The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > The NSW Greens' Transport Policy

The NSW Greens' Transport Policy

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
Paul,

Thanks for the figures, but Railcorp get a subsidy of nearly $2bn a year otherwise they would not be able to compete at all.

The cheapest and quickest is to ship a container directly via road. The alternative road cost is via a depot which involves one trip to the depot and a second to the destination, which adds a double handling cost. The cost of rail essentially covers the cost of shipping to the station, but does not include the on shipping cost, and is not an accurate comparison, thus even the subsidised rail cost is not entirely competitive.

Secondly, as stations for freight are relatively far apart, the road option is generally faster and cheaper, which makes rail convenient only for shipping long distance, and considering that majority of cargo handled by Botany is destined for Sydney, rail is only a niche solution.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 12:48:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aidan,

But you see, the greens tout these aspirational goals as policies, when they are just populist sloganeering. Ideas that sound good as long as the consequences are ignored. The greens have never submitted policies for costing, because they would lose all credibility.

If you compare rail from station to station, to road along a similar route, then rail is cheaper and more efficient. However, once all the other issues of accessibility and double handling creep in, the story is very different.

Here is another pearl. The Greens support using biofuels as long as it does not compete with food production. Well duh, it pretty much all does to some degree.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 1:44:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Shadow, I don't think those aspirational goals (which they list as aims) were even populist sloganeering. They're simply ill thought out. But that doesn't mean "the greens have never submitted policies for costing". Paul says they have. Are you calling him a liar?

The cheapest way to ship a container depends on where it's going. Of course handling costs are a major part of the rail cost, hence my comments about automation. AIUI rail transport is becoming more competitive in more situations, as most of the possible improvements to road transport have already been made. The Sydney area is huge and there is great potential for more freight terminals. But it goes without saying that there is a large part of the market where rail will never be competitive.

And there's much of Australia where food production is not viable; some of this land could be used for biofuels. So though I disagree with that aim, it isn't as stupid as you seem to think it is.

And how much of Railcorp's two gigabuck annual subsidy is for lines which aren't even used by freight trains?
Posted by Aidan, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 2:42:36 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To quote "In general, the Greens’ policies is a ramshackle collection. They resemble the unedited record of an extended workshop of strident and diverse interest groups pushing their own barrows and narrow ideologies – doomsayer environmentalists, anti-globalisers, gender
politicians, indigenous activists, welfare professionals, industrial relations club members and disappointed adherents of the old Left.
They are as populist and as pork-barrelling at the other parties – just aimed at the hip pocket of a far more Left wing- crowd.
But underneath this diversity, and despite a number of startling internal contradictions, there lies a common theme. The Green policy
framework could be said to be revolutionary. If enacted, it would radically alter existing policies and political processes. It is not new, however. Its philosophy is now more than a century old."

As for the greens costing, while they have cherry picked some token policies or policy fragments for (generally populist tax hikes on business or the wealthy) they have never submitted all their major policies (and not released some costings they did get). This is like doing the household budget whilst excluding 70% of the costs.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 3:34:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aidan, "there's much of Australia where food production is not viable; some of this land could be used for biofuels"

In the very dry marginal land of Australia, what biofuels might be produced economically and at what cost to diesel fuel and water? Talking about that latter, the Greens make dam building quite impossible with their bloody-minded political opportunism.

If global warming is a factor, that would make the production highly risky to impossible.

I think you may find that biofuel crops are displacing food crops. For example, maize for fuel replacing soybean for food.

Apart from that, biofuel production is not without environmental and social impacts. In places like South America, is clearing of forests for biofuel is better or worse than clearing the forests for food?

My criticism of Greens 'policies' is that the words are only green slogans, pegs for mantras and activism to appeal to an easily influenced audience, particularly youth, who are willing to suspend their own judgement and are being ruthlessly and shamelessly scared witless by pronouncements of imminent doom.

There is internal competition and conflict in Greens environmental 'policies' However the Greens are unfussed by that because they are actually about social change and the environment is just a hammer to sledge and de-stabilise government (of either major party).

That is not to say that many Greens members themselves are not worried about the environment. However one only has to look at the record of the Greens in the federal Senate to arrive at the inescapable conclusion that the green cloak is fine for rhetoric and headlines, but their major political deals behind the scenes always put Greens' far left social reengineering first and foremost.

The Greens are an utterly cynical, inappropriately titled, protest party, that is all.
Posted by onthebeach, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 3:35:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Unfortunately, poor old SM continues to talk from a point of ignorance. The Port Botany freight line is operated by a private company. My partners d-in-law works for Qube.

The trains currently servicing the port include the following operators:

Qube Intermodal Shipping Terminal at Minto is using Qube Logistics as its rail provider for its Port Botany shuttle.
Pacific National is operating the Manildra Group’s Manildra and Nowra rail services.
Qube Logistics is servicing clients in the Central West, including Dubbo, Bathurst and Naramine.
Qube Logistics, Pacific National and Freightliner are servicing clients in the North West, including Narrabri, Wee Waa, Moree and Tamworth.
Pacific National services the Blayney intermodal site on behalf of Linfox.
Qube Logistics is the rail operator for their intermodal site at Yennora.

A typical Liberal mushroom! No wonder The Greens done so well at the recent state election.

Then there is Beach who chimes in with his typical anti Green hogwash!

AND I have not even started on the total cock up in this state that is Baird's Coal Seam Gas policy, its a total joke. These fools had claimed CSG is an absolute necessity due to the looming "gas crises" the state faces. NO SUCH CRISES EXISTS! In fact there is a surplus supply of gas over the next 20 years. The Liberals and Nationals were out to destroy the states best agricultural lands for the financial benefit of a few CSG blood sucking multinationals!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-15/right-all-along-about-no-looming-gas-crisis3a-anti-csg-group/6393272
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 8:16:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. Page 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy