Supplementary Evidence to Scottish Parliament Freight Transport Inquiry
Freight on Rail is writing to make additional comments to clarify certain crucial subjects raised in Gordon Fleming’s oral evidence, where he represented SCOTS in May 2006.
1. Capacity on Scottish network
We believe that the Society of Chief Officer of Transportation should take a more balanced approach and support policies to increase both freight and passenger services on the shared rail network, (Ref Shift passengers not freight) which will benefit the economy and society.
With the exception of certain pinch points, there is ample capacity on the Scottish network, apart from at peak hours when passenger and freight services do not need to coincide.
Examples
- On the busy corridor between Glasgow and Edinburgh passenger trains every 15 minutes manage to share the line with coal trains.
- Malcolm Group container trains run from Grangemouth to Elderslie departing at 6.35 am and arrive at 9.35am, a distance of 41 miles, with punctuality of over 90 per cent.
GNER does not claim that rail capacity is a problem throughout Scotland and the UK in its submission, merely on the ECML, most of which is in England, although the Network Rail RUS has yet to conclude, the principle capacity constraints on the ECML are generally acknowledged to be between Leeds and London.
The typical freight train matches the speed of semi-fast passenger trains and thus takes a similar amount of capacity. Substantial investment in the rail freight industry has led to significant improvements in freight train speeds and increases in train payloads and lengths. Already express trains and mail trains run at 110 mph whilst the latest intermodal trains can now do 90mph and new coal wagons are designed for operation at 75mph. For example 102 tonne coal wagons are being introduced which allow rail to move coal two thirds faster and using a third less trains.
2. Ref col 3717 in oral evidence
Gordon Fleming said that rail freight most significant contributions might be to the Highland economy, not least because of the longer distance between the Highlands, the central belt and the south.
The blanket statement that rail freight is not viable for short journeys is one of the most commonly propagated myths about rail freight. Break-even distances are market specific. Traffic such as aggregates and waste can be economic over distances as short as 12 miles. Local example is the municipal waste removal from Edinburgh to Dunbar.
There are key rail freight hubs in the Central belt such as Grangemouth on the east side, Coatbridge and Mossend in the centre and Deanside and Elderlie on the west side, which service long and short distance flows.
JIT economy
Ref col 3717
It is incorrect to state that customers of rail freight cannot rely on goods arriving on schedule; the comments made are misleading and inaccurate. Companies are moving to rail freight expressly because of reliability issues caused by road congestion.
There are various flows from the West Midlands to Scotland.
Examples
- Daily Asda traffic from Daventry to Mossend at speeds and reliability which lorries cannot match.
- DHL traffic from Walsall to Glasgow and Aberdeen in high speed trains complete the journey to Aberdeen in just over seven hours; the equivalent road journey takes nearly 13 hours.
Industry quote
“Rail to and from the UK's major ports is proving more reliable than road. Dedicated K&N rail services from Southampton and Felixstowe are recording 95% reliability levels, compared with 'low-mid 80%' for comparable road haulage”. Peter Ulber, Chief Exec. Kuenhe & Nagel 2005
3. Road Tear and Wear from HGVs
On the question of road wear and tear from HGVs, it should be noted that HGVs are up to 160,000 times more damaging to road surfaces than the average car; some of the heaviest road repair costs are therefore almost exclusively attributable to the heaviest vehicles. Research carried out in March this year, by Freight on Rail, highlights that in counties with significant rail freight potential, such as bulk, waste or port traffic, the local transport authorities could save as much as £770,700 on local road maintenance each year if certain goods in its area go by rail rather than road. See attached report
One very important factor which is often ignored is how modern HGVs can lift axles off the road, both from tractors and trailers. Thus a six axle artic combination can become 4 axles. This means that the damage from the heaviest multi-axle lorries is underestimated.
4. Speed limit restrictions in 40mph areas
A9 is predominantly a single carriage road. It is very hard to see how raising the lorry limit can solve any safety problems. Speed limits on single carriageway roads are being reviewed nationally with the possibility of bringing down car speed limits.
The latest Vehicle Speeds Great Britain report, key paragraph-
On major, non-built-up single carriageway roads, 77 per cent of articulated HGVs were exceeding their 40 mph limit (27 per cent by more than 10 mph). The average speed recorded for articulated HGVs on these roads was 46 mph, just 3 mph less than the average speed of cars (49 mph), for which the limit is 60 mph.
Rail freight is also safer than road transportation. Richard Eastman Divisional Director for Network Strategy at Highways Agency acknowledged this in a Freight magazine interview in May 2006 where he said “Many of the worst incidents involve HGVs … and by their nature, accidents involving them tend to be more serious”.
5. Wider economic and environmental benefits of rail freight
There are clearly other economic, social and environmental benefits from rail freight which SCOTS does not mention. In congestion terms, a single aggregates train can remove 120 HGVs from our roadsi. Rail freight makes a vital contribution to protecting the environment and reducing the impacts of climate change; tonne for tonne carried rail produces less than one tenth of the CO2 emissions, the principle greenhouse gas, of road transportii and has 2.5 times greater fuel efficiency than road transport.
The fact that road users do not pay their full track costs is supported by the consultation on Scotland’s national transport strategy May 2006 which states that
Transport users do not pay full costs of journeys item 29
‘Most of the problems that are caused by transport are caused by the fact that transport users – particularly road and air transport – are paying an artificially low price for transport which does not reflect the full cost of making a journey. Car users, for example, pay costs for their car, fuel and tax and insurance but they do not pay for the external costs they impose on society ie increased air pollution, increased noise, accidents.’
Separate research indicates that heavy goods vehicles only pay for around 59% - 69% of the full (including the social and environmental) costs they impose upon society. These costs include greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, noise, congestion, accidents and deaths. - Environmental and Social Costs of Heavy Goods Vehicles and Options for Reforming the Fiscal System, Oxford Economic Research Associates, report prepared for English Welsh and Scottish Railway, January 1999
Freight on Rail members would be pleased to discuss these issues further with members of the committee. We will also be contacting SCOTS to ask for further discussions, separately.
Philippa Edmunds Freight on Rail 12th June 2006 philippa@freightonrail.org.uk
i. Network Rail 2005
ii. AEA Technology for SRA October 2004