old man emu Posted Tuesday at 10:47 PM Posted Tuesday at 10:47 PM The Federal Government has just announced that work on the inland rail route between Melbourne and Brisbane will cease when the track reaches Parkes in Central NSW. The given reason is that to complete the trtack from Parkes to Brisbane would cost $46 billion dollars. The purpose of the route was to reduce reliance on road transport between Queensland and Victoria along the Newell Highway which is the inland route. Already millions have been spent on preliminary geophysical investigations along the proposed route north of Parkes. Rural properties have been purchased. The Gilgandra Shire created a residential estate will all the road and water infrastructure for the building of housing to rent to the construction workers employed on the nearby section. Once the work was completed those houses would be placed on the public market for sale. However, demand for housing follows demand for employment, and there is not much locally. There was nothing wrong with the concept of a dedicated freight line between these two States. The problem, no doubt, is that the ability to generate the funding for the project, amongst all the other demands on government, is beyond the capacity of a Nation with such a small population compared to its area. Perhaps if our natural resources had not been sold off at bargain basement prices, or tax concessions to foreign companies were curtailed, the Government might be able to provide the funds to finance the many demands made of it. Here's a link to the Inland Rail website: https://inlandrail.com.au/ 1 1
facthunter Posted 22 hours ago Posted 22 hours ago Barnaby will be disappointed. He Purchased Land . Railways have a record of not Paying for themselves In this country. Levels of utilisation would need to be far above what it is. There's a lot of Maintenance on Railway Lines. and rolling stock. Nev 1
Siso Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago Maybe we should put some of the global warming budget into it. Trains are efficient when you work out the tonnes of freight/ litre of fuel. 1 1
old man emu Posted 2 hours ago Author Posted 2 hours ago 25 minutes ago, Siso said: Trains are efficient when you work out the tonnes of freight/ litre of fuel. That may be correct, but building the infrastructure to run them on is where the cost is. Also, railways need a higher level of maintenance than roads. Trains don't like potholes and other sorts of irregularities that trucks can accept from the roads they travel over. 1
facthunter Posted 55 minutes ago Posted 55 minutes ago Rail tracks and rolling stock have to be safe OR nothing gets there. The SHOW goes off the rails. Nev
nomadpete Posted 39 minutes ago Posted 39 minutes ago 21 hours ago, facthunter said: There's a lot of Maintenance on Railway Lines. and rolling stock. Nev Yeah, unlike like highway maintenance - that's an investment!
nomadpete Posted 35 minutes ago Posted 35 minutes ago 1 hour ago, old man emu said: That may be correct, but building the infrastructure to run them on is where the cost is. As would apply if any government was so wasteful as to build a brand new straight, high speed expressway between capital cities.... from scratch. Any greenfield project can be expected to cost a lot to do the groundwork.
facthunter Posted 35 minutes ago Posted 35 minutes ago One BIG truck does more damage than hundreds of Lighter vehicles. Nev
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now