The Hamburg Port Authority’s Impressive IoT Project – Forbes #fremantle

The Hamburg Port Authority (HPA) has engaged in the most impressive Internet of Things (IoT) projects that the logistics industry has seen. And their work is not yet done. Sascha Westermann, the Head of ITS and Intermodal Traffic Management, spoke at SAPinsider on March 21st about HPA’s progress to date and […]

Source: The Hamburg Port Authority’s Impressive IoT Project – Forbes

Interesting to read the comments on Freoview today in regards so the blog post titled.

FREMANTLE CITY REINVENTING THE PORT DEVELOPMENT WHEEL

No surprise that commentators, comments actually disagree with the point they are trying to make. Stating that modern ports don’t need to be as large as they used to be contridict the point they make later about having to built a new port to cater for expansion.

Fremantle port can dispense allot more TEU’s than it does now, but it is restricted with its trucks movements as not to flood the local road network with trucks, jamming the entire local network making its decades out dated road network completely congested.

What the new port crowd will not tell is about ports that are completely residential locked and with no space to expand, are they moving as the anti-port crowd wants for Freo, of course not they are mechanizing, becoming more efficient and investing in technology and infrastructure , something that Fremantle council fights constantly against.

Here is a couple of quotes from Fobres magazine April 2016 on the 2nd busiest container port in Europe with over 40,000 TRUCK movements a day. Europe use trucks for port and container movements, you wouldn’t believe it with all the anti-truck & car crap you hear from a select elite self appointed  few in Fremantle.

“The Port of Hamburg is the second busiest container port in Europe, and is a key trade lane connecting Eastern Europe to Germany and the rest of the world. The HPA is in charge of providing efficient infrastructure in the port area: managing the real estate; making sure quay walls, bridges, wharves and other waterfront structures are maintained, maintaining 140 kilometers of roads and 130 bridges within the port area, and managing the traffic,

Over 9 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) are transported through the port every year, and this is forecast to double by 2025. But the Hamburg Port is located in an urban area and they cannot increase the size of the port to handle increased traffic. To handle shipments efficiently, the HPA must operate smarter. Better traffic management also helps to minimize pollution. The port and city are impacted by up to 40,000 truck trips daily and no one wants those trucks spending a high amount of time idling.”

European port can you believe, the statistics, nothing like the BS we here from the anti establishment crowd, completely distorting the facts on what is going on overseas to suit their own personal and political agendas.

So the second biggest port in the EU.

  • 140kms of Roads
  • 130 bridges
  • Tunnels (can’t do that in Freo the world may end our suburb may fall into it. Strangely the rest of the worlds cities, have networks of tunnels under them, Freo we prefer, folklore over fact and evil tunnel stories to scare our kids with.)
  • Traffic management, not anti car as Freo council but management.
  • 9,000,000 TEUs movements, compared to Freo’s 700,000 a year, whats the difference, roads, tunnels, bridges, thousands of trucks infrastructure not quite the story painted by Freo’s anti car and truck political elite.
  • 40,000 truck visits a day, WHAT trucks in Europe ins’t it all on rail, powered by wind and solar power, you mean they use trucks running on diesel in the middle of residential area with a population of 1,700,000 people not quite the same as freo’s 30,000 is it.

Never let the facts get in the way of a bullshit story.

Fremantle Hacked, Don’t drink the coolaid Freo your getting a con j ob story from a few designed to scare the mass for their ideological purpose.

Oh and for container ships the draft is only one issue for efficient loading we need cranes that can get out to width of the vessel the draft is less important as thats more about harbour depth and dredging.

Its amazing how just one new crane in Freo about 2103 significantly increased the efficiency of Freo port operations. Imagine what 4 would do?

So why do we need a new port which would need the same new cranes anyway, oh right, they hate roads etc, they will have to build twice as much road space to make their new harbour work, plus new break-yards, and have freight travel twice the distance, all in the name of efficiency and pollution reduction.

LOL. Where does the BS stop.

Oh and all that development still leaves freo for freight, trucks, trains, and passenger vehicles numbers worse off after they only invest in the new harbour.

Make sense, NO, right so “Dont Drink the Coolaid”,  its all they are selling.

 

 

Ambitious plan to transform Freo port – The West Australian

Waterfront homes for thousands of people, an international standard cruise ship terminal and a $1 billion boost to State Government coffers are key outcomes of an ambitious plan to change the face of the southern side of Fremantle port.

 

Source: Ambitious plan to transform Freo port – The West Australian

 

More pie in the sky spin from our Mayor Brad Pettitt

How many decades before such infrastructure could be built and with Fremantle’s geographical  location would it ever warrant such a development for the cruise ship industry, the state gov would need to get commitment from the cruise industry before developing such a place, to ensure it just didn’t become unused infrastructure.
Barnett has already said live export would move to the outer harbour once its built. So why is bringing this into his discussion as its moving anyway.

No need to move the car off load for RORO and double the distance for cars to be delivered to car yards, just make this part of the development.

The picture attached of Broadwater is hardly a good comparison as this area of the gold coast is all estuaries, mariners, beaches, residential development, leisure activities parks etc.

The google link above to the map or earth shot is movable and can zoom in and out so have a look just touch and drag to explore it.

Not what fremantle harbour is, being active cargo port, narrow river mouth surrounded by concrete.


What escapes the Mayors grasp of reality or suits his latest agenda is without a proper road network how will the thousands of guests and crew, new residences, workers get in and out of the city area in a efficient manner.
He and his council have made our road system into a dogs breakfast with their Anti-car platform.
Not to mention he needs to remove the rail out of the way, as this will also be a problem for development of residential apartments with trains riding down the side of it with heavy freight rail at night. Which would just create another problem.

Attached here is a link (Click to see it) to a post I wrote a while back, doing some of things this idea above mentions, but also deals with removing the heavy rail from traveling through town,

  • Sorts out the traffic problems,
  • Opens the north side of Freo up to more residential use and provides better access PT to new residents,
  • Opens north Freo back to the beach fronts,
  • Slashes traffic movements down Stirling Hwy
  • Cuts traffic of South st
  • Diverts, trucks off Hampton road heading south or north
  • Removes passengers vehicles from Fremantle who are only driving through to get somewhere else.
  • Opens up poor used land for better use in the north port side
  • Brings back a village feel to the Tydeman road precinct, well till Sullivans try’s to approve a 15 story building for it.
  • Lowers noise pollution
  • Makes our local roads safer
  • Lowers emissions to the local area, by taking away the stop start of heavy vehicles making them more efficient.
  • Opens up the heavy freight line running south of Freo back to PT (Public Tranport), linking the new developing suburbs to the rail stations, with rail cutting the need for people to park and ride in town.
  • Giving space for more cycle and pedestrian ways.
  • Opens the possibility to link the north lines PT rail to Freo in a circle line opening up direct PT rail to Cockburn and the Mandurah line also allowing a rail service with one change to the hospital and Murdoch.
  • All while keeping an operational port in town.
  • Improving Freo’s Green space and lowering the amount of concrete surface our council loves so much.

In case it’s escaped his attention the outer harbour is not planned to replace Fremantle port but be a spill over once Freo harbour/port reaches a cap which is higher than its current container movements right now.

.
Which will put more freight on rail without increasing the % moved on rail and will bring more container Trucks to our suburb as he was against the infrastructure that would have removed them. Being the PFL, Roe 8 or Roe 9 or which ever way its portrayed.

.
So too add to the congestion he proposed thousands more to come to work, in the city and more visitors while he wants NO new roads, while increasing freight rail through town, creating More division and social problems and less car parking.

.
Sounds like a recipe for disaster, but at least we have a rapid charging point for EV in town and guaranteed you can get pissed at a noisy concert right in the centre of a what was a quiet historic area of town, now  heavily used for residential.

.
Maybe that’s the plan with J-shed if the noise is loud enough from his approved, piss up concerts, it may drown out the noise from the trains.

Oh and Paul I think this is offering a solution while disagreeing with another POV, just in case you missed that point again.

Mayors exchange words

MELVILLE Mayor Russell Aubrey has criticised the City of Cockburn for backing a $290 million road project to unlock traffic in Perth’s south-east

Source: Mayors exchange words

Good to see both Mayors of Melville and Cockburn driving development that will make their own citys, less congested, more efficient, more productive, safer, better for emplyment etc.

The ALP seem to have no issues building new roads, with great promises to Armadale and Cockburn.

I hope they have a big budget as Metronet and the Outer Harbour looks like costing them 10 billions on just to projects. I wonder if that leaves any money for the Freo area or are we due to miss out again on any state funds.

Cockburn is driving for new roads and connections to keep their area, driving forward with development. Of course they want the Outer Harbour to develop and possibly more importantly the Lat 32 giving the area a huge boost in revenue, developments and jobs.

Seems that both Roe 8 and the outer harbour will have environmental impacts.

Back to Freo with all the chat on the various issues and views, if Roe 8 and Roe 9 don’t go ahead what will be done  for Freo in the 10-15 years to fix the growing car traffic and of course the every expanding Port.

Considering at the last meeting I saw with the Premier and Peter Newman they seem to agree that the while Fremantle port already has best practice in Australia for Rail use, it would not be possible to expand containers to Rail much past 30% which is the current target. The also both agree Fremantle Port will continue to operate and with cap and transitions (once the outer Harbour opens) will see the port grow in containers movements over the next 15 years at least.

So the question stands what will happen to improve Fremantle’s every worsening  traffic situation? I still haven’t heard a solutions just objections.

In my reading i found this doc below which had some interesting reading in.

Southmetroconnect

On pg 11 (of the above link) shows some of the environmental studies/info which shoulders right to the Lat 32 area.?

Fremantle Bias Where We Need Balance

Bias_Pio-Clementino_Inv279 (1)

Do I blindly accept the governments Perth Freight Link (PFL) old options, of course not.

The real question on the various issues before Fremantle is, do we get a balanced source or feed of information? Sadly Fremantle council is deeply entrenched in partly politics, labor, greens and even the little known socialistic something, whatever they call them. To give us all the pros and cons of the various issues, as it doesn’t suit their political agendas.

Personally I can see some major faults with the government’s old PFL plans but currently we don’t actually know what is planned for the PFL.

As the current Transport Minister has asked for 3 new proposals from 3 different consortiums with some that do not even build roads!

Personally I find it hard to protest something, I don’t even have the facts on, that’s not saying the current government will not drive some 1/2 cocked idea. The issue before us, can we make an intellectual objection before we 1st have facts on what we are objecting to.

I have major issue with council’s current fear mongering over the PFL? What’s that you ask, well 1st of all it’s not much to with trucks. It’s mostly to do with cars. Cars are the major part of the PFL issue if anyone has bothered to check the real facts/data, its cars that are the majority of traffic clogging the road systems we are discussing.

Before I forget the so called PFL will not make more trucks carrying containers, that’s just pure bullshit. What makes more containers in a port, is people buying things that need to be imported. This is one of Fremantle’s council major problems, fact or fiction, all that drives the ports increase in containers is demand for offshore or imported products. If people bought more Australian made or produced products we would need to import less. Hence less containers, a new road will not make more trucks it will only depend on what is imported into the country.

The council supports a group like Aldi coming to Fremantle, guess what, they import huge amounts of product from overseas, which means more containers, more trucks, etc. Try supporting local business and lessen the demand for imported goods, less containers, less trucks.

So getting back to the cars, if someone is against expanding or increasing the road network for cars, personally I respect that point of view but only to a point. If that person uses a car but objects to new car drivers adding to the network, that’s a double standard. You can’t expect to use a car yourself and then expect everyone to use something else? Just recently I went to the Stock Rd and Winterfold Rd protest, not surprisingly to see cars parked everywhere, imagine going to a protest to complain about the road network you just drove on to get to the protest, does no one find that hypocritical? It’s a little like seeing a 350.org protest or something similar at Freo in the evening and seeing all the street parking full on a Tuesday night, if you are going to demand people divest money from fossil fuels stop buying petrol or diesel yourself 1st.

One of the real problems is,  the council is actively promoting fear or hate mongering with little facts,  one day they are driving the PFL thru East Fremantle, the next thru Hilton or Hamilton Hill, it can’t be both or all 3 so which is it? Well, what they are hoping is for is to trigger all the nimby attitudes to protest everything with little or no facts, fear is what they hope to drive, is this what’s best for Freo or is it their own personal political futures.

If people expect to drive cars u cannot expect to double the population over 50 years and not increase the road network? So if u drive a car and protest the increase of the road network like 80% of our council who drive cars, you are just another hypocrite, like them. Our council is quite good at “Do as I say, not do as I do”.

Our council should be working for the best possible outcome for Freo not their own personal political benefit.

If this road is going to go ahead as most of the councillors seem to believe it will from what u hear at council meetings, wouldn’t it be better to try and be part of a plan and ensure that Fremantle gets the best possible outcome. Instead of behaving like a spoilt child, stamping their feet and screaming no no no no no.

There must be a better way to do the Link than knocking down people’s homes along High St and Leach Hwy. If the tunnel option is taken that sort of cancels the whole fear campaign the council is driving on that front.

So far, apart from putting everything on the rail which does not seem to be possible, or shifting the port to Kwinana, i.e. just pushing the problem to some else’s back yard. I have not heard any solutions on what happens if the PFL was cancelled. The demand for imported stuff is not going away, the trucks that carry the containers even if rail is doubled will not lessen as the port continues to increase volume. The # of cars will continue to increase. The congestion will continue to worsen. The councils increasing the density of our suburbs which will bring more cars and congestion. Their fables of rail links running everywhere just aren’t going to happen. They are blindly adding density with no ability to add the needed ingredients to make the density sustainable or workable. We are more than likely to just get extra people and cars in our suburbs with no added infrastructure, lets be honest the Fremantle councils record on getting deliverables from any colour of state government is less than poor.

So what is the solution?

What is the impact on Fremantle if we increase the rail through town? Noise, vibration, pollution, etc.

What safety issues would it cause at all the level crossings through Fremantle, this could happen 30 to 100 times a day depending on which scenario is used, can u imagine how Fremantle would function with a 100 trains and day going through the city.

  • Fremantle cut roads by train
    • Phillimore
    • High St access for round house
    • Bathers beach pedestrian crossing
    • Warden Lance
    • Mews Rd
    • Capo D’Orlando Drive
    • Intersection at Scott St
    • Ocean Rd
    • Rollinson Rd

Imagine going to South Beach with a 100 trains a day going past, how many people and pets will end up getting injured or killed at the multiple crossings, along this track, not mention the noise, vibration and smell. I don’t imagine that would be great for cockburns new coastal community around the old power station development. It would also kill all the property prices along the coast for the new developments between South Freo and Cockburn

What impact will it have in Spearwood/Cockburn where trains would cut off at least 3 major roads with 30 to 100 trains a day going through the suburbs?

What safety issues would it have for homes in Spearwood where the train track is higher than the roofs of the house and only metres away?

Would the extra trains past the Round House have any impact with vibration?

The real problem is the whole issue is not being addressed by anyone, it’s just each camp yelling the loudest on what they are against, is anyone looking at all the pros and cons and giving a true picture of what is best for Fremantle and being honest about what impacts different scenarios would have on different parts of Fremantle.

What does Kwinana think of Fremantle kicking its problem further down south? The government doesn’t have the billions needed to build a new port down there.

Where will the increasing number of cars go to without new road infrastructure, you will frequently hear some Fremantle Councillors rattle on about the international known facts that more roads means more congestion, strange then, that governments all over the world are spending trillions on Hwys, Freeways, Motorways etc.

So before we jump onto the council’s bandwagon of screaming no, what are we saying no too and what will be the effects of doing nothing or implementing a different approach, considering we don’t have details/facts on anything yet?

 

 

%d bloggers like this: