News & Discussion: Adelaide Metro Trains

[Will409]

Just saw the 6am news report on Sunrise. In the local section, it made note of TransAdelaide. While I didn't quite get the whole story (still half a asleep!), it did make mention that the whole TransAdelaide board may be removed all together and the whole organisation placed under the direct control of the State Transport Minister/Department. Something like that anyway, have to wait for the 7 am news when I am 100% awake.

[ozisnowman]

Article in todays tiser notes that Rann will make an annoncement today
probably in relation to dumping the TransAdelaide Board and managing
TransAdelaide directly through the Transport Department.... If he thinks
that will solve the problem, expect many more breakdowns and delays to
come. I at least hope that at least then the Transport Department will
stop passing the buck and come to the conclusion that our train system
is in a state of decay and that the problem can only be solved by
also fixing all the rail lines, standarising them and electrifying them and
purchasing new rolling stock...

[Will409]

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

TransAdelaide gutted as another tram breaks down

TRANSADELAIDE has been stripped of responsibility for all rail infrastructure after a series of embarrassing bungles - including another tram breakdown today.

Transport Minister Patrick Conlon today announced a major restructuring of the troubled rail operator.

Responsibility for all infrastructure - including tracks, trams and trains currently owned by TransAdelaide - is being taken over by the Transport Department.

The Government also will take over responsibility for new major rail infrastructure works.

Mr Conlon said over time he would "change the skills sets contained in the TransAdelaide board''.

Other changes include the establishment of a rail projects directorate within the Government's Major Projects office.

The Government will also recruit extra senior management to work under TransAdelaide general manager Bill Watson.

As for the vote of no confidence, it was defeated by a margin of 19-24(ish) so Conlon still has his' job (for the moment).

[rubberman]

Part of the problem with ALL infrastructure in SA is that during the eighties and nineties governments of both political colours got rid of their infrastructure planners as they downsized the public service.

Without people to do the planning, there is no proper identification of infrastructure needs until things get out of hand such as with transport (I don't need to list the c0ckup$ here). However, once problems become apparent, it then takes several years to do designs, get approvals and then actually build stuff.

It doesn't matter whether the buses or trains are run publicly or privately, if the Government has not anticipated the need to upgrade and (importantly) fund those upgrades, then we will always be behind in what we need.

In addition, without properly experienced planners, estimates for works such as recent highway fiascos are way out of line.

Therefore the government is doing the right thing by trying to get experienced railway and transport people in to set priorities and realistic timelines and budgets.

The problem is that such people are at a premium now right round the world, and you won't get anyone under the $150k mark at least - even for mid level planners.

[bmw boy]

who votes in this vote of no confidence. and who calls for one and under what cirsumstances? (i'm guessing when there are problems within a portfolio?)

[Bulldozer]

It's payback for the TransAdelaide board daring to speak out against the government last week.

[Norman]

who votes in this vote of no confidence. and who calls for one and under what cirsumstances? (i'm guessing when there are problems within a portfolio?)

The opposition makes them, and all the people in the State Lower House vote.That's what I know anyway.

[ozisnowman]

The article should have read "Premier flags COSMETIC changes for TransAdelaide"
because without serious funding commitments to fixing the rail lines (not just
resleepering a few), standardising them, electrifying them, building new
stations with ample secure car parking and buying efficient and fast rolling stock
anything else wont fix the problem...

Its like expecting a heart surgeon to use 19th century medical equipment to
try and perform a triple heart bypass it aint going to work is it... The patient
will suffer....

In this case the Rail Commuter will suffer, until they get it into their thick heads
that without money any change is just cosmetic.

I think the Government is just doing this to get the angry commuting public (big hairy monkey)
off its back for the time being.

[Diamond]

I went on the Outer Harbor line today, and was pleased with the track quality from Woodville to Bowden.

I think that section of track had new sleepers installed some 2-3 years ago if my memory serves me correctly.

[Norman]

I don't think resleepering is such a small thing, especially since they are gauge convertible. You can't electrify and change it all in one big swoop. Give it a bit of time. I doubt all the other capitals converted in 1 or 2 years.

Even in Stuttgart, Germany, where they are replacing the old trams with the new ones, it has taken 25 years to build tunnels, build the new rolling stock (164 new cars), new track, new platforms, expanding the network... they also have the most expensive tickets... a Daytrip costs 9 Euros, about $16. So given that it took them that long, re-doing Adelaide's train system would take about 4 or 5 years, and even more as we have a lot less money here.

But stop complaining, the upgrade is happening, and we'll get a better train system soon.

[Norman]

I went on the Outer Harbor line today, and was pleased with the track quality from Woodville to Bowden.

I think that section of track had new sleepers installed some 2-3 years ago if my memory serves me correctly.

Yeah, but it's still feels great on that line

[Will409]

The section from the end of the Gaol Loop to Woodville was actually done way back in 1999. The section after Woodville to Outer Harbour was done between 2001 and 2002.

Part of the reason why the Commercial Road Viaduct has such a severe speed restriction is because of the extremely sharp curve, dual guage (standard and broad gauge) and finally, the decking construction. The sleepers are simply bolted to the bridge structure.

[bmw boy]

On ABC's Difference Of Opinion forum program tonight, the topic was on public infrasturcture being semi and fully privatised vs staying in the hands of the govt, if anyone is interested. It will prob be replayed on ABC 2 I would assume.

[duke]

Interesting article on the benefits of electric rail.

http://www.aspo-usa.com/index.php?optio ... &Itemid=91

A 10% reduction in America's oil consumption is not out of reach. There is an overlooked, practical, and affordable approach using technology available today that would allow the U.S. to achieve this goal in 2017. Here is a five step program outlining this approach.


Step One – Electrify US Freight Rail Lines and Shift Freight to Rail

Japanese and most European railroads are electrified. The Russians recently finished electrifying the Trans-Siberian Railroad, from Moscow to the Pacific, and to the Arctic port of Murmansk. So there are no technical limitations. Electrifying railroads and transferring half the truck ton-miles to rail should save 6.3% of US oil consumption.

Electrified railroads also expand rail capacity since they accelerate and brake faster.

Today’s diesel railroads are roughly eight times more energy-efficient than heavy diesel trucks. Railroads carried 27.8% of the ton-miles with 220,000 barrels/day while trucks carried 32.1% of the ton-miles with 2,070,000 b/day (2002 data).

When we convert trains to electricity, the rule of thumb is that 1 Btu of electricity will do the work of 2.5 Btus of diesel on rural plains, and 1 to 3 in mountainous and urban areas. Generating electricity back into the grid when braking is the difference.

These savings are multiplicative. Switch freight from truck to diesel rail (x8 savings) and electrify the railroad (x2.5 savings) and end-use goes from 20 BTUs of diesel to one BTU of electricity.

Faced with cheap oil and toll-free interstate highways for decades, US railroads reduced their capacity (often by tearing up one of two tracks) and ceded much cargo to trucking. Today, intermodal shipments (local trucking, long distance by rail via containers) are growing rapidly – but this trend must be accelerated.

USA railroads have pointed to property taxes as the reason that they have not electrified (no taxes on their diesel, property taxes on electrification infrastructure). Exempting any rail line that electrifies from property taxes under the Interstate Commerce clause would promote the rapid electrification of many rail lines. Expanding capacity would then be more economically attractive without the burden of property taxes. Removing property taxes on electrified rail lines would take the thumb off the scale in the economic competition between rail and trucks. Trucks pay no property taxes, directly or indirectly, on their right-of-way. Trains do. Local property tax losses above a certain percentage of total taxes could have the excess compensated by the Federal Government.
Step Two – Increase Urban Rail Federal Funding

Building the gas-saving equivalent of twelve DC Metros would save 4% of US oil use (6% of transportation oil use). New electric mass transit will benefit the USA much more than new highways.

In 1970, 4% of DC commuters used city buses to get to work. Today over 40% use public transit. The difference is the 106 miles of Washington Metro. Washington Metro saves between a half-billion and a billion gallons of gasoline per year; changes in urban and suburban development patterns contribute to these savings. Such savings will only increase over time.

Miami passed a sales tax to build a 103-mile system of elevated "Subway in the Sky".
http://www.miamidade.gov/trafficrelief/RailMap.htm [brown lines are 2016+]

Twenty-five years to build a system that will save billions of gallons of gasoline: why so long? Limited Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding. Robust federal funding would result in an explosion of urban rail, from streetcars to light rail and rapid rail, combined with widespread commuter rail.

The Interstate Highway system was built with 90% federal funding; yet federal funding for new urban rail has been cut from 80% to de facto 30%.

The United States once built 500 electric streetcar systems in 20 years. Most towns of 25,000 and larger built a non-oil electrical transportation system. The USA did this with a population of less than one-third of today's, approximately 3% of today's GNP, and simple technology. We did it once; we can do it again!
Step Three – Promote Electric Trolley Buses

They require electrical infrastructure but electric trolley buses are cheaper and lighter, they last longer, they are pollution-free, and are quiet, smooth (much less jerky) and more attractive to passengers than fossil-fuel buses.

The FTA currently funds 80% of bus replacement costs on a twelve-year cycle; 15 years might be more appropriate. Perhaps FTA could fund fossil-fuel replacement buses on a 13.5-year cycle at 75% and trolley buses (with their electrical infrastructure) at 92%.
Step Four – Promote Transportation Bicycling

Only 0.4% of Americans commute by bike to work; 3.5% of Portland (OR) commuters use bicycles. Increasing the national average of bicycling commuting will have a measurable impact on oil consumption, and public health. Bicycling, like rail, has “Elasticity of Supply” in an emergency. Local steps plus national support, including making it patriotic to bicycle and walk, can help.
Step Five – Create a Strategic Railcar Reserve (SRR) to Supplement the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR)

One future scenario: The Islamic Republic of Arabia replaces the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the new Islamic Republic cuts exports to buy just essentials. The USA would face a severe and prolonged oil supply interruption.

The US government would immediately institute a variety of oil conservation measures and start draining the SPR. Demand would swamp the capacity of every urban rail system in the country. Freight railroads and Amtrak would be overwhelmed. Soon more severe oil demand restrictions would be required, such as rationing.

Every urban rail system will need more rolling stock. Rail cars are the first limiting factor. Freight railroads and Amtrak will need more cars as well.

More rolling stock will reduce USA oil demand and allow the SPR to last a few days longer. Once the SPR is exhausted, the SRR (and all the steps above) will still be benefiting the nation. Rail cars are made in the USA, their benefit will last much longer than barrels of oil, they can be used and not disappear in minor oil supply interruptions, and they are cheaper, per barrel saved, than $100+ oil in a prolonged emergency.

Urban rail systems should estimate demand in the case of an oil supply interruption and what would be required to handle this demand. Sometimes retired cars could be mothballed, but usually new cars would be required for the SRR.
Summary

Twenty BTUs of diesel fuel consumption replaced by one BTU of electricity is the energy trade by shifting from heavy trucks to electrified railroads. Replacing 2 million barrels/day of heavy truck diesel fuel would take just 1.4% of US electricity.

Transportation uses 0.19% of US electrical demand today. The gasoline-saving equivalent of a dozen new DC Metros would likely double that 0.19% figure.

These proposals would complement the widely discussed steps of higher CAFE, etc.. They are complementary and not mutually exclusive. And these steps can start immediately, they require no new technology, and they would have a significant impact in the medium term.

These steps would be faster than drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge, would produce at least twice as much oil savings as ANWR would produce at its peak, and would never deplete (Prudhoe Bay is producing at 20% of its peak, Washington Metro hits a new peak in oil saved every year).

Sometimes good public policy is good politics. Reducing US oil consumption, reducing greenhouse gases, improving the US economy, reducing congestion, providing non-oil transportation alternatives, and reducing the number of 18-wheel trucks on the highways should be both good public policy and good politics!

Alan Drake is a consulting engineer and reformed accountant who has combined his interests in the iconic St. Charles streetcars 2.5 blocks from his home in New Orleans and Urban Rail in general, plus experience with engineering for efficiency. He is searching for economic solutions that address both global warming and post-peak oil issues.

[bdm]

Lol, that article basically said that intervention into the transport market by the U.S. government is what kills rail. Taxes, subsidies, federally-financed roads.