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.

 

 

Great to see So Many “Lat 32” Clicks

Great to see so many readers hitting the Lat 32 click or link.

This is really important that people inform themselves on the issues and not just listen to the tabloid style information being put out on the PFL from both sides of the argument.

Its knowledge, good information and listening to both sides of a debate that allows you to make an informed decision. Sadly this issue has had no debate and most of the information is loaded to suit their soapbox speakers own argument or point of view.

Questions; if you had to choose, between the impact on Beeliar wetlands and the impact on Cockburn sound which one would you choose. Now of course its ok to choose neither, then I hope you don’t buy imported products as they have to get here somewhere?

No where in this barrage of ranting on this issue has any arguments been for the pros and cons of the decisions before us, its all just crappy politics. It was quite clear to see when our council quite inappropriately invite a politically based Media group to film their decisions on the PFL. Cheap politics yet we hear them say they have no political leanings, really 1st thing is don’t just listen to what they say, look at what they do and how they vote, its just politics.

Kudos for those who choose to inform themselves on the issues.

Perth Freight Link Damned if we do Damned if we don’t Pt 2.

If they bothered to read the Lat 32 plan it does not take trucks off roads or shorten truck trips it actually increases them and requires a longer road to be built. Plus it has Roe 8 as part of its plan. If anything the Lat 32 would increase truck miles and more than likely the number of trucks needed to do the job. Have a look here is a link latitude32.com.aulatitude32-location-map2

 

Perth Freight Link Damned if we do Damned if we don’t Pt 3.

Following up from Pt 2.

To sum up they don’t want PFL, fair enough everyone has a right to an opinion, environmental impacts a big reason, they seem to want Lat 32 which needs the outer harbour, but that will also have huge environmental impacts greater than the PFL, so maybe its they are just against development? Sadly the whole thing is just political not practical and the residents of Fremantle will be left to have large trucks driving many different routes through our suburbs and our roads congestion will just get worse. Outer harbour has many challenges before construction can even begin, the biggest will be where will the $5billion to build it, come from?

Not to mention the $90 per 40′ container subsidy that each container doing onto rail gets from the state government, doubling the containers onto rail will also mean doubling the budget for subsidies. A budget that runs out soon, then what?

Rail struggle in Fremantle due to ‘shorthaul’ competition

One thing for sure this Lat 32 will not put more containers on rail or lower truck miles or stop bad environmental impacts on our local areas.  It will just shift it, though it will;

  • Increase truck miles for most containers
  • Need more trucks to the same job that is done now
  • Increase truck pollution
  • Increase costs for shipping and freight
  • Not increase rail out of Fremantle Port with out new infrastructure being built, ie dedicated rail lines and links
  • Have a huge impact on cockburn sound and on the areas for the Lat32 intermodal area and all the new roads it needs to work
  • Do nothing for Fremantle’s current congestion problem which will just continue to grow

Perth Freight Link Damned if we do Damned if we don’t Pt 2.

 

Following up from Pt 1.

If they bothered to read the Lat 32 plan it does not take trucks off roads or shorten truck trips it actually increases them and requires a longer road to be built. Plus it has Roe 8 as part of its plan. If anything the Lat 32 would increase truck miles and more than likely the number of trucks needed to do the job. Have a look here is a link latitude32.com.au

latitude32-location-map2

Future Regional Road is ROE 8

The High wide load corridor is a road twice as long as PFL for truck trips, not rail. Rail use still stays at the max of 30% whether a new port is built or not.

As the COF council has eluded to in the council meetings is that the PFL well may go ahead anyway, if it does sadly it does not look our council has fought to get the best possible outcome for our suburbs in regards to traffic management and we will just sit and watch as congestion gets worse and more accidents happen and the state government just puts through a road that’s best for the port. Council is missing the opportunity to solve other traffic management issues which have nothing to do with trucks or FPA operations.

I still find it quite amusing the council complains about commercial in confidence when the state government uses it but council has commercial in confidence meetings regularly, the Kings Square business plan a perfect case in point. Since October last year a Fremantle resident has asked questions about some of the financial figures council used which are hidden from residents view due to the council claiming it’s in commercial in confidence. No double standards there right?

Why Does Fremantle Need or Not Need, Perth Freight Link (PFL)

 

Premier takes passenger s seat – The West Australian

Premier Colin Barnett joins State Political Editor Gareth Parker to discuss issues concerning WA voters.

Source: Premier takes passenger s seat – The West Australian

Here is the bit I’m sure interests all the locals on the PFL.

The section on the light rail is interesting as well.

PERTH FREIGHT LINK

GP: One of the issues that a lot of people wanted to talk about on our Facebook pages and on Twitter is the Perth Freight Link. It’s a very expensive project, it’s a very contentious project. Why are you going ahead with it?
CB: Perth is quite a unique city. We have a population of just under 2 million, but Perth is also a major trading point. We don’t have much manufacturing industry scattered around the suburbs of Perth, and yet we’ve got huge mining, petroleum and agricultural industries. So we’ll always have large amounts of heavy transport, chemicals transport, agricultrual produce, minerals, coming out of rail systems and the like. That makes us a little bit different, our ports are very important. The project, I think, should be looked at in two stages. The first stage is Roe 8, which is taking (traffic) from the (Kwinana) Freeway through to Stock Road. Now, whatever the future of the port may be, Roe 8 is needed, both to service the Fremantle Port and a future port at Cockburn.

GP: Do you say that Roe 8 could take traffic south as well as north (from Stock Road?)
CB: Wherever the port goes, you need Roe 8. So Roe 8 will be the first stage and a lot of work has done into that, its design, environmental approvals, it really is ready to go. We think work will probably start next year on Roe 8. The second component is getting heavy vehicles, not only through Roe 8, but into the port. There are all sorts of issues there, because we’re going through established residential areas. So the design work is not yet complete. A fair bit of work needs to happen on that. We do need to have a better access into Fremantle. Fremantle will continue to grow as a port for another 15 years, then it will continue (as a working port). It’s not going to close. There seems to be a view that Fremantle is going to close. It won’t. It will reach its capacity then continue to operate at that capacity. In about 15 years time you will start to see extra port facilities develop in Cockburn. It won’t be as big as Fremantle initially, but by 2030 maybe it will become the main port. So at that stage, you will also need the access to go to Cockburn.

GP: There’s two main options beyond Roe 8. One is to take it north on Stock Road, then west on Leach Highway and High Street. The other option the Transport Minister is looking at is tunnelling. You’re supposed to award a contract by December. Are you confident you’ll have enough information to be able to pick an option that’s within Budget by December?
CB: No I’m not. I think that’s probably a bit tight.

GP: It will be pushed out?
CB: Well I think we’ve got to get this right. And it is complicated. For the moment, the concentration will be getting Roe 8 underway.

GP: So you’re now saying this is really a two-stage process?
CB: There are two projects. Interconnected, but Roe 8 is the start, get Roe 8 built, then build the connection into Fremantle. So there is a bit of time to sort that out, and there are complex issues, one of which is the choice between different road routes, or tunnelling – a lot of work to be done to investigate that. There is also the issue of how do you get across the Swan River and into North Fremantle and the port facilities.

GP: Indeed, because even if you build the $1.6 billion link, it only takes you to Canning Highway, doesn’t it.
CB: It will get you there, then you need to get across the river. That’s the southern part of my electorate of Cottesloe. I’m very conscious of the issues of getting that tight corner into the Fremantle port area.

GP: So I guess given that uncertainty, and that issue about getting traffic into the port, a lot of people are wondering why you don’t just take the investment, send it further south to service a new road and rail corridor into a new port down at Cockburn.
CB: Well, the new port is probably $4 billion or $5 billion to build. And it’s not needed yet. It will be needed, but probably not for another 15 years. So we’re not going to build a road system to a port that isn’t there.

 

 

%d bloggers like this: