this post was submitted on 31 Mar 2025
13 points (100.0% liked)
Aotearoa / New Zealand
1809 readers
33 users here now
Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general
- For politics , please use !politics@lemmy.nz
- Shitposts, circlejerks, memes, and non-NZ topics belong in !offtopic@lemmy.nz
- If you need help using Lemmy.nz, go to !support@lemmy.nz
- NZ regional and special interest communities
Rules:
FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom
Banner image by Bernard Spragg
Got an idea for next month's banner?
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Really need more details to understand or make the comparison between the two plans.
Upgrading port side infrastructure in line with earthquake and environmental regulations still needs to occur - this was a major reason for the cost blow-out, and aside from shifting this burden to the port side councils (not a solution imo), what is the revised costing for this?
Iirc a reporter asked Winston this question but the stupid old fart can't/doesnt want to answer questioning along these lines - what is the additional maintenance costs we have to fund to keep the current aging fleet going to the absolute end of their tether - this is millions of dollars in funding that's going to maintain old ships that are going to be scrap.
A question I haven't seen answered too is the whole - we'll build different ships with different shipyards. Are we going with one rail enabled ship, one just cars and trucks? Again - I'd love further information here.
Re- the slight bump in capacity freight and people wise - I'm all for the efficiency gains by having rail enabled ferries - but it's a bit of a shame they will only carry 40 rail carts per trip. I'd prefer a bigger shift towards moving goods by rail and reducing trucks on the road - this is the only way to do it given its such a vital choke point.
Bit of a novel apologies - a guy who takes the ferries mostly as passenger walk on ~10 times a year.
I think the major cost saving is having smaller ships means less port side infrastructure, so even if we do upgrade the port to modern standards, it will still be cheaper.
My understanding is we're buying two ships, which will be identical.
Also, forty rail cars is a lot, each one is equivalent to a fully loaded truck at least.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I'm a project analyst working for government and hate relying on vague articles and cryptic press conferences.
Might chuck through a cheeky IOA and dig around for an updated Business case!
40 train carts is a good start, but my personal preference is for the ratio of trucks to train to tip over more to the train side, and with forty carts per ferry, I don't see how it's going to help given that according to gemini a train can carry 90-120 carts in one go.