I would imagine that there might be a green dimension in BCRs in the not too distant future. Either freight haulage by electric motive power will have lower track access charges than diesel, of certain sectors of routes might be restricted to low/zero emissions traffic. The NLL might be one of those. In that context, larger investments will be considered better than the 'do nothing' option just to svae up front cash. Wiring the Felixstowe branch would involve just under 15 route kilometers of which over 80% is immediately adjacent to residential areas. The run into London and round to the WCML also involves another 115 km of which over 35km is through residential areas. So all of that will weigh towards the electrification of just 15km to remove almost all diesel services from nearly 50km of suburban running, and that's before the CO2 arguments are examined.
Would it be feasible to have a shunter waiting on the appropriate road, Electric gets to the throat and is dragged to the end by the shunter, then an electrified release road is provided for the loco to runround for it's next working?
Not very easy with a traverser!
Well, the good news is that the A14 overbridge was actually future proofed by being readied for a second line.... Waverley route, take careful note!
Ooops, yes I meant to convert the number of miles to km. I did refer to them as "route kilometers" so the distance is the same whether single or double track, and I took on board the comments of others (including you) about wiring into the port, so I only assumed for wiring to Felixstowe passenger terminus.
That's really good news, the UK commitment to zero carbon certainly doesn't look like falling by the wayside now.Couple more reception roads on the north branch and beach branch. Engine neck at Trimley. Push everything in
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Not so.
Saving a tonne of CO2e is worth £60.83 in a business case, and increases by some seemingly random amounts year on year for future years. It can quickly add up, and is just another B in the BCR. If the BCR makes the grade, regardless of what the ‘B’s are, then the project is a goer.
That's a different subject to wiring the Felixstowe branch.
The 'exchange sidings' have existed for a long time - it's called Ipswich Yard (which isn't exactly a long way away from the terminals at Felixstowe)
:
The original assertion is that FOCs have no interest in Electric traction, which isn't true. The reason for the lack of electric haulage is, as you quite rightly point out, for economic and operational reasons. If the electrified network covered routes operators wanted to go, and was cleared to allow the traffic operators wanted to run, I suspect DB, GBRf and Freightliner would quite happily get their electric traction out and about. They wouldn't necessarily need to be forced into it.
That's a symptom not a cause though - if there was an opportunity for electric freight TOCs would have ordered some, but why spend money on locos they can't use? If we want more all-out electric freight we need to put wires up. And work out how to operate top-loading terminals (which is the overwhelming majority) efficiently with locos that need wires.
Just over 400.
I'm not sure those numbers are wholly accurate, only 383 in active pools on TOPS yesterday at quick count (there are some stored and some new imports for GBRf so real number will be higher) . The DB number is too high, it still includes locos that are now with DRS which are also included in the DRS number.
So if you wanted (as an example) to borrow money to fund the cost of electrifying the GE-GN joint line between Werrington and Doncaster on the basis of lower energy/fuel costs, how long a payback period would you need?
