Could Drax services be rerouted via Ormskirk to avoid Manchester ?

[6Gman]

Indeed, but this thread is partly about future proofing several Transpennine routes for any future intermodal routes. This is necessary in order to meet our climate targets.

Is it?

Do you have a source to support this claim?

 

[AlastairFraser]

If this discussion involves rebuilding old railway lines, the best option is to rebuild the Rochdale - Bury - Bolton line, half of which has been preserved by the East Lancashire Railway., leaving about 6 miles to rebuild. This is around 30 miles shorter than the current route for Drax trains> this route also has the advantage that it could provide a passenger service linking some very large towns in the Northwest and West Yorkshire with Liverpool avoiding Manchester.
I am not campaigning for this because nobody can see the obvious.

Sadly not viable as heavy rail due to extensive building on the alignment between Radcliffe and Bolton. It would work as a tram-train for passenger services though.

Would the obvious be that it would be absolutely nuts to build a line avoiding Manchester?

It's not nuts.
There's a **** ton of pent-up demand on the Bolton-Bury-Rochdale corridor, as evidenced by the perpetual congestion issue on that section of the A58, and the frequent, very well-utilised bus service.
This would enable a lot of non-passenger services to avoid a very busy section of the railway through Manchester Victoria and most of the Chat Moss (heading through St. Helens to Wigan, reverse at Wallgate then through Bolton).

Unfortunately, it's not currently an option for heavy rail at least, due to the aforementioned building on the alignment (particularly around Bradley Fold and northern Radcliffe.) Tram-train would suit the passenger traffic and the ELR well though, so it's not dead as a rail-based corridor completely.

It's no less viable than the current arrangements, which are only "sustainable" because rail freight operators pay essentially nothing for track access.

There is absolutely no way that it is economic to spend the money to improve the infrastructure to ship biomass across from Liverpool so that Drax can pretend to be environmentally friendly for a tiny while longer

It's not just about Drax, it's about encouraging modal shift of trans-Pennine haulage routes to rail to help meet our climate targets and relieve the M62.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Aug 2024 ==

Is it?

Do you have a source to support this claim?

Sure. This presentation primarily focuses on modal shift in Asia and the Pacific, but the same principles are applicable to our climate change transition plans. https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/d8files/event-documents/1Modal-shift.pdf

 

[HSTEd]

It's not just about Drax, it's about encouraging modal shift of trans-Pennine haulage routes to rail to help meet our climate targets and relieve the M62.

A handful of freight trains travelling short distances out of Liverpool Port isn't going to make any meaningful impact on climate targets. I say this as someone who does decarbonisation research for a living.

It's a very small market and rail already has a sizeable chunk of the total maritime intermodal business.
There just aren't that many destinations where the flow sizes and distances can practically be met by rail.

The expenditure would be totally out of whack with the benefits.

 

[AlastairFraser]

A handful of freight trains travelling short distances out of Liverpool Port isn't going to make any meaningful impact on climate targets. I say this as someone who does decarbonisation research for a living.

It's a very small market and rail already has a sizeable chunk of the total maritime intermodal business.
There just aren't that many destinations where the flow sizes and distances can practically be met by rail.

The expenditure would be totally out of whack with the benefits.

Fair enough. What's your recommendation for optimum decarbonisation (particularly interested in transport)?

 

[The Planner]

If it's just a paperwork issue why is Burnley-Colne a higher load limit, despite nothing being able to get to it (and there being no freight demand on that line)?
Class 66-hauled trains are limited to the following trailing weights between these points:
Blackburn to Gannow Jn: 1,385 tonnes. Gannow Jn to Colne: 2,835 tonnes.
Colne to Gannow Jn: 2,275 tonnes, Gannow Jn to Blackburn: 2,455 tonnes.

I don't know 100% the process, and again I am going off a website and don't have access to the original loads books so can't verify the data. But this suggests the weights are calculated against the infrastructure, not assessed for the service need.

Gradient pretty much, curvature plays a small part, and the tractive capability of the loco.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Gradient pretty much, curvature plays a small part, and the tractive capability of the loco.

Where's the steep part? Out of Blackburn towards Rishton is the only park which I can think of as slightly steep, and maybe a short section out of Accrington to Huncoat.

 

[HSTEd]

Fair enough. What's your recommendation for optimum decarbonisation (particularly interested in transport)?

Well outside transport the answer is probably "build as much low carbon electricity generating plant as possible".

In the transport sector, probably something along the lines of:

1. Push electric car/plug in hybrid adoption harder.
2. Create a programme to develop a drop in Class 66 replacement electrodiesel using various advanced technologies, then order 300+ and lease them to FOCs at such low costs that they drive all the diesels out of the market.
3. Giant orders for battery electric and electrodiesel units (arguably we could probably develop a battery unit that can do everything), then order enough of them to drive all the existing diesel multiple units out of service.
4. Fund that eHighway trial on the M180, if it works it will be a huge deal, so we need actual data and not conjecture. If it works - that solves road freight decarbonisation for a few billion.
5. Bus a lot of electric buses, if possible start funding trolleybus schemes.

To summarise, we only have limited time and resources, so we have to lean towards systems that can make use of existing infrastructure so far as possible.
To link back to the thread topic, reopening railways is going to consume resources far beyond the advantage gained - and the best solution to keep Drax open is just to pay what it takes to get a suitable dock close to the plant.

 

[Nottingham59]

Drax really should ship its biomass into Immingham or another East Coast port.

 

[zwk500]

Drax really should ship its biomass into Immingham or another East Coast port.

The rail route from Immingham to Drax isn't exactly direct. Or you'd need to tranship to barges for the trip up the Ouse to as close to Drax as you can get.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Drax really should ship its biomass into Immingham or another East Coast port.

Lol. It comes from North American ports. It'd be a significant diversion to reach any East Coast port. Another 500 miles round the UK from the Atlantic approaching the UK

 

[Bald Rick]

The Drax biomass comes from North America, so it's a long way round the UK to rivers accessible from Drax

Not all of it.

Frequently asked questions about biomass | Drax

If you have any questions about the biomass products we use to generate our renewable electricity, then you can find the answers here in our biomass FAQ.

energy.drax.com

Where do Drax pellets come from?​

For the year ending 31 March 2021, we sourced our pellets from areas including USA (64.9%), Canada (15.5%), Latvia (9.3%), Estonia (2.8%), Brazil (2.5%), Portugal (2.4%), Belarus (1.4%)*, UK, (0.7%), Russia (1.2%)*, and other European countries (0.1%).

* Drax no longer sources biomass from Russia or Belarus, in line with international sanctions brought against Russia due to its war on Ukraine.

Drax really should ship its biomass into Immingham or another East Coast port.

It does. Around 14 paths a day from Immingham to Drax for biomass, and another 6 from Port of Tyne.

 

[zwk500]

Lol. It comes from North American ports. It'd be a significant diversion to reach any East Coast port. Another 500 miles round the UK from the Atlantic approaching the UK

They approach from South of the UK anyway - New York is at approximately the same latitude as Lisbon. It wouldn't be excessively long to reach Immingham rather than Liverpool. The problem is that you'd still need to move the cargo from Immingham to Drax.

 

[Bald Rick]

Lol. It comes from North American ports. It'd be a significant diversion to reach any East Coast port. Another 500 miles round the UK from the Atlantic approaching the UK

And yet much of it does come this way. For example, on Friday, 12 train loads ran from east coast ports compared to 6 from Liverpool.

 

[WAO]

I would have thought that a railway deliberately avoiding Manchester is a good idea in principle in view of the congestion West of Piccadilly.

The Lancashire towns of Bolton and Bury (and on to Rochdale and Bradford) were the targets of the original Liverpool and Bury Railway. Whether there really is the freight (and passenger) traffic, both now and in the future to justify it is an open question. I would argue that at least some of the economic decline of these Cotton/Wool towns followed their weakened rail links.

Leeds has a similar problem to Manchester but in its Eastern approach; here the Calder Valley route through Wakefield K provides potential relief.

It is no accident that the downgrading of the L&Y system has contributed to these problems but congestion is in fact a mark of success!


WAO

 

[Bertie the bus]

I would have thought that a railway deliberately avoiding Manchester is a good idea in principle in view of the congestion West of Piccadilly.

The Lancashire towns of Bolton and Bury (and on to Rochdale and Bradford) were the targets of the original Liverpool and Bury Railway. Whether there really is the freight (and passenger) traffic, both now and in the future to justify it is an open question. I would argue that at least some of the economic decline of these Cotton/Wool towns followed their weakened rail links.

Something that happened 180 years ago has no relevance to today and it would be sheer lunacy to spend hundreds of millions of pounds to build a railway to slightly reduce the time taken for just 6 freight trains per day. The amount of passenger traffic between those towns would be minimal. When you look at how many people at Bolton board Preston bound trains it gives a reasonable indication of rail travel patterns in the North West. People use the train to either get to their local large town or one of the major cities, not between random towns..

 

[AlastairFraser]

Not all of it.

Frequently asked questions about biomass | Drax

If you have any questions about the biomass products we use to generate our renewable electricity, then you can find the answers here in our biomass FAQ.

energy.drax.com

It does. Around 14 paths a day from Immingham to Drax for biomass, and another 6 from Port of Tyne.

80% is pretty high.

They approach from South of the UK anyway - New York is at approximately the same latitude as Lisbon. It wouldn't be excessively long to reach Immingham rather than Liverpool. The problem is that you'd still need to move the cargo from Immingham to Drax.

An additional 500 miles is still somewhat significant, and do we want more ships passing through the English Channel unnecessarily?

And yet much of it does come this way. For example, on Friday, 12 train loads ran from east coast ports compared to 6 from Liverpool.

Assuming that is down to the approx 15%+ from European ports.

 

[HSTEd]

80% is pretty high.

An additional 500 miles is still somewhat significant, and do we want more ships passing through the English Channel unnecessarily?

Assuming that is down to the approx 15%+ from European ports.

The net distance would be less than 500 miles.
Last time I checked a lot of biomass was being loaded in New Orleans (although this might have changed as a lot is coming from Canada now).
It will approach the UK from the North thanks to the Great Circle.

I make a route from New Orleans to Liverpool, avoiding land, to be around 5200nm.
The route from New Orleans to Immingham, again avoiding land, is about ~5520nm.
So about 300nm or so.

300nm of sea haul is not nothing, but it will not cost much at all given how cheap deep sea shipping is. Noone will be sailing through the English Channel, but in any case, do we really want very sluggish trains filled with a very low value commodity clogging up the rail system unnecessarily?

These trains are a major operational headache for the railway.

 

[randyrippley]

Best way of avoiding Manchester would be to send it by barge from Liverpool via the Liverpool-Leeds canal, then down the Aire, then up the Ouse to Drax. The last couple of miles from the river to the power plant could be done using a covered conveyor belt.
It's the kind of bulk transport the canals were built for.
Might need a bit of investment to update the lock gates, but it's a cheap low-cost solution. And time doesn't matter - after transiting the Atlantic by ship the cost of an extra couple of days transport by canal would be trivial, especially if the canalboats could be fitted with automated steering and controls, taking labour costs out of the equation

No reason why you couldn't make them battery powered with electrical motors

 

[WAO]

Something that happened 180 years ago has no relevance to today

Physical geography creates economic geography. We don't know freight patterns post Drax, so shouldn't preclude West - East Pennine freight. Think how much is being spent on Oxford - Bedford!

When you look at how many people at Bolton board Preston bound trains it gives a reasonable indication of rail travel patterns in the North West. People use the train to either get to their local large town or one of the major cities, not between random towns..

Thank you for confirming(?) my point about potential travel between neighbouring not random, Lancashire towns. Bury and Rochdale both have substantial populations, not far from that of Preston. They do however need revitalising, which is a social role of the railway.

I do agree that Network Rail's costings (as elsewhere) may make such a project impossible.

WAO

 

[The Planner]

Where's the steep part? Out of Blackburn towards Rishton is the only park which I can think of as slightly steep, and maybe a short section out of Accrington to Huncoat.

Its 1 in 105 on the western approach to Blackburn, 1 in 118 to Rishton, a section of 1 in 105 up to Accrington, 1 in 71, 1 in 70 and 1 in 68 from Burnley Oxford Road to the summit.

Max load for a 66/6 from Daisyfield to Hall Royd is 1795 tonnes, Hall Royd to Gannow is 1720 tonnes.

 

[Nottingham59]

These trains are a major operational headache for the railway.

Precisely. It's ridiculous that the railway allows the freight industry to use up capacity. By all means let freight trains run wherever there are no capacity constraints, and then only charge them the marginal cost of use - such as increased maintenance. But not when the network is congested. There needs to be some economic incentive for the FoCs to reduce their impact on the network capacity.


For comparison, the route from Norfolk VA to Immingham is 6300km. To Liverpool is 5800km. Because of great circle effects, ships will use the Northern Approaches.





The most economic routing for the country as a whole would be for Drax shipments to go East, releasing capacity in the North West for daytime passenger services.

 

[WAO]

The East coast route thus adds 1000km at <15 knots to a return trip, perhaps 40 hours more charter time per load.

WAO

 

[The Planner]

The most economic routing for the country as a whole would be for Drax shipments to go East, releasing capacity in the North West for daytime passenger services.

Best tell that to the government who want a 75% uplift in freight. As for the Drax services, removing them doesn't automatically release swathes of capacity, especially when they are going via Northwich and Denton.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Best way of avoiding Manchester would be to send it by barge from Liverpool via the Liverpool-Leeds canal, then down the Aire, then up the Ouse to Drax. The last couple of miles from the river to the power plant could be done using a covered conveyor belt.
It's the kind of bulk transport the canals were built for.
Might need a bit of investment to update the lock gates, but it's a cheap low-cost solution. And time doesn't matter - after transiting the Atlantic by ship the cost of an extra couple of days transport by canal would be trivial, especially if the canalboats could be fitted with automated steering and controls, taking labour costs out of the equation

No reason why you couldn't make them battery powered with electrical motors

For the quantities that Drax requires, you'd need a hell of a lot of canal boats. It's either road or rail haulage (or sailing down the east coast then barge and conveyor belt).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Aug 2024 ==

Its 1 in 105 on the western approach to Blackburn, 1 in 118 to Rishton, a section of 1 in 105 up to Accrington

Fair enough

1 in 71, 1 in 70 and 1 in 68 from Burnley Oxford Road to the summit.

Max load for a 66/6 from Daisyfield to Hall Royd is 1795 tonnes, Hall Royd to Gannow is 1720 tonnes.

I'm assuming you mean Burnley Manchester Road, but I was talking about the strange low load limit as far as Rose Grove. The limit on the Copy Pit section makes sense, because the gradients are severe through the valley towards Todmorden, but not so much on the Blackburn to Burnley section.

 

[Halifaxlad]

The docks line is in a tunnel at Kirkdale, looking on google maps without your line I can't see any alignment that doesn't go straight through people's houses.

Its where it goes under the line through Kirkdale where I believe a chord should be put in to enable freight services to head straight to Wigan or go through Ormskirk and bypass the far West end of the Chat Moss corridor.

I reckon it maybe possible if Kirkdale station was slewed over Eastwards so that depot access could be slewed over aswell.

Heading via Bamber bridge does nothing to resolve the load limits issue. Why reopen a curve that will see little use instead of 4-track the WCML between Wigan and Euxton?

I was also looking at potential options that also avoid the WCML!

 

[Bevan Price]

I'm curious to know how Liverpool freight could reasonably gain direct access to the residual L&Y single lines, whether to Preston or Wigan, now that the North Mersey branch is 2/3 obliterated. I agree that it's a pity and that the downgrading of the L&Y by Beeching has led to a cycle of decline all along its route into Yorkshire but we are where we are.

WAO

I think that most - possibly all - of the track on the North Mersey line still "exists" -- you can still see rails, between the forest of trees that have grown around and between those rails since they stopped using the line.

 

[WAO]

I think that it "exists" between Bootle New Strand and Aintree stations (Budleia notwithstanding) with most track bed intact to the Kirkby line except for housing estate gardens to where the route crosses the Ormskirk line obliquely.

West of the Southport line, the important part connecting to the Seaforth dock is really lost under a housing estate, thoughtfully planned with the houses over the trackbed, rather than the gardens. It might be simpler to extend the reversing siding at Sandhills to allow dock freight to change traction but Sandhills is now two roads not four and has to pass 24 Merseyrail trains per hour before any shunting movements. The sharp Kirkdale curve is well below the Northern line with buildings and Stanley Road above the tunnel. The trackbed through the Kirkdale tunnels to Walton Jn is quadruple, however.

The other problem would be the necessary rebuilding of the c18 miles of run down single track to connect to the Blackburn line.

A pity but we are where we are.

E&OE

WAO

 

[Halifaxlad]

The other problem would be the necessary rebuilding of the c18 miles of run down single track to connect to the Blackburn line.

I can't see that being a major problem!

A new chord to Lockstock Hall so that services could get to the Blackburn line directly would be more of a problem since its outside the existing railway boundary due to the original alignment having been built upon.

Rather than reversing around the place and crossing 24 Merseyrail services I still think the optimun solution would be to connect the Kirkdale Curve with the Merseyrail line above and four track it to Walton, which used to be four tracks!

 

[zwk500]

I can't see that being a major problem!

Finding the money for it will be.

A new chord to Lockstock Hall so that services could get to the Blackburn line directly would be more of a problem since its outside the existing railway boundary due to the original alignment having been built upon.

A deviation around the houses looks possible for a low speed freight only line, although see above and below for why that's largely academic

Rather than reversing around the place and crossing 24 Merseyrail services I still think the optimun solution would be to connect the Kirkdale Curve with the Merseyrail line above and four track it to Walton, which used to be four tracks!

Your curve will sever the depot access road and require alterations around Kirkdale station not to mention the insufficient standage and adverse gradients. Why is any of this 'optimum' when a route from Liverpool docks to Blackburn using existing infrastructure is possible, especially infrastructure that is largely already designed for freight trains?

 

[Bald Rick]

The optimum solution, of course, is to stop burning trees at Drax, which I suspect will be the answer within the next decade.