Trains of lorry trailers via Tunnel and HS2
Jim Steer of Greengauge 21 suggests that the eastern arm of HS2 should be built at less than European gauge, in order to save money (RAIL 966). I say: “Think again!”
Freight may not be the first subject that comes to mind when considering a new high-speed line, but (in my view) there is a need for freight to play a much greater role in the planning for HS2.
In fact, a great advantage from HS2 should be that it gives us a new railway of European gauge right through to the Midlands and North - a railway capable of taking trains of lorry trailers which are currently heading up and down our motorways.
In mainland Europe, trains carrying lorry trailers are a significant part of freight operations. For example, a company called CargoBeamer currently runs such trains from Italy and the south of France to their terminal in Calais, and viceversa. If any of this traffic is to or from the UK, the furthest that an unaccompanied lorry trailer can presently penetrate into the UK by rail is a depot in Ashford.
We need to change this in the interests of fighting climate change and of improving efficiency.
We need to reduce the number of lorries that come through the Channel Tunnel on Le Shuttle, and then end up on our roads. So, how do we do this?
HS1 is happy in principle to have freight trains on its tracks, provided that they do not conflict with its core purpose of running high-speed passenger trains. So, trains of lorry trailers could come through the Channel Tunnel as far as locations such as Barking or London Gateway.
And what do we need to do to run such trains to the Midlands and the North?
Firstly, we need to reinstate the previously planned link between HS1 and HS2. Why was this ever dropped? To me, this decision does not make sense.
Secondly, convince HS2 management that they can run freight trains during night hours, at times when the requirement for passenger trains is less.
Thirdly, plan for the potential locations for freight terminals to deal with the lorry trailer traffic (preferably sites near to HS2 with good motorway connections), and plan for any loops that might be needed to deal with freight traffic.
Having set up the basic infrastructure, there would (of course) be much more to do - for example, discussions with freight operators, logistics companies and others to identify traffic flows that might be accommodated on trains of lorry trailers, including the potential for return loads.
There would no doubt be discussions with operators of such trains in mainland Europe, to assess their interest in extending routes into the UK.
There would need to be a method of applying customs checks to such trains travelling to or from the UK via the Channel Tunnel.
Perhaps there might be financial incentives initially to encourage such traffic. But without the basic infrastructure, there would clearly be no prospect of running this traffic on rail.
So, I would encourage Greengauge 21 to promote the benefits that could accrue for freight traffic in this way - and the benefits for the country in terms of reduced emissions.
John Labrum, Sidmouth