 |
High speed rail in Spain.
Autors:Sánchez-Borràs, M.
Congrés: 1st TEMPO Conference on sustainable Transport. High speed rail in Norway.
Lloc i Data: Oslo- Noruega, 18-19 de maig de 2010.
Idioma: anglès
Resum:
Talking Points:
- Development of the Spanish HS (high-speed) network.
- Opertaion: offer, quality commitment, demand.
- Market share and HSR competition versus other modes.
- Environmental impact: greenhouse emissions, energy consumption.
- Impact on residential location and commuting.
- Profitability and cost.
Conclusions.
Spain has put a strong bet on HSR...
Country with more HSL after China (when lines under cosntruction are opened to operation)
....and has succeeded in front of airways
Vcommercial up to reaching a door-to-door time compatible with the one of airways.
Vmax = 350 km/h were necessary in the Madrid-Barcelona HSL for comercial purposes (up to 2f 30 min demand substatially).
- ⇑ Service frequency
- Safety, Reliability
- Importance given to sustainability
The external costs pricing to be implemented in a near future will favour HSR (Rext. C. < Aext.c.)
Spain has made a strategic decision (vs operative decision):
- Investments of public money should be all submitted to CBA but... there are aspects of difficult inclusion within a CBA.
- Strategic decisions take into account “hidden attributes” for the users other than time, costs, comfort, reliability, etc.
- Strengthened territorial links
- Commuting distance widened above 100km
- Rail industry: Economic growth support for Spain
Input-output tables & Multicriteria analyses should complement CBA.
- Consideration of all the effects of the project for all the stakeholders
- Users, non-users, operators, competitor modes, industry, society, etc
Spain has made a strateic decision (vs operative decision)...
...but perhaps the trade-off between spatial coverae and critical mass of demand has not been considered thoroughly?
- In some cases 350 km/h are not justified: 200 km/h are enough
- Line upgrading (Vmax= 200 Km/h) much cheaper than HSL.
Need to justify economic profitability and financial equilibrium of the Spanish HSR master plan, otherwise:
- Low incomes from rail infraestructure charges
- Need to raise charges to ensure cost recovery
- Traffic reduction as a result of higher mark-ups above MC
Need to redefine rail charges structure and level
“Tool for modernising railways organisation and render it more efficient, i.e. morea able to face the competition of other modes of trabsport”(ECMT, 1998).
- Clearly reflect MC (infrastructure, esternal)
- Mark-ups setting according to market’s ability to pay: social benefits maximisation
- Eliminate fixed charge: discriminatory in a open market scenario
- Estimation of ε, λ, Ci /Cs for each link → Optimal mark-up/link
- Analysis stakeholders/effects: Social benefits maximisation.
|
|
