MORE INDUSTRY NEWS...
most recent
|
most popular
MORE TECHNICAL NEWS...
most recent
|
most popular
RELATED STORIES...
most recent
|
most popular
COMMENTED STORIES...
most recent
|
most popular


By Rob McKay | June 25, 2010

The Australasian Railway Association has leapt on findings that up to 45 road deaths a year could be reduced if 15 percent of contestable road freight is transferred to rail.

The figures appears in the May issue of the Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety.

“A simple shift to rail of the 15 percent of road freight said to be transferable (or contestable) could save up to 45 lives annually (calculated on the basis of roughly three deaths for every 1 percent of freight hauled),” Tasmanian transport and road safety researcher Peter MacKenzie writes.

He also suggests that by shifting the same amount of freight from road to freight 275 people or more could avoid serious long-term disabilities and estimates the savings at more than $1 billion.

In an echo of transport industry debate in January following a spate of accidents involving trucks, MacKenzie went on to support the compulsory shifting of freight from road to rail, starting with fuel products and other dangerous goods.

He notes Infrastructure Australia’s estimate that $42 billion will need to be spent to bring the national highway to a four-star safety rating.

In highlighting the article, Australasian Railway Association Chief Executive Bryan Nye says his organisation is seeking the optimisation of the best mode of transport for each type of freight task rather than engaging in competition with the trucking industry.

“Our vision is that where there is a viable rail network, such as between the capital cities, freight is transported by an efficient rail network to integrated intermodal terminals where it is forwarded to its city location by smaller trucks, preferably avoiding peak periods of congestion,” Nye says.

Despite the caveat, Nye reiterates the ARA’s opposition to higher-productivity vehicles.

“Putting more or heavier trucks on the road is not a sustainable solution for the nation,” he says.

Nye wants “governments of all persuasions to do everything possible to help rail take freight off the road”.

A response from the Australian Trucking Association was awaited at deadline today.


COMMENTS (5)
Comment by 15630643
posted 1 year ago
..er, I don't think the rate of injuries/fatalitieson the road carrying out vital food supplies, clothing, fuel,etc is anywhere near the death rate from smoking, or win quaffing.

Weary as I am of pointing out this simple fact again and again and again, I'll do it one more time.

Rail takes freight from where it has to be delivered to to where it has to be pcked up from.

Road takes freight from where it's ready for delivery to where it has to be.

Economically, rail can never win the cost race.
Comment by Unknown
posted 1 year ago
I totally agree that so much risk involving trucks is initiated by the error-making of other drivers (and other road-users. Everything from struggling older drivers to erratic, reckless young risk-takers. In a previous item on the topic I wrote "..and that includes truck drivers, who all know, no matter how error free they may be, that they have to play dodgems very regularly. I know this from large vehicle driving experience (bus not truck). In my current article I also said in regard to crash reductions "..It would include a significant reduction in numbers of dead or traumatized truck drivers..". I would also like truck drivers to be paid better rates; have good safe roads to drive on; not be pressured into unsafe practices by unscupulous others.

Together, these issue make for an unsafe system and the so-called "Safe System is way over the horizon if achievable at all. The ATA and NTC both argue for reduction in truck numbers and exposure to risk,but through bigger trucks replacing smaller semis. My argument is for even greater reduction of numbers by transfer of freight to rail (with intermodal truck connections)- concentrating on highly flammables like fuel, and on roads known to be safety and otherwise deficient (lack of overtaking lanes, truck rest areas etc) and others with difficult mix of traffic. At the same time, the connecting roads would need upgrading.

Without these changes, truck drivers will continue to be working in sub-standard dangerous conditions that is an occupational health and safety nightmare.

Peter Mackenzie
Comment by Unknown
posted 1 year ago
Good heavens, if driving trucks is as dangerous as what truckies make out, then maybe sending it by rail is the better option. If freight was sent by roads that hadn't changed since the early 1900s then maybe freight would take even longer than 2 weeks to get there. Governments have hardly invested in rail freight since WW2 so if as much money has been spent on rail as on roads then we'd all be wondering why road freight was so slow.
Comment by 16615118
posted 1 year ago
The Poor Truck Driver.
People want trucks off the roads.
A lot of blame is put on truck drivers for accidents. People need to be educated about the dangers of cutting in on trucks,
braking in front of them,passing them & going slow once passed. Their should be more advertisements about the problems truck drivers face. They are not in a car that can stop quickly. A truck driver takes his life in his hands each day he drives with the inexperienced car drivers on the roads. The problem is people make mistakes. Humans can make errors of judgement.
Most Truck drivers are very responsible it is their profession & the way they earn their living.
A car driver can drive as long as he likes. A truck driver has limitations.
A truck driver if he looses points on his license, looses his car license also.
Their should be a car licence & a Truck Licence for professional drivers with seperate points, or extra points for professional drivers. If he looses his licence he looses his job & cannot get another job as he has no car licence.
A truck driver does not get in his truck to kill someone, sometimes it is caused by another car. Moving freight to trains is not always the way to go. More people will be unemployed. Trains may cut down some of the transport, but it has to be transported to terminals stored & at the end it has to be stored before pick up again which all takes time.
The cost to the public will be enormous. You also cannot change the environment overnight. The trucks of the future will be made to better the environment, the power generators use coal which they say also damages the environment. Unfortuneately their is no quick solutions. May be people would be better informed on what happens on the roads by spending more time with a truck driver & watching from inside a truck what happens on the road each day.
Comment by Unknown
posted 1 year ago
people want there freight asap , not waiting 1 to 2 weeks as you would get via rail , it would be great to save more lives on aust roads , but why do people think the trucks are always to blame ,truck operators are like everyone else on the road , they want to get home to family as well , just like car drivers which 90%of the time take to many risk at the truck drivers exspence to get somewhere faster ,

Add Comment
SUBMIT COMMENT
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Australasian Transport News - AT A GLANCE
Home News Subscriber Exclusives Diesel Prices Truck Sales Daily News Bulletin