Looking beyond the short term, a thorough review of the intermodal rail freight market is required, to evaluate where improvements need to be made to sustain growth for the long term. Key to this assessment will be the evaluation of Mode Shift Revenue Support (MSRS), set up to assist companies with the operating costs of running rail or inland water freight instead of road, and its application to encourage traffic in the medium term.
Aggregates have the potential to be another long-term market for rail freight, with various rail-served quarries across the UK already possessing extant planning consent. Our involvement could support £100bn of government investment in construction projects up to 2020 and beyond, provided there is encouragement of rail freight on these schemes.
Contrary to deep sea box haulage, mineral sources extend across the UK, and different regions specialise in different types of sand, gravel and crushed rock. To understand what rail routes are important and require improvements, the geographical location, demand and use of each of these types of aggregate has to be evaluated.
There are three or four corridors that are of value to freight in general and to aggregates in particular. The most important of these are the Midland Main Line (MML) in the Leicester area and the Great Western Main Line in the Mendips, which support the haulage of sand and stone to London.
It was recently announced that electrification of the MML would continue, even if it is spread across both CP5 and CP6. However, the costing problems associated with major UK electrification programmes notwithstanding, there are other schemes that have a more immediate significance to the region and to the transportation of construction minerals.
Two key schemes are the four-tracking from Kettering to Bedford and capacity improvements in and around Leicester station. To the north of Bedford, the combination of freight and passenger services is constrained by the mixture of four-, three- and two-track alignments, and three-aspect signalling. Four-tracking this route would tackle many of the bottlenecks along the line and cater for future freight and passenger growth. This is far more valuable in the short term than overhead wires.
Integrated transport and logistics
Intermodal and aggregates could provide the future foundations of domestic rail freight, and it’s important that the Government and industry focus on the challenges faced by these markets specifically. Any approach to these challenges cannot be piecemeal - it needs to fit within the wider transport agenda.
Too often, significant investment is made into one mode of transport without duly considering the knock-on effect this investment will have on others - or equally how we could maximise return by joining up investment across modes of transport.
One stark example is the Government’s £1.5bn A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon Improvement Scheme. This was the first major roads project to be awarded under this spending period, demonstrating the Government’s commitment, and is no doubt a hugely important scheme to help relieve congestion and unlock growth in the region.
Yet one of the central problems with the A14 is the congestion caused by lorries. By considering transport in its entirety - road and rail - transport planners should recognise that in order to further relieve congestion and facilitate the freight modal shift from road to rail, the Government should align the Cambridge-Huntingdon project at the same time as double-tracking into Felixstowe, taking more lorries off the road.
As freight operators, we recognise that we’re part of a wider transport and logistics system. The Government’s National Policy Statement for National Networks was a major step forward, as it highlighted the importance of Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges in supporting not just freight, but logistics as a whole. Yet Black Friday last year further showcased the inefficiencies that exist across transport modes and infrastructure in delivering goods and services to customers.
In order to effectively tackle this fragmented transport approach, I would like to see the National Infrastructure Commission evaluate the long-term logistics needs of the UK, up to 2050.
Conclusion
In her first speech to the rail freight industry under this Government, Rail Minister Claire Perry asked the industry for help in better understanding what it needs from Government, what joined-up investment is needed in rail freight infrastructure, and how we can jointly raise the profile of rail freight in order to keep Britain’s economy moving.
To date, government funding through the Strategic Freight Network and Transport Innovation Fund has provided crucial capacity enhancements for freight growth, and MSRS has allowed rail freight to compete with road for intermodal traffic.
However, the decline of the coal and steel manufacturing markets has left the industry looking for alternative core commodities that will allow it to invest and grow. Opportunities exist in the intermodal and aggregates market, but public and private investment in key network infrastructure is required.
The recent opening of the new Chiltern Railways Oxford-London line highlighted the possibilities of sourcing private investment for capacity enhancements. I very much support incentivisation of private funding, if it delivers the infrastructure we need. What we must remember is that in order to carry out intelligent investment in rail infrastructure, an understanding of the economics of rail freight is imperative.
Read the peer reviews for this feature.
Download the graphs for this feature.
