Government considering road pricing for lorries

Oxfordblues · 23 Dec 2017

The Government spin machine has released a suggestion of road-pricing for the UK road haulage industry: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42464125

The government is considering a "pay-per-mile" scheme for lorries to cover the cost of damage to roads.

Transport Secretary Chris Grayling confirmed the current HGV levy, used to pay for wear and tear on the road network, was being consulted on.

Critics say the current scheme means international drivers using the roads do not have to pay towards upkeep.

But the Road Haulage Association (RHA) said it was unfair to target lorries and it needs to see more detail.

Mr Grayling denied any plans for a road toll system for other vehicles for the "foreseeable future"...

At present, once the annual charge per lorry is paid, the roads are free at the point of use (with a few exceptions such as the M6-Toll) apart from an element of fuel duty.

Could this potentially help rail freight by "levelling the playing field"? If hauliers are finally forced to pay directly for using the roads, could rail's competitiveness improve to the point where less-than-trainload volumes would become economic? Might we see the return of a national network for smaller flows which railfreight companies can't currently see as profitable?

RailUK Forums

HSTEd · 23 Dec 2017

Doubtful.

The rail industry is not set up to make wagonload and less than wagonload traffic feasible.
It was only ever profitable on a marginal basis - and we can't have that in the glorious new era can we?

And our loading gauge is far too small to make piggyback operations feasible, so in the end I doubt this will make any difference at all.

lordbusiness · 23 Dec 2017

Personally I'd like to level the playing field by extending delay repay to bus and coach operators.
Any costs caused by roadworks could then be claimed back by the operator from Councils and the Highways Agency.

radamfi · 23 Dec 2017

Germany has had distance based tolls for lorries for a few years now. Has that helped increase the proportion of freight carried by rail?

thejuggler · 23 Dec 2017

More Govt policy by flying kites for a reaction.

Hauliers don’t pay for using the roads, the customer buying the products carried by those lorries do.

Jonny · 23 Dec 2017

thejuggler said:
More Govt policy by flying kites for a reaction.

Hauliers don’t pay for using the roads, the customer buying the products carried by those lorries do.

Technically yes in the sense that the upstream customer eventually pays; however, those in between would do well to minimise that cost and often seem to find ways of doing so. That may include the use of rail...

plannerman · 23 Dec 2017

The UK isn't suited to rail carrying small consignments, and tinkering with charges won't change that. Rail works for big tonnage over mid or long distance, for everything else road wins.

furnessvale · 23 Dec 2017

Oxfordblues said:
The Government spin machine has released a suggestion of road-pricing for the UK road haulage industry: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42464125

At present, once the annual charge per lorry is paid, the roads are free at the point of use (with a few exceptions such as the M6-Toll) apart from an element of fuel duty.

Could this potentially help rail freight by "levelling the playing field"? If hauliers are finally forced to pay directly for using the roads, could rail's competitiveness improve to the point where less-than-trainload volumes would become economic? Might we see the return of a national network for smaller flows which railfreight companies can't currently see as profitable?

A per mile charge will change nothing because the duty on fuel vehicles use, effectively does the same thing now.

HGVs currently receive a massive 70% subsidy on the costs they impose on society and I doubt the government has any plans to ADD taxes to HGVs given its love affair with them.

What is more likely to happen is that the government will REDUCE charges on HGVs by putting more duty on fuel which, in the future, HGVs will be exempt from paying. Hauliers have been demanding a so called "essential user discount" on fuel for years, and this is just a backdoor method of giving it to them.

Dentonian · 23 Dec 2017

lordbusiness said:
Personally I'd like to level the playing field by extending delay repay to bus and coach operators.
Any costs caused by roadworks could then be claimed back by the operator from Councils and the Highways Agency.

Why single out Councils (ie. Tax-payers)? Most roadworks are done by BT or the Ultility Companies. Also, where is the compensation for delays/road closures caused by criminal activity etc. Bearing in mind - I'm told by someone who takes a keen interest in such things - that Police forces treat all injury RTAs as Crime scenes until satisfied otherwise. This is why major delays due to seemingly minor accidents arev far more commonplace nowadays and take much longer to clear.

edwin_m · 23 Dec 2017

A road user charge levels the playing field in the sense that it would apply to all HGVs regardless of nationality, and may help the government avoid a huge hole in its revenue base if electric trucks really catch on (but doesn't address the similar but much bigger problem with electric cars). An extra cost on vehicle mileage might lead to adoption of distribution patterns that are less mileage-intensive, but (a) the other per-mile costs are probably high enough that vehicle-mileage is already minimised, and (b) the extra charge would most likely be offset by a rebate on fuel so per-mile costs would stay about the same in any case.

It's unlikely that rail would have the capacity to take much more freight on the sorts of trunk haul where this might tip the cost balance away from road.

Bovverboy · 23 Dec 2017

furnessvale said:
HGVs currently receive a massive 70% subsidy on the costs they impose on society

Could you elaborate, please?

rebmcr · 23 Dec 2017

The clean air lobby is getting stronger and stronger as time goes by — this seems fairly plausible to me.

Starmill · 23 Dec 2017

I do love the way people talk about the 'clean air lobby' as if that somehow does not include everyone who breathes?

HSTEd · 24 Dec 2017

Bovverboy said:
Could you elaborate, please?

Some estimates for uncosted externalities imposed by HGV transport come up as high as £1.48/mile

Now if we didn't live in a country where any new railway construction costs a literal trainload of banknotes, we could build a minimalist freight railway system that existed solely to carry piggyback lorries.
That way existing road hauliers could benefit from reduced linehaul costs (as staff could rest whilst the consignment is still moving, reducing the strain on the limited driver supply) and avoid this taxation without requiring enormously expensive transhipment moves.

Rail likes to move heavy loads from concentrated sources and sinks of traffic.
But the cost per tonne moved in such a situation is so low that picking up whole lorries is not a significant disadvantage - since lorries can concentrate themselves at the loading point.

And if electric lorries take off, an electrified lorry carrying piggyback train could recharge the lorries whilst rolling.

furnessvale · 24 Dec 2017

HSTEd said:
Some estimates for uncosted externalities imposed by HGV transport come up as high as £1.48/mile

Now if we didn't live in a country where any new railway construction costs a literal trainload of banknotes, we could build a minimalist freight railway system that existed solely to carry piggyback lorries.
That way existing road hauliers could benefit from reduced linehaul costs (as staff could rest whilst the consignment is still moving, reducing the strain on the limited driver supply) and avoid this taxation without requiring enormously expensive transhipment moves.

Rail likes to move heavy loads from concentrated sources and sinks of traffic.
But the cost per tonne moved in such a situation is so low that picking up whole lorries is not a significant disadvantage - since lorries can concentrate themselves at the loading point.

And if electric lorries take off, an electrified lorry carrying piggyback train could recharge the lorries whilst rolling.

What an interesting concept I had not thought of!

ps Just thinking about it, maybe not quite as easy as first thought of. HGVs would require twin pan set ups like the early Swiss and Italian railway AC electrifications.

HSTEd · 24 Dec 2017

furnessvale said:
What an interesting concept I had not thought of!

ps Just thinking about it, maybe not quite as easy as first thought of. HGVs would require twin pan set ups like the early Swiss and Italian railway AC electrifications.

Whilst such a system has been developed by SIemens - I am actually referring to using a typical plug in charger on the wagon that the lorry is riding on.
The kit would be fitted below the solebar and be supplied by the train's 25kV system.

furnessvale · 24 Dec 2017

HSTEd said:
Whilst such a system has been developed by SIemens - I am actually referring to using a typical plug in charger on the wagon that the lorry is riding on.
The kit would be fitted below the solebar and be supplied by the train's 25kV system.

That's more like it! I had visions of 50+ pans up as the train bowled along!

Bletchleyite · 24 Dec 2017

A big advantage of road pricing will be that we can tax non-UK lorries operating on UK roads on an even keel, rather than them trucking in cheap diesel and paying nothing.

It will also put an infrastructure in place for car road pricing which will be needed once everything is electric, as fuel tax will no longer work.

furnessvale · 24 Dec 2017

Bletchleyite said:
A big advantage of road pricing will be that we can tax non-UK lorries operating on UK roads on an even keel, rather than them trucking in cheap diesel and paying nothing.

It will also put an infrastructure in place for car road pricing which will be needed once everything is electric, as fuel tax will no longer work.

The road haulage industry is already complaining that it is being used as a guinea pig for exactly that.

The loss of revenue from fuel duty is the main driver behind this move, but levelling the playing field with foreign lorries will be a useful by product.

mac · 24 Dec 2017

Sometime people will realise how much we need trucks, forget putting goods on trains it will never work even the railways use trucks if something needs moving.

furnessvale · 24 Dec 2017

mac said:
Sometime people will realise how much we need trucks, forget putting goods on trains it will never work even the railways use trucks if something needs moving.

Road and rail freight both have their strengths and weaknesses. No need to "forget" using either.

HSTEd · 24 Dec 2017

mac said:
Sometime people will realise how much we need trucks, forget putting goods on trains it will never work even the railways use trucks if something needs moving.

I don't need lorries
I need goods moving from A to B, how they are moved is irrelevant.

Lorries should pay the true cost of transport, as should all other transport mechanisms
This should include a fair assesment of environmental and other costs.

I see no reason why a lorry should drive from London to Glasgow, when it could drive to a facility on the M25 and be hauled to the outskirts of Glasgow on the back of a train, using electriciy and with fewer crew requirements, and using less valuable road space.

Master29 · 24 Dec 2017

plannerman said:
The UK isn't suited to rail carrying small consignments, and tinkering with charges won't change that. Rail works for big tonnage over mid or long distance, for everything else road wins.

That`s because the way this nation of ours works. We pay for it and the motorways get stuffed up with more lorries with firms no doubt seeing it as another form of tax evasion.

markindurham · 24 Dec 2017

HSTEd said:
I don't need lorries
I need goods moving from A to B, how they are moved is irrelevant.

Lorries should pay the true cost of transport, as should all other transport mechanisms
This should include a fair assesment of environmental and other costs.

I see no reason why a lorry should drive from London to Glasgow, when it could drive to a facility on the M25 and be hauled to the outskirts of Glasgow on the back of a train, using electriciy and with fewer crew requirements, and using less valuable road space.

Time factors are a big one - transfer times at each end, plus train timetabling, for starters. Door to door timing is key.

HSTEd · 24 Dec 2017

markindurham said:
Time factors are a big one - transfer times at each end, plus train timetabling, for starters. Door to door timing is key.

Since rail freight expansion in any meaningful sense would require a reasonable loading gauge, to enable piggyback operations to occur - we are looking at a newbuild line in all likelihood.

Which means timetabling restrictions are largely irrelevant since we would have multiple departures an hour up and down, and the only traffic would be piggyback trains anyway.
Which means we have 'turn up and go' frequency for lorries, and we can run the trains at 140km/h or more, compared to the 90km/h that Lorries can manage, even with no traffic or breaks or whatever.

It would be expensive to build the railway, but it would eventually pay itself off in terms of reduced road occupancy and environmental damage.

furnessvale · 24 Dec 2017

markindurham said:
Time factors are a big one - transfer times at each end, plus train timetabling, for starters. Door to door timing is key.

Indeed, which is why Tesco, Sainsburys, Morrisons, Argos etc., etc. use rail for some traffic. The door to door timings are more reliable than throughout road movement.

MarkyT · 24 Dec 2017

furnessvale said:
Indeed, which is why Tesco, Sainsburys, Morrisons, Argos etc., etc. use rail for some traffic. The door to door timings are more reliable than throughout road movement.

And total driver hours, numbers of tractor units and emissions are reduced significantly by trunking to regional transhipment terminals compared to each trailer being hauled individually on road. Tesco and the others manage to do all this within the diminutive UK loading gauge. I continue to hope that these flows offer a good template for other haulage companies to follow.

furnessvale · 24 Dec 2017

MarkyT said:
And total driver hours, numbers of tractor units and emissions are reduced significantly by trunking to regional transhipment terminals compared to each trailer being hauled individually on road. Tesco and the others manage to do all this within the diminutive UK loading gauge. I continue to hope that these flows offer a good template for other haulage companies to follow.

Indeed, although to be fair, Stobart was not the first. JG Russell and WH Malcolm beat them to it. Wincanton now have their own trains from Southampton.

Long may the trend continue.

markindurham · 24 Dec 2017

furnessvale said:
Indeed, which is why Tesco, Sainsburys, Morrisons, Argos etc., etc. use rail for some traffic. The door to door timings are more reliable than throughout road movement.

Agreed - but these outfits have introduced these pretty much as new flows, in conjunction with the freight operators, and are sizeable contracts. The problem is getting existing road traffic of less than train loads to move onto rail.

mac · 24 Dec 2017

furnessvale said:
Indeed, which is why Tesco, Sainsburys, Morrisons, Argos etc., etc. use rail for some traffic. The door to door timings are more reliable than throughout road movement.

But how much ton wise do they move, I go near in Sainsbury depot at Sherburne and they must have 100 lorries running 24 hours a day taking stuff to stores and the same amount coming in but nothing by rail. they claim they like rail but all there lorries run back empty

Government considering road pricing for lorries

Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member