www.viewpoint.net.nz - NZ Transport, Aviation, Logistics & Supply Chain Blog

Climate change cost?

I read this article in the October truck and driver magazine and thought I would post an excerpt here:

The biggest risk to the transport sector arising from climate change won’t be the change itself … but poorly-based Government polices, New Zealand Institute of Economic Research director Brent Layton told the RTF Conference.

“If the policy changes to deal with climate change are well thought through, aimed at minimising greenhouse gas emissions at minimum cost to the economy, applied evenly to different business sectors and are formulated so as to not reduce NZ’s competitiveness compared with other countries, then their impact is likely to be modest – and the impact on the road transport industry likewise. ...

“There are increasing signs that policy advisers seem keener to offer advice that is acceptable to the Government rather than giving the best advice. Finally, there is the strong political interest locally in emission control, so of it manifesting itself as an urge to see NZ leading the charge to save the world.

On the transport-specific front, climate change and environment issues seem to be a magnet for people that feel that cars, and by association trucks, are obviously bad, so that something which is against there use is obviously good.

The worry is that we’ll end up with NZ instituting polices that lead globally, but end up tilting the playing field unevenly. A subsidy for biofuels is example of this type of approach.”

I agree with what Brent is saying. There seems to be this ground swell of opinion that we need to lead the world in being green. But at what cost?

People really don’t want to look at climate change objectively.

“It is the trucks fault and trucking companies need to fix it … dirty smelly trucks” seems to be the feeling and yet the same people demand more and more consumer choice (which means more and more trucks). The same people jump on a 747, which uses 16 tonnes of fuel just to take off (The equivalent of running six cars for a year).

It is convenient to point the finger at just the transport industry. Then it is not my problem.

The solution needs to be found in a holistic approach to the supply chain. Something I fear (know) our government will not do.

 

Infrastructure Rant – Part 2

I was on the North Shore last night and I saw all the work and expense going into the bus lanes. I wondered how many people are actually going to use the bus when the are bus lanes?

I couldn’t help but wonder what would have happened if they had decided to put rail in instead. If they had decided to close two lanes of the Harbour Bridge and make it rail. (I know it is probably not technically possible due to the incline but bear with me).

Suddenly you are sitting in 3 lanes on the harbour bridge rather than 4, watching the trains fly by. Would you then look at catching a train tomorrow if you really don’t need your car at work?

You bet!

Quickly transport movements are freed up and productivity improves.

Steve W raised 2 really valid points to my last post.
1) Auckland is an isthmus. In my view this further drives the need to act now, as it takes longer to make tunnels and bridges.
2) The second crossing needs to be joint rail and road. I agree if it doesn’t have rail and connection into southern rail network Auckland is stuffed.

Finally, in my last post I said that strong leadership is needed. Ideally that would come in the form of one strong leader with the desire and mandate to fix the problem.

The problem in Auckland is far greater than that however. There is no one body that really controls Auckland. The councils are often out to protect their interests rather than collaboratively work together. Even when they have the right intentions and start working together it appears Central Government and Transit slow the process to a grinding halt.

What’s needed, in my view?
Either, one regional council that combines all of the councils. This makes the most sense for the long-term planning and productivity of Auckland, but I suspect will take 3 – 5 years too long to really happen and will only be a half hearted attempt.

Or Central Government appointed relentless leadership (not a commission of inquiry or working party) who have the legal mandate to steam roll Transit and the councils with clear short-term goals to make it happen.

 

Infrastructure Rant – Part 1

We need strong, long term leadership to fix Aucklands problems and we need it now!

The most noticeable thing to me when I first hit Melbourne was the infrastructure!

They actually have a transport infrastructure.

They have a motorway from the airport to the city and beyond. You can get everywhere in the city by Train, Tram or Bus. You can pick-up a rental car in the centre of Melbourne at 8:30 in the morning drive aimlessly around the central city and get onto a motorway in 10 minutes. Even as I left the city the inbound traffic was mildly congested, maybe 10 minutes slower than normal.

Compare that to Auckland with a population half the size.

The second thing I notice is that when they decide to build a road. They build it. They work around the clock to make it happen (Oh, that means they get lots done at night when the traffic is not around) If it is a critical road they pull out all the stops with the consent process and push it through.

Compare that to Auckland. The Greenlane intersection (which is outside our Auckland Office) will take 9 months longer to complete, will be have grown in cost from $14 million to $26 million dollars.

I was in Auckland this week and there was no work happening on it at all. What would I expect? After all it was the school holidays and traffic is lighter so it makes perfect sense to do nothing.

“Almost finished the upgrading of the Green Lane intersection” is the first transport highlight that Dick Hubbard sights on his website as a reelection highlight. 9 months late and $12 millions dollars over spent. Now that’s a highlight.

I know that not all cities in Australia have the infrastructure and planning that Melbourne has. But at least when they decide it is needed. They do something. In New Zealand we talk and talk and talk and talk. But nothing happens. Nothing.

Auckland in all reality is not any better off than it was 15 years ago when I joined the industry. No light rail, no real improvement to inner city traffic.

If we want to continue to grow as a country. We need strong leaders that will make it happen.

I find it all quiet disheartening and can see why 2,000 people a week head off to Aussie.