Fresh produce has never been a major contender for space on the rail network, since a combination of steel, aggregates and oil monopolises its resources. The rail freight market has historically been dominated by large amounts of low-value goods moving short distances. However, with increased traffic exacerbating congestion on the roads, choosing alternative routes is a high priority for all distribution industries, and according to the Freight Transport Association’s (FTA) chief executive, Richard Turner, several supermarkets, including Asda and Morrisons, are showing an interest in embracing the possibility of distribution by rail.
While readily admitting that rail will never dominate the supply chain, or even come close, Turner claims that its contribution to easing the volumes going by road is undeniably valuable. And the rail network has great potential for industry in general, he says, although significant modifications will be needed before this potential can be reached. “Rail is actually doing quite well, much better than it has been in previous years,” says Turner. “Competition between rail-freight companies has been introduced, which is producing a lot of innovation and creativity. Trains tend to be timetabled and therefore you know when you can expect the freight to arrive, although there is still room for improvement in this area.
“One of the areas we are looking at closely within the industry is how we can introduce KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) for the rail network,” Turner continues. “It is very important for people to know what sort of reliability and performance they can expect. We need to be more transparent and let people make more informed choices.” Achieving such clarity requires co-operation from all sides, however, and the FTA is not capable of exacting the necessary improvements alone.
“There are all sorts of pressures on the system but we know more about future demand than ever now, and more about how individual companies can create a competitive service for customers. And as we develop more knowledge about KPIs for the rail network, customers will get more confidence in it. There is a bigger need for more confidence with rail than with road.”
In a similar vein to road transport, the government’s commitment to improving rail freight growth has been less than satisfactory. The 10-year plan, introduced three years ago, stated that efforts would be made to grow rail freight by 80 per cent and increase its share of the market to 10 per cent. However, the vast majority of objectives have been conspicuously abandoned, and the system of evaluation and investment has been altered dramatically.
“The whole structure has changed,” says the FTA’s rail policy manager, Andrew Traill. “There are no targets, it’s all about what the forecasts of demand are, what the capacity of the network is and if an investment of public money is required, a value for money appraisal is to be undertaken and we need to make sure that value for money mechanism is equitable with other schemes, whether it’s passenger rail, road, airports, whatever.”
The industry is still beholden to the five-year budget allocated in 2004, while trying to prepare research to present to the secretary of state that will influence the funds allocated for 2009 and beyond. However, a development in the last couple of years has generated further concern for Traill and his fellow ambassadors of the freight industry.
“Rather than having a separate system for road, rail, shipping etc, from 2007 there will only be one budget for transport so everybody is going to have to compete for the same money, from the Sustainable Freight Transport Grant,” he says. “We will all have to say ‘What we are demanding will cost this, and not doing anything will cost the industry this’.”
When it comes to funding, England gets a particularly raw deal, according to Traill. “In England there is no neutral freight revenue support,” he says. “In Scotland they still have freight facilities grants which come out of the Scottish Executive’s funds and the Welsh Assembly has grants available, but for the last couple of years there has been no equivalent in England.”
Studies being performed by the FTA in conjunction with the Rail Freight Group and the Rail Freight Operators’ Association, have already highlighted some issues on the current system which will give rise to positive and negative repercussions. “We estimate that by 2014 there will be vast increases in the demand for rail freight, mainly for moving international containers from ports and distributing them around the country,” says Turner. “But this projected increase will necessitate analysis of the hotspots of congestion. There is a potential for growth but if we are going to grow as much as we need to accommodate the increase in demand, we have also got to put more capital into rail.”
The London rail network is attracting particular concern. According to the findings of the joint FTA-Rail Freight Group study, the capital’s rail freight will not withstand the forecast increase in demand, forcing an overspill of freight onto the roads. Both organisations are urging Transport for London to consider the findings in their London Freight Plan.
FTA is particularly concerned about the North London Line, which is showing an increase in demand of 155 per cent in general, with peaks of up to 258 per cent above average levels in places. At the same time the Midland Mainline faces increases of 346 per cent, the Great Eastern Main Line around 137 per cent and demand for the Thameside Line is expected to double.
The study has suggested that some of the extra train paths required by 2014 could be handled by timetabling, or by introducing alternative routes or longer trains. Yet others may require investment in the track or signalling. At the same time Traill has expressed concern over the long-term allocation of capacity. Identifying alternative routes is all well and good but it can have negative repercussions, he says. These routes may be longer, have different speed, weight or capacity restrictions, or lack electrification.
In addition, Traill says rail-freight operators have a tendency to focus on isolated locations affecting them rather than imposing an objective and rational view of the situation at large. “We look at the freight not the mode, and what we are trying to do with that freight before trying to come up with the best possible solution. Everybody in the chain has to play a part. You can’t leave it to one part of that chain to sort out.”
The FTA is hoping the boost in transparency initiated by the study will enable it to engage with many more stakeholders to raise the level of awareness and implement suitable solutions. Co-operation, and not dictation is the association’s remit. “If customers altered their own scheduling etc, especially the big ones, that could have terrific benefits for the industry. We want to get the system to engage the customer - that is really quite key in all of this. It is not necessarily something that all of the rail-freight industry will understand, appreciate or want but is certainly the FTA’s perspective,” Traill adds.
The FTA’s policy of co-operation extends to its partners across the waters and it is calling for greater communication when the EU’s transport policy comes under scrutiny during the mid-term review of its white paper. Turner says the UK is currently lacking European partners of comparable standing although commercial pressures are in place for vast developments in this field. “But there are structural problems because a lot of the European freight system is dominated by government management,” he says. “Here we have actually made some progress, opening up our network and working commercially.”
One distinctly inhibiting factor has been the failure of the Eurotunnel to live up to expectations, he says. After various struggles, the Eurotunnel operator is trying to get its finances in order but a large proportion of its freight development team has fallen by the wayside, which will naturally prohibit freight development and make it difficult to assume any increase in tunnel rail traffic, Traill says.
Armand Toubol, advisor to the chairman of France’s rail organisation SNCF, agrees that the state of the European rail network is essential in terms of securing trans-continental trade links. “France is in the middle of the connections between the UK and the rest of Europe through the Channel Tunnel and also in the middle of the connections between the Iberian Peninsula and the rest of Europe,” says Toubol. “The flows of traffic are huge and also subject to important seasonal variations. So it is vital to have excellent communications through France.”
There are both positive and negative comments to be made about the current situation, he suggests. “For the Iberian Peninsula, the Pyrenees barrier concentrates the traffic on both coasts which is a favourable factor for increasing volumes but creates a lot of pollution.”
However, rail quality in Europe overall has collapsed and the traffic flows are decreasing. To combat this SNCF’s freight division has been restructuring the entire production process and industrialising it, says Toubol. “The quality is starting to improve on certain areas of traffic and is spreading progressively. All efforts are being directed at restoring a high quality level of service specifically on these transit routes.”
As in the UK, road transport assumes the largest market share for freight throughout Europe but Toubol suggests it will be impossible to rely on its continuing development in the long term. Alternative solutions have to be organised for sustainable development, and if the imminent plans for rail development are successful, it could be a particularly viable method of easing road congestion, he claims.
Progress in freight transport will always be compromised by competition from passenger trains, which will not allow the highest level of quality to be reached for freight traffic, according to Toubol. However, long-term infrastructure investments will provide more capacity on the network, and a new project is afoot which could dramatically improve the network, he explains.
“To solve the problem of quality level and of capacity I think the only solution is to apply the New Opera project which is a feasibility study being made under a contract with the European Commission,” he says. “The project will encompass the whole of Europe. It will take 15 years to complete but will ensure strong rail market share development and a large capacity enhancement.”
The premise of the project is to construct a new 4,000-6,000km network dedicated to freight on which trains of 1,500 metres to 2,250m in length will travel at the same speed of 100km per hour with electronic breaks and radio-commanded locomotives in the middle of the train. To ensure efficient operations, the number of stops on the lines will be limited to around one every 250km and the trains will be divided into sections heading towards intermodal terminals.
Back in the UK, such dramatic action is unlikely to emerge in the near future. However, Traill remains hopeful that progress is still possible. “There was an announcement only last week relating to the South Western line - effectively a recommendation within the Rail Utilisation Strategy which will go to consultation for one of three options to improve the carrying capacity on the line from Southampton through Reading to connect to the West Coast Mainline,” he says. “It is something we have been calling for for a very long time, and would be a definite help. It is not always a question of upgrading the network, sometimes it is signaling, or needing a couple of sidings or longer or heavier trains.”
However, a recent change in government attitude could strongly scupper any signs of development. Following interest from private sources in putting the money up for plans to develop the rail network from Felixstowe port, the government is suggesting this to be a suitable blueprint for all future projects.
Traill is quick to highlight the negative consequences of such a philosophy, however. “That’s quite a big jump from where we have been. We are dealing with an open access network. If you pay for some of the upgrade, what does that entitle you to? Surely you can’t buy your access. A large number of the companies needed to make the network function would not be able to do that so you could end up with half of them closing which would obviously lead to a lot of job losses.”
If the FTA is hoping to implement sufficient developments to help the network reach its potential, Traill and his associates will certainly have their work cut out for them. With no guarantees of funding for rail freight in the future, proposals will have to be slicker and more convincing than ever before. In accordance with the new funding scheme, developments will henceforth be examined on a case-by-case basis to assess their value to a number of constituents. However, according to Traill, the government needs to adopt a shift in perspective: to appreciate the value of the rail network not only to industry, but the national economy as a whole. Until that happens, all progress will be marginal, and the state of the network will continue to deterioriate.
No comments yet