Session introduction David Mitchell BTRE Improving North-South corridor road and rail links – issues, options, payoffs

Inter-capital freight movement – road predominant Note Freight estimates exclude steel movements carried by rail and bulk freight moved by coastal shipping, the latter includes significant quantities of liquid fuel transported from Westernport (Vic.) to Sydney and Brisbane. Source BTRE 2006, Freight measurement and modelling in Australia (Report 112).

Inter-capital passenger travel – air predominant Source BTRE 2007, Passenger movements between Australian cities, to (Information Sheet 26).

North–South corridor traffic volumes Light vehicles (AADT) Heavy vehicles (AADT)

Inter-capital road traffic a small share Sources BTRE 2006, Freight measurement and modelling in Australia (Report 112), State/Territory road traffic data (2005) and BTRE estimates.

BTRE-projected BAU freight growth 3.5%pa (absent significant modal shift) Sources BTRE 2006, Freight measurement and modelling in Australia (Report 112) and BTRE forthcoming, Road impacts of road–rail mode shift.

Projected BAU North-South freight by mode Sources BTRE 2006, Freight measurement and modelling in Australia (Report 112) and BTRE forthcoming, Road impacts of road–rail mode shift.

Under these assumptions, inter-capital truck travel up 70% on average Sources BTRE 2006, Freight measurement and modelling in Australia (Report 112) and BTRE forthcoming, Road impacts of road–rail mode shift and BTRE estimates.

Projected North-South freight – increased rail share scenario Sources BTRE 2006, Freight measurement and modelling in Australia (Report 112) and BTRE forthcoming, Road impacts of road–rail mode shift and BTRE estimates.

Significant inter-capital rail mode shift, but muted impact on total corridor truck movements Source BTRE estimates.

Supporting material

BAU projected freight task – Syd-Mel

BAU projected freight task–Bne-Syd

BAU projected freight task–Bne-Mel

Other material

Key issues Volume of freight likely to switch Infrastructure costs Benefits –Reduced road wear –Reduced external costs (e.g. accidents, pollution, congestion) –Reduced shipper costs/increased service quality

Road-side (external) cost savings are often large ARTC (2001) rail audit – road-side savings were X per cent of total gross benefits –Y per cent from road wear –Z per cent from externalities (accidents, greenhouse, pollution) –The remaining benefits accrue to existing rail customers North–South rail study estimated these savings were X per cent of total gross benefits –Y per cent from road wear –Z per cent from externalities

Net road-side savings may be overstated Life-cycle pavement cost based modelling implies avoidable road costs between 1–2 c/km for heavy vehicles on these corridors –Well below current fuel-based variable charges (9–10 c/km) External costs –Accidents costs most significant – between 1–5 c/km for HVs, varying with road standard and traffic mix –Greenhouse gas emissions $A10/t CO 2 ) – between x–y c/km –Other external costs negligible for inter-capital freight

Avoidable road infrastructure costs are low Life-cycle pavement cost based modelling implies avoidable road costs between 1–2 c/km for heavy vehicles on these corridors –Well below current fuel-based variable charges (9–10 c/km) External costs –Accidents costs most significant – between 1–5 c/km for HVs, varying with road standard and traffic mix –Greenhouse gas emissions $A10/t CO 2 ) – between x–y c/km –Other external costs negligible for inter-capital freight

External accident costs Costs imposed on third parties not otherwise internalised. Empirically – impact of traffic volume on average accident costs (rate) Low HV accident rates on dual carriageway highways  low external accident costs Higher HV accident rates on undivided carriageways  concomitant impact on external costs

Net road-side impact and implications For most inter-capital links, including North-South corridors: –Avoidable pavement wear & external costs < Current variable road use charge –The implication is that heavy vehicles more than cover avoidable infrastructure and external costs –For infrastructure assessments, this implies that the indirect impacts of rail investment is nil (negative) –For rail projects then, the benefits within the rail mode should at least cover the project costs to be considered.

Concluding remarks Projected growth in North-South inter-capital freight will be serviced by road—freight to more than double 2005–2025 Increasing vehicle size will mitigate the growth in vehicle numbers Rail may increase share. However, likely to reduce inter- capital HV traffic by less than 20% Indirect road-side savings likely to be small