Albanese wants to spend $114 Billion on Trains, why?
Thread Starter
Albanese wants to spend $114 Billion on Trains, why?
Don't understand this....why would you spend 114 Billion on a transport network that is more expensive, more environmentally damaging, more inefficient, and more statistically dangerous than flying?
Trains are fine for SYD-CBR or Newcastle distance, but are way to slow to start doing Melbourne. You can do SYD-MEL return easily in a business day in a jet, something you won't be doing in a train.
How about the Australian Government take some of that 114 Billion and spend it on the Aviation industry and make that more efficient rather than these stupid pie in the sky train ideas.
And why are the Greens backing trains when they destroy such a large amount of the natural landscape? Greens epspeciialy at a local council level have a fit if you cut down a tree, now they want to go and bulldozed 1700KMs of natural landscape and hills.
Don't understand their thinking. Aviation is arguably the greenest form of transport after sailing, how about we let it reach its potential rather than these stupid ideas.
Albanese backs high-speed rail despite cost
Trains are fine for SYD-CBR or Newcastle distance, but are way to slow to start doing Melbourne. You can do SYD-MEL return easily in a business day in a jet, something you won't be doing in a train.
How about the Australian Government take some of that 114 Billion and spend it on the Aviation industry and make that more efficient rather than these stupid pie in the sky train ideas.
And why are the Greens backing trains when they destroy such a large amount of the natural landscape? Greens epspeciialy at a local council level have a fit if you cut down a tree, now they want to go and bulldozed 1700KMs of natural landscape and hills.
Don't understand their thinking. Aviation is arguably the greenest form of transport after sailing, how about we let it reach its potential rather than these stupid ideas.
Albanese backs high-speed rail despite cost
Federal Transport Minister Anthony Albanese has said the government is “serious” about building a high-speed rail network for Australia’s east coast, despite estimates that it will cost around $114 billion and take more than 40 years to complete.
Greens Leader Christine Milne also enthusiastically backed the project and suggested Australia’s “cashed up” superannuation funds could invest in the project.
However, the report estimates a feeble rate of return for investors of just 0.8 per cent, meaning it will have to be built with state and federal government money.
“An expected return of at least 15 per cent would be required at this stage of project development to be attractive to commercial providers of debt and equity to major infrastructure projects. [The link] would fall well short of this,’’ it says.
Mr Albanese on Thursday launched a report commissioned in 2010 into building a 1700 kilometre high-speed rail link between Melbourne and Brisbane.
“It’s pretty clear this would require a substantial commitment by the national government. It’s also the case there would need to be state and territory government contributions,” Mr Albanese told ABC radio on Thursday morning.
“Overall, there is a significant economic benefit, a return of $2.30 for every dollar that is invested.”
Mr Albanese said he had written to first ministers in NSW, Queensland, Victoria and the ACT about the report and would be establishing a “high-speed rail advisory group”.
Opposition infrastructure spokesperson and leader of the nationals Warren Truss said the idea of a high-speed rail line was a “great dream” but he was not convinced of its value.
“The cost estimated at this stage is obviously a high barrier. The country has $300 billion in gross debt and to find that extra money will obviously be a challenge,” Mr Truss said.
“It’s just a shame that debt is already in place, it could have been used for more productive things like high speed rail and we’d have something to show for it, but so much of it unfortunately has just gone into the wind.”
Mr Truss said he was not convinced of the forecast take-up of a high-speed rail network, arguing Australians did not already have an established culture of train travel. He said he was also suspicious of the $114 billion projected cost, given the cost blowout of the current government’s NBN project.
Basing the price of travel on an air fare of similar distance, the study found an average 84 million passengers would use the high-speed rail service every year.
The entire link would not be finished until 2058 and by 2065, the study forecast that the link could take from the airlines 40 per cent of inter-city air travel and 60 per cent of regional air travel.
A trip between Sydney and Canberra would take just over an hour on high-speed rail according to the report, while Sydney to Melbourne would take 2 hours and 44 minutes.
The study concludes that “the potential to attract private finance is limited’’ because of a paltry rate of return.
“An expected return of at least 15 per cent would be required at this stage of project development to be attractive to commercial providers of debt and equity to major infrastructure projects. [The link] would fall well short of this,’’ it says.
“The estimated financial internal rate of return is 1 per cent for Sydney-to-Melbourne and 0.8 per cent for the whole network.’’
Greens Leader Christine Milne also enthusiastically backed the project and suggested Australia’s “cashed up” superannuation funds could invest in the project.
However, the report estimates a feeble rate of return for investors of just 0.8 per cent, meaning it will have to be built with state and federal government money.
“An expected return of at least 15 per cent would be required at this stage of project development to be attractive to commercial providers of debt and equity to major infrastructure projects. [The link] would fall well short of this,’’ it says.
Mr Albanese on Thursday launched a report commissioned in 2010 into building a 1700 kilometre high-speed rail link between Melbourne and Brisbane.
“It’s pretty clear this would require a substantial commitment by the national government. It’s also the case there would need to be state and territory government contributions,” Mr Albanese told ABC radio on Thursday morning.
“Overall, there is a significant economic benefit, a return of $2.30 for every dollar that is invested.”
Mr Albanese said he had written to first ministers in NSW, Queensland, Victoria and the ACT about the report and would be establishing a “high-speed rail advisory group”.
Opposition infrastructure spokesperson and leader of the nationals Warren Truss said the idea of a high-speed rail line was a “great dream” but he was not convinced of its value.
“The cost estimated at this stage is obviously a high barrier. The country has $300 billion in gross debt and to find that extra money will obviously be a challenge,” Mr Truss said.
“It’s just a shame that debt is already in place, it could have been used for more productive things like high speed rail and we’d have something to show for it, but so much of it unfortunately has just gone into the wind.”
Mr Truss said he was not convinced of the forecast take-up of a high-speed rail network, arguing Australians did not already have an established culture of train travel. He said he was also suspicious of the $114 billion projected cost, given the cost blowout of the current government’s NBN project.
Basing the price of travel on an air fare of similar distance, the study found an average 84 million passengers would use the high-speed rail service every year.
The entire link would not be finished until 2058 and by 2065, the study forecast that the link could take from the airlines 40 per cent of inter-city air travel and 60 per cent of regional air travel.
A trip between Sydney and Canberra would take just over an hour on high-speed rail according to the report, while Sydney to Melbourne would take 2 hours and 44 minutes.
The study concludes that “the potential to attract private finance is limited’’ because of a paltry rate of return.
“An expected return of at least 15 per cent would be required at this stage of project development to be attractive to commercial providers of debt and equity to major infrastructure projects. [The link] would fall well short of this,’’ it says.
“The estimated financial internal rate of return is 1 per cent for Sydney-to-Melbourne and 0.8 per cent for the whole network.’’
Last edited by neville_nobody; 11th Apr 2013 at 06:30.
Moderator
Why do you think Albanese's opinion is important?
The release suggests a 40 year program but the likely scenario is that Albanese will not be in a position to influence transport projects after September 2013 and may not even be in Parliament after that date. I doubt he has a 40 week political career ahead of him, not 40 years!
However your are rather short sighted in your rejection of the proposal. High speed rail is also used for freight, Australian railways move one billion tonnes of freight each year, 95% of which is Australia's mineral and agricultural produce.
The remaining 5% represents around 3% of Australia's total general and mixed cargo movement, 97% of which is moved by expensive and polluting road trains, which clog our inadequate and antiquated highway system.
A decent, modern, high speed rail system can't come soon enough.
This project has been aired for the last few weeks. The last proposal I heard was that Government provide the track infrastructure and private enterprise provide the rolling stock, operations, sales, marketing and administration infrastructure - which makes a lot of sense!!!
I assume you feel a high speed rain network will impact upon airline viability, hence your post in a professional pilot forum? As there are geographical and economic limits to where high speed rail networks can be built, I think you will find high speed rail networks in Asia and Europe may adversely affect airline traffic over limited, specific short haul routes, but have little or no impact on total airline traffic.
We'll see if there is any other news on this proposal, other wise the thread may be moved to our other forum for open debate.
The release suggests a 40 year program but the likely scenario is that Albanese will not be in a position to influence transport projects after September 2013 and may not even be in Parliament after that date. I doubt he has a 40 week political career ahead of him, not 40 years!
However your are rather short sighted in your rejection of the proposal. High speed rail is also used for freight, Australian railways move one billion tonnes of freight each year, 95% of which is Australia's mineral and agricultural produce.
The remaining 5% represents around 3% of Australia's total general and mixed cargo movement, 97% of which is moved by expensive and polluting road trains, which clog our inadequate and antiquated highway system.
A decent, modern, high speed rail system can't come soon enough.
This project has been aired for the last few weeks. The last proposal I heard was that Government provide the track infrastructure and private enterprise provide the rolling stock, operations, sales, marketing and administration infrastructure - which makes a lot of sense!!!
I assume you feel a high speed rain network will impact upon airline viability, hence your post in a professional pilot forum? As there are geographical and economic limits to where high speed rail networks can be built, I think you will find high speed rail networks in Asia and Europe may adversely affect airline traffic over limited, specific short haul routes, but have little or no impact on total airline traffic.
We'll see if there is any other news on this proposal, other wise the thread may be moved to our other forum for open debate.
Thread Starter
However your are rather short sighted in your rejection of the proposal. High speed rail is also used for freight, Australian railways move one billion tonnes of freight each year, 95% of which is Australia's mineral and agricultural produce.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't these trains run on electricity, and aren't the watermelons in favour of shutting down conventional power stations? If so it's going to take a whole heap of windmills to get a slow speed train from Melbourne to Brisbane let alone a "high speed" one.
Moderator
I have not been following the Australian proposal, but general freight and mixed passenger/freight is carried on high speed rail networks in other countries. A passenger only high speed network in Australia would not be viable due to our relatively small population and long distances.
A recent ABC article I heard on the proposal - which gave me the above statistics - talked of passengers and general freight.
And if they can reduce the number of Toll, TNT, Linfox, Australia Post, Q Rail etc roadtrains on our highways, it would be a blessing to motorists and enhance road safety.
But I suspect $114 Billion for 1,748 kilometers of track is another wet dream, the same as variously $20 to $45 Billion for the NBN. The entire proposal should go no further until it is accurately costed and an honest cost/benefit survey carried out.
A recent ABC article I heard on the proposal - which gave me the above statistics - talked of passengers and general freight.
And if they can reduce the number of Toll, TNT, Linfox, Australia Post, Q Rail etc roadtrains on our highways, it would be a blessing to motorists and enhance road safety.
But I suspect $114 Billion for 1,748 kilometers of track is another wet dream, the same as variously $20 to $45 Billion for the NBN. The entire proposal should go no further until it is accurately costed and an honest cost/benefit survey carried out.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: melb
Posts: 2,162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ANY infrastructure of this magnitude is well beyond Australia's ability we can't even get the bloody awful public transport ticketing system right (costs I believe beyond $1 Billion
) never lone build such a rail link. The NBN..............God that's a monumental joke!
In theory it's a great idea but Australians don't know how to spell the word!
It would never work, the current Australian Govt system is so short sighted that the fools within that system are there for one reason, to feather their own nest in the 3 yrs (if they last that long) they get to rape & pillage the joint & get out with all the perks we foolish public allow them!
That amount of money as quoted wouldn't even last to get the rail to the next border ! Can you imagine the rorts, the kickbacks the corruption within the Govt & contractors...............
We are doomed we will never in our or our children's lifetime see anything like this come to fruition so I wish these idiots would stop wasting our time/money!!
For crying out loud they can't even get a 2nd Rwy organized within the next zillion years for Brissy...
I look at the rest of the industrial world who leave us for dead in such construction & I am almost to say I am ashamed to be an Aussie
Wmk2
) never lone build such a rail link. The NBN..............God that's a monumental joke!In theory it's a great idea but Australians don't know how to spell the word!
It would never work, the current Australian Govt system is so short sighted that the fools within that system are there for one reason, to feather their own nest in the 3 yrs (if they last that long) they get to rape & pillage the joint & get out with all the perks we foolish public allow them!
That amount of money as quoted wouldn't even last to get the rail to the next border ! Can you imagine the rorts, the kickbacks the corruption within the Govt & contractors...............
We are doomed we will never in our or our children's lifetime see anything like this come to fruition so I wish these idiots would stop wasting our time/money!!
For crying out loud they can't even get a 2nd Rwy organized within the next zillion years for Brissy...
I look at the rest of the industrial world who leave us for dead in such construction & I am almost to say I am ashamed to be an Aussie
Wmk2
Last edited by Wally Mk2; 11th Apr 2013 at 07:40.
Thread Starter
It would appear that the railway is stand alone and needs to be to compete with aviation.
Read the high speed rail report - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Here's the ABC's spin on it:
Albanese calls for debate on high-speed rail link - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Read the high speed rail report - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Here's the ABC's spin on it:
Albanese calls for debate on high-speed rail link - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Last edited by neville_nobody; 11th Apr 2013 at 07:46.
Having spend some time on the French rail system last year, I can vouch that it is a pleasure to travel on.
No machines to walk through, can carry my nail clippers, runs on time and is unbelievable quiet.
We could even have red Aust Post hi-speed trains like the yellow La Poste TGVs in France.
SNCF TGV La Poste - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
No machines to walk through, can carry my nail clippers, runs on time and is unbelievable quiet.
We could even have red Aust Post hi-speed trains like the yellow La Poste TGVs in France.
SNCF TGV La Poste - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Tallong NSW
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ben Sandilands says it is a race between Halley's Comet and the high speed train network as to which appears first this century.
But it's an interesting report, a lot better than some of the others I've read today.
HSR in race with Halley?s Comet to first appear in Australia | Plane Talking
But it's an interesting report, a lot better than some of the others I've read today.
HSR in race with Halley?s Comet to first appear in Australia | Plane Talking
The incredibly detailed High Speed Rail study begs for discussion and bi-partisan support, and it may not be as hopelessly unaffordable as many are already claiming if it is staged and drives strong ancillary economic benefits
Launching the study Transport and Infrastructure Minister, Anthony Albanese, made it clear the study isn’t a policy manifesto but a document for discussion and hopefully, a cause for critical corridors to be set aside for the future.
It might have been the only press conference the minister ever gives that is reviewed many times over after his death, indeed, given the time frames, after the death, or decline into elderly dementia, of most of those reporters in the Blue Room at Parliament House or watching the video cast.
It might have been the only press conference the minister ever gives that is reviewed many times over after his death, indeed, given the time frames, after the death, or decline into elderly dementia, of most of those reporters in the Blue Room at Parliament House or watching the video cast.
Albanese was in form, correcting the inaccuracies in Greens leader Christine Milne’s grasp of the political history of the study, which had nothing to do with the party, and contradicting her earlier statements as to how it would remove the need for a second Sydney airport.
“Sydney’s position as a global city of the future is endangered unless a second airport is built,” he said.
He also referred to the need for a growing population to sustain high speed rail on a European scale, a form of growth the Greens generally oppose, and reiterated that “Australia isn’t Europe.”
“Sydney’s position as a global city of the future is endangered unless a second airport is built,” he said.
He also referred to the need for a growing population to sustain high speed rail on a European scale, a form of growth the Greens generally oppose, and reiterated that “Australia isn’t Europe.”
Moderator
Ben Sandilands says it is a race between Halley's Comet and the high speed train network as to which appears first this century.
It seems the proposal includes 44 kilometers of tunnels!
Sky News tonight appears to be confirming it is an Albanese dream and neither Party will be taking it to the elections.
As Wally suggests, getting our current rail network working would be a great start!
Just from my experience of catching high speed trains in Japan. A ticket for a train ride similar distance of sydney to Melbourne costs nearly the same as a flight and it takes 4 times longer too. The only reason they have high speed trains in Japan is because of the high population which Australia doesn't have. Not only that, Japan's airports probably couldn't handle all the domestic movement without these high speed trains so they have no choice but to build a high speed rail network.
Last edited by pull-up-terrain; 11th Apr 2013 at 08:17.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The local paper here today quotes that the RTA are about to spend $500,000 on an electronic sign in Taren Point to advise motorists of road conditions on the Captain Cook Bridge.
Jesus wept. Half a mil for a friggin sign! Just another example of the ridiculous cost of infrastructure in Australia. Any wonder the government's broke.
The chances of any government committing the sort of money required for a HSR link are less than zero.
Even if they did, the state bureaucracy would probably require the rolling stock to change at Albury because they couldn't decide what gauge to make the line.
Jesus wept. Half a mil for a friggin sign! Just another example of the ridiculous cost of infrastructure in Australia. Any wonder the government's broke.
The chances of any government committing the sort of money required for a HSR link are less than zero.
Even if they did, the state bureaucracy would probably require the rolling stock to change at Albury because they couldn't decide what gauge to make the line.
Moderator
In retrospect, the $114 billion high speed rail link is today's wet dream for Albanese.
Tonight the 40 plus year proposal appears to be drawing hoots of laughter from all sides of politics and commerce.
Now, I wonder what incredibly expensive ludicrous dream Gillard and her cronies will propose next week?
Tonight the 40 plus year proposal appears to be drawing hoots of laughter from all sides of politics and commerce.
Now, I wonder what incredibly expensive ludicrous dream Gillard and her cronies will propose next week?
Back to the Future...
"...EARLY in 1952, a group of trucking operators decided to protest against the restrictions on interstate road freight imposed by the states to protect their inefficient railways. Placing a copy of the Australian Constitution in a wheelbarrow, the truckers pushed it from Melbourne to Sydney. The journey took 11 days; but that was still two days quicker than a parcel mailed the same day and carried by rail..."
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
.
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
.
Works out to a bit over $65,000,000.00 for every kilometre of track laid. At least he managed to keep a straight face when he floated this one for the media. Having said that, whenever I see Albo on the tele (was it just me today, or did he seem to have an Adolf Hitler comb over today ?) two words spring to mind. The first one's cock and the second one is head.