Supporting a major transport integrated system in the UK, benefits and possibilities 

As Britain proceeds to unravel itself from European legislation, it would be prudent to suggest the country must simultaneously plan for the immediate introduction of systems of ‘best policies and best practice’ such that, as sectors of EU disconnection and separation are confirmed, so the best possible technical / legal / and bottom-line financial practices are put in place for immediate, seamless and efficient transgression to newer ‘open for business’ horizons.

Go to the profile of Doug Hutchinson
Oct 03, 2017
0
0
Upvote 0 Comment

A prerequisite for stand-alone Britain must be the national interest, not vested interest and the adoption of an efficient integrated transport system which seeks to minimise and effectively eliminate the major problems of congestion thus bringing about the reduction of energy and fuel imports which in turn leads to reducing pollution and pollution concentration centres. Here, the national interest must predominate in all decision making.

With the decision to develop a third runway at London’s Heathrow Airport (LHR) already taken, this must add to a much greater extent the potential for congestion occurring on the M25 and M4 Motorways in the West London area. Increased aircraft flights coupled with roadway and motorway increased traffic flows obviously lead to increased pollution generation and pollution concentrations in this area.

Motorway widening where possible, increased traffic signs, and increased interconnection with A (and possibly B) roads from the motorways, requires vast Capex and Opex expenditure which would not be forthcoming and highly undesirable in the immediate post Brexit period. An integrated transport system, at the premier transport level, offers the best way forward.

The adoption of a national integrated transport system has the advantages of:

  • Having a ‘spread of airports’ serving the various regions of the world, this would not over burden motorways and main roads as in the case of Heathrow.
  • This would also ensure all would not be brought to a standstill every time the country is invaded by fog, gales or heavy snowfalls.
  • A ‘spread of airports’ would enhance job creation right around the country.
  • It would enhance skills levels and higher job earnings right across the country.
  • It would lead to increased service industry expansion and job opportunities.
  • An integrated transport system would also lead to an increase in rail and sea port development, job opportunities and higher job earnings right up and down the country.
  • Inland heavy engineering rail communities together with heavy engineering coastal communities would be the beneficiaries.

All this is achievable whilst simultaneously reducing:

  • Treasury sapping fuel imports.
  • Highway capex / opex expenditure.
  • Pollution and pollution concentration centres.
  • Weather disruption potential.
  • And last but not leastnational security risk levels.

Motorway widening, resurfacing, traffic lighting, street lighting, more road signs (complicated, and confusing to read at speed) are all helpful, but demonstrably, they do not significantly reduce congestion.

Completely changing the way we use our road systems using integration techniques offers every chance of reducing congestion.

PGSL definition of congestion

Congestion occurs when the physical dimensions of the road is exceeded by the volume of traffic moving upon it. The weather, vehicle breakdowns, accidents of any and every description, national security issues and checks, community disasters of any and every kind are all contributors to causing traffic congestion. When any dimensional constriction occurs and the physical dimensions of the road is exceeded by the volume of traffic moving upon it, congestion, usually to a major extent, is the result.

Glibly stating ‘user pays’ – is not good enough, congestion charging is highway robbery, the user is already paying vast sums to use the roads, further taxing individuals (particularly the aged) and businesses to the limit is neither helpful or smart. The current roadway arteries are schematically typified throughout. The congestion in England is at the top of the overall congestion issue pile and for the most part, has been found to occur in the south east of the country. PGSL posed the question, ‘Why? And furthermore what could be done about it!’

Sea ports and container ports – The major seaports of Britain extend (clockwise) from Aberdeen and Forth, to Newcastle, Hull, Immingham, etc., around to Liverpool and Glasgow.

Britain’s ports industry handles 95% of all imports and exports by volume, approximately 500 million tonnes of freight and around 22 million international passengers per year. From the on-set it is important to know whilst the country has numerous ports (some 120 depending on one’s definition of what constitutes a port) some are dedicated ports such as ferry ports (Dover), container ports (Felixstowe) oil and energy importing ports (Milford Haven) then there are fishing ports leading all the way down to old ports which have become dedicated to harbouring leisure craft of all description. [1]

In considering ports in general it is important to understand that the majority of bulk sea freight traffic is concentrated in approximately 20 ports throughout the entire country; these ports handle some 88% of all freight imports and exports. [1]

In order to obtain the order of magnitude of the mass of diesel powered transport attending these ports via the country’s motorways and major roads systems is by referral to the Department for Transport (DfT) Seaports Statistical Release document dated September 1, 2017. This revealing document indicates a total of 484 million tonnes of freight were handled by the UK’s ports during 2016 and approximately 472.8 million tonnes went through these major ports. [2]

Seaport freight tonnages are further complicated by the country’s ferry ports taking short and long sea voyage passengers – as well as Roll on - roll off freight carrying trucks. Thus ferry ports traffic increased by 1% to 18.2 million units during 2016. [2]

Keeping the order of magnitude big picture in mind, the port of Felixstowe accounted for approximately 44% of all inward container unit traffic! However Felixstowe is nowhere near the country’s motorways - what must the roads be like in Suffolk and adjoining Norfolk, Lincolnshire, Cambridgeshire and Essex?

Not surprisingly, the largest increase in container traffic was recorded in London’s port locations which experienced a traffic increase of 24%, or an extra 8,600 units, bringing the total number of container units up to 449,000 units or 759,000 TEUs during 2016. That’s over three-quarters of a million containers in 2016!

An interesting term of container freight measurement has emerged – that of the TEU, which requires minor explanation. TEU stands for Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit - and thus applies to the standard 20-foot container. The standard 40-foot container therefore measures, in freight capacity terms, 2 x TEUs. Specialist forms of containers have been developed for special cargoes, however, these special applications are in a minority when compared to the vast volumes of container freight transported around Britain.

Outbound export traffic from UK ports was decreased slightly by 1 % to 180.9 million tonnes in 2016. With these huge number of units tabulated, one can reasonably conclude one of the main contributors to the country’s motorway and major (A-roads) congestion is seaport and container port transport.

A fact worth remembering is the oceans cover some 70% of the world’s surface and over 90% of the world’s trade is carried in ships. The world’s thirst for oil products led to the design, construction and commercial operation of what popularly became known as the super (oil) tanker – more specifically, very large crude (oil) carriers (VLCCs) and ultra-large crude carriers (ULCCs). Today ULCCs carry near to 500,000 tons of crude oil and have subsequently become the world’s largest ships. The technology so developed, led the way to developing the architecture for giant sized containerships, and they likewise, are now known as very large container vessels (VLCVs) and ultra-large container vessels (ULCVs).

Today’s VLCVs and ULCVs rival the world’s largest bulk carriers and oil tankers and a Danish company, the Maersk Shipping Company, has led the world in developing and operating a succession of these ultra large ships like the motor vessel MV Maersk McKinney Moller [3]

Whilst beauty of line, dramatic size and enormous TEU carrying capacity is something to marvel at, it is worthy of note that – every container needs a diesel fuel burning truck to deliver it to and from its destinations … throughout its entire lifetime! Every time a container is lifted requires either electrical or diesel fuel expenditure. Realist engineering anticipates it will be a very long time before battery powered trucks will assume or surpass the present flexibility and performance of today’ diesel container trucks.

In its day, the MV Maersk McKinney Moller was the largest container vessel of the Maersk Container fleet and in the world and was designed to transport 18,270 TEUs. This series of Maersk vessels were built to the company’s superb engineering design philosophy – the ‘Triple E’ formula – standing for economy of scale, efficiency in fuel consumption and environmental superiority. Its two diesel engines were 20% more fuel efficient and produced 20% less CO2 emissions than similar ships operating at that time.

Quantum leaps in container ship design continued and the containership size mantle for the world’s largest containership has been wrested by the Orient Overseas Container Line’s OOCL Hong Kong - which has the capacity to transport 21, 413 TEUs. The world’s largest containership OOCL Hong Kong entered the port of Felixstowe on June 22, 2017.

Clearly, if the potential for motorway congestion is to be minimised, non-essential, non-time-dependent, non-perishable goods sea-freight general and container transport requires to be substantially reduced wherever possible from motorways and major road systems. As in all practical plans, there has to be interim transition planning, interim management by objective and over a period of time, an implementation period in order to achieve the final intended objective.

An integrated transport system would allocate the vast majority of non-essential, non-time-dependent, non-perishable goods general container cargo to be directed onto an enlarged, energy efficient rail system and a specially developed energy efficient coastal shipping system. Britain’s steel industry, and the country’s rail and coastal shipbuilding industries, together with engine and ship and port equipment manufacturing would be invigorated up and down the country.

It is anticipated more than half of the containers entering / leaving Britain would constitute non-essential, non-time-dependent, non-perishable goods general container cargo; this vast tonnage conservatively (say) 200 million tonnes could well be progressively and systematically removed from our motorways and road systems with the attendant reductions of fuel-burn and pollution generation.

Rail and coastal vessels could carry infinitely more containers (hundreds) for less fuel consumption and therefore less pollution in generation.

It should be known, countries like Australia, by design, have not built bridges over their main line railways. With no height restrictions, Australia’s freight trains have now been developed to carry double the amount of containers (one on top of the other) on its cross-country rail networks. These mega-trains lengths are measured in kilometres! Australia seems to have nailed the problem from the very commencement with clear thinking and implementation in one hit! But then we’ve always known they were great batsmen!

Another important issue is seaport and container port depth of water and physical location. The largest containerships are also the heavy-lift, long distance runners of the marine world – principally employed on the Asia – Europe run. These VLCVs and ULCVs are not dedicated to operate between single ports. The Far East trade demands the vessels visit Britain and chiefly northern European ports.

For these seagoing giants, Britain’s deep water ports of convenience lie along its south and south-eastern coasts, enroute to the economies of northern Europe. Thus, if a cargo for (say) Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales or the north and west of England is off-loaded, it will be most probably be trucked from Southampton London, or Felixstowe to its destination in those regions.

All three deliveries will demand motorway transportation, generally on the A1 and A1 Motorway (A1M), the M1, M6, M4, M3, and of course the infamous M25.

Similarly a significant proportion of Roll on – Roll off European bound freight will be directed to the ferry ports located in the south and south east of the country and in all probability these Ro-Ro vehicles will also use the same motorway routes to the ferry boarding ports.

Up to now, we have concentrated on seaport, chiefly container freight, however, there are ports dedicated to the importation of energy oil and gas products.

Energy usage in the UK has remained reasonably stable on balance. On the one hand electrical energy usage has fallen due to the loss of high electrical energy consuming manufacturing such as steel making. Electrical energy demand has also fallen because of the adoption by businesses and households using energy reduction strategies and more efficient appliances. Thus, from the electrical energy standpoint, the UK has relied less on coal derived electrical energy, thus importing less coal and the nuclear plants together with rapidly increasing alternative renewable energy plants, notably wind, hydro-electric, biomass and solar energy generating plants have thus proliferated. It is worthy to note that the UK has under-sea electrical links with France and The Netherlands and is increasingly importing electrical power from these sources.

Britain obtains approximately 45% of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from North Sea sources; some 17% of LNG is imported via ports like Milford Haven, whilst the remaining 38% is imported from European pipelines (Norway). Note approximately 35 % of EU gas is imported from Russia.

Gas is transported and distributed via pipeline, whilst crude stocks are transferred from ship to shore via pipeline and processed in refineries to produce chiefly diesel, gasoline, aviation fuels and lubricating oils. The oil industry learned long ago that pipelines were the most efficient way to transporting energy and finished product fuels and so, end-of-the-line diesel and gasoline tanker lorries distribute these products to our villages, towns and cities via motorways. Whilst road oil product tanker vehicles have also proliferated significantly over the years, in numbers, they are nowhere near the numbers of container vehicles. A further note is that oil products road tankers of necessity more frequently use our A roads as they distribute their products to villages, towns and cities. [4]

To further illustrate seaport tonnages transported (million tonnes), the key seaports utilising the motorways and main road systems are shown along with order of magnitude of tonnages handled in 2013 / 2014. [5]

Sea Ports (General cargo & containers)

2013

2014

Grimsby & Immingham

62.6

59.4

London

43.2

44.5

Tees / Hartlepool

37.6

39.5

Southampton

35.8

36.7

Milford Haven

41.1

34.3

Liverpool

31.1

31.0

Felixstowe

26.2

28.1

Dover

25.3

27.6

Forth

26.4

24.6

Belfast

16.8

16.8

TOTALS

346.10

342.50

(Reference – Gov’t Annual Port Freight Statistics 2014)

Ferry Ports

In order to obtain the order of magnitude of the vehicle and passenger statistics utilising Britain’s ferry ports one has to refer to the Department for Transport (DfT) Seaports Statistical Release dated February 22, 2017 – Provisional Sea Passenger Statistics 2016. [6]

Ferry Ports by definition attract and handle huge volumes of private automobile and road haulage transport. The problem is exacerbated by ‘peak season deluges’ of traffic. Thus, a fixed dimensional motorway/major roadway when subjected to ‘deluge’ volumes of traffic – undoubtedly has the potential for major hold-ups and prolonged congestion.

Major Ferry Ports & Motorways are schematically typified below.

Again, the country’s major ferry ports are principally concentrated on the country’s east coast, south east, London and our south coastal areas. Short sea passenger numbers totalled 20.0 million in 2016. The busiest route was Dover – Calais which has consistently accounted for between 46 % and 51% of ferry port traffic amounting to some 9.1 million passengers.

DfT categorises the ferry port passenger situation as follows:

Port Group

2016 Passengers (millions)

Thames & Kent

12.0

South Coast

3.0

West Coast

2.7

East Coast

2.3

 

For the same year Channel Tunnel passengers numbered 20.6 million and whilst tunnel passengers bypass the ferry port melee, these passengers descend on London and Euro Star’s St Pancras International Station by road, rail and underground rail links. Thus 20 million passengers got to the Euston and King’s Cross areas of London and must have utilised the M25 and its feed-in tributaries.

Thus vehicular traffic on all motorways and major roads leading to the south eastern corner of the country contribute very heavily to the problem of congestion in this area.

Up to now, the discussion has only highlighted traffic congestion; but huge concentrations of commercial activity introduces people into the equation. The south east and greater London area is densely populated and this puts considerable strain on housing and housing prices, food and commodities supply and prices, utilities, electricity, water, gas supply and prices – then of course there are the social issues of hospitals, schools, police, fire and the ever-looming issues of community security, however, these are spin-off topics associated with massive commercial activity, over-crowding and congestion and are not the main subject matter of this discussion paper.

Airports

Airports also impose immense passenger and air-freight traffic volumes on the motorway / major roads systems of the country. London Heathrow passenger volumes alone account for over 73 million passengers a year.

To convey the overall airport traffic volumes carried by motorways / the major roads systems – a table of the London Airports and the 10 largest British Airports are shown. Full acknowledgement and compliments must be given to Wikipedia’s derivations of airport passenger numbers, based on UK CAA statistics, which points the way to motorway and major roads vehicular passenger, air-freight traffic and thus an indication of traffic density. [7] Precisely how every passenger gets to and from airports in Britain is not exactly known, however, the passenger volumes indicate where in the country and in roughly what proportions of congestion contributing factors exist.

Airports in the greater London Area now handle some 71 % of the nation’s airport passengers. Thus London and the South East are at the very heart of enormous passenger up-lift. [7] These enormous quantities of passengers and air-freight volumes are concentrated in the Greater London area’s motorway and major road systems, notably, the M25 and all its feeder tributaries. A1M, M11, M2, M20, M23, M3, M4, M40 and M1 converge onto the M25 to deliver passengers to these airports.

London Area Airports (by total passengers) 2015 and 2016.

Airport

Total Passengers 2015

Total Passengers 2016

###span#< Change

London Heathrow

74,985,748

75,711,130

1.0  

London Gatwick

40,269,087

43,119,628

7.1  

London Stansted

22,519,178

24,320,071

10.8

London Luton

12,263,505

14,645,619

11.1

London City

4,319,301

4,538,813

4.5

London Southend

900,648

874,549

2.9

Passenger Totals

155,257,467

163,209,810

 

Wikipedia from CAA statistics:

A glance at the tables shown indicates London area airports handle nearly double, the passengers of the next 10 largest regional airports in the country!

Typified Airport distribution England and Wales

10 Major Regional UK Airports (by total passengers)

Airport

Total Passengers 2015

Total Passengers 2016

###span#< Change

Manchester

23,136,047

25,637,054

10.8  

Edinburgh

11,114,587

12,348,425

 11.1  

Birmingham

10,187,122

11,645,334

 14.3  

Glasgow

8,714,307

9,327,193

7.0  

Bristol

6,786,790

7,610,780

12.1  

Belfast Int’l

4,391,292

5,147,546

17.2

Newcastle

4,562,853

4,807,906

5.4

Liverpool

4,301,495

4,778,939

11.1

East Midlands

4,450,862

4,653,818

 4.6

Leeds Bradford

3,455,445

3,612,117

4.5

Passenger Totals

81,100,800

89,569,112

 

Wikipedia from CAA statistics:

Congestion observations

Further survey of the major road system reveals:

  • Nine (9) motorways converge onto one motorway around London – the M25 motorway was designed to handle 100,000 vehicles a day but now is plagued to accommodate double that volume, 200,000 vehicles per day. According to the AA, the most frequently asked question by motorists on its online route planner is: “How can I avoid the M25?” [8]
  • The vast volume of England’s seaport, container port, sea-ferry port and now airport traffic lies within the black dotted lined sector and can only use the fixed dimensional motorways / major road systems shown. The potential for congestion and gridlock is ever present. Apart from anything else, this situation is no longer good enough for our national security.
  • Widening modifications has alleviated some congestion at certain locations and at certain peak times of the day. In some places the motorway has been widened to 12 lanes – but even this cannot cure London’s or the M25’s congestion problems. [9]
  • More and more enlargements have meant more lights and traffic signs which potentially distract and confuse motorists travelling at controlled speeds in high traffic densities. The motorway now has 10,606 lights and 2,959 illuminated signs along its length. [9] Whilst rail services are available to the newish and the largest of the Thames container ports, the DP Gateway container port located at Thurrock in Essex, (3.5 million TEUs a year), the Thames container ports of Tilbury and Thamesport also very heavily rely on the M25 motorway.
  • One train or coastal ship can transport infinitely more freight per gallon of distillate engine fuel used and so rail and coastal shipping alternatives leap to the fore.
  • Motorway congestion affects national security as well as the nation’s economy. Create a massive motorway problem and response times to any national security or other emergency will undoubtedly be adversely affected. Also read about BMW’s just in time ‘Mini’ automobile manufacturing works centred in Cowley near Oxford, Hams Hall (engines) and Swindon (body pressings & sub-assemblies) [9]
  • Fog / gales / snow and ice conditions invariably inflict severe traffic problems, hold-ups and congestion conditions.
  • On a fixed dimension motorway/major roads network, the removal of as much non-essential, non-time-dependent, non-perishable good general container cargo traffic can logically be removed by utilising, up-grading and/or extending rail networks and coastal shipping systems.

Overall policy direction

Whilst Britain progressively disconnects itself from EU legislation, it has to simultaneously, plan for the future.

The decision to develop a third runway at LHR has been taken and this will undoubtedly increase the potential for congestion, pollution, pollution concentrations and issues relating to national security.

A Policy has to be developed such that details the integration of transport services, firstly at the very top primary motorways / major roads level across the country.

Realisation summary - motorways

  • Substantive amounts of bulk and container freight is arriving and being unloaded in the south eastern and southern British ports destined for delivery to the South West, Wales, the Midlands the north of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Goods for export travel in the reverse direction.
  • The undesirable effects are increased fuel burn thus increasing national fuel imports, pollution and pollution concentrations in areas of congestion complexities.
  • The adverse effects of congestion have, and will continue to, necessitated excessive highway Capex/Opex expenditure.
  • The 117-mile M25 ring road has been without doubt a huge arterial success connecting the nation with the capital and undoubtedly contributing immensely to our national economic growth and prosperity. The growth experienced in the south east and south is now so large that the volume of traffic generated has to all intents and purposes doubled. [10]
  • The further expansion of Heathrow airport means the M25 is to be modified again. Apparently, this modification will require the motorway to run beneath the third runway involving extensive tunnelling; another solution apparently under consideration is the runway being constructed on a slope over the road. [10]
  • Highways England (HE) who manage the motorways, and Transport for London (TfL) (interconnections) are obviously looking for solutions. Both HE and London’s DfT warn of the substantial risk of excessive road user frustration during what promises to be a complex and prolonged period of M25 re-construction. [10]
  • Highways England has proposed building a multi-billion-pound road tunnel under the Thames east of Gravesend in a bid to reduce pressure on the QE II Bridge (Dartford crossing) at an estimated cost of some £4.3 to £5.9 billion. [10]
  • Apparently a number of local MPs want to see the new crossings built at Dartford, thus adding to congestion chaos. [10]
  • It is worthy of note, around 50 million people use the QEII bridge each year; this is estimated to be an increase of 20 million since it was opened. [10]
  • New motorways, bridges, crossovers, tunnels, permissions, land acquisition, construction and funding all take years, in some cases tens of years.
  • Flat based container rail cars can be mass produced and commence being brought into service within six months. Coastal shipping vessels would take a little longer, but today’s shipbuilding industry also has its own mass-production techniques. Thus, the removal of conservatively 200 to 250 million tonnes equivalent of general port and container non-essential, non-time-dependent, non-perishable freight could commence to become a reality within 9 to 18 months at the maximum.
  • Essentially, the vast bulk of non-essential, non-time-dependent, non-perishable container cargo can be transported to end users by rail and/or coastal shipping.
  • Containers carrying medical, perishable food or military / government essential supplies – will be allowed onto the British road network and operate in a roaming capacity servicing destinations around the country.
  • Coastal shipping and rail networks must integrate with the major container / sea freight ports.
  • The general policy will be such that sea-freight cargo can be exported from, or delivered to, the nearest rail terminal or nearest seaport.
  • Falmouth and Plymouth particularly, are good deep water ports and should be the next destined for container and general cargo seaport development. These ports are suitable (depth of water) to accommodate VLCVs and ULCVs thus diverting port and container trucks away from the south-eastern / greater London areas. Falmouth and Plymouth could also become the preferred ports for all trans-Atlantic trade thus reducing shipping congestion in the English Channel.
  • Avonmouth, Cardiff, Pembroke and Milford Haven together with Holyhead will be similarly studied and appropriately developed to maximise potential usage.
  • A resurgence of the rail and coastal shipping industries would rejuvenate the steel industry, the railway industry, shipbuilding, marine engine manufacture and all marine support industries.

Realisation summary - seaports

  • Essentially, the vast bulk of non-essential, non-time-dependent, non-perishable container cargo can be transported to end users by rail and/or coastal shipping.
  • Containers carrying medical, perishable food or military / government essential supplies – will be allowed onto the British road network and operate in a roaming capacity servicing destinations around the country.
  • Coastal shipping and rail networks must integrate with the major container / sea freight ports.
  • The general policy will be such that sea-freight cargo can be exported from, or delivered to, the nearest rail terminal or nearest seaport.
  • Falmouth and Plymouth particularly, are good deep water ports and should be the next destined for container and general cargo seaport development. These ports are suitable (depth of water) to accommodate VLCVs and ULCVs thus diverting port and container trucks away from the south-eastern / greater London areas. Falmouth and Plymouth could also become the preferred ports for all trans-Atlantic trade thus reducing shipping congestion in the English Channel.
  • Avonmouth, Cardiff, Pembroke and Milford Haven together with Holyhead will be similarly studied and appropriately developed to maximise potential usage.
  • A resurgence of the rail and coastal shipping industries would rejuvenate the steel industry, the railway industry, shipbuilding, marine engine manufacture and all marine support industries.

Realization summary - airports

  • Flights to/from North America should predominately be conducted from Manchester and airports on the western side of the country. Exeter, Bristol, Birmingham, Liverpool, and Glasgow. LHR and Gatwick predominate now, but must now not be considered for any further airport expansion.
  • The London / Manchester high speed rail link would receive greater utilisation and revenue earnings if it can truly link Manchester with London for the air travelling public.
  • If disused railway lines still mar our countryside up and down the country, they can now be put to good use and be re-dedicated to heavy haulage general cargo and containerisation.
  • Flights to/from northern and central Europe should predominately be from Aberdeen, Edinburgh, Newcastle and Humberside.
  • Flights to/from central and southern Europe should predominantly be from Humberside, Norwich, Stanstead, LHR, Gatwick, Southend and Lydd.
  • Flights to/from South America and Africa should be from Southampton, Bournemouth and Exeter. All further reducing traffic inflows into the south east and London area.
  • LHR would remain as is. No further airports or runway additions and expansion.
  • More runways at Heathrow and the suggested creation of a new airport in the Thames estuary should be shelved since this further increases the potential for congestion on the M25, together with London, and chiefly Essex, Sussex and Kent which are already overcrowded with seaport, ferry port and airport traffic.

Policy benefits

Policy changes

  • Having a ‘spread of airports’ serving the various regions of the world, would help ensure all would not be brought to a standstill every time the country is invaded by adverse weather conditions.
  • This spread of airports would lessen the current over-load effects of the greater London airports region.
  • Essentially, the vast bulk of non-essential, non-time-dependent, non-perishable container cargo can be transported to end users by rail and/or coastal shipping, thus alleviating the congestion in the south east.
  • Containers carrying medical, perishable food or military or government essential supplies – will be allowed onto the British road network and operate in a roaming capacity to destinations around the country. This avoids emergencies within the National Health Service, supermarkets and military and all government services.
  • Job creation right around the country.
  • Enhance skills levels and higher job earnings right across the country.
  • Enhanced steel industry, rail industry, ship building and all associated support industry expansion.
  • Increased coastal community development up and down the country.

Resource reductions

  • Substantial reduction in fuel (diesel) imports with a reduction in attendant pollution.
  • Substantial reduction in highway capex / opex expenditure.
  • A reduction in potential weather disruption and national security risks.

References  

[1]

  • Major Ports Organisation
  • Http://ukmajorports.org.uk/about/the-uk-ports-industry.

[2]

  • Department for Transport (DfT) Seaports Statistical Release - dated September 1, 2017.
  • Https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/port-freight-statistics-2016-final-figures.

[3]          

  • Maersk Shipping Company – part of A P Moller – Maersk Group – integrated transport & Logistics Company with multiple brands and is a global leader in container shipping and ports.
  • http://www.maersk.com/.

[4]          

  • See Telegraph - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/0/why-the-uk-is-using-less-energy-but-importing-more---and-why-it/.
  • See British Gas - https://www.britishgas.co.uk/the-source/our-world-of-energy/energys-grand-journey/where-does-uk-gas-come-from.
  • See Centrica

[5]          

  • UK Gov’t Annual Port Freight Statistics 2014
  • https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/port-freight-statistics-2014-final-figures.

[6]         

  • Department for Transport (DfT) Statistical Release – Provisional Sea Passenger Statistics 2016 22 February 2017
  • https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/provisional-sea-passenger-statistics-2016.      

[7]          

  • https://en.wikipedia.org/.../Busiest_airports_in_the_United_Kingdom_by_total_passengers.
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_transport_in_the_United_Kingdom.

[8]         

  • www.ibtimes.co.uk/LifeStyle/Travel.
  • http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/happy-birthday-m25-25-facts-infamous-motorway-239455.
  • https://www.skanska.co.uk/expertise/projects/57004/M25-Motorway%2C-UK.

[9]         

  • See BMW manufacturing UK - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plant_Oxford.

[10]        

  • See Evening Standard - https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/britains-most-hated-motorway-the-m25-turns-30-years-old-a3381706.html.

About Power Generation Services Ltd (PGSL) 

Power Generation Services Ltd commenced life in Hong Kong in 1992 after the founder and owner (Douglas Hutchinson) had completed 3 x 2 year contracts working in China on what was at that time, the largest joint venture, conventional power station project in the country, namely, the US$ 540 million, 700 megawatt, coal fired, Shajiao ‘B’ power station project situated in Guangdong Province. Hutchinson, as Power Company Operations Manager, ran the project for the first six years of operation.

The World Bank and various (Asian) members of IFC came to study the Shajiao ‘B’ project and Hutchinson was later asked to write and present a paper to The World Bank / USAID organisations for their “Private Sector Power in Asia” conference held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on 27 - 29 October 1992 covering the private power experience in China.

In the past 25 years PGSL have successfully completed projects in 20 countries.

Go to the profile of Doug Hutchinson

Doug Hutchinson

Director, Power Generation Services Pty Ltd

Career achievement, - working as Power Company Operations Manager on the US$ 540 million, 700 MW, joint venture, Shajiao 'B' power generation project in Guangdong Province PRC, the World Bank / IFC came to study the project and Doug was later asked to write and present a paper to The World Bank / USAID organisations for their " Private Sector Power in Asia" conference held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, on 27 - 29 October 1992 covering the private power experience in China. Author – Central Electricity Generating Board – A Method Study Approach to Power Station Operation. Author - IET Eng/Ref - Overview, Asset Management, Gas Turbine Power Stations. STEM Ambassador – UK

No comments yet.