Personal tools

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Postit

Blog - Rail Express

 
You are here: Home archive 2010 January January 13 2009 Other Top Stories More calls for bulk freight to be taken off roads

More calls for bulk freight to be taken off roads

by Rail Express last modified Jan 12, 2010 11:22 AM
— filed under: ,

The Australian Institute of Marine And Power Engineers (AIMPE) has backed calls for all dangerous freight to be taken off the nation’s roads on safety grounds, as the truck-related death toll in New South Wales rose on January 7th to nine in 11 days.

By Rob McKay

The latest accident claimed the life of a utility driver involved in a collision near Wyong with a truck carrying mining equipment.
A coalition of rail unions, transport and motoring groups led by the Rail, Tram And Bus Union has also reportedly urged the Federal and State Governments to ban the long-distance transport of dangerous goods on the road. The coalition is advocating for each state and territory to introduce a uniform change in their Dangerous Goods Act that would require hazardous materials such as petrol and other chemicals to be transported to and from the nearest available rail hub, it was reported.
AIMPE federal secretary Henning Christiansen widened the argument, saying that there were strong safety, environmental and public-spending grounds for all bulk commodities to be similarly taken off the roads.
“Of the $4.7 billion of public money being spent each year on public roads, the billions spent on reinforced concrete arterial highways would not be necessary if government required bulk-freight as well as dangerous freight to be carried where possible by existing rail infrastructure,” Christiansen said.
“The ordinary family car and even light trucks do not require such expensive roads due to their much lighter axle-loads, so effectively the public is paying for roads far stronger and more expensive than ordinary taxpayers need.
“This is a huge subsidy of the heavy-truck industry at the public’s expense.
“That this money is spent to produce an alternative freight infrastructure which has gradually eroded the financial viability of the public rail system, already funded over the last 100 years, is just extraordinarily wasteful.
“All Australian domestic freight modes should be able to compete on an equal footing: road, rail and domestic shipping but the distortion produced by the subsidy of the heavy-truck industry has over decades shifted freight from the safer modes of Australian rail and Australian domestic shipping onto public roads with horrific road accidents the result.
“All bulk freight and dangerous cargoes should be required to be carried on domestic rail or domestic shipping, with heavy-truck haulage restricted to delivery from the railhead or the wharf.
“Competition on the long trips (e.g. Melbourne-Sydney-Brisbane) between domestic rail and domestic shipping would ensure that such legislative requirement was not exploited by either workforce.”
The events of the past two weeks have increased the focus on the issue and forced defensive responses from the trucking industry.
Toll chief executive Paul Little and NSW premier Christine Keneally, have both pointed to the logistical difficulties of forcing a modal shift to rail freight.

Source: Lloyd’s List Daily Commercial News – www.lloydslistdcn.com.au


 





Weekly Top Stories

Document Actions

Dangerours Good, Heavy Moves.

Posted by Anonymous User at Jan 18, 2010 10:13 AM

    Hi There, Jan 17th, 10, 15:45 Hrs. M.S.T.

       1st Off, I Get Your Imformation Sent to My Email, But
    Don't Have the Info to Log In etc,
      I Have Over Time Taken Several DG Courses so I Know
    Full Well Whats Involved in Tnspt of the Material Handled
      Its One Thing to Demand the Material B Transported by
    Rail. In Reallity for Australia Its a Whole Nightmare and
    Getting State - Co -operation is Something Else.
      1,You Need the SAME Federal/States Rules on DG to B the
    Same All Across the Country, NO Exceptions Plus a Clear
    Inderstanding of Whats Involved, and Who is Qulified and
    What the rules Will B as DG Goods Cross State Lines and
    Where and How It Will B Handled Both on Rail and Road
    Tnspt.
      
      2, To Have DG Good Handled By Rail, With the Protection
    and Saftey of All, Like It or Not Australia Needs a
    Uniform Standard Guage Rail System so DGs Can Move from
    1 State to Another Weather it B Western Austrailia,
    Victoria or any Other States, for that Matter. Buy
    Refusing to Standardize the Rail System - Victoia is a
    Good Example, Because Petty States Differences, Come 1st
    and Refusing to Look at the Good of the Country as a
    Whole, Because States Can't See Past the State Line or
    Refuse to Coperate on These Matters, Then Austraila
    Hasn't Got a Hope in Hell of Having DG or Heavy Equipment
    or Other Items as Required to Move By Rail.
         Shippers Don't and Should Not Have to Pay to Have
    These Goods Constantly Changed form Freight Car to
    Freight Car at the State Line. Its Stupid, and Uncalled
    For. Is It any Wonder the Truckers are Singing the Big
    10-4s Going Down Highways/Roads That Were Never Designed
    for Them in the 1st Place. Another Accident? So What.
          Maybe Its Time for Federal/State Co operations on
    Reallities of Dangerours Goods When the Next Accident
    Happens and More Lives Get Lost Sober Thought to Consider
    as Well.

    Thanks,

    Andrew,
    Calgary,

    trainorders@hotmail.com