Yes, Paul, you're not the one asking, but you're the one misdirecting Is Mise to the NSW treasury, so it was appropriate for me to address my comment to you too.

Paul,

I don't want a costing to the Nth degree just a reasonable estimate will do; and there must surely have been some discussion among you Green engineers as to the desirability of rigid trucks over articulated ones.

You told us that you're an engineer, surely my question is not outside the field of engineering.

Is Mise, as a transport engineer it's in my field, and further up this thread I've already speculated that it could be for safety reasons. But I also stated that it's badly thought through, and should the Greens ever be in a position to implement their transport policy, they'd abandon that part of it rather than trying to implement it.

Like every other green's policy, the transport policy is work of fantasy designed to appeal to the technically challenged left whingers. Semi trailers and B doubles exist because per unit of freight they are cheaper to run and more energy efficient, and banning them would drive up GHG emissions.

Transport policy needs to cater for all transport types, and while I would agree with a terminal at port botany, I don't see the use of rail being the answer to many more freight issues. While train freight costs should be much cheaper the reality is that the heavily unionised rail service is generally more expensive, and needs substantial subsidisation to begin to compete with road transport.

SM driven by some ideological ignorant fantasy of yours;

<< While train freight costs should be much cheaper the reality is that the heavily unionised rail service is generally more expensive, and needs substantial subsidisation to begin to compete with road transport.>>

Port Botany container movements per day 2,900 2010 to estimated 4,700 by 2021. 14% by rail 2010. All movements = approximate 2/3 imports 1/3 export.
Rail movements per day = 30 in 2010, would need to increase to 70 by 20121 to obtain 20% rail movements, physically impossible with the existing installation has a maximum daily capacity of 35 movements. The most recent figures has road movements at 86%.
Road movements are in two forms (1) Road Direct 20% to 25% of all movements, and Road via Transport Depot 60% to 65%.
The average cost per movement is;

(1) Road direct $458
(2) Road/depot $634
Rail $476, not subsidised.

Given that Sydney already experiences significant arterial road congestion, without significant investment on road infrastructure the delay cost attached to road transport will increase substantially over the next 5 years. (Sydney Ports Authority).

I present facts not ill informed opinion.
Draw your own conclusions. The Greens and rail, the Liberals and road. Who is in fantasy land!

Shadow, despite that small flaw which is only an aspiration anyway (they certainly WEREN'T promising to ban them if they gained enough votes to form government in their own right) the Greens' transport policy was on the whole more sensible than those of Labor and Liberal. Which I admit isn't saying much.

Rail is intrinsically more efficient than road for moving large volumes of freight. The problem is terminal operating costs, not unions – the days when unions had a major influence on freight train operation are long gone. And increased automation is reducing the terminal operating costs.