Evidence given to the Committee at the ports visited, indicated that each had at least one serious infrastructure problem hindering access to the port area. The Committee identified critical projects to a potential value of $6.5 billion – required at Australian ports and their environs and port-related corridors.

It is the view of the Committee that, while industry and state governments are committed to a number of these projects, the Australian Government may need to contribute not less than $3 billion, on a 50/50 basis with either State or private providers, to bring the ports up to internationally competitive standard.

Ship Sizes

Source: Port of Melbourne

Dredging

The Corporation is currently undertaking a major project to increase the depth of its channels to 14 metres to accommodate the larger, more efficient vessels now being utilised by shipping lines. Already, 30 per cent of the container ships that visit Melbourne cannot enter or leave the port fully laden because of draught restrictions.

Without the planned increased channel depth, future trade growth and the development of the port will be retarded and there will be higher costs for shipping lines, exporters and importers. The project has the in-principle support of the government, shipping lines, exporters and the majority of port users and the Corporation has devoted a significant amount of funding and resources to progress the project.¹

If that does not occur, it will affect Sydney and Brisbane, not just Melbourne.

The debate has been hijacked by vested interests in the environmental side and it has lost balance from the real impact on the state of Victoria it would have if that did not proceed.

Ships are already altering their whole cargo patterns because of the limitations in Melbourne. That has been happening for the last three or four years, and it is going to get worse. Shipping lines the world over are consolidating. There will be further consolidations. Vessel sizes are increasing. Ports must be capable of dealing with those deeper draft vessels.²

There are many regulatory challenges that I think all ports face. Even with dredging, there is the potential duplication of the federal environmental process with the state process and how complex it is to get sea-dumping permits. So I would hope that through the COAG and other processes there is a lot of work done on that simplification and facilitation. At the same time, there are reasons these regulations are in place—I do not question that; you need to do it right—but I am not sure that we need to make it quite as complex as we do.³

There are often unnecessary delays in the approvals process through government regulatory agencies particularly relating to environmental issues and especially dredging and dredged material disposals. These delays often delay the commencement of capital and maintenance projects unreasonably and can potentially disrupt dredging projects once they are under way.

There appears to be a lack of coordination in setting standards and requirements between and within the Australian government and states relating to dredging and dredge material disposal approvals and new issues continue to be raised each time there is an application from a port, often with little linkage, if any, back to current or previous applications from a range of ports.

There appears no agreed mechanism in Australia covering the Australian government and its agencies and states/territories that gives confidence that there will be a proactive and balanced approach to dredging environmental concerns, so that the approvals process can be made more efficient and effective.
Furthermore, the interaction between the Australian government and the states/territories in the dredging and disposals process raises the environmental bar every time there is an application which leads to continually increasing costs and greater operational inefficiencies, often with little overall benefit other than research opportunities.⁴

Advance funding for channel and berth deepening at Newcastle, Melbourne and Albany to make each of those ports capable of loading a 14 metre [draught] Panamax vessel.⁶

Urban Encroachment

Urban encroachment, always a problem in most of the larger ports, is now also posing a serious problem for some of the smaller ports.

The problem highlights the need to reserve transport corridors well in advance of need. The difficulties caused by failure to take this seriously, were brought to the Committee’s attention on several occasions.

The Queensland Government commented that this is a growing problem faced by several of the ports in that state:

As populations grow, land surrounding port facilities is consumed for urban, industrial and commercial purposes. Corridors for access to the port come under pressure with a growing mix of traffic. Urban amenity issues soon arise – heavy transport and residential housing do not mix well.

Urban congestion is a significant problem for Queensland’s major ports in Brisbane, Gladstone and Townsville, all of which are ringed by densely populated urban areas or commercial/retail precincts.⁹

The Port of Brisbane Corporation summed up the need for a long-term view of protecting these corridors:

By their very nature, freight facilities and associated transport corridors are increasingly becoming a 24 hour a day land use. Consequently it is vitally important that both the port, linkages to it, and any freight facilities planned in the immediate and broader hinterland regions, are protected from urban encroachment and are properly designed to minimise any potential impacts from current and likely future  urban settlement patterns.¹⁰

Adsteam Marine Limited claimed that the problem has been made worse by a decline in the facilities available for bulk and break bulk cargoes in major ports, especially Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane:

In short, older break bulk and bulk cargo facilities in many of Australia’s major capital city ports are under pressure from commercial and residential development and the attractive yields such land use generates for government and commercial investors.¹¹

Esperance has looked to the future of transport corridors around the port and has made provision in the town planning scheme to preserve them. All undeveloped land along the main corridor through Esperance has been reserved and cannot be developed. On land that was already developed, the scheme requires that, if redeveloped, the owners must comply with specified requirements; for example, quiet house design to block out noise. The aim is to ensure that the corridor can operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and that there is sufficient room for future expansion.¹²

This topic is discussed in more detail in Chapter 8.

Individual Ports

New South Wales

Port Botany and Sydney Harbour

In its Trade Report for 2005-06, the Sydney Ports Corporation reported that its ports had achieved a record year. Total throughput was 26.7 million tonnes, up 3.1 per cent on the previous year. Of this total, imports made up three quarters at 20.2 million tonnes, a 1.8 per cent increase, and exports contributed 6.5 million tonnes, a very healthy increase of over 8 per cent.¹³

The total number of containers passing through Sydney continued to grow and reached 1.445 million TEUs, 5 per cent more than the previous year. Other trade grew much more slowly, a 1 per cent increase. The containerised trade showed a continuation of the growing trade influence of Asia. Of the total containers imported, 61 per cent were from Asia. Similarly, containerised exports increased 8.4 per cent, reflecting the high level of demand from Asia.¹⁴

A survey of truck turnaround times, in February/March 2006, indicated that the average turnaround time had decreased from 64 minutes in June 2000, to 45 minutes. Monthly container throughput has increased from 82,000 to 106,000 over the same period. To assist the process, a one–way traffic system was opened in November 2006.¹⁵

The number of containers moved by rail has increased from 123,000 in 1997-98 to 290,000 in 2005-06. Currently that is 21.5 per cent of all containers moved into and out of the port. The NSW Government’s objective is to increase that share to 40 per cent.¹⁶ This will be assisted by the recently approved Southern Sydney Freight Line, which will link Port Botany to the south-west of Sydney and to the main line to Melbourne.¹⁷

Based on figures for 2001-02, the Port Authority estimated that Port Botany accounts for 60 per cent of the economic impact generated by Sydney’s ports. Kurnell Refinery and the Gore Cove Terminal account for 20 per cent and Darling Harbour, Glebe Island and White Bay 5 to 7 per cent each.¹⁸

The proposal will allow for about 1.6 million additional containers a year. It is designed to cater for the expected increases in container trade over the next 25 years. The proposed additions require approximately 60 hectares of reclaimed land, and will provide five new berths capable of handling large container vessels. Provision has also been made for a tug and support vessel facility, with six new tug berths. The area will be serviced by dedicated road and rail links.²⁰

The NSW Government has announced its intention to move the motor vehicle import facilities from Sydney to Port Kembla. The Port Kembla Port Authority reported that the transfer will be carried out in stages and that the new facilities will be in full operation in 2008, handling up to 250,000 cars annually.²¹

The Botany Bay City Council expressed opposition to any further development of Botany Bay. It is concerned that the combination of: traffic for the port, the airport traffic, and large industrial developments, commercial facilities and residential areas, is already overwhelming the road system.²²

The Council said that even greater reliance on rail would not solve the difficulties. It suggested that future development should be in Port Kembla and Newcastle:

The traffic in City of Botany Bay is increasing alarmingly without any port extension due to the saturation of industrial development coupled with the [ever] increasing land use conflicts between industrial, residential and commercial development.

Expanding the port would create grave ramifications on the operation of all the major roads in the area. Given that an average truck displaces some 4 standard passenger cars and a B-double displaces some 6 standard passenger cars, the actual increase in truck traffic on the road network is, in reality, substantially greater.

Whatever policies are developed to increase the use of the railway movement of freight, past history has proved that road transport will increase enormously. Added trucks on [the] existing congested road network would bring heightened anxiety, time-loss, air pollution levels, accidents and frequent gridlock at major intersections. Traffic congestion will be compounded by increased freight rail movements, which will contribute to air and noise pollution.

Strategic consideration should be focussed on alternative locations for the expanded port(s) and to the potential to integrate while diversifying cargo inputs to the three major ports in the Greater Metropolitan Sydney. Greater consideration for areas of both Port Kembla and Newcastle is essential.²³

Newcastle

Newcastle is the natural port for the resource-rich Hunter Valley and the North and North-West of NSW. In tonnage moved, it is one of Australia’s largest ports; with coal making up more than 90 per cent of total throughput. Newcastle is also one of the world’s largest coal export ports. Other cargoes handled at the port are: grains, vegetable oils, alumina, fertiliser and ore concentrates. Movements of general cargo, such as aluminium, steel and machinery, are increasing.²⁴

The HunterNet Co-operative indicated that there is a need to divert some of Sydney’s container traffic to Newcastle. HunterNet said that many products of the Hunter Valley are taken to Sydney for export, simply because there is a lack of shipping connections in Newcastle.²⁵

It said that research by the Port of Newcastle showed that there would be a comparative advantage in shipping about 160,000 TEUs of the Sydney traffic through Newcastle. The Co-operative said that what is needed is the development of the proposed Multi Purpose Terminal:

It is our contention that consideration be given …to the establishment of specialised export shipping facilities within the precincts of the Multi Purpose Terminal to assist current exporters, facilitate export endeavours of smaller prospective exporters, and reduce traffic loads for road/rail and port facilities within Sydney and environs.

Such a facility would also add to the attraction of the region for the entry of new or transferred businesses from other regions, while the increased level of shipping movements would create greater …opportunities for the local ship repair/servicing support industry.²⁶

The Port Corporation is encouraging development of the former steelmaking site at Mayfield. It considers the brownfield site, left behind by BHP, as the perfect site for a port to be developed. The site is flat, has deep water access and an existing road and rail infrastructure. The area also has 100 hectares of land that could be used in complementary development.²⁷

In addition to the coal loading facilities operated by Port Waratah Coal Services, there is a bulk liquid terminal. The East and West Basins have four main berths, with a depth of 11.6 metres; there is another at Throsby Basin, slightly shallower at 11.0 metres; the Steelworks Channel has six more berths, two quite shallow, two at 12.8 metres and two deep water berths with 16.5 metres. Kooragang Island offers one berth at 11.6 metres, one at 13.5 metres and three berths at the coal terminal at 16.5 metres. Development of the former BHP site would open up several more berths.²⁸

The port has several development plans in view. The NSW Government has called for proposals to build a 150 hectare site, to be known as the Intertrade Industrial Park. It is funding $8 million in infrastructure for the site. The Port Corporation is spending $22 million to refurbish BHP Oil Berth Five and to develop 80,000 square metres adjoining the wharf for cargo-handling, storage or an assembly area.²⁹

Another project will extend the shipping channels into the South Arm of the Hunter River. The main shipping channels will be deepened and possibly widened. Although Newcastle has a declared depth of 15.2 metres, between 25 and 33 per cent of deep-draughted vessels are unable to load to capacity. The intention is to dredge to between 16 and 17 metres.³⁰

Further development is planned for Kooragang Island. An important part of this planning is a lease to the Newcastle Coal Infrastructure Group, to build a facility with two additional coal loading berths. The Group has until early 2009, to obtain the necessary planning and environmental approvals. There are plans also to establish bulk goods handling and manufacturing facilities at Walsh Point.³¹

Other plans are in hand to develop industrial sites at Tomago and West Wallsend, to take advantage of the proximity of the port and the road and rail connections already in place, or planned.³²

In early 2007, Newcastle had once again run into problems with coal deliveries and a long queue of ships had built up. Some mines were slowing their production, with the threat of other mines closing down, because they were unable to move their coal to the port:

The Hunter Valley Coal Chain Logistics Team Chairman …said the queue was the result of a combination of contributing factors – most of which the HVCCLT have little or no control over…mostly a result of the natural peaks and troughs in demand experienced by coal ports all over the world.

There has been an increase in arrival rates of vessels sent by large coal consuming countries. This is part of the normal seasonal pattern and demonstrates the ongoing strong global demand for Hunter Valley Coal.

Other factors contributing to the vessel queue have been some maintenance and reliability issues, as well as recent poor weather affecting both the operation of the rail network and the movement of vessels within the Newcastle port.

Recent poor weather has delayed vessel loading by several days … Heavy rain falls have also caused flooding on parts of the rail network which has hampered the ability to bring coal into Port Waratah Coal Services.

To assist in bringing down the queue in the short term, the Hunter Valley Coal Chain Logistics Team has scaled back planned maintenance activities so as to temporarily increase coal chain capacity. In particular, PWCS has deferred some ship loader maintenance to enable the port stocks to clear and to bring the coal chain back to its planned level of capacity.³³

In its April newsletter, the Hunter Valley Coal Chain Logistics Team reported that, despite a new record for a quarterly throughput in the quarter to March 2007, the coal chain had still underperformed. It said there were many reasons for this: locomotives, track problems, loading points, ship-loading and weather difficulties all had an impact.³⁴

With the new stockpile and stacker at PWCS now fully operational, the rate of throughput has been increased to the equivalent of 90.4 million tonnes a year. The target is to maintain rates equivalent to more than 90 million tonnes a year, for the remainder of this year.³⁵

Port Kembla

Port Kembla has two major commodity export terminals. The Port Kembla Coal Terminal (PKCT) exports 10 to 11 million tonnes of coal and coke a year, with capacity for 15 million tonnes. The Port Kembla Gateway handles bulk and break-bulk cargoes, such as: copper concentrates, fertiliser, clinker, logs and steel products.³⁶

The Port Kembla Grain Terminal, in the Inner Harbour, exports various grains from regional NSW. The quantities vary with seasonal conditions. The terminal is managed by Grain Corp.³⁷

Overall, the port handled almost 26 million tonnes of cargo in
2005-06. Of the total, a little less than 11 million tonnes consisted of coal and coke, 8 million tonnes of iron ore was imported, and 3 million tonnes of steel exported.³⁸

Port Kembla is in a state of transition as a result of the NSW Ports Growth Plan in 2003. The port is preparing for new roles under that plan: handling general and break-bulk cargo and, particularly, the transfer of motor vehicle imports from Sydney.³⁹ Throughput at Port Kembla will include up to 250,000 cars annually, 250 additional ship calls, 40,000-50,000 containers (TEU) and 125,000 tonnes of break bulk cargo.⁴⁰

Just over two years ago we loaded a number of vessels with coal which was produced in the Hunter Valley and railed to Port Kembla. We know it can be done!  Historically, coal has been received at Port Kembla from Mudgee and a major proportion of our current coal throughput emanates from the Lithgow region.⁴⁵

When the coal and, indeed, any other coal that was to come to Port Kembla from Newcastle …it would come through the Sydney network. The Maldon-D ombarton line would be an advantage, but it would only be an advantage if we took a broader view of freight transport from, say, the base of the Blue Mountains so that the coal could skirt around Sydney rather than having to join the Sydney-Illawarra rail line.⁴⁷

Of course, coal trains cannot run at peak commuter travel times and curfews are imposed during both the morning and the evening. The impact of these curfews is to reduce the available receival time at Port Kembla by nine hours on any given day – so we have a 15-hour window of opportunity. …The combined impact of the restrictions on both public road receivals and our rail curfews is that PKCT’s overall receivals capability is restricted to 55 per cent of available time.⁴⁹

Source: Professor Philip Laird, Exhibit 17 (Original prepared by Mr Bob Stack).

…by removing the curfews in the case of rail you would have an interaction of coal trucks and passenger movements through Sydney. So whilst it would be an optimal decision for Port Kembla Coal Terminal, it would be a suboptimal one for …New South Wales.⁵¹

…support for the Maldon Dombarton link. It is no longer an either or situation. PKCT needs access to increased road and rail receival capability if it is to provide an efficient service to our customers and importantly to realise our growth potential in an environment of growth elsewhere in the port.⁵²

You need to look not only at the coal terminal growth plans but also at the port’s growth plans and put the two together and then make an assessment…⁵⁴

If we look forward then we will have to look at what we can do to maximise the ability to move cargo efficiently into and out of the port. I think that that will necessarily involve a higher rail ingredient than we have at present, so we need to plan and build towards that.⁵⁷

Victoria

Melbourne

The Westgate Bridge exceeds capacity for several hours each day. This infrastructure is a key connector between the apex of freight and logistics activities in the western suburbs and the Port of Melbourne. An alternative river crossing will be needed within the next few years to sustain efficient freight movement.

The Monash Freeway linking the south-eastern metropolitan region to the port precinct is also chronically congested during daylight hours. This route is the key arterial connection for more than one-third of freight generation and consumption sites in Melbourne.⁶²

The whole thing does clog up for several hours each day. It is working beyond its volume to capacity ratio.⁶³

Without the planned increased channel depth, future trade growth and the development of the port will be retarded and there will be higher costs for shipping lines, exporters and importers.⁶⁶

Geelong

• a grade separation access road to the Geelong By-pass; and
• a dual gauge rail spur to connect the Lascelles Wharf terminal to the main rail networks.⁶⁹

Portland

Table  3.1 Comparison of Port depths

There are a number of developments in the hinterland of Portland that are expected to begin exporting their products in the next two or three years.

• standardisation of the Victorian regional rail network (particularly the Mildura line) to end Portland’s isolation from the eastern rail network;
• reinstatement of the rail link to Mt Gambier in South Australia;
• road improvements to accommodate the safe usage of B-doubles; and
• construction of an overpass at Wellington Road, to separate port and residential traffic (already under consideration by the Victorian Government).⁸⁰

Queensland

Brisbane

…is very large for a port anywhere in the world – 1,000 hectares is a very large piece of real estate.

I think that puts a little in perspective the fact that we are building a port facility which will not have bottlenecks, which is prepared for the future and has plenty of capacity to grow.⁸⁵

We have just had Patricks invest over $100 million in a world-first automated straddle terminal… It is the only one in the world.

The straddle …picks up a container, moves it around the terminal, takes it up to the crane to put under the ship or on the truck. These were always driven in the past by people; we now have high-tech and these things are robotic.
There are a whole range of other companies investing tens and hundreds of millions of dollars at the port. It is not just our investment that is massive; it is also that of the private sector.⁸⁶

An important thing about our port is that we are master-planning the port. …we are developing a greenfields facility and, really importantly, we are our own planning authority. We can approve developments on our land, which is quite unique in the Australian context. …So if we are looking at getting the job done we do not have to rely on getting council approval or state approval to do it. We have very strong planning controls but…the quality of development is very high. But it is important in developing infrastructure for the future that we can plan our own developments.⁸⁷

• an expected increase in rail’s share of the national freight task:
  
  
  • as the cost of road transport increases,
  • to combat increasing road congestion, and
  • to service new and expanded intermodal terminals at Ipswich and Acacia Ridge;
• urban development pressure on, and around, existing corridors; and
• significant increases in coal tonnages through the port.⁸⁸

It is clearly recognised that a dedicated, fast and reliable rail freight network is required to link the industry nodes along the Western Corridor (and the hinterland…) and the northern rail network to the Port of Brisbane situated within the Australian Trade Coast … – one of the fastest growing, integrated industrial trade regions in Australia.⁸⁹

We have rail to the port, which carries bulk cargoes such as coal and grain. Once again, it works quite effectively. About 15 per cent of our containers come in or leave on rail, so it is a good facility. Queensland Rail is making further improvements to the network. The freight network has to come through the passenger network. It has always been a bit of a constraint, but QR has been very effective in improving the amount of rail we can get to the port.

Looking to double coal volumes in the next couple of years, the rail system can handle that as QR is investing enough to make sure that we can continue to grow. We think the rail capacity is adequate for the medium term. In the longer term, some work may be required but in the medium term it is okay.⁹⁰

At the present time there is a partial standard gauging into the Port of Brisbane. It is a dual gauging framework. It is very difficult to get capacity into the port because it has to fight with capacity on the urban passenger system...

…It jumps from partly standard then to dual gauge. That means that the capacity to get trains through to the Port of Brisbane is significantly constrained by having to fit between urban passenger systems. In the longer term there is a need to look at a single standard gauge connection to the port, separating that from the urban system. That is one of the long-term plans.⁹¹

…In the same corridor. It can fit in the corridor without too much trouble. The issue is getting a consensus between the levels of players about that.

That is, on the eastern seaboard, I think one of the most significant gaps to be resolved over the next decade.⁹²

Rail freight capacity from the west of Brisbane, through the suburban network and thence to the Port of Brisbane is becoming a critical issue. Hence an investigation into a new freight corridor commencing at Ebenezer and extending south-east to link with the standard gauge rail line at Bromelton.⁹³

In terms of the road to the port, we have had significant growth in containers, as I mentioned. We are moving the old port out of Hamilton. We have a major facility at Hamilton where we move roughly 180,000 cars through. We are moving that out to the port as well, so the pressure on road is very significant.

We have the potential for an excellent road network, there is no doubt about it. You can now drive from the Port of Brisbane to Gympie… to the bottom of the Toowoomba range and … to the border without a set of traffic lights. That is quite remarkable. We have the potential for a fantastic road system.

We can get to motorways very easily and in short distances. But the last six kilometres of the road to the port is our biggest constraint. We have access to fantastic motorways except for the last six kilometres, which you will see this afternoon. The state has already worked with the federal government in providing stage one of the port motorway. It runs from the Gateway Motorway... The first four kilometres down to the port was completed in December 2002, which had a fantastic influence on the movement of cargo in and out of the port.

…It is just the last six, which is planned for some time in the future. We have seen significant growth [and] as we move the old port from Hamilton to the Port of Brisbane, we are going to see a quite significant increase in traffic. We have potential for a fantastic road except for the last six kilometres, which is a current and future bottleneck. The Port of Brisbane Motorway is part of the AusLink network. Stage one has been done but stage two is still somewhere in the distance.⁹⁴

Gladstone

…experiencing rapid and significant growth, drawing many billions of dollars of investment into the region. This area is poised to experience more job creation than anywhere else in Australia.

The population in the coastal sub-region is expected to grow from just over 64,000 in 2002, to an estimated 105-106,000 in 2026.⁹⁷

Mackay

Bundaberg

• industrial minerals from 110,000 tonnes a year (approximately 1,850 B-double trips) in about 2007-08, to 500,000 tonnes (8,500 B-doubles) five years later;
• woodchips – 50,000 tonnes a year in about 2009 (1,400 B-double trips) to 400,000 tonnes (about 10,000 B-doubles) after four years; and
• stockfeed – 100,000 tonnes (2,850 B-doubles) expected about 2007-08 to 250,000 tonnes (7,150 B-doubles) after three years.¹¹¹

• cement and building products – 25,000 tonnes a year in 2005-06, to 40,000 tonnes in 2010-11, doubling heavy vehicle movements from 1,000 to 2,000;
• molasses – on average 4,750 B-double movements a year;
• fuel – imports through Bundaberg are expected to recommence soon.  Imports are expected to total 120 to 150,000 tonnes a year, that is about 2,200 heavy vehicle movements; and
• other petroleum products – projections show a possible market of 50,000 tonnes by the end of 2010-11 (about 10,000 heavy vehicle movements).¹¹²

Prospects for new trades such as sand and woodchip, are constantly being investigated, however, none of these initiatives is likely to require the provision of additional major infrastructure at the port or require rail access to the port.¹¹⁴

Road upgrades, however, will likely be required in the short term for reasons other than port related freight. A growing beverage and small crop industry is impacting traffic in the CBD as is the seasonal movement of sugar cane from farm to mill. Some of the cane railway network has become redundant with the closure of the Fairymead Mill forcing cane onto the road network.¹¹⁵

Rail freight is limited in its capacity to take up the additional demand due to noise constraints associated with night loading in a largely residential area. This seasonal constraint is threatening the growth of several major local producers with the potential for such firms to relocate closer to Brisbane. This situation is serious for the regional economy as it would add to the significant unemployment problem in the area.

Other factors, such as the impact of the restructure in the sugar industry on road cane haulage, and the development of several new large industries that plan to export their product through the Port of Bundaberg, have begun to place pressure on the city’s road transit routes. The need to bring forward the proposed Bundaberg By-pass Road has become evident.¹¹⁶

Townsville

Cairns

Weipa

Western Australia

Fremantle

Over a number of major inquiries, the Committee has been enormously impressed by Fremantle Ports and feels that it should press on with its planned efficiencies and expansion plans.

Geraldton

Bunbury

We have a couple of large producers who rail freight into the port, but we certainly have many other customers who rely heavily on road to get their product into the port.¹⁴⁰

The alumina guys in particular regularly say, “We want maximum draught.” Certainly, the coal exporters hold out increased draught as a significant factor for themselves.¹⁴⁷

Currently when we have a confluence of trucks that arrive at the Eelup roundabout in Bunbury it becomes a very visible issue in the community’s minds. They see the number of trucks. There is a perception of risk, a perception of danger, and that escalates peoples’ perceptions of freight as an industry in our region. Our approach to that has got to be: how can we get traffic in and out of the port and how we can get product in and out of the port in a way that is less visible to the community through dedicated freight routes? The Bunbury Port Authority provided information in relation to the port access route - that is one option – and the potential for an outer ring-road around Bunbury complements that option.

Looking at road to rail options is another way to proceed. For our region and for the size of our region, we need to balance those investments in a way that we can manage the conflict between freight industry and community amenity as opposed to thinking purely in economic terms about the rate of return on a particular freight issue.¹⁵⁰

…Bunbury shares the same problem with a lot of ports around the country: the city has grown closer to us. Some of the residents were close to start with, but certainly we are seeing residential development come closer and closer to the port. Issues of noise, dust, and operations at night, are concerns for the community. Where we can we put buffers in place. …The port is pretty much surrounded by residents and that does cause us issues.¹⁵²

Quite a few of the operators have modified their loading and yard practices to try to reduce as far as possible the impact on the community.¹⁵³

Albany

Were the export of coal through Albany Port to eventuate it is likely that the coal would be transported by rail given the long haul distance and the potentially greater efficiencies that could be achieved by rail in transporting bulk minerals freight great distances.

Given that coal trains are up to 2 kilometres in length there would be a need for stakeholders to make significant modifications to the railway infrastructure within the Port area. It is also likely that it would be necessary to duplicate long lengths of the railway line between Albany and approximately Katanning to transport large quantities of coal economically.¹⁶⁰

Esperance

• lead carbonate, also increasing and expected to reach 20,000 tonnes within two years;¹⁶⁸ and
• woodchips, an expected 300,000 tonnes of exports a year from 2008.¹⁶⁹

I think that there is a problem arising rapidly but just when it starts is the question.

Iron ore is the big product that comes down that rail and they already have problems getting sufficient iron ore down. Recently we had to close down for a week for maintenance. There are 18 trains a week with 120 wagons on a train. If you lose those trains for that week you never catch up; that is gone forever.

I know that Portland [Mining is] increasing their facility at Koolyanobbing to produce more product and consequently they would like to get it down the line. They have just completed another shed at the port to hold product so that they can get more through.¹⁷¹

The Pilbara Ports

In operational time frames, integrated operation of mine, rail and ports provides flexibility to run additional trains or alter train timetables at short notice to meet shipping and customer requirements. Similarly, risk attributable to breakdowns, accidents or events of force majeure, can be most effectively managed when mine, rail and port operation are integrated.¹⁷³

…the integration of rail, mine and port facilitates the efficient and timely augmentation of rail and port capacity in step with the development of mine capacity. This provides a strong competitive advantage to the Pilbara iron ore producers in the international iron ore market. Various …overseas competitors enjoy many advantages, including lower wages and/or higher iron ore content, so efficiencies are important to maintain competitive advantage.¹⁷⁴

The ability of the Pilbara iron ore producers to expand rapidly to capture new opportunities has been demonstrated starkly over the last few years since the China-led boom in demand for commodities became apparent.

Capacity expansions totalling 122 Mtpa have been announced …since 2002, much of which has already been commissioned, resulting in exports increasing from 173 Mt of ore in 2002 to 244 Mt of ore in 2005. Contrast this performance with the response of coal producers dependent on multi-user facilities on the east coast of Australia.¹⁷⁵

South Australia

Adelaide

…increased capacity is planned for the port to efficiently handle the larger deeper draught container ships that have started to service Australia. Combined with the deepening of the Outer Harbour channel to service Port Adelaide’s container and bulk grain berth, Adelaide will have the capability to assist Victorian exporters and importers who may not be able to access …larger ships due to channel and congestion constraints through the Port of Melbourne.¹⁸⁰

Other South Australian Ports

Tasmania

Hobart

What we are seeing…is the cargo throughput in Hobart slowing down significantly. It is all going through the north of the state, largely through Burnie, Devonport and Bell Bay. Bell Bay was taking a lion’s share. …we are now sitting with Bell Bay as the major port in terms of tonnage, followed by Burnie and then Devonport.¹⁸⁹

…are only casual. They are basically going to Risdon, which is bulk, and Self’s Point, which is bringing fuel into the state. The remainder in the city centre is pretty minor commodities and cruise vessels and that sort of thing. As a cargo port, the city centre of Hobart is really not doing terribly much at all. So all that cargo is coming north…¹⁹⁰

Bell Bay

For over four years the port has tried to secure an upgrade of a council road (currently limited to 5 tonnes capacity) which will provide a second port access and reduce traffic congestion within the port area.

Equally, a second rail access is required to provide greater efficiencies for cargo handling activities and improve the level of safety throughout the port area. A submission for funding has been made under the Regional Partnerships process.¹⁹⁷

…unless the port is supported by improved road and rail access to allow cargo to be moved more effectively, efficien[cy] gains made by the port will be lost.

We are currently experiencing difficulties with rail operations in cargo handling areas where inefficient movement of containers creates lost time. An inability to meet schedules …ultimately comes at a cost. An additional rail access to the port will resolve most of these issues.¹⁹⁸

The only rail loading facilities at Bell Bay are located on the wharf area. This area is congested and parts of it are not accessible while ships are being unloaded.

The Bell Bay rail facilities have evolved with the port. The yard layout is poor. Connection to the rail network is also sub-optimal; the gradient leading out of the port is very steep and limits the weight of trains that can be hauled from the port.

An alternative access has been designed that would rectify this and improve yard layout. Funding has been [sought] under the DOTARS Regional Partnerships Scheme to construct this access ($3.5M).¹⁹⁹

There is one rail access. It is a very steep access. In fact, I understand that the entrance there is one of the steepest gradients in Tasmania on the rail network. …they come in through the main entrance and then have to shunt to one end of the port. Bell Bay is a very long coastal strip so they have to shunt to one end of the port and then shunt all the way back to the other end.

The solution is to have another entrance from the main line at the western end … so that you can come in from both ends. That would save additional shunting and save crossing three roads, delaying traffic and causing safety issues as well.²⁰⁰

Devonport

Burnie

…cannot come straight off the main line and get straight into that terminal; it has to shunt over in a westerly direction and then back back into the terminal again, so it is slowing up there. They have to split the train in the terminal. There are various lines there. It is a bit inefficient, but it is probably better catered for than the other ports.²⁰²

Northern Territory

Darwin

That was primarily to provide rail access into the port and a four-hectare container terminal. All up there is about $200 million worth of basic port infrastructure being established at East Arm with the idea of it being the foundation for further development of the port facility.²⁰⁴

The port is designed for 100,000 tonne vessels – East Arm that is. In terms of [draught] restrictions, the shallowest depth on entry to the port is 12.2 metres at the mouth of the harbour. But Darwin is unique in that it has an eight-metre tidal range. So you can quite easily work the vessels. We get quite deep-[draught] ships getting out of Darwin.

We do not do any maintenance dredging here as a regular program… There has been no call for any major capital dredging for the port to date. A classic example of that would be the LNG vessels that we are considering for export out of here early next year. They are 298-metre long vessels and they draw something like nine or 11½ meters on exit. They are not an issue. They will work the tide to move in and out of Darwin.²¹¹

• businesses in the adjoining Business Park do not have direct access to collect containers. Operators are forced to leave from the front of their premises, drive to the port entrance, enter the port and drive to an area directly behind their premises, collect the container and then retrace their journey. In addition to the obvious waste of time and money, the situation raises other issues. Because part of the journey is on public roads, the container can only be, for example, 20 tonnes. A heavier container would exceed the permitted axle loading for the public road.
• the weighbridge only weighs vehicles heading in one direction (into the port). Trucks leaving the port, including road trains, must do a u-turn, go through the weighbridge and then do another u-turn to leave the port.
• trucks are required to park outside the port, while they wait to collect their load or unload. The problem is, that there is no allocated parking area and it would only take a few trucks to block off the port access. The problem is manageable now, but with the expected growth of the port’s throughput, that situation will not last.²¹⁵

Committee Assessment

The Committee believes that for the proposed fund to achieve its aims it will need the active co-operation of both COAG and the National Transport Commission. A process will have to be established to manage appropriations from the Australian Government and the States. This could be done by establishing a Commission, for example a Critical Port Infrastructure Commission, to administer the new fund.

The arrangements envisaged would involve representatives of the Australian Government, each State, and appropriate representatives of the Australian Local Government Association. It would have an established process for identification of the suitable projects, a Secretariat and funding to make purchases.

In talking of access, the Committee is not solely confining this to road and rail access, but places considerable emphasis on the matter of channels.

Summary of Port Access Issues

These issues are listed in no particular priority order:

• Channel dredging in Melbourne
• A multi-purpose terminal at Newcastle
• Dredging the shipping channels at Newcastle
• The Maldon-Dombarton rail link
• The removal, or major reduction, of the curfew restrictions at Port Kembla
• The rail connection to Webb Dock in Melbourne
• A review of the capacity of Westgate Bridge
• The Dock Link Road in Melbourne
• An upgraded rail connection to West Maribyrnong
• The Geelong By-pass
• Re-routing of the main standard gauge line through North Geelong
• A rail connection for the Lascelles Terminal at Geelong
• Standardisation of the rail line to Mildura
• Re-instatement of the standard gauge link between Mt Gambier and Portland
• Road improvements around Portland, to allow the use of B-doubles
• An overpass at Wellington Road, Portland
• A standard gauge rail connection to the Port of Brisbane, separate from the passenger rail
• A rail freight corridor from Ebenezer to join the standard gauge line at Bromelton
• The last 6 kilometres of the Brisbane Port Motorway
• Extension of Kirkwood Road in Gladstone
• Completion of Gladstone’s port access road
• Rail improvements to the DBCT and Hay Point Coal Terminals
• The Townsville Port Access Gateway Project
• The development of Oakagee Port
• Dredging at Bunbury
• The Bunbury outer ring road and its link to the port access road
• Provision for a grade separated crossing at Princess Royal Drive, Albany
• An additional rail loop in the port at Albany
• The Albany Ring Road
• Grade separation on the Port Access Corridor in Esperance
• Re-alignment of the Port Access Road near the port entrance at Esperance
• A rail connection to Shark Lake Industrial Park near Esperance
• Duplication of 3 kilometres of the rail line into the port at Esperance
• Deepening the channel at Thevenard
• Upgrading the alternative port access road at Bell Bay
• A second rail access to the port at Bell Bay
• Re-design of the port access at Bell Bay, to improve the yard layout and remove the steep gradient leading out of the port
• A rail crossing of the river at the port in Devonport
• Direct access from the main rail line to the port terminal at Burnie
• Grade separation of  the port access road in Darwin
• Direct access from the Business Park adjoining the port in Darwin – removal of the need for Business Park companies to go onto public roads to collect their goods from the port
• Redesign of the Darwin Port Weighbridge to allow operation for traffic moving in either direction
• A dedicated truck parking area outside the port for waiting trucks.