Collapse of the bulk load freight business ?

[mwmbwls]

The Port of Immingham has already begun redundancy programmes for workers involved in their coal import business as a result of the phased programme of coal powered power stations. This also has an effect on the number of rail staff involved in this traffic. Now with the added complication of the collapse of the British steel industry which rail freight companies will be worst affected by the loss of bulk load traffic? Will the loss of freight traffic endanger any routes? On the other hand where freight services are withdrawn - where are there opportunities to expand passenger services? Is anybody apart from their trade unions standing up for the staff affected?

 

[FordFocus]

Sadly DB Schenker are in the process of closing depots or reducing head counts vastly because of the collapse of coal imports. Freightliner HH are in consultations.

Trade Unions help workers affected get the best deal, help find alternative companies and ensure that the FOCs keep as many as they can. Making sure that the FOCs do not use the collapse of coal as an excuse to cull more than the numbers necessary then rely on cheaper overtime.

 

[142094]

Port of Tyne have also announced that there will be jobs lost due to the decrease in the amount of coal being imported, with the increase in biomass and wood pellets for Drax not covering the shortfall.

 

[Murph]

In an ideal world, (some of) the network capacity freed up by loss of coal trains could potentially be used to take more containers off the road network.

 

[daccer]

The demise of many bulk commodities has been predicted for a long time. Coal has long been on borrowed time and in a way the biomass evolution has offset some of this pain. The metals sector is one that is very vunerable due to market conditions over which we have little control. All future railfreight growth seemed to be based on intermodal growing more quickly than the bulk commodities decreased. Construction is bucking the trend but getting rid of all wagonload traffic means that finding new flows is now harder than it might have been due to the need for train loads to make it viable. Maybe intermodal will pick up the slack but for those staff being let go that will not help much due the vast geographical variances in the various commodity sectors.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

In an ideal world, (some of) the network capacity freed up by loss of coal trains could potentially be used to take more containers off the road network.

In theory yes - but the economics and flexibility of road scores against the railway with 24 hours in advance loading requirements at Ports etc to get stuff onto rail wagons.

A lot money in CP3 was put into protecting infrastructure for bulks and coal - and more in CP4 for intermodal. (think Southampton and Ipswich tunnels etc and route clearance)

The issues revolve around globalisation , unfortunately for the train crew depots concerned. (and others)

 

[dk1]

I'm still confused as to why coal fired power stations are closing yet we are getting told that we are fast approaching an energy supply crisis in the UK. Why don't we just continue using them. Seems to have been good enough for the last century.

 

[Murph]

I'm still confused as to why coal fired power stations are closing yet we are getting told that we are fast approaching an energy supply crisis in the UK. Why don't we just continue using them. Seems to have been good enough for the last century.

Many of the coal stations being closed asphyxiate too many bunny rabbits per kWh, I believe. I agree that it's a bit concerning to see what looks like more loss of capacity than new build, but I believe many of the stations being demolished are past their design life (in addition to the green issues). In theory, new build stations should be significantly cleaner and/or more efficient.

 

[Mugby]

I'm still confused as to why coal fired power stations are closing yet we are getting told that we are fast approaching an energy supply crisis in the UK. Why don't we just continue using them. Seems to have been good enough for the last century.

Exactly.

I suppose the answer is because the electricity industry is privatised and it's all about profit rather than capacity. Also we have a load of dumb ass politicians who are stupid enough to believe the country can run on wind power and don't understand that the lights will go out sooner rather than later.

But we digress!......

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Potential of getting brown-outs more likely?
Short term thinking - using far too much gas generating electricity.
Railways and heavy industry need long term policies.
''Let market forces decide'' :-x

 

[najaB]

I'm still confused as to why coal fired power stations are closing yet we are getting told that we are fast approaching an energy supply crisis in the UK. Why don't we just continue using them. Seems to have been good enough for the last century.

Carbon costs for the most part. It's cheaper to close the station as you would never make a return on the investment for carbon capture and storage systems.

 

[cin88]

I'm worried about a collapse in rail freight myself, as it's where I eventually want to end up if I manage to become a driver. Hopefully something else will come along to replace the loss in coal traffic.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I'm worried about a collapse in rail freight myself, as it's where I eventually want to end up if I manage to become a driver. Hopefully something else will come along to replace the loss in coal traffic.

I would say its highly doubtful that the FOC's will come close to generating enough additional Intermodal business to replace what has been lost in terms of coal traffic and now iron ore at Scunthorpe.

Surely we can expect to see plenty of freight locos 'stored serviceable' after RHTT services finish for the year.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Potential of getting brown-outs more likely?
Short term thinking - using far too much gas generating electricity.
Railways and heavy industry need long term policies.
''Let market forces decide'' :-x

Well you could argue that the railways don't need long term policies from the Government. If the freight (i.e. coal) is no longer there for the railway to cart around then that is it. If you think back to the demise of domestic coal not to mention a decline in petroleum products, steel etc the writing has been on the wall for awhile now. I'm guessing that the Carbon Tax was probably the straw that broke the Camels back.

As far as I can see Intermodal traffic and construction / waste disposal is still on the increase but no where near enough to replace what has been lost
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A lot money in CP3 was put into protecting infrastructure for bulks and coal - and more in CP4 for intermodal. (think Southampton and Ipswich tunnels etc and route clearance)

The wonderful Settle and Carlisle route comes to mind here. Millions were invested in order to help the line cope with heavy coal trains and now most of that traffic appears to have vanished.

 

[455driver]

I don't see what the problem is, we import most of our gas from Russia and a lot of our electricity from Germany (or is it France!), I mean what could possibly go wrong?

 

[RichmondCommu]

I don't see what the problem is, we import most of our gas from Russia and a lot of our electricity from Germany (or is it France!), I mean what could possibly go wrong?

Its France

 

[cin88]

Its France

So everything then?

 

[455driver]

Its France

Thanks, I wasn't sure if it was France with their nuclear or Germany with their brown coal.

 

[dk1]

The wonderful Settle and Carlisle route comes to mind here. Millions were invested in order to help the line cope with heavy coal trains and now most of that traffic appears to have vanished.

Makes you wonder that should something major happen to one of the many tunnels/viaducts, would there be the money or will to get things going so quickly or at all. I would hope so but it is a worry with what in effect are quite lightly loaded services much of the time.

 

[HSTEd]

Thanks, I wasn't sure if it was France with their nuclear or Germany with their brown coal.

Electricity is something like France's 3rd or 4th biggest export in cash value terms.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Its France

It's 'it's'

(sorry, couldn't resist. I'll get my coat...)

 

[Radedamer]

Probably some of our electricity originates from Lithuania. That country generates far more electrons than it eats due to having been used as a repository for nuclear stations back in Soviet days.

As for the effect on rail freight, and the person whose ambition was to become a driver, perhaps if carbon costs were – or possibly even are at some point in the future – applied to transport, then that would result in a shift from road to rail. OTOH, by that time we'll probably have self-driving trains too!

 

[Jamesb1974]

Deleted

 

[Bald Rick]

Electricity is something like France's 3rd or 4th biggest export in cash value terms.

We take a maximum 3GW from France; right now we are taking 5% of that as there's a stiff breeze up north.

France sells electricity to Spain, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Switzerland as well, often more than it sells us.

This website shows our grid generation http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

This one shows the French version http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/france/

Even allowing for their exports, the French demand is much higher than ours, presumably because they don't use anywhere near as much gas.

On the subject of Gas, we don't get any from Russia. Ours comes from the North Sea, and (increasingly) Qatar via Milford Haven.

 

[HSTEd]

We take a maximum 3GW from France; right now we are taking 5% of that as there's a stiff breeze up north.

France sells electricity to Spain, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Switzerland as well, often more than it sells us.

This website shows our grid generation http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk

This one shows the French version http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/france/

Even allowing for their exports, the French demand is much higher than ours, presumably because they don't use anywhere near as much gas.

We turn out to take more than that.... as the 'BritNed' connection and its 1000MWe capacity is basically used as a second France-UK connection, with power normally moving in the France England direction, just via the Netherlands.
And it is very unsual for the tethers not to be running flat out.....

 

[furnessvale]

I think the title of this post is a little hysterical, personally. Rail freight tends to ebb and flow. Some flows are long term, some are short term. Losing the coal has had a big impact, but I don't think rail freight in the UK is quite as close to a total collapse as you would think. FOCs will streamline and downsize, but there is still work out there.

True. Even before the current collapse in coal, intermodal had overtaken coal as the single largest commodity.

A visit to Stafford, with the near continuous stream of intermodals, shows how much has changed in the last 10-15 years.

 

[RichmondCommu]

True. Even before the current collapse in coal, intermodal had overtaken coal as the single largest commodity.

A visit to Stafford, with the near continuous stream of intermodals, shows how much has changed in the last 10-15 years.

All that says is that the railway is now carrying more Intermodal freight than it is coal. However the underlying fact here is that the amount of freight carried on the railway is dropping and that is the concern that is being raised in this thread.

The FOC's are not it seems able to create enough new Intermodal business replace the coal traffic that has been lost.

 

[Jonny]

The other thing that I can think of is that as biomass-based fuels (e.g. wood pellets) generally needs to be kept dry, it could be run using intermodal containers (ISO container-derived carriers) and the associated railway facilities and stock.

 

[muddythefish]

It seems to me there is much greater scope for intermodal growth. There's nothing, for instance, down to the south west. Devon, Cornwall, Somerset could generate as much traffic as Scotland surely ?

 

[RichmondCommu]

It seems to me there is much greater scope for intermodal growth. There's nothing, for instance, down to the south west. Devon, Cornwall, Somerset could generate as much traffic as Scotland surely ?

The problem is it's all too often cheaper and more convenient to send stuff by road rather than by rail. In terms of Devon, Cornwall and Somerset you are competing against the M4 and the M5 in a cut throat market. And of course for intermodal to work on the railway you need fully loaded services.

I'm pretty certain I read on here that Sainsburys had shown a interest in running intermodal services to the South West but nothing came of it.

 

[muddythefish]

By the same token, Anglo Scottish rail traffic competes with the M1 and M6. Felixstowe traffic competes with the A14. There must be some scope for rail in the south west