Barnaby to led re training for Net Zero
The Net Zero article was indeed very interesting and very thought provoking.
My mind immediately thought of changing “Net Zero” into “Need Trains”. As an ex-farmer I to have learnt many lessons from raising livestock to growing crops. I rapidly learnt that to reap the benefits of all your hard work on a large scale you needed a truck to import farm supplies and to market your pigs, cattle and sheep as well as delivering grain to the silo. My little old small truck rapidly became bigger until I had a prime mover and trailer combination. I was clocking up many miles on the New England Highway both day and night. The truck was even keeping the bank manager happy as I was generating revenue carting other people’s products. I had a run carting rabbits from the chillers in the North West and New England to the casting works at Homebush Abattoirs with the obvious back load to my hometown.
Earlier this week I topped up a modern large high efficiency truck with diesel. I put $990 worth in the right tank and almost the same in the left tank to cover the next day’s work. Two grand a day to keep harassing the cars on the New England Highway makes me think we “Need Trains” and we need them now.
Barnaby, Sam and all the other political leaders need to do some serious modelling and get on board with the majority of those living, visiting and working in the New England and Northern Inland Region who are calling for the reestablishment of a quality passenger and freight rail line from Newcastle to South East Queensland via the cities of Maitland, Tamworth and Armidale.
Whilst rail trails do not have the economic benefits or viability of a sound rail network they are, in fact an extremely harmful distraction.
Importing diesel from overseas to pump it out the exhaust pipes on our highways is not the efficient way to achieve Zero Emission.
Electrify the rail corridor from Newcastle to Tamworth, build a new Ardglen Tunnel and connect the rail line from Armidale to Queensland is the railway to achieve Net Zero in double quick time. And don’t forget to put the batteries in our new regional passenger trains.
Barnaby, the voters of the New England will love you if you can “re train” the regions transport of passengers and freight and led the way to community prosperity with achievable and sustainable emission reduction goals.
Rick Banyard
Warratah West
Got something on your mind? Go on then, engage. Submit your opinion piece, letter to the editor, or Quick Word now.
Another option is solar powered electric trucks.
Michael Kean road freight is terribly inefficient when compared to rail though. Plus elecric trains can use overhead power, negating the need for batteries which are heavy, expensive, and require time to recharge.
Ashley Baldwin indeed, but trains can’t go to the destination in most cases, so trucks are still needed. You might be able to cut some of the need, but building and maintaining train lines are also an entergy intensive process.
Battery tech will continue to improve.
Ashley Baldwin could you please elaborate on the inefficiencies of road freight in our region.
Jenny Wild rubber tyres rolling on a road create huge energy loss. Energy is also lost by hitting bumps, stopping and starting due to traffic as well as hills. Steel wheels rolling on steel tracks suffer almost zero deformation so rolling resistance is very low thus are extremely efficient per weight moved.
Ashley Baldwin ok so this is an energy issue rather than a productivity concern.
Regional business rely on productive and reliable freight services. Trains can’t deliver those, and never could. There is a bigger picture here than inefficient use of energy, which is, of course a concern. Michael Kean is correct we are seeing major developments in energy efficient vehicles let’s hope that continues.
Trains however will only increase the problems faced with freight movement in general.
Michael Kean small trucks are certainly useful in that local end case, but you don’t need dozens of B-doubles trying to match the capacity of one train.
Ashley Baldwin That is why our new regional trains should have been trimode.
Jenny Wild containers are widely used to handle freight. Have a look at a modern freight train and it is loaded with containers from major road transport operators like Linfox, Lindsay Bros Kent and more. Side loaders can take the containers from the train to the end user very simply and efficiently.
Rick Banyard of course containers are already used, but that happens from a single source, who stuff the container, then the containers get loaded onto the train. At the other end it is unloaded and delivered intact to the destination. How many regional businesses can handle a container load of product from a single source? And consider the infrastructure that would be required at each station not to mention the very low speed limits on the GNR which would make the freight movement unreliable and ridiculously slow.
The construction of the inland rail shows that in certain circumstances high volume single source freight works, mostly from importation ports to large hubs. But to consider that the moderate amount of freight that flows between those hubs to end users would be better off on a train suggests a lack of understanding of the system and the cost of the logistics involved.
If Australia got its act together, long distance trains could have a small specially-built ‘carriage’, attached to the main battery, (also in it’s own little carriage) carrying a spare battery which could be switched over when needed. These battery carriages could be sitting beside a specially built ‘fire fighting’ carriage – complete with large water tanks and hoses to be linked up to the main train, in a siding, when the need arose. It’s not rocket science. Who can make this happen?
Same pipe dream nonsense put out by Rick. Remember he told us local residents that there were 1000s of kms of non road bike trails. He does not even live here. After 36 years can we stop with this train nonsense in the New England. From a Tenterfield resident sick of train nuts outside our area trying to hijack the narrative.
“Whilst rail trails do not have the economic benefits or viability of a sound rail network they are, in fact an extremely harmful distraction.” An excellent and concise statement, thank you Rick!
David Good Thank you David.
David Good – “extremely harmful” ? What absolute nonsense. By the way Rick where is the map of the tens of thousands of kms of bike trails you previously claimed were already in the New Emgland? No wonder no one is listening to rail advocates and the local councils are supporting a trail.
Steve Hodges go your hardest. It goes without saying, your list of alleged information in this debate might be very different to mine.
Well said Rick Banyard!!
#BringBackTheTrains
#FixNotRipRails
It’s common sense with the growing population in the upper New England region, that the old Main North railway line is reopened to provide a reliable, safe and more environmentally friendly mode of Public Transport. Rail is far safer, greener and faster than a bus service.
Don’t believe the old story the rail trailers peddle that they line is “too steep and has too many curves”
As someone who’s studied the curve and gradient diagram for entire the line, the steepest grade north of Armidale is the same as the steepest between Armidale and Tamworth.
It will also make the region more attractive to potential manufacturing/food processing/agricultural export businesses and investors to set up their businesses in the New England as their will be a direct rail link to the ports of Newcastle/Botany/Kembla.
And it will, provide a massive tourist dollar boost, far more than a rail trail could ever provide when heritage rail operators (Picnic Train, LVR and ThNSW) just to name a few run tours up to the New England, which they will do.
Andrew Grills What nonsense. The idea rural rail is ” Green” is a myth. Parliamentary Inquiry into the closure of the Northern Rivers line was explicitly advised it was not possible to show the train was less polluting than the replacement coaches. There is similarly no data or other evidence that shows rail is safer than road based public transport – it’s frankly an insult to bus operators to suggest it’s nit. Rail is not an efficient way to move farm or inwards freight, as both require double handling. In the case of the North of New England increasingly freight goes into Queensland where there is no connection and the line is narrow gauge ( and could not be adapted to standard gauge without major realignment). For passenger traffic the nearest capital city and major shopping and health care hubs are Toowoomba and Brisbane.
Successive governments have repeatedly advised they have no intention of restoring closed rail lines. The Capex and running costs are extremely expensive for little or any benefit.
There is no coach connection to Stanthorpe and Brisbane or Toowoomba. The rail lobby shows how little it is interested in real public transport challenges: it has never lobbied to improve the bus connections around New England or to QLD. The rail enthusiasts know the trains are not coming back. The success of the rail trail in Northern Rivers and elsewhere is an embarrassment to those who repeatedly called them ” fail trails”. The rail enthusiast movement has morphed into a lobby group that’s focussed on stopping the rails trails in Northern NSW by whatever means possible.
The new England line has been an integral part of the supply chain there’s no reason it cant be rebuilt qld are doing their end