4 ms·

I don't understand how they could justify this investment. Aren't railways cheaper and more efficient anyway?

tpetry 7y ago
You can think of politics handing over a lot of money to only a few big companies for a research project. Its nothing more than that ;)
elaus 7y ago
I don't think this is meant as a replacement for long-distance transports (where trains and barges are already well established) but for the "last mile" where you need to transport only a few goods to varying destinations (but along an existing highway).
- matteuan 7y ago
  It looks like the "last mile" problem is not solved if they have this infrastucture only on highways. Probably this project makes sense with large batteries on-board(e.g. Tesla semi).
  - geff82 7y ago
    They have a combustion engine on board that powers the truck when not driving on the highway.
  - flohofwoe 7y ago
    In Germany you're never more than a few kilometers away from the next Autobahn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobahn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobahn Driving the "first and last" mile on diesel or battery and everything inbetween with electricity from the overhead wire makes a lot of sense IMHO, at least in Germany and countries with similar infrastructure.
NikkiA 7y ago
Railways are great for bulk transport of goods, but road trucking excels at smaller loads with finer-grained destination selection. The railway equivalent to what these trucks facilitate would be wagon-load freight, which is largely considered impractical in europe[0] and generally lost out to road trucking post war[1]. To explain why this isn't necessarily the case in america [0], it's important to understand that america didn't have a huge rebuilding effort post-war [1] that relocated industry away from the rail lines that had been servicing them for a hundred years. Post-war europe did have that rebuilding effort, and it saw a lot of medium industry spread out as the costs to remain in denser populated areas near rail hubs increase. Thus road networks became the feeders for these industries rather than proximity to rail freight depots and rail spurs. Maintaining wagon-load rail delivery in that environment became much more expensive as a result.
- croisillon 7y ago
  I think you forgot to post the [0] and [1] notes
  - NikkiA 7y ago
    In this case I was using them as cross-references.
    - croisillon 7y ago
      oh ok!
- kameltoz 7y ago
  Regarding road v rail freight efficiency. Most freight companies struggle with empty running on the truck's return leg home. In the UK roughly 30% of trucks on the roads are empty. [1] I was wondering how this compares with rail freight as I haven't found a comparative analysis online. [1]https://www.paragonrouting.com/en-gb/blog/post/empty-running-rise/ https://www.paragonrouting.com/en-gb/blog/post/empty-running...
- hokkos 7y ago
arno_app 7y ago
I wouldn't say railways are cheaper but they are definitely much more efficient and environment friendly. One of the big issues is it that is very hard to build new railway tracks. The current German infrastructure is already near the limit and the time and cost till a project starts (a lot of issues with people living near it, costs, regulations) is very high. All in all I think it's a good idea to improve existing infrastructure but not sure if it will scale.
- adrianN 7y ago
  German rail infrastructure is currently shrinking. It is no where near the limit. 2018 we had about 2500km less track than 2005.[1] [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/DB_Netz#Netzentwicklung https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/DB_Netz#Netzentwicklung
mschuster91 7y ago
> Aren't railways cheaper and more efficient anyway? The problem is that railways have massively higher investment costs than roads in construction plus there's roads everywhere but you can't build a freight rail line into the center core of Munich, for example.
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  Not always -- local service trains were effectively the pickup trucks of early forestry and mining operations, operating at low speeds (5-10 MPH) over temporarily-laid tracks which might be re-laid in a day or two to service new areas. Relatively this was fairly low-intensity, though modern engineering and safety requirements might limit such deployments. The comparative advantage was over hand- or animal-transport over unimproved or poorly-improved terrain.
dredmorbius 7y ago
Railroads do endpoint delivery -- last mile -- poorly. The height of the railroad era in the US actually saw the peak of the horse population -- moving goods the final or first mile, or block, to and from the railroad depot was a huge need. The automobile and lorry rapidly picked up this niche, but horses were used well into the 1920s. A train is an exceedingly good way to get goods or passengers from near point A to near point B. But if you want specific pickup and deivery, you either need to put everthing at ponts A and B (densification, tower construction), build an immense set of spur line (low raffic, high loal impact, low rate of return), develop an exceptonally efficient intermodal system (goods can coninue across multiple transport modes without major break-bulk costs -- shipping containers are an example). Or you have a means of accomplishing the final and initial delivery legs. Keep in mind that there are transport needs that concentrate poorly, with agriculture being a prime example. You might even call ag an industrial productive mode dominated by spatial (or areal) inputs. Keep in mind that the fundamental unit of area under old units, the acre, is literally defined as a daily work unit. In German, that is literally true: Tagwerk, a day's work. Which means that both the inputs and outputs of agriculture must be delivered over a sparse network not amenable to infrastructure-based optimisations. And running rail to every last field is a losing proposition. Asphalt or gravel roads are far less expensive infrastructure, and even electrifying those would be a high challenge. (Other materials sourcing operations face similar dynamics.)
michaelt 7y ago
If you were designing a country's infrastructure and industry with a clean sheet, a railway would certainly seem logical. This solution is the result of looking at the situation as it is right now (logistics mainly uses trucks, can we avoid changing that? We don't have land for new railways, can we avoid using extra land?) and trying to make an evolutionary improvement.
Arnt 7y ago
This isn't production deployment, it's an prototype. An experiment. Those still require justification, but not as much. Here's some handwaving: "We have a large existing road network and some heavily used spots. How well would it work to charge trucks while driving along the densest 0.7% of the road network?" Does this sound like a question one might spend money to answer?
Shivetya 7y ago
European trains have some limitations compared which push more freight towards trucks [1]. Compared to North American trains the carry less tonnage per axle, run shorter routes, with small number of cars, and lines are nationalized which limits profitability which in turn reduces the incentive to invest more into using them. However what is doing them in is the same which will do in most rail, whether cross country or in city. Efficiency of trucks and buses is increasing and the move towards electrification will remove the pollution then combined with autonomy and specialized vehicles will arise to displace both freight and passenger use [1] https://www.freightwaves.com/news/railroad/us-and-european-freight-railroads-are-on-different-tracks https://www.freightwaves.com/news/railroad/us-and-european-f...
imtringued 7y ago
Trains can't climb hills. Therefore railways can't be built everywhere which increases costs significantly.
- baud147258 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Federal_Railways https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Federal_Railways
  - porpoisemonkey 7y ago
    More context: They use rack-and-pinion railways in Switzerland [0][1] to accommodate the steep grades. > The trains are fitted with one or more cog wheels or pinions that mesh with this rack rail. This allows the trains to operate on steep grades above around 7 to 10%, which is the maximum for friction-based rail. [0] [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_railway https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_railway [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rack_railways_of_Switzerland https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rack_railways_of_Sw...
  - 24gttghh 7y ago
    I feel this list better convey's what you're going for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_steepest_gradients_on_adhesion_railways https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_steepest_gradients_on_...
_visgean 7y ago
Also on the topic: in the central europe there is extensive rail network. The problem is that is already used heavily for the transportation so it cant be used as extensively for freight...
Someone 7y ago
This is less efficient, but also requires a much smaller investment. That makes it viable for routes that aren’t busy enough to warrant building a rail system. Also, because they can take much steeper inclines and tighter corners, trolley buses can compete with trams in busy city centers if those cities have steep hills.

You can think of politics handing over a lot of money to only a few big companies for a research project. Its nothing more than that ;)

elaus 7y ago

I don't think this is meant as a replacement for long-distance transports (where trains and barges are already well established) but for the "last mile" where you need to transport only a few goods to varying destinations (but along an existing highway).

matteuan 7y ago
It looks like the "last mile" problem is not solved if they have this infrastucture only on highways. Probably this project makes sense with large batteries on-board(e.g. Tesla semi).
- geff82 7y ago
  They have a combustion engine on board that powers the truck when not driving on the highway.
- flohofwoe 7y ago
  In Germany you're never more than a few kilometers away from the next Autobahn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobahn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobahn Driving the "first and last" mile on diesel or battery and everything inbetween with electricity from the overhead wire makes a lot of sense IMHO, at least in Germany and countries with similar infrastructure.

NikkiA 7y ago

Railways are great for bulk transport of goods, but road trucking excels at smaller loads with finer-grained destination selection. The railway equivalent to what these trucks facilitate would be wagon-load freight, which is largely considered impractical in europe[0] and generally lost out to road trucking post war[1]. To explain why this isn't necessarily the case in america [0], it's important to understand that america didn't have a huge rebuilding effort post-war [1] that relocated industry away from the rail lines that had been servicing them for a hundred years. Post-war europe did have that rebuilding effort, and it saw a lot of medium industry spread out as the costs to remain in denser populated areas near rail hubs increase. Thus road networks became the feeders for these industries rather than proximity to rail freight depots and rail spurs. Maintaining wagon-load rail delivery in that environment became much more expensive as a result.

croisillon 7y ago
I think you forgot to post the [0] and [1] notes
- NikkiA 7y ago
  In this case I was using them as cross-references.
  - croisillon 7y ago
    oh ok!
kameltoz 7y ago
Regarding road v rail freight efficiency. Most freight companies struggle with empty running on the truck's return leg home. In the UK roughly 30% of trucks on the roads are empty. [1] I was wondering how this compares with rail freight as I haven't found a comparative analysis online. [1]https://www.paragonrouting.com/en-gb/blog/post/empty-running-rise/ https://www.paragonrouting.com/en-gb/blog/post/empty-running...
hokkos 7y ago

arno_app 7y ago

I wouldn't say railways are cheaper but they are definitely much more efficient and environment friendly. One of the big issues is it that is very hard to build new railway tracks. The current German infrastructure is already near the limit and the time and cost till a project starts (a lot of issues with people living near it, costs, regulations) is very high. All in all I think it's a good idea to improve existing infrastructure but not sure if it will scale.

adrianN 7y ago
German rail infrastructure is currently shrinking. It is no where near the limit. 2018 we had about 2500km less track than 2005.[1] [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/DB_Netz#Netzentwicklung https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/DB_Netz#Netzentwicklung

mschuster91 7y ago

> Aren't railways cheaper and more efficient anyway? The problem is that railways have massively higher investment costs than roads in construction plus there's roads everywhere but you can't build a freight rail line into the center core of Munich, for example.

dredmorbius 7y ago
Not always -- local service trains were effectively the pickup trucks of early forestry and mining operations, operating at low speeds (5-10 MPH) over temporarily-laid tracks which might be re-laid in a day or two to service new areas. Relatively this was fairly low-intensity, though modern engineering and safety requirements might limit such deployments. The comparative advantage was over hand- or animal-transport over unimproved or poorly-improved terrain.

dredmorbius 7y ago

Railroads do endpoint delivery -- last mile -- poorly. The height of the railroad era in the US actually saw the peak of the horse population -- moving goods the final or first mile, or block, to and from the railroad depot was a huge need. The automobile and lorry rapidly picked up this niche, but horses were used well into the 1920s. A train is an exceedingly good way to get goods or passengers from near point A to near point B. But if you want specific pickup and deivery, you either need to put everthing at ponts A and B (densification, tower construction), build an immense set of spur line (low raffic, high loal impact, low rate of return), develop an exceptonally efficient intermodal system (goods can coninue across multiple transport modes without major break-bulk costs -- shipping containers are an example). Or you have a means of accomplishing the final and initial delivery legs. Keep in mind that there are transport needs that concentrate poorly, with agriculture being a prime example. You might even call ag an industrial productive mode dominated by spatial (or areal) inputs. Keep in mind that the fundamental unit of area under old units, the acre, is literally defined as a daily work unit. In German, that is literally true: Tagwerk, a day's work. Which means that both the inputs and outputs of agriculture must be delivered over a sparse network not amenable to infrastructure-based optimisations. And running rail to every last field is a losing proposition. Asphalt or gravel roads are far less expensive infrastructure, and even electrifying those would be a high challenge. (Other materials sourcing operations face similar dynamics.)

michaelt 7y ago

If you were designing a country's infrastructure and industry with a clean sheet, a railway would certainly seem logical. This solution is the result of looking at the situation as it is right now (logistics mainly uses trucks, can we avoid changing that? We don't have land for new railways, can we avoid using extra land?) and trying to make an evolutionary improvement.

Arnt 7y ago

This isn't production deployment, it's an prototype. An experiment. Those still require justification, but not as much. Here's some handwaving: "We have a large existing road network and some heavily used spots. How well would it work to charge trucks while driving along the densest 0.7% of the road network?" Does this sound like a question one might spend money to answer?

Shivetya 7y ago

European trains have some limitations compared which push more freight towards trucks [1]. Compared to North American trains the carry less tonnage per axle, run shorter routes, with small number of cars, and lines are nationalized which limits profitability which in turn reduces the incentive to invest more into using them. However what is doing them in is the same which will do in most rail, whether cross country or in city. Efficiency of trucks and buses is increasing and the move towards electrification will remove the pollution then combined with autonomy and specialized vehicles will arise to displace both freight and passenger use [1] https://www.freightwaves.com/news/railroad/us-and-european-freight-railroads-are-on-different-tracks https://www.freightwaves.com/news/railroad/us-and-european-f...

imtringued 7y ago

Trains can't climb hills. Therefore railways can't be built everywhere which increases costs significantly.

baud147258 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Federal_Railways https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Federal_Railways
- porpoisemonkey 7y ago
  More context: They use rack-and-pinion railways in Switzerland [0][1] to accommodate the steep grades. > The trains are fitted with one or more cog wheels or pinions that mesh with this rack rail. This allows the trains to operate on steep grades above around 7 to 10%, which is the maximum for friction-based rail. [0] [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_railway https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_railway [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rack_railways_of_Switzerland https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rack_railways_of_Sw...
- 24gttghh 7y ago
  I feel this list better convey's what you're going for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_steepest_gradients_on_adhesion_railways https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_steepest_gradients_on_...

_visgean 7y ago

Also on the topic: in the central europe there is extensive rail network. The problem is that is already used heavily for the transportation so it cant be used as extensively for freight...

Someone 7y ago

This is less efficient, but also requires a much smaller investment. That makes it viable for routes that aren’t busy enough to warrant building a rail system. Also, because they can take much steeper inclines and tighter corners, trolley buses can compete with trams in busy city centers if those cities have steep hills.