beef up the figures? That would certainly account for the attempt to soften the blow by adding in the population of Athenry to try to put some kind of good face on it.
Either way, it still made no difference. The WRC was always a fantasy project with no basis in reality, and Jaspers and the EIB have blown it out of the water in no uncertain terms. I don't think I've ever seen what was after all a politically inspired report coming down so strongly on one side of a debate.
Sean Canney has done the state some service in ensuring that this report was delivered. It puts this argument to bed for once and for all.

Tigerandahalf · 09-01-2021 04:07PM

This report doesn't take account of the new post covid work situation where many people will no longer need to commute. Even less of a case for it now.

westtip · 09-01-2021 05:57PM

eastwest wrote: »

Says it all
'the reports in full show that the weak case is reinforced under every area of scrutiny, including freight.'

https://www.con-telegraph.ie/2021/01/08/rail-reports-end-western-rail-corridor-as-viable-option-claims-greenway-group/

Let's face it folks we have debated this until we are blue in the face, the simple fact is, denial is no longer an option. the railway is not going to be re-opened can we all get on with our lives now.

westtip · 09-01-2021 05:58PM

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

This report doesn't take account of the new post covid work situation where many people will no longer need to commute. Even less of a case for it now.

If you consider the idea of mobile working hubs being situated in our rural towns commuting into say Kiltimagh, or Swinford by bike from surrounding rural areas means the bike commuting option is even stronger, and it serves to reinvent town centres

eastwest · 09-01-2021 06:49PM

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

This report doesn't take account of the new post covid work situation where many people will no longer need to commute. Even less of a case for it now.

The EY report might appear not to factor in the Covid issue, but the reality is that it didn't foresee it, which is fair enough considering it was mostly written in 2019. But it also doesn't factor in the National Broadband plan, which also aims to reduce commuting. Covid has shown us that the nature of commuting has changed for ever, in truth.
Two other incorrect assumptions were made in an attempt to justify the freight option, although they still couldn't come up with a case for a freight railway. They factored in growth in bulk fertilizer loads to Mayo, ignoring the fact that that is actually a shrinking market with the pending reduction or at best zero growth in the national herd. It also assumes export of logs from Mayo through Waterford and Dublin, when in fact Irish mills are actually importing logs to meet demand. Glennons in Longford has a ship permanently on charter bringing logs from Scotland because of a shortage of local product, and planting targets aren't even close to being met. Trees planted today will be harvested in thirty five years time, but not enough of them are being planted to create demand for log trains in thirty years.
It's over, as others have said. We need to accept it and move on.

Isambard · 09-01-2021 07:37PM

eastwest wrote: »

The EY report might appear not to factor in the Covid issue, but the reality is that it didn't foresee it, which is fair enough considering it was mostly written in 2019. But it also doesn't factor in the National Broadband plan, which also aims to reduce commuting. Covid has shown us that the nature of commuting has changed for ever, in truth.
Two other incorrect assumptions were made in an attempt to justify the freight option, although they still couldn't come up with a case for a freight railway. They factored in growth in bulk fertilizer loads to Mayo, ignoring the fact that that is actually a shrinking market with the pending reduction or at best zero growth in the national herd. It also assumes export of logs from Mayo through Waterford and Dublin, when in fact Irish mills are actually importing logs to meet demand. Glennons in Longford has a ship permanently on charter bringing logs from Scotland because of a shortage of local product, and planting targets aren't even close to being met. Trees planted today will be harvested in thirty five years time, but not enough of them are being planted to create demand for log trains in thirty years.
It's over, as others have said. We need to accept it and move on.

trees are often planbted on mountains and not accesible by rail Onc on a truck they may as well go straight to destination. They roll past my house all day and night.

Del.Monte · 09-01-2021 08:02PM

Isambard wrote: »

trees are often planbted on mountains and not accesible by rail Onc on a truck they may as well go straight to destination. They roll past my house all day and night.

If that's the case why are there timber trains running from the North West to Waterford - a lorry shortage?

Isambard · 09-01-2021 09:56PM

no idea.

Sam Russell · 09-01-2021 10:06PM

Del.Monte wrote: »

If that's the case why are there timber trains running from the North West to Waterford - a lorry shortage?

How many and how often?

If they can go now, why invest hugely in an alternative?

What is the current routing?

eastwest · 09-01-2021 10:53PM

Del.Monte wrote: »

If that's the case why are there timber trains running from the North West to Waterford - a lorry shortage?

There can't be much round log moving in that direction. Ireland is experiencing a severe shortage of logs, and we are paying the highest prices in Europe for them. As I said in an earlier post, Glennons in Longford are running a ship full time from Scotland to meet the shortfall in their own mill, a 3 day turnaround with 3,000 tonnes on each trip.

westtip · 10-01-2021 03:05AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

How many and how often?

If they can go now, why invest hugely in an alternative?

What is the current routing?

Weekending the 9th of October 2020 there were 93* pulpwood trains in the previous 12 months on an MAT basis ex Ballina/Westport all bound for Waterford, that is less than 2 trains per week that are accommodated on the existing rail infrastructure, you don't go building a new rail freight line just to transfer this business.
* source Irish Rail. Just email them and ask, that is what I did. Just for comparison the figs provided to me by Irish Rail showed that in the weekending 3rd Jan 2020 the MAT (effectively the annual fig for 2019) was 119 pulpwood freight trains so the numbers have dropped significantly since January 2020.

Your point is exactly right if they can go now why invest hugely in an alternative for less than two trains a week. Its not going to happen in particular with numbers decreasing.

eastwest · 10-01-2021 02:57PM

westtip wrote: »

Your point is exactly right if they can go now why invest hugely in an alternative for less than two trains a week.

But they have the LUAS up in Dublin?

Del.Monte · 10-01-2021 07:32PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

How many and how often?

If they can go now, why invest hugely in an alternative?

What is the current routing?

Not wishing to get thread/site banned, but should you be posting or moderating in this forum if your knowledge of current Irish railway operations is so lacking? Incidentally, nobody is advocating that the Athenry/Claremorris line should be reopened solely for a couple of timber trains per week - least of all me.

monument · 10-01-2021 07:46PM

Warning to all: Please do not post over the top comments or sarcastic / trolling etc. Thank you very much.

Del.Monte wrote: »

Not wishing to get thread/site banned, but should you be posting or moderating in this forum if your knowledge of current Irish railway operations is so lacking? Incidentally, nobody is advocating that the Athenry/Claremorris line should be reopened solely for a couple of timber trains per week - least of all me.

Banned. More than enough warnings and prefaces the backseat moding with a note about not wishing to get banned but going head on in questioning if people should be posting here, rather than simply saying something to the extent of the bit in bold, which is fine.

-- moderator

monument · 10-01-2021 08:13PM

Normal posting:

Isambard wrote: »

trees are often planbted on mountains and not accesible by rail Onc on a truck they may as well go straight to destination. They roll past my house all day and night.

Stronger antidote: Trees on trucks go by me on my local main road and a switched to rail at the train station.

Sam Russell wrote: »

How many and how often?

If they can go now, why invest hugely in an alternative?

What is the current routing?

The best thing for freight from the west would be to invest in the existing infrastructure which is already operational and shared with passengers services - ie more or better passing loops, looking double tracking sections etc.

Such improvements would benefit passenger services and allow for the expansion of freight services.

westtip wrote: »

If you consider the idea of mobile working hubs being situated in our rural towns commuting into say Kiltimagh, or Swinford by bike from surrounding rural areas means the bike commuting option is even stronger, and it serves to reinvent town centres

Do you know what weakens the case for bicycle commuting between towns and from rural to urban?

Suggesting rubbish infrastructure with poor surfaces and at needlessly grade crossings of 100km/h national roads when the route is already on embankments on both sides.

Isambard · 10-01-2021 08:45PM

well no. The extra handling costs would make the operation far more expensive.

In addition,my local Railway Station has no facilities and the nearest with the necessary sidings etc is a further 12 miles on top of the 20 already travelled and then the train would have to go all round the country to get to the dock.

Sam Russell · 11-01-2021 02:21PM

monument wrote: »

The best thing for freight from the west would be to invest in the existing infrastructure which is already operational and shared with passengers services - ie more or better passing loops, looking double tracking sections etc.

Such improvements would benefit passenger services and allow for the expansion of freight services.

That is the point I was trying to extract.

Freight is a minor activity on Irish Rail, and the future of rail is heavily dependant on the Dublin passenger traffic - both in Dublin and into Dublin. Cork Limerick direct routing might be the exception.

Get Dublin sorted and then look at the rest of the network, but keep what is there running and properly serviced. By that, I mean Metrolink (1 and 2), Dart expansion, Dart Underground, Enterprise, and Dublin/Cork Express service.

ezstreet5 · 15-01-2021 04:02PM

Just screened the EY report. What an unmitigated disaster, regardless of your railway versus greenway view. Despite not including any of the raw data on which their analysis is based, their numbers (quite literally) do not add up. Their main CBA output tables in Appendix F contain dozens of errors. Those are not simple math errors, but rather, residual data left in the tables from a prior version of the analysis. When the benefit-to-cost ratio is recalculated using the prior data (e.g., cumulative benefits of €395.9 million by year 30 of operation), the CBR suddenly becomes 1.18, and the findings and conclusions of the report are completely reversed. EY were quite sloppy for not scrubbing the prior data from their report.

Was also shocked that 73% of the 6,572 public participation responses were in favour of reactivating the railway, in contrast to 10% in favour of "cycling infrastructure."

Greaney · 16-01-2021 01:01AM

1) Catchment areas are the population of the town and the surrounding area that uses it. The EY reports figures are Tuam-1059, Ballyglunin-unknown and Athenry 4445.

Why are we funding a census every 5 years if the information doesn't get used???

2) Now we know why Sean Canney & Louis O'Hara got the top two first preferences in the Tuam/Athenry constituency

3) No wonder 73% prefer rail with the demographics of the catchment area. Above average numbers commute. Large population of children (parents constantly driving), car ownership at 93%.....

Note all of these screen shots are from the actual report

ezstreet5 · 16-01-2021 02:01PM

Digging deeper...

When we look at Table 5: Total Capital Costs, first we see first that the "Phase 2 only" total is off by €9.1 million (doesn't EY use spreadsheets?). But even after that bonehead mistake is corrected, the capital costs are estimated to be about €4.9 million per km. Yet Phase 1, with all of its cost overruns, came in at just over €1.8 million per km. So we are supposed to believe that Phases 2 and 3 will somehow cost 2.7 times more than Phase 1? I'm sorry, that does not pass the laugh test, and I would tend to agree that the report is fatally flawed.

https://assets.gov.ie/109762/c06750ba-391a-4074-a40e-4134ca8b017c.pdf

ShaneC1600 · 16-01-2021 08:24PM

It is an absolute joke and very frustrating. If the report was water tight as we would have expected then the argument for rail vs trail would have been put to bed. Now we are again left in limbo, with one side crying foul. After spending 500k one would imagine we would be finished with this topic but unfortunately with the level and quantity of errors in the report it cannot be used for deciding on whether to rail or trail the line and more noise should be made to discredit it as the first story told is usually the story believed!
Will EY will have to present the findings at an Oireachtas meeting?

MayoForSam · 16-01-2021 08:32PM

I hear Rudy Giuliani is at a loose end, maybe he could take a look and bring it to the Supreme Court?

ShaneC1600 · 16-01-2021 08:34PM

MayoForSam wrote: »

I hear Rudy Giuliani is at a loose end, maybe he could take a look and bring it to the Supreme Court?

You give him a call there so, super stuff

mayo.mick · 16-01-2021 11:18PM

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

It is an absolute joke and very frustrating. If the report was water tight as we would have expected then the argument for rail vs trail would have been put to bed. Now we are again left in limbo, with one side crying foul. After spending 500k one would imagine we would be finished with this topic but unfortunately with the level and quantity of errors in the report it cannot be used for deciding on whether to rail or trail the line and more noise should be made to discredit it as the first story told is usually the story believed!
Will EY will have to present the findings at an Oireachtas meeting?

One would have to ask, what the hell was in the original report, if it took so long for it to be published.....

17-01-2021 12:24PM

Greaney wrote: »

1) Catchment areas are the population of the town and the surrounding area that uses it. The EY reports figures are Tuam-1059, Ballyglunin-unknown and Athenry 4445.

Why are we funding a census every 5 years if the information doesn't get used???

It says it on the page you took that from - Ballyglunin is too small to register for those sort of statistics.

Census small area statistics for anyone interested, select Small Area or Electoral Division for some basic pop detail.
http://census.cso.ie/sapmap/
Much easier on a PC.

Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

Comments