INFRASTRUKTUR | Norske jernbaner | Railways [Archive]

muster

June 5th, 2009, 07:58 PM

Fra innstillingen
6.3.2.1.1 Høyhastighetsbaner

Komiteens flertall, alle unntatt medlemmene fra Fremskrittspartiet, viser til at planen fastslår at høyhastighetsbaner skal utredes, og at dette er et omfattende arbeid. Det er flertallets klare oppfatning at de utredningene som skal gjennomføres, skal ha bygging av høyhastighetsbane som siktemål. Utredningene vil vise om det er mulig å nå dette siktemålet.

Det er flertallets klare oppfatning at de utredningene som nå skal foretas, skal gi et godt beslutningsgrunnlag i god tid før behandlingen av Nasjonal transportplan om fire år. IC-satsingen som ligger i NTP-forslaget, kan bli første steg i en framtidig høyhastighetsbane.

Flertallet gir sin tilslutning til den prosess og de strategivalg som Regjeringen beskriver for de utbyggingsprosjektene som er omtalt i NTP. For alle påfølgende utbyggingsprosjekt i InterCity-triangelet skal det gjøres en konkret vurdering av mulighetene for å tilpasse det aktuelle prosjektet slik at man får en hastighet på minimum 250 km/t, og også gjøres en vurdering av om det bør gjøres tilpassninger ved dagens utbygginger, som for eksempel vil gjøre det mulig på et senere tidspunkt å bygge nye spor der man går utenom enkelte byer. Flertallet vil understreke viktigheten av at også regionale myndigheter trekkes inn i beslutninger om lokalisering av stasjoner og stoppesteder slik at også regionale hensyn kan tas med i betraktningen når ulike hensyn skal veges mot hverandre.

Flertallet mener det er viktig å ha en grundig og bred prosess om hvordan fremtidens jernbane skal se ut. Flertallet er derfor svært fornøyd med at Samferdselsdepartementet har gjennomført en åpen utredningsprosess om høyhastighetsbaner der ulike fagmiljø fra inn og utland har blitt invitert til å gi bidrag. Flertallet mener det er konstruktivt at man undervegs i prosessen også har lagt til rette for at uavhengige utredningsmiljø og interessegrupper har fått mulighet til å presentere sine syn både i form av kommentarer til de fremlagte utredningene og egne planer og vurderinger.

Flertallet konstaterer at det fortsatt gjøres til dels svært ulike vurderinger av blant annet miljøeffekter, kostnader og samfunnsmessig nytte av høyhastighetsprosjekter. Flertallet registrerer videre at det er svært stor forskjell mellom de ulike utbyggingskonseptene som foreslås, blant annet når det gjelder trasévalg, om det bør bygges ett eller to spor og driftskonsept. Flertallet deler derfor Regjeringens vurdering om at ytterligere utredninger er nødvendig for å få et mer omforent og faglig robust grunnlag for å fatte politiske beslutninger.

Flertallet mener at et framtidig høyhastighetstilbud ikke bare skal binde sammen de store byene, men også fange opp mellomliggende trafikk. Dette kan for eksempel oppnås med et høyfrekvent tilbud der noen tog stopper på noen stasjoner, og andre tog på andre stasjoner, noe som bør vurderes i de utredningene som skal foretas. Flertallet deler Regjeringens vurdering av at konseptet for høyhastighetsbaner må videreutvikles og tilpasses norske forhold. Flertallet mener Norge har et betydelig trafikkgrunnlag for høyhastighetstog. Markedsundersøkelsen som Urbanet Analyse nylig har utført på oppdrag fra Jernbaneverket, viser at høyhastighetstog har potensial til å overta 75–95 pst. av det store flymarkedet mellom Oslo og de andre største byene i Norge. Flertallet mener det spesielt bør arbeides videre med konsepter for flerbruksbaner med blandet trafikk av høyhastighetstog, regionstog og godstrafikk. Før en beslutning om bygging av høyhastighetsbaner kan tas, vil det også være helt nødvendig å ha foretatt grunnleggende strekningsvise analyser som kan gi grunnlag for trasévalg.

I tillegg mener flertallet det er behov for ytterligere analyser av ringvirkninger i form av regional utvikling og forstørring av arbeidsmarkeder samt klimapolitiske muligheter. I tillegg ønsker flertallet at det også utredes nærmere hvordan høyhastighetslinjer kan danne grunnstammen i et sammenhengende kollektivtilbud.

Flertallet mener det må trekkes veksler både på det arbeidet som er utført i statlig regi og av eksterne jernbanefaglige miljøer, jf. utredninger som skjer i regi av eksempelvis Norsk Bane/Deutche Bahn. Flertallet viser også til prosjektet Corridor and Innovation and Cooperation(CONICO North) som har hovedfokus på hvordan en høyhastighetstogsløsning mellom Oslo–Gøteborg og videre til kontinentet, kan bidra til regionutvikling, og til det konseptet Høyhastighetsringen AS og andre miljøer arbeider med.

Flertallet er opptatt av at Samferdselsdepartementet tar stilling til hvilke utredninger som skal gjøres, og legges til grunn for den videre planleggingen blant annet hvilket arbeid som skal skje henholdsvis i regi av Jernbaneverket og eksterne jernbanefaglige miljøer.

Flertallet viser til at Regjeringen vil be Jernbaneverket arbeide videre med å vurdere hvordan ulike konsepter for utbygging og drift av høyhastighetsbaner eventuelt kan utvikles og tilpasses norske forhold. For å håndtere en så stor utbyggingsoppgave mener flertallet det også bør vurderes å etablere en egen prosjektorganisasjon for bygging av høyhastighetsbaner. Erfaringene med bygging av høyfartstog i andre land viser at det kan gi gode resultater og effektiv fremdrift.

Flertallet har merket seg at Regjeringen varsler en vurdering av kapasiteten i Oslotunnelen frem mot neste rullering av NTP. Flertallet vil peke på at en vesentlig økt kapasitet for jernbanen gjennom Oslo antakelig er en forutsetning for en eventuell bygging av høyhastighetsbaner i Norge, og mener en slik vurdering også må tas med i de videre utredninger av høyhastighetsbaner som skal foretas.

Komiteens medlemmer fra Høyre, Kristelig Folkeparti og Venstre mener at de utredningene som nå er utført av blant andre Jernbaneverket og Tyske VW 1 gruppen, Norsk Bane og DB International, og Høyhastighetsringen AS, gir et tydelig bilde av at høyhastighets jernbane vil være en framtidsrettet jernbanesatsing i Norge.

Disse medlemmer mener at en slik satsing vil være miljøvennlig og gi unike mobilitetsforbedringer for folk og næringsliv, som i sin tur kan gi store samfunnsøkonomiske gevinster i et langt perspektiv.

Disse medlemmer vil derfor allerede nå gå inn for at det bygges høyhastighetsjernbane i Sør-Norge, der driften er lønnsom.

Komiteens medlemmer fra Høyre og Kristelig Folkeparti mener investeringskostnadene må holdes utenfor en slik lønnsomhetsberegning.

Disse medlemmer mener derfor departementet snarest mulig må starte arbeidet med å utarbeide en konseptvalgsutredning og dernest en handlingsplan og endelig en prioritert utbyggingsplan for høyhastighetsjernbane i Sør-Norge.

Disse medlemmer mener at det på denne måten legges til rette for en forsvarlig prioritering og beslutningsgrunnlag.

Komiteens medlemmer fra Fremskrittspartiet viser til sine merknader om høyhastighetsbane i innstillingens kapittel 1.2.2.

Komiteens medlemmer fra Høyre viser til at Høyre alt i 2006 tok til orde for en satsning på høyhastighetstog i Norge, jf. Dokument nr. 8:94 (2005–2006) Forslag fra stortingsrepresentantene Øyvind Halleraker, Trond Helleland, Bent Høie, Peter Skovholt Gitmark, Kari Lise Holmberg og Svegn Flåtten om å utrede grunnlaget og mulighetene for en sørnorsk høyhastighetsring for jernbane.

Komiteens medlemmer fra Høyre, Kristelig Folkeparti og Venstre fremmer følgende forslag:

"Stortinget ber Regjeringen legge til rette for at det i planperioden 2010–2019 kan bygges en høyhastighetsbane mellom alle de store byene i Sør-Norge og til svenskegrensen mot Stockholm og København, hvis driften beregnes som lønnsom."

Ingenioren

June 5th, 2009, 08:48 PM

So they don't really care about the costs of building these lines as long as running them is profitable =) :cheers: Minimum 250 km/h? Very nice!

City of Rain

June 5th, 2009, 09:14 PM

here is a map of HSR in europe

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/High_Speed_Railroad_Map_Europe_2008.gif

to be honest, having a 320 - 350 km/h HSR would be much awesomer than having a 250 km/h one! :)

but atleast it will be the fastest one in northern europe, even if its only 250 km/h!!

anyone know how long it will take, say, oslo-bergen if its 250 km/h compared to 350 km/h?

muster

June 5th, 2009, 09:40 PM

250 km/h is MINIMUM! The speed will most probably be like 280 - 320 km/h. ;)

From DB report:

Det har også vist seg at banehastigheter på 270–300 km/t kan realiseres nesten overalt. Det er
ikke tilrådelig å bygge for lavere fart. Det ville føre til betydelige trafikktap fordi en da neppe ville
kunne kombinere konkurransedyktige tider i forhold til flytrafikken med stopp underveis. Bare
det å redusere farten til 250 km/t ville f.eks. gi nesten 15 minutter lengre reisetid mellom Oslo og
Trondheim.

http://www.norskbane.no/thumb.aspx?file=prod_images/doc_78_3.jpg&width=475

From Norsk Bane today:

Norsk Bane AS ser no fram til snarlege avklaringar når det gjeld selskapet si rolle i den vidare prosessen. Komitéfleirtalet har sett knappe tidsfristar og ambisiøse mål for eit utfordrande arbeid. Desse måla vil ein berre kunne nå med høg kompetanse og ein sterk og koordinert innsats. Innan 2020 bør dei første samanhengande høgfartsbanene i Noreg vere i drift.:cheers:

Ingenioren

June 5th, 2009, 09:57 PM

Only one year ago 200km/h was maximum for the same stretches, so we are moving in the right direction! I hope they are also considering together with Sweden to build Oslo - Stockholm, i would much rather have one to Stockholm than Bergen, looks like there is a benefit with some rather fast existing lines to Stockholm aswell, also Oslo - Gothenburg has the benefit of fast existing lines... =)

Spearman

June 5th, 2009, 10:03 PM

250 km/h is MINIMUM! The speed will most probably be like 280 - 320 km/h. ;)

The faster it is, the more people it will take away from planes. If you consider the distances involved, I think the optimum would be closer to 350; even if that is more expensive to build. 400 even would probably be cheaper than 250 - there are no stops worth any money between Oslo and Bergen, so only the total travel time counts. With 400 you would even start taking the traffic from Stochlolm and Gothenburg.

Bahh... I'm dreaming. But seriously; 350 is cheaper than 250. We just have to find a way to make the politicians understand that.

Ingenioren

June 5th, 2009, 10:06 PM

400? Getting a little ahead of ourselves maybe :D Would be dead-awsome tough!

muster

June 5th, 2009, 10:35 PM

The faster it is, the more people it will take away from planes. If you consider the distances involved, I think the optimum would be closer to 350; even if that is more expensive to build. 400 even would probably be cheaper than 250 - there are no stops worth any money between Oslo and Bergen, so only the total travel time counts. With 400 you would even start taking the traffic from Stochlolm and Gothenburg.

Bahh... I'm dreaming. But seriously; 350 is cheaper than 250. We just have to find a way to make the politicians understand that.

What!?!? Are youl telling me that my dear Odda is not worth a stop????:nuts:
;)

Seriously, the "underveis! traffic is very important for this project.

From DB report again:
Trafikkpotensial
De høye trafikktallene for bil- og flytrafikk i Norge i dag skyldes et sterkt mobilitetsbehov og
manglende alternativer, f.eks. i form av gode togtilbud. Med nye banestrekninger, konkurransedyktige
reisetider og hyppige avganger oppnår man vesentlige endringer i markedsandelene for
jernbane-, vei- og flytrafikk. Det gir grunn til å regne med betydelige økninger i skinnegående
person- og godstrafikk i Norge.
For 2025 er det prognostisert følgende togtrafikk i gjennomsnittet per dag:
• ca. 8 800 reisende mellom Oslo og Trondheim (punkt-til-punkt-trafikk)
• ca. 19 500 reisende mellom Oslo og Bergen/Haugesund/Stavanger (punkt-til-punkttrafikk).
I tillegg kommer underveistrafikk som varierer i størrelse fra delstrekning til delstrekning. Her
skal det nevnes to eksempler på togtrafikken per dag på utvalgte delstrekninger:
• ca. 12 700 reisende mellom Dombås og Oppdal (Oslo–Trondheim)
• ca. 26 800 reisende mellom Åmot og Haukeligrend (Oslo–Bergen/Haugesund/
Stavanger).
Disse prognosene er i samme størrelsesorden som trafikken som finnes allerede i dag på nynye
utenlandske linjer for raske tog. Dette viser de følgende eksemplene for togtrafikken per dag:
• ca. 18 000 reisende Madrid–Córdoba–Sevilla
• ca. 23 000 reisende gjennom kanaltunnelen
• ca. 30 000 reisende Köln–Rhein/Main
• ca. 100 000 reisende Taipeh–Kaohsiung

Den forventede veksten i togtrafikken i Norge beror blant annet på at nordmenn reiser mye over
lange avstander – noe som også gjenspeiler seg i den sterke flytrafikken – og at det fremtidige
togtilbudet vil bli svært konkurransedyktig og godt tilgjengelig i forhold til fly- og biltrafikken.
Togdriften vil bli lite påvirket av værforhold, f.eks. om vinteren. Det resulterer i en togtrafikk som
f.eks. vil være åtte ganger så stor mellom Åmot og Haukeligrend som i InterCity-nettet ved
Hamar, Moss eller Tønsberg i 2007.

City of Rain

June 5th, 2009, 10:37 PM

ingeniøren, why would you much rather have one to stockholm than one to bergen?

bergen - oslo is one of the stretches with the most air traffic in all of europe. do you have any idea how much pollution all this causes?

obviously itd be better for norway, its nature and its people to have a HSR between bergen and oslo, though i guess most people from eastern norway wouldnt benefit from it, as bergen is such a craphole, so they wouldnt have any reason use the train to go there, anyway. :| am i right?

i hope the HSR will be as fast as possible. if we only make it, say, 280 km/h we will risk that it might be outdated much faster than if they make it, say, 350.... or even 400 :nuts: aiming for the (distant) future ftw!!

Ingenioren

June 5th, 2009, 11:29 PM

I think there is larger potential for increase business towards Sweden, while Bergen as you say, they aubviously travel to Oslo all the time anyway - so no such boost from this line :D But i think they should all be built (Except Steinkjer ofcourse :nuts: ) so don't worry...

Red-Lion

June 5th, 2009, 11:59 PM

Yaaaay. But I seriously hope they go with 300-350 km/h. It needs to be fast enough to be a sure success.

C'mon! Would you rather drive to Oslo?
It shouldn't be an either/or decition. And I don't think it will be. This represents such a massive investement, if it comes out of "samferstselsbutsjettet" alone, it's already eaten up many times over.

No it shouldn't but most of the time i'm not going to Oslo either.

Red-Lion

June 6th, 2009, 12:05 AM

City of Rain

June 6th, 2009, 12:07 AM

well, give us money to build a bigger airport with more direct flights and we wont have a reason to go to oslo anymore.

:lol: im joking. relax, im not trying to start a fight lol

i do however think its more important to make økt velvære for the norwegian population, than to increase business towards sweden, which you cant guarantee that will happen.

Nordmannen

June 6th, 2009, 01:30 PM

Why should Stockholm have any priority at all? Even Steinkjer – Trondheim will have more traffic. Don’t misunderstand me, Stockholm is maybe the most beautiful city in Europe, but we don’t build high speed train for tourists.

If I could choose, the first project should be Bergen – Stavanger - Oslo over Haukeli. Hordaland and Rogaland will still for many years be where we earn the money in this country and the infrastructure between the three biggest and most important cities for the Norwegian economy should be prioritized.

Nordmannen

June 6th, 2009, 01:40 PM

Is it only me that see the trouble of spending billions of tax payer money on railways that are gonna be designed to only cover maintenance and operating cost only. All work, rails, trains, power cables, stations, and all other infrastructure supported by this project will be paid by the government and not considered in the final decision whether or not to build a HSR-system in Norway.

I suppose you are the only one that can see the problem, because you are the only one that doesn’t know anything about Norwegian economy. It’s obvious that you will vote for the peasants in FRP in September, since you are using the silly American word “taxpayers money”. The money is not owned by the tax payers but by all the people in Norway. It’s not even us tax payers that have “given” the money to the Government. If we tax payers should have funded the high speed train it would never have been built. It’s to be paid our oil money, which is not only owned by “tax payers” or all the citizens of Norway. The money is also owned by future generations, people that are still not borne. The question will be: Shall we hand over an undeveloped country with a shit load of money to our grandchildren or shall we let them inherit a country with top infrastructure and a little bit less money?

muster

June 6th, 2009, 02:29 PM

There are actually private companies who wants to finance the HSR. Doesn't have to be tax-money..

virgule82

June 6th, 2009, 02:47 PM

This sounds great, but I'll believe it when I see it. Talk is cheap, especially in an election year. We'll see what happens when politicians actually have to come up with the money.

Red-Lion

June 6th, 2009, 03:57 PM

I suppose you are the only one that can see the problem, because you are the only one that doesn’t know anything about Norwegian economy. It’s obvious that you will vote for the peasants in FRP in September, since you are using the silly American word “taxpayers money”. The money is not owned by the tax payers but by all the people in Norway. It’s not even us tax payers that have “given” the money to the Government. If we tax payers should have funded the high speed train it would never have been built. It’s to be paid our oil money, which is not only owned by “tax payers” or all the citizens of Norway. The money is also owned by future generations, people that are still not borne. The question will be: Shall we hand over an undeveloped country with a shit load of money to our grandchildren or shall we let them inherit a country with top infrastructure and a little bit less money?
Oh, personal attacks are so 2005.

I'm gonna try reply to you without accusing you for having a fetish for Mao or whatever.

The "oil"-money is also taxed money. But don't think that Norway's economy is made up by oil money alone. There is no doubt that we should develop this country. But the enormous cost of a HSR-system in a country like Norway can not be justified. The problem is that they are using our money, the peoples money, on a HSR-railway system which will benefit a few regularly and most on an odd occasion. There is a lot of local traffic, alot of traffic going where the HSR system is unrepresented, and alot of traffic not going between oslo and whatever city. The problem with the HSR-system is that it goes to Oslo from every city, people traveling inbetween other cities will not have a competitive HSR-railway to use.

I also think it's unplausible to have a High speed railway many parts of the country at winter time. So we will spend alot of money on a railway that will be "not-so-high-speed-railway".

And yes you are damn right, I'm gonna vote FrP, anything else would be retarded for a person like me who wants individual freedom and smartest solutions.
I want stuff to be chosen because it's smart, not because it's political correct.
Use money where it's best in use.
(I would vote Venstre, but they are infested by weed heads from Bellona)

Anyways, next time don't accuse others for not knowing the Norwegian economy if you are gonna write a reply of your quality. Norwegian government tax almost 50% of the BNP. Over 1000 billion NOK. But obviously you are probably one of those who think that you can chose what money to spend, or chose that if you don't use gas powerplants in Norway, it's not gonna make other countries produce more coal power.

Mulefisk

June 6th, 2009, 05:59 PM

^^

The cost can be justified, just check out the utredning that DB did. :)

And if you want to talk about justifying the costs, building an HSR line between Oslo and Trondheim or Oslo and Bergen is much more justified than say for example, building a line between Bergen and Tromsø. They have to take the most trafficated routes first, then they can move on to the smaller ones.

About the snow, they have HSR in Japan, and that country gets quite a snowfall in the winter. As far as I know it's not much of a problem there.

Also, isn't there a rule against political discussions in here? Can we please keep that in the Icebar section?

Red-Lion

June 6th, 2009, 07:07 PM

Yeah I'm sorry, I didn't start it however, just pointed out economic facts and got the typical political bias against me as most people get when there are no real arguments.

I agree that
Oslo-Trondheim
Oslo-Bergen
Oslo-Stavanger
Stavanger-Bergen
perhaps also Trondheim-Bergen and to lesse extend Stavanger-Trondheim
is some of the most important routes.

But there are big questions about the whole calculations done on the project. They are adding "local maintenance hiring along the route" as an income, but it's a spending. This is why there is big need for a new calculations to base a decision on. So I still hope the majority will vote no when the final voting is done.

But still a good road network would benefit alot more people much more often. Norways total emission is little on worlds basis, and reducing domestic air traffic will just help a fraction. International air traffic is just as important.
Norways CO2 emissions are 0,16% of the global emissions, even with our "dirty" petroleum industry:
http://www.cicero.uio.no/sporsmal/detail.aspx?faqid=47

So I don't believe in the whole save the environment. We need to compare the emissions from the airtraffic with electricity from coal plants. (Half of earths electricity comes from coal.)

I think that the current airplane system works and is very safe. That's why I don't think spending alot of money to fix what's not broken is the right way to focus our infrastructure budget.

IceCheese

June 7th, 2009, 03:20 AM

My initial reaction to this political decision is: YES!!!:banana::banana:

Then I see some negative comments here and elsewhere. VG "slaughtered" the decision in their leader Saturday, while at it also saying Gardermobanen was a fiasco, based on some more or less ficitional numbers.

To the information for some people regarding statistics from OSL Gardermoen to some HSR-destinations:

Travleste internasjonale ruter fra Oslo lufthavn, Gardermoen (2007)
Plassering Lufthavn Antall passasjerer
1 Københavns lufthavn, Kastrup 1,339,719
2 Stockholm-Arlanda Flygplats 1,058,015

Travleste ruter innenriks fra Oslo lufthavn, Gardermoen (2007)
Plassering Lufthavn Antall passasjerer
1 Bergen lufthavn, Flesland 1,642,254
2 Trondheim lufthavn, Værnes 1,633,153
3 Stavanger lufthavn, Sola 1,308,024

Gothenburg is mainly served by train even today and have little traffic, I guess... This shows that a HSR to Stockholm shouldn't be completely forgotten, though I suspect transfer passengers will use plane eitherway.

The detailed planning will take a lot more than 2-4 years if not Stortinget change how planning of big infrastructure is conducted.

As it is today, every municipality the line passes through have to handle, both administrative and political, the proposal (with different alternatives) for the route alignment. This can take almost forever if the planner and local authority disagree on anything.
Please correct me if I'm mistaken, cause I only remember to have read it somewhere sometime. Wasn't Gardemobanen in it's timed planned through a "riks delplan" (or what it's called) instead of many local "kommunedelplaner", thereby avoiding local bureaucracy/democracy? This would of course be the only way to ensure an efficient process in this case.

Is it only me that see the trouble of spending billions of tax payer money on railways that are gonna be designed to only cover maintenance and operating cost only. All work, rails, trains, power cables, stations, and all other infrastructure supported by this project will be paid by the government and not considered in the final decision whether or not to build a HSR-system in Norway.

So what? It's not as the railroads will loose their value over the years. Would you rather see the oilmoney invested in stocks in foreign companies that can go bankrupt, or have their stocks droping? It's just a matter of where we put our money. If the system will cover maintainance and operation costs, that will be truly amazing, as the lines we have today don't do that at all!

And lastly, personally I don't see the environment-arguement as important at all. It's not like it was a factor when most of our railroad network was build back in 1854-1920ies, and I don't see why we need it now either. It can be a yet another bonus, but not a reason for building. That would be decreased traveling time, less expenses in transporting goods, tie regions together and probably a lot more we can't even imagine today. Two thumbs up!:cheers:

Red-Lion

June 7th, 2009, 03:50 AM

NSB in Rogaland, and also I guess Oslo is the only two regions where NSB makes money, that is true.

New railways are an investment, but it's hard to put a value on it. Yes building infrastructure is one of the things a country can do, and I think that is great.

But a new HSR-network would require spendings unprecedented for the Norwegian government. I just think that the money could be spent more wisely. If a railway system perhaps manages operating costs is crazy. If we want to invest our money we should put it into renewable energy. Build out more water electricity, more windturbines, more geothermal heatening et... Atleast we would cover more than just the operational cost, we would actually get some money back, and the infrastructure would still be there as an investment.

http://bygg.no/id/44724

Here is an article about it, saying that it will only reduce domestic flights in norway by 1/3rd. In person-kilometer, it is less than 20%, and that is assuming 80% of those traveling that distance takes the railway. On international airflights the number is 8%/1,4% if you connect to big european cities. This I would say is very optimistic. But seeing how shorter flights use a little more fuel per kilometer let's say,

WE reduce maybe 25% of inland emissions, and 2% of emissions on international airflights, this is not taking into account the energy use of trains, or any infrastructure used in combination with train or airports.

Mulefisk

June 7th, 2009, 04:05 PM

Nordmannen

June 7th, 2009, 04:55 PM

Oh, personal attacks are so 2005.

I'm gonna try reply to you without accusing you for having a fetish for Mao or whatever.

The "oil"-money is also taxed money. But don't think that Norway's economy is made up by oil money alone. There is no doubt that we should develop this country. But the enormous cost of a HSR-system in a country like Norway can not be justified. The problem is that they are using our money, the peoples money, on a HSR-railway system which will benefit a few regularly and most on an odd occasion. There is a lot of local traffic, alot of traffic going where the HSR system is unrepresented, and alot of traffic not going between oslo and whatever city. The problem with the HSR-system is that it goes to Oslo from every city, people traveling inbetween other cities will not have a competitive HSR-railway to use.

I also think it's unplausible to have a High speed railway many parts of the country at winter time. So we will spend alot of money on a railway that will be "not-so-high-speed-railway".

And yes you are damn right, I'm gonna vote FrP, anything else would be retarded for a person like me who wants individual freedom and smartest solutions.
I want stuff to be chosen because it's smart, not because it's political correct.
Use money where it's best in use.
(I would vote Venstre, but they are infested by weed heads from Bellona)

Anyways, next time don't accuse others for not knowing the Norwegian economy if you are gonna write a reply of your quality. Norwegian government tax almost 50% of the BNP. Over 1000 billion NOK. But obviously you are probably one of those who think that you can chose what money to spend, or chose that if you don't use gas powerplants in Norway, it's not gonna make other countries produce more coal power.

You are so sweet :nuts:

City of Rain

June 7th, 2009, 05:48 PM

Oslo-Trondheim
Oslo-Bergen
Oslo-Stavanger
Stavanger-Bergen
perhaps also Trondheim-Bergen and to lesse extend Stavanger-Trondheim
is some of the most important routes.

you and i think alike :lol:

i was just at the bergen train station 20 minutes ago, as there is this really old museum train coming from oslo and there was alot of buekorps and stuff etc... i think you could walk around inside the train, too (the main reason i went was cause some hot chick from my school was dancing there, though).

anyways, there was this dude there holding a speech and he mentioned HSR and said that it could make the distance between oslo and bergen (actually, he said "the time itd take for oslo people wanting to visit bergen :tongue4: ) by train become less than 4 hours.

wtf? i thought it was going to be more like 2.5 hours.. anyone got a list of how long time itll take with the different speeds etc? if its gonna take 4 hours, then theres no way itll be able to compare with planes.. i mean, nowdays it takes like 6 hours so it would be much of a difference (about 1 movie and a couple of songs!!)

muster

June 7th, 2009, 06:04 PM

The guy you heard don't know what he is talking about. There has been some talks about a "kvasi" -HSR, fixing some stretches at Bergensbanen to make it possible for higher speed with about 4 hours from Oslo-Bergen. Maybe that is what he was talking about?

Here is Norsk Bane's plan. Probably it willl be faster though. DB report suggest even faster..:)
http://www.avento.as/norskbane/upload_images/35297A355FD9469DA318B11D8A4B718E.gif

Høyhastighetsringenhttp://www.hhringen.no/files/documents/reisetid_og_frekvens(2).jpg

City of Rain

June 7th, 2009, 06:10 PM

Ingenioren

June 7th, 2009, 06:13 PM

^ There are different options, and ofcourse Voss and Geilo will be fighting for their cause:D What he was talking about at Bergen station was the status quo in NTP, that is simply Ringeriksbanen, and nothing else =)

City of Rain

June 7th, 2009, 06:16 PM

hmm... i bet the tickets are going to be really expensive, as the HSR will cost soo much to build!! :ohno:

btw, why isnt trondheim included in any of those lists? its the 3rd biggest city!! is it too far north?? id love to know how long itll take from bergen to trondheim!

muster

June 7th, 2009, 06:16 PM

ooh... no Voss or Geilo??

alot of skientusiaster are gonna be really dissapoited if they dont include those two places!!

also, how are they going to build this HSR? i assume they cant use the nåværende tracks, right?

it will suck if it wont be done till 2020.. :ohno: ill be old already!

EDIT: ah, that one you postet after editing includes voss and geilo :)

You can just forget about Voss an Geilo. There wont be HSR along Bergensbanen over Hardangervidda. That is the proposal from Høyhastighetsringen. Høyhastighetsringen was rightfully crushed by the DB report. It is too expensive..

City of Rain

June 7th, 2009, 06:23 PM

^^
but voss and geilo are both included in that list you posted!

btw, how fast will the train be if its going to take as long as in that list?

i just hope theyll make it as fast as possible.. 350 km/h would be badass!! :nuts:

Red-Lion

June 7th, 2009, 06:59 PM

No one is saying that we should stop investing in renewable energy. Who says that the HSR is going to take away money from investments in renewable energy? Either way I though it was the power companies that dealt with investments like that, not the state.

It's well known that trains use far less energy than airplanes. Trains can also draw their energy directly from renewable sources, something that is impossible for planes to do today.

I don't see why you seem to think that every investment in infrastructure needs to make money for the ones that built it? It will make money, but not for the state. It will make money for people and businesses that use it on a daily basis. It will make money for all the cities placed along the new lines because access to them will be better. It will cause sustainable growth for the entire country.
Actually state sponsor renewable energy building (Enova), while they are not always the ones who make money out of it. It's not a question about how much money HSR-system will make, but if. There are several government owned power companies. Maybe the state should start a renewable energy company?

Trains does not run on renewable energy, that's a myth. All energy produced is put into a giant pool, and it's mixed, it's not like the renewable energy is lost if it's not used. Yes it's true that it use less energy, but it still will take some energy to pull a train up several hundred meters altitude in 250km/h ++++

The energy is not green, as opposed to making more green energy will infact reduce the need for using fossil fuel.

I don't think a HSR-system will come, I believe this is an uthopia and it's a card played out for the election this autumn. HSR in mountainous sparsely populated country, it sounds too good to be true. Also no excisting HSR got the same weather conditions as Norway.

In side effect we would probably lose all commercial domestic air traffic, if the companies can't operate on the financial justified routes they are not gonna operate on questionable routes just to be nice. We would have to start a 100% government operated airline to fly to Northern Norway, we would have to spend billions on Avinor so they can operate with loss on every airport. Or we could just force all northern Norwegians to live in total isolation or move to southern Norway.

Last but not least, if a HSR-system is justified around major cities, there is no problems building it just around these cities.

You are so sweet :nuts:
The day I want to be judged by my sweetness by internet tough guys I'll let you know.

Red-Lion

June 7th, 2009, 07:04 PM

Dan

June 7th, 2009, 07:25 PM

Seems like a lot of stops for HSR!

Ingenioren

June 7th, 2009, 07:29 PM

^ This will surely be a one of a kind system, who would have tought Jondal would get an express-train 10 years ago? :lol:

muster

June 7th, 2009, 07:38 PM

Seems like a lot of stops for HSR!

The trains will not stop on each station every time. Most of the time they will just pass the smaller stations.

^ This will surely be a one of a kind system, who would have tought Jondal would get an express-train 10 years ago? :lol:

This is my home district, and even I don't understand the Jondal stop. The Odda stop will cover Jondal, no need for two stops.

Ingenioren

June 7th, 2009, 08:21 PM

Maybe it will serve both sides of the fjord, and they are supposed to park their cars on North-side and walk over the bridge to the station?

muster

June 7th, 2009, 09:34 PM

Maybe it will serve both sides of the fjord, and they are supposed to park their cars on North-side and walk over the bridge to the station?

Lol, the bridge will of course also include lanes for car traffic. The construction of Jondalstunnele (http://www.hardanger-folkeblad.no/hfnyhende/article4381015.ece)n is just around the corner. This is the second last pieze making E134 (http://www.bedreveier.org/haukeliveien/E134-Ekspressvegen.pdf) the most effective East-West road connection. The bridge is the last pieze:)

Ingenioren

June 7th, 2009, 10:53 PM

^ And there are still a lot of km to be saved on shorter route past Seljord and over Haukeli :) If Haukeliveien got to chose the route, it would be even better!

IceCheese

June 7th, 2009, 11:53 PM

Maybe the state should start a renewable energy company?

http://www.statkraft.no/

muster

June 8th, 2009, 12:31 AM

^^As far as I know it is actually the biggest renewable energy company in Europe. m))

Ingenioren

June 8th, 2009, 12:44 AM

Right on, and there is a LOT of power to still harvest from water - only now they actually have to pay the landowners marked value for those waterfalls:D

Kjello0

June 8th, 2009, 01:15 AM

The first is haukeli-banen (the only viable option imo)
the second is the high speed ring,
Norsk Bane's option
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/Norsk_Bane_reisetid.jpg/533px-Norsk_Bane_reisetid.jpg

Den Sør-Norske høyhastighetsringen
http://www.hhringen.no/images/kart.gif

The last one actually would cost more than the first one. Even though it doesn't have links to Trondheim and Ålesund and don't have a direct link between Oslo and Stavanger.

It does however have a link between Stavanger and Kristiansand and a more direct link between Stavanger and Bergen.

Red-Lion

June 8th, 2009, 11:58 PM

Oh BTV-ringen looks interesting!

and IceCheese: I meant a renewable energy company that invest in renewable energy that has no chance to pay back investment costs. Or ofc, a much higher Enova supported renewable energy building for Statkraft.

Kjello0

June 9th, 2009, 06:35 AM

We could have that ring with Norsk Bane's option too.

City of Rain

June 9th, 2009, 10:08 AM

We could have that ring with Norsk Bane's option too.

that would be amazing, but i bet it'd be really expensive, too!!

Hansadyret

July 5th, 2009, 06:19 PM

Haukelibanen should be the first line built. While the most expensive it is by far the the line that would pick up the most passengers. It would connect the three largest city-areas i Norway and link up Western Norway. Even Stavanger-Bergen has airtraffic close to a million each year. The combined airtraffic(not counting Haugesund) between those three cities is about 4mill and will probably grow with population growth.

Fender56

July 5th, 2009, 06:38 PM

Þróndeimr

July 5th, 2009, 06:48 PM

muster

July 5th, 2009, 06:54 PM

The amount of money, you put in these railways in Norway, is only possible through the imense income from oil. There simply no sense in this, it is way cheaper to send passengers through the air, for free........

Construction of this kind is only possible in states, 10 fold the size of Norway.

Norway a very big country, with very few people..... :ohno:

You are wrong, it is not the population of the country that is important, but passenger numbers.

Trafikkpotensial
De høye trafikktallene for bil- og flytrafikk i Norge i dag skyldes et sterkt mobilitetsbehov og
manglende alternativer, f.eks. i form av gode togtilbud. Med nye banestrekninger, konkurransedyktige
reisetider og hyppige avganger oppnår man vesentlige endringer i markedsandelene for
jernbane-, vei- og flytrafikk. Det gir grunn til å regne med betydelige økninger i skinnegående
person- og godstrafikk i Norge.
For 2025 er det prognostisert følgende togtrafikk i gjennomsnittet per dag:
• ca. 8 800 reisende mellom Oslo og Trondheim (punkt-til-punkt-trafikk)
• ca. 19 500 reisende mellom Oslo og Bergen/Haugesund/Stavanger (punkt-til-punkttrafikk).
I tillegg kommer underveistrafikk som varierer i størrelse fra delstrekning til delstrekning. Her
skal det nevnes to eksempler på togtrafikken per dag på utvalgte delstrekninger:
• ca. 12 700 reisende mellom Dombås og Oppdal (Oslo–Trondheim)
• ca. 26 800 reisende mellom Åmot og Haukeligrend (Oslo–Bergen/Haugesund/
Stavanger).
Disse prognosene er i samme størrelsesorden som trafikken som finnes allerede i dag på nynye
utenlandske linjer for raske tog. Dette viser de følgende eksemplene for togtrafikken per dag:
• ca. 18 000 reisende Madrid–Córdoba–Sevilla
• ca. 23 000 reisende gjennom kanaltunnelen
• ca. 30 000 reisende Köln–Rhein/Main
• ca. 100 000 reisende Taipeh–Kaohsiung

Den forventede veksten i togtrafikken i Norge beror blant annet på at nordmenn reiser mye over
lange avstander – noe som også gjenspeiler seg i den sterke flytrafikken – og at det fremtidige
togtilbudet vil bli svært konkurransedyktig og godt tilgjengelig i forhold til fly- og biltrafikken.
Togdriften vil bli lite påvirket av værforhold, f.eks. om vinteren. Det resulterer i en togtrafikk som
f.eks. vil være åtte ganger så stor mellom Åmot og Haukeligrend som i InterCity-nettet ved
Hamar, Moss eller Tønsberg i 2007.

Fender56

July 5th, 2009, 07:05 PM

You are wrong, it is not the population of the country that is important, but passenger numbers.

muster, call it what you like, Norway is not NORMALLY big enough to finance this kind of project. The number of passengers will never, ever pay the expenses of this project..............OIL ONLY WILL PAY.

I love Norway, but not these nonsense projects.. :cheers:

muster

July 5th, 2009, 07:12 PM

muster, call it what you like, Norway is not NORMALLY big enough to finance this kind of project. The number of passengers will never, ever pay the expenses of this project..............OIL ONLY WILL PAY.

I love Norway, but not these nonsense projects.. :cheers:

Is it nonsense to travel by train instead of planes? Or is it nonsense using trains for goods, rather than trucks??? Of course oil will finance parts of the project, but does that make the project nonsense??? You are just jelaous.. :)

Fender56

July 5th, 2009, 07:23 PM

Is it nonsense to travel by train instead of planes? Or is it nonsense using trains for goods, rather than trucks??? Of course oil will finance parts of the project, but does that make the project nonsense??? You are just jelaous.. :)

No i´ts no sense to go by train rather than airplane.. BUT you in Norway plans to invest so much money in train, that it can not be paid by the travellers alone, but only by money from the goverment... (read OIL)

Over the rest of Europa this simply is not possible, because it demands more people than in Norway, ....totally.

:ohno:

IceCheese

July 5th, 2009, 07:24 PM

If this HSR project is nonsense, then it was even more nonsense to build the current railroads in Norway back in the days when the costs were far higher (compared to budgets).

Fender56

July 5th, 2009, 07:42 PM

Here in Denmark, we have planned highspeedtrains for years.

We have an area less then 1/5 of Norway, but with more people than Norway combined. And we are not even sure that an highspeed railway system is financially posibble, here.!

And then you Norwegians, want to convince me and the rest of the world, that railway systems, in solid rock in Norway is cheaper than here, where we just scrap the mould aside, and lay down the tracks...think again dear Norwegians.

I would love to have highspeed trains in Norway and everywhere, but if Norwegians think this is for free....think again.

:cheers:

muster

July 5th, 2009, 08:00 PM

Þróndeimr

July 5th, 2009, 08:04 PM

We have an area less then 1/5 of Norway,

but if Norwegians think this is for free....think again.

Actually, Denmark is just 1/8 of mainland Norway. :)

And they mentioned 400 billion Kroner up there. Not free, but affortable. Every country in the world build what they can affort. It is natural that Norwegians spand more money on such projects since we have more money per people than in most other countries in the world.

Don't think our HSR project is nonsense yet, but it can be a failiour if they don't do it very properly this time...

Ingenioren

July 5th, 2009, 10:44 PM

i'd rather use 8-9 hours to drive to Oslo

Not everyone will use new HSR - there will ofcourse still be a marked for cheap coach-trafic and cars aswell, it's worse for you to get to Trondheim S, than Værnes?

Þróndeimr

July 5th, 2009, 11:10 PM

it's worse for you to get to Trondheim S, than Værnes?

Same really, just cheaper to go to Værnes even though its further away. And since the policy is to make Midtbyen and Trondheim a car-free city more or less i see where its going!

Would be okay if they had more busses and boats going to Trondheim, but they cut down on that too, so i guess we're supose to walk than! :)

Red-Lion

July 7th, 2009, 12:31 AM

muster, call it what you like, Norway is not NORMALLY big enough to finance this kind of project. The number of passengers will never, ever pay the expenses of this project..............OIL ONLY WILL PAY.

I love Norway, but not these nonsense projects.. :cheers:
Again a person with questionable behaviour and IQ on these forums...

Not that I would spend money on it, but learn and study some economy...

naive.super

July 7th, 2009, 01:02 AM

Here in Denmark, we have planned highspeedtrains for years.

We have an area less then 1/5 of Norway, but with more people than Norway combined. And we are not even sure that an highspeed railway system is financially posibble, here.!

As you said Denmark is 1/5 of Norways with more than 1/3 of population living in Metro Copenhagen area. Obviously highspeed railway is not a priority there. Norway on the other hand is a different case. It has (if you will) a linear structural distribution of cities, connecting them with highspeed railwy network makes sense.
Of course it is an expensive project, but it is a wonderful one as well, it will pay off greatly in future. Especially of other modes of transportation will be integrated in it better.
Ridership may be a problem at first, but again I'd say it will largerly depend on how integration with other transport is managed + tourists will add up some numbers, given the number of tourist/cultural attractions along the route.

I would love to have highspeed trains in Norway and everywhere, but if Norwegians think this is for free....think again.

:cheers:

Nothing is for free, any kind of project of comparable scale requires significant expenditures. Following your logic, nothing would ever be built.

IceCheese

July 7th, 2009, 01:34 AM

Minister of Transportation LS. Navarsete spends her summer vacation testing HSR in Germany, while trying to keep Norwegian journalists in the blur about the Norwegian HSR-project:

http://www.smp.no/article/20090706/NYHETER/349556562/1002

Fender56

July 7th, 2009, 04:56 PM

As you said Denmark is 1/5 of Norways with more than 1/3 of population living in Metro Copenhagen area. Obviously highspeed railway is not a priority there. Norway on the other hand is a different case. It has (if you will) a linear structural distribution of cities, connecting them with highspeed railwy network makes sense.
Of course it is an expensive project, but it is a wonderful one as well, it will pay off greatly in future. Especially of other modes of transportation will be integrated in it better.
Ridership may be a problem at first, but again I'd say it will largerly depend on how integration with other transport is managed + tourists will add up some numbers, given the number of tourist/cultural attractions along the route.

Nothing is for free, any kind of project of comparable scale requires significant expenditures. Following your logic, nothing would ever be built.

Just to correct you a little, only 24% in Denmark is living in the Metro Copenhagen area, or less than 1/4 of the population. 52% is living in Jutland alone (Jylland not included Fyn).... some likes to think CPH is all Denmark, but that´s far from true.

But nevertheless, if you in Norway really thinks that a project far more expensive, than the Hamburg-Berlin Transrapid superhighspeed trainsystem, is going to be payable by the consumers alone, then you need some basic economy lessons.

Deutche Bahn could not see economy in it, and that between to German cities with the double inhabitants of all people of Norway. AND please don´t forget, the Berlin - Hamburg strech was planned to cost 1/10 of the Norwegian project...!

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transrapid

:ohno:

muster

July 7th, 2009, 06:27 PM

Just to correct you a little, only 24% in Denmark is living in the Metro Copenhagen area, or less than 1/4 of the population. 52% is living in Jutland alone (Jylland not included Fyn).... some likes to think CPH is all Denmark, but that´s far from true.

But nevertheless, if you in Norway really thinks that a project far more expensive, than the Hamburg-Berlin Transrapid superhighspeed trainsystem, is going to be payable by the consumers alone, then you need some basic economy lessons.

Deutche Bahn could not see economy in it, and that between to German cities with the double inhabitants of all people of Norway. AND please don´t forget, the Berlin - Hamburg strech was planned to cost 1/10 of the Norwegian project...!

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transrapid

:ohno:

Why du you repeat you population numbers? You still don't get it, do you? BTW, Deutche Bahn is the company behind the report that recomend HSR in Norway.

naive.super

July 7th, 2009, 08:47 PM

Just to correct you a little, only 24% in Denmark is living in the Metro Copenhagen area, or less than 1/4 of the population. 52% is living in Jutland alone (Jylland not included Fyn).... some likes to think CPH is all Denmark, but that´s far from true.

Well, I am not an expert in this issue, and anyways it's offtopic. But just for the sake of the argument, I looked up numbers on wikipedia where's Copenhagen's metro area has 1,87 mln inhabitants, with total population being approximately 5.5 mln so it's actually roughly 34 %, but not 24, sorry.

But nevertheless, if you in Norway really thinks that a project far more expensive, than the Hamburg-Berlin Transrapid superhighspeed trainsystem, is going to be payable by the consumers alone, then you need some basic economy lessons.

Deutche Bahn could not see economy in it, and that between to German cities with the double inhabitants of all people of Norway. AND please don´t forget, the Berlin - Hamburg strech was planned to cost 1/10 of the Norwegian project...!

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transrapid

:ohno:

I'm not sure what's the point are you making? That Norway does not need this project? Or whether Norway isn't going to be able to pay for it?

If it's first than it's debatable, at least I see it more justified in Norway than in Denmark (given geographical distribution of cities, etc)
If it's second then don't worry, I'm sure there were good economists involved in this project to make sure it is carried out in a good way.

HasseVonHammarby

July 8th, 2009, 08:15 AM

Just to correct you a little, only 24% in Denmark is living in the Metro Copenhagen area, or less than 1/4 of the population. 52% is living in Jutland alone (Jylland not included Fyn).... some likes to think CPH is all Denmark, but that´s far from true.

But nevertheless, if you in Norway really thinks that a project far more expensive, than the Hamburg-Berlin Transrapid superhighspeed trainsystem, is going to be payable by the consumers alone, then you need some basic economy lessons.

Deutche Bahn could not see economy in it, and that between to German cities with the double inhabitants of all people of Norway. AND please don´t forget, the Berlin - Hamburg strech was planned to cost 1/10 of the Norwegian project...!

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transrapid

:ohno:

I like you Fender. A couple of week ago you were your village expert on motorway driving. Now you are a financial expert on railway construction. Denmark must be proud of a son like you.

KiwiRob

August 4th, 2009, 02:00 PM

This is horrible news! I rather have better roads :< How many people are we gonna sacrifice on poor roads so that some politicians can feel good about themself?

100% agree, this proposal is great news for people living in the major cities but it doesn't help those who don't, we wil still have to suffer with third world standard roading.

KiwiRob

August 4th, 2009, 02:28 PM

Spearman

August 6th, 2009, 02:48 AM

I must say it's nice to see the state thinking about opening the purse a little and seeing what all the oil wealth could really do for Norway. Norway is a great country but my god I'm believe the people in charge of the public purse must be Scottish, infrastructure, education and health are not at the level I was expecting.
It's not a matter of money per se. It's a matter of finding the people to do the jobs. Right now, the unemployment rate is 3.6%, but even that is usually considered to be just people in transit between jobs.

So the gigantic flow of oil money into the public purse is not doing us a great deal of good.

Not saying there aren't room for improvements. Some (most?) government enterprises are run horribly inefficient. Road construction, for instance, has been critisized several times in studies for being victim to pork spending, poor planning and too many too small allocations inducing unnecessary start up and shut down costs. But it's (usually) not a matter of increasing the amount spent.

KiwiRob

August 6th, 2009, 09:18 AM

^^ You don't have to use Norwegian companies to build it, just like the shipbuilding industry in Norway who hire lots of Eastern European contractors NSB could hire in. The money is there so why not use it.

Spearman

August 6th, 2009, 08:20 PM

^^And that is probably what they will do. But: when spending money for government projects, the REAL cost is hidden, and probably lower than the stated project cost, because if it creates jobs, the people getting the money will be paying taxes rather than recieving welfare + ofc they will spend more money, thus generating further economic activity. This is true all over the world, and especially so in Norway (where both welfare payments and taxes are quite substantial compared to many other places); so spending money purely hiring foreign workers increases the real macroeconomic cost. Some investements in infrastructure pay for themselves over time, others do not (and should thus be considered luxury), and unfortunately, many road projects in Norway fall in the second category.

So the attidude has been to not spend the money now on luxury, but rather save it for a rainy day.

Now, as far as this HSR project is concerned; there seems to be an economic case for it, but that depends on the fraction of travellers using it. My personal opinion is that even if HSR is really, really cool, they shouldn't do it if it's a project that ends up loosing us 100+ billion kr.

But: while the overlying policy on spending is imho the right one, the end result spending is not. Ever hear of the famous US "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska (Google it)? We have many such projects already, and more underway (mostly undersea tunnels to nowhere, though), and the way the money allocated to road construction is used is more a result of politicians from god- and (more importantly) people-forsaken places trading pork barrels with each other, and the money is not placed where it is needed.

So I agree the state of roads is shameful and below standard, but I disagree that spending oil money is the way to solve it.

Speaking of really, really cool: I would like to know how a maglev line would perform before I make up my mind for this project. They usually cost more to build, but are cheaper to operate; and they are built on poles; so snow might be less of an issue in the winter. Most of all, they are faster, so the fraction of travellers choosing the train would go up.

KiwiRob

August 7th, 2009, 12:25 PM

^^But: while the overlying policy on spending is imho the right one, the end result spending is not. Ever hear of the famous US "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska (Google it)? We have many such projects already, and more underway (mostly undersea tunnels to nowhere, though), and the way the money allocated to road construction is used is more a result of politicians from god- and (more importantly) people-forsaken places trading pork barrels with each other, and the money is not placed where it is needed.

So I agree the state of roads is shameful and below standard, but I disagree that spending oil money is the way to solve it.

Interesting reading about the bridge, but it all worked out for the best in the end, they didn't build it, pitty the same can't be said for similar projects in Norway.

Fender56

August 7th, 2009, 06:16 PM

mjoks007

August 7th, 2009, 06:50 PM

^^ You obviously dont know anything about this project, but you still laugh about it?

-Yes, like the threadtitle says, its majority for highspeedtrain on strontinget.

-Not decided, probably around 2025.

-The travelpotensial is good, like for many highspeedstreches in europe, is thoose payed by the passengers?

-NSB is owned by the state, so the project will be financed by the oljefond first (Probably).

I guees you laugh because you dont can see have we something like that in Norway? Did you f.exa. know that Oslo-Bergen is one of the most trafficated airplaneroutes in europe?

muster

August 7th, 2009, 09:03 PM

I´m still amazed about this nonsense project, so far.....

1.: Is this project accepted/approved by the Stortinget.?

2.: If yes, when will it start, and where.?

3.: Is this blue-light of a project, ever to be payed by the passengers themself.?

4.: If not payed by the travellers, who will pay...?

Hopefully, normally Norwegians, are more clever than the Norwegian politicians..........

:lol:

1. There is a majority for HSR at Stortinget yes

2. The final decision will be made in 2013, before that there will be some more reports (where the tracks will go, etc..)

3. and 4. The finance of the project is not decided yet, but that wont be a problem. I know that Deutche Bahn and other private companies are interested, but probably the state wants to own the tracks.

IMO there is 95% chance that Norway's first HSR line will be finnished before 2025. I'm sorry you wont get it in Denmark, but you just have to understand that the country is too small..

Hansadyret

August 8th, 2009, 02:37 AM

This is a good project for the future i think. Both eastern and western Norway are growing pretty fast with more potential passengers in the future, and linking up Stavanger, Haugsund, Bergen is allso extremely good for western Norway. The two lines that should come first is Stavanger/Bergen-Oslo and Trondheim-Oslo. 300B NOK is just 3B a year over hundred years.
This will be very demanding projects and would involve some very long bridges an tunnels. In 50 Years or so i think the next generations will be glad we built it.
If this ever happens i just hope they keep the old Bergensbanen as a tourist line and for local traffic/maybe godstraffic.

Hansadyret

August 19th, 2009, 06:45 PM

Fender56

August 19th, 2009, 07:01 PM

And now I see Sweden has started planning for a high speed line between Stockholm and Gothenburg.
http://www.destination.se/article5662032.ab

Stockholm-Gothenburg in 2 hours and a top speed of 320 km/h, sounds nice.

Isn´t that nice, I love the project, high-speed trains between Stockholm and Gøteborg, makes sense. :cheers:

But between Oslo and Trondheim that´ll kill Norwegian Rail, or some notty politycians...:

ohno:

mjoks007

August 19th, 2009, 08:24 PM

You cant only look at the citysize. Oslo-Trondheim is much more trafficated than Oslo-Göteborg f.exa. But both streches have basis to be highspeed railroads.

IceCheese

August 19th, 2009, 09:14 PM

Isn´t that nice, I love the project, high-speed trains between Stockholm and Gøteborg, makes sense. :cheers:

But between Oslo and Trondheim that´ll kill Norwegian Rail, or some notty politycians...:

ohno:

Why oh why is that?

Both important national cities: Check
Capital is on the route: Check
Running through flatlands with mostly woods/farm lands: Check
Distance at around 500 km: Check
The route is today characterized by stretches of non-motorways: Check

What makes these two stretches so different?

IceCheese

August 19th, 2009, 09:20 PM

And to some happy news, since elections is coming:

Det blir dobbeltspor Farriseidet - Porsgrunn
18.08.2009

Det er nå bestemt at den nye delen av Vestfoldbanen fra Farriseidet ved Larvik til Porsgrunn skal bygges med dobbeltspor. Banestrekningen er så langt planlagt og regulert som en enkeltsporet bane med to 900 meter lange kryssingsspor.

http://www.jernbaneverket.no/no/Nyheter/Nyhetsarkiv/2009/Det-blir-dobbelspor-mellom-Farriseidet-og-Porsgrunn/

And since we're at it:

Holmestrand får stasjon i fjell
19.08.2009

Jernbaneverket har nå bestemt at nye Holmestrand stasjon skal bygges inn i fjellet og at vestfoldbanens nye dobbeltspor fra Holm til Nykirke skal tilrettelegges for 250 km/t.

http://www.jernbaneverket.no/no/Nyheter/Nyhetsarkiv/2009/Holmestrand-far-stasjon-i-fjell/

These are both important in the highspeed-longrun if you ask me...

IceCheese

August 19th, 2009, 09:31 PM

And finally some numbers for mister Fender56, directly from Deutsche Bahn (if that's a source reliable enough for you):

Fakta

Oslo-Trondheim
 Reisetid: 2t 25 min
 Frekvens: To tog i timen i begge retninger
 Stoppmønster: Alle tog stopper på Lillehammer,
Hamar
og Gardermoen
 Regiontog stopper ulikt slik at alle stasjoner får
ett stopp minst annenhver time
 Byggekostnad: 81 mrd. kroner (inkl.10 prosent
uforutsett)
 Nye person- og godstog: 11 mrd (inkl.10 prosent
uforutsett)
 Totale billett- og fraktinntekter: 7,7 mrd. kroner/år
 Drift og vedlikehold av tog og spor: 1,6 mrd.
kroner/år
 Samfunnsøkonomisk inntjening (nytte) over 30 år:
286 mrd. kr
 Reduserte CO2-utslipp: 460 000 tonn/år

Oslo-Bergen/Haugesund /Stavanger
 Reisetid: Oslo-Bergen 2t 05 min, Oslo-Stavanger
2t 05 min, Bergen-Stavanger 1t 25 min
 Frekvens: To tog i timen – ett ekspress og ett som
stopper mer lokalt
 Byggekostnad: 129 mrd. kroner (inkl.10 prosent
uforutsett)
 Nye person- og godstog: 19 mrd (inkl.10 prosent
uforutsett)
 Totale billett- og fraktinntekter: 10,7 mrd. kroner/år
 Drift og vedlikehold av tog og spor: 2,1 mrd.
kroner/år
 Samfunnsøkonomisk inntjening (nytte) over 30 år:
659 mrd. kroner
 Reduserte CO2-utslipp: 940 000 tonn/år

City of Rain

August 19th, 2009, 11:53 PM

obviously the HSR connecting east and western norway should be prioritized.

it would be cool to be able to just hop on a train and take a day-trip to oslo whenever i felt like it :)

Ingenioren

August 20th, 2009, 01:20 AM

And to some happy news, since elections is coming:

Best news i've heard in a long time, hopefully this trend will follow when Ringeriksbanen and other new railroads finally will be built (Sørvestlandsbanen and Moss-Halden? =) (As a dual-track and high-speed railroad... ) :banana:

Hansadyret

August 20th, 2009, 06:27 PM

Some swedish expert about the norwegian plans for high speed trains:
http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/article3224720.ece

Ingenioren

August 21st, 2009, 08:56 AM

That is a dream come thru, both we get a new bullet-train, and we get to see the districts loose their domestic airlines, love it! F*** Finnmark;P

IceCheese

August 21st, 2009, 02:21 PM

Everybody in this country knows and understand that the government never would allow such airports to get closed. The only thing that will happen, is that the govs have to put in more money. Eitherway, it's not like OSL will go bankrupt without the domestic travel. Most travel is international eitherway, and that won't suffer much at all.

City of Rain

August 21st, 2009, 03:24 PM

"Høyhastighetstog gir liten miljøgevinst"

http://www.bt.no/nyheter/valg/%26ndash%3B-Hoeyhastighetstog-gir-liten-miljoegevinst-911925.html

IceCheese

August 21st, 2009, 04:04 PM

That's the same conclusion as Econ Pöwry came up with when doing the same analysis for Jernbaneverket. And I agree with it completely: Building HSR on a climate-arguement alone is completely nuts! Luckily there are sooo many other arguements for building a HSR-net, that I won't worry much...

Fender56

August 21st, 2009, 04:13 PM

British report says, high-speed trains are worse than aeroplanes CO2 wise.:

http://ing.dk/artikel/101621-rapport-fly-er-groennere-end-hoejhastighedstog

:nuts:

IceCheese

August 21st, 2009, 04:20 PM

Not in Norway where 97 % of all electricity is from renewable sources...

HasseVonHammarby

August 22nd, 2009, 01:07 PM

British report says, high-speed trains are worse than aeroplanes CO2 wise.:

http://ing.dk/artikel/101621-rapport-fly-er-groennere-end-hoejhastighedstog

:nuts:

Why is Einstein, sorry Fender56, so negative to high speed train in Norway? You should be happy that your neighbours can afford a fantastic infrastructure? When Norway has their high speed railway ready you can Maybe ask them for help to build electrified railway to your homevillage.

54°26′S 3°24′E

August 23rd, 2009, 02:34 AM

^^ Well, we have to see whether it actually gets constructed or not. I would not be surprised if the politicians eventually pull out as the real cost of the project is calculated in further studies. Only the minor parties of Norway have really commited themselves to high speed trains. The labor party (biggest) is luke warm, the progress party (second biggest) is against, and even the conservative party (third biggest), which apparantly is more positive than the other two, say that they have to see further, unbiased, and more comprehensive studies. As such, the DB study is more of a private initiative and not really part of the political process. The major problem with the study is that the group ordered it has an agenda of their own, which probably affected both the questions asked and the information provided to DB.
Not in Norway where 97 % of all electricity is from renewable sources...
That's a somewhat dubious argument, as Norway is no part of the European energy marked, and will increasing be so with new and better power cables to the continent. Hence, increased use of electricity in Norway means increased burning of coal or some other fossile fuel somewhere else. However, if and when CCS (carbon capture and storage) becomes a reality and/or the whole of Europe goes renewable you will have a valid point.

Having said that I certainly believe that HSR, with reasonably speeds, use less energy than air planes, but the important thing in the present situation is to get the transport on ground (i.e. train /car), rather than continue the senseless use of air travel in Norway. Thus, I am in favor of both HSR and motorway development to reach that goal.

Ingenioren

August 27th, 2009, 10:56 AM

As expected, the regulatory work will be done by the central government for the HSR project:)
http://www.aftenposten.no/nyheter/iriks/article3230259.ece

kjetilab

August 27th, 2009, 11:46 AM

It's about time they start to plan railroad lines this way. Hopefully the entire Intercity-triangle will be planned and constructed this way.

KiwiRob

August 27th, 2009, 03:11 PM

I believe the major obsticle in the way of HSR in Norway is the complete lack of population to support it, there just aren't enough people living here. The highway network needs to be brought up to a modern and efficient standard before a fantasy project like HSR should even be thought of.

If money is going to be spent on the railroads then it would be better spent improving the freight service, removing trucks from the road would be a great benefit to Norway.

Ingenioren

August 27th, 2009, 04:38 PM

Doesn't matter how many we are, it's how much we travel :)

KiwiRob

August 27th, 2009, 09:03 PM

^^ true Norwegian do travel but I can't see HSR really eating into the air travel market, a lot of Norwegian cities are big enough to sustain 3-4 boeing 737's a day to Oslo but you aren't going to get anywhere near that kind of frequency with HSR unless it's heavely subsidised, plus it's only really going to be between Oslo and 3-4 other points. People living in places like Molde, Tromso, Alesund, Kristiansund, Bodo, Navik are all still going to fly.

It takes me 1.5 hours from walking out my door in Molde to arriving in Olso, where I then fly out of the country, HSR isn't going to be any use for me, however a decent highway from Molde to Trondheim, Alesund, Lilliehamer, would be much more beneficial and safer than the current goat tracks we have to use today.

HSR would be fantastic but money would be better spent fixing and up grading the existing 3rd world road network. If we could build something like what the Croatians have done in the last 5-10 years I would be impressed, their national highway network is almost completed, it's fantastic, it's built in some pretty difficult areas to build, it connects the everywhere in the country to everywhere else, it's posted speed are between 110-130, and Croatia is a much poorer country than Norway.

KiwiRob

August 27th, 2009, 09:05 PM

double post

IceCheese

November 5th, 2009, 07:55 PM

Should we rename this thread and make it into a general railroad thread for Norway?

There is "a lot" of news about railways in Norway, as there seem to be many people fighting for it and agreeing on the need of it. Therefor there are also a lot of interesting analysis and discussions about it.

This thread could be the "Norwegian railways thread" :)

Þróndeimr

November 5th, 2009, 08:02 PM

^^ suport that one, request sent to mods.

Gsus

November 7th, 2009, 01:56 PM

Regarding highspeedlines, I'm not very optimistic about it. When you see how long time the government wants too use rebuilding the IC-network on Østlandet, I can't see anything other than this being a "spill for galleriet", as we've witnessed too many times before. It's unbelievable that our politician doesn't seem to understand the importance of good rail and road connections. But when we look at other things as the health care system and schools as well, we can see that in one of the richest countries in the world, everything is supposed too be on a minimum when it comes too government funding.

Too get a good railway network as soon as possible, I think that railways (and roads) should become a "foretak". Also the government has too stay FAR away from deciding where the money should be used. A system where jernbaneverket and statens vegvesen every fifth year or so deliver a report too the government of which projects they want too prioritize, and how much money they will need. The report should also be open too the public, so the government can't brag about how much they use, when the sum needed is really much higher, but silenced.

mjoks007

November 7th, 2009, 02:10 PM

Norsk bane ber om fortgang (http://www.norskbane.no/default.aspx?menu=4&id=115)

Stortingets vedtak om minst 250 km/t for nye prosjekter og IC-området må derfor følges opp og bør presiseres. 300 km/t bør være standarden, mens 250 km/t bør være unntaket. Omskriv*nin*gen til "opp til 250 km/t", jfr. forslaget til statsbudsjett, side 120, er derfor en farlig svekkelse av Stortingets vedtak, som også kan medføre langt lavere hastighet.

muster

November 9th, 2009, 06:26 PM

A seminar about HSR in Norway(Oslo - København) , at Bristol tuesday 17.11.
(http://www.mandagmorgen.no/artikkel.shtml?id=4007)
YOU can join the seminar for only 1750,- NOK

IceCheese

November 9th, 2009, 11:10 PM

^^1750 for breakfast?:eek: I guess it will be kneippbrød again that day...:nuts:

Ingenioren

November 19th, 2009, 12:01 PM

15 km of new dualtrack opens 14. december from Stavanger to Sandnes:

http://www.jernbaneverket.no/PageFiles/8863/paradis01.jpg

http://www.jernbaneverket.no/no/Nyheter/Nyhetsarkiv/2009/Forste-helhetlige-bane-siden-Gardermobanen/

kjetilab

November 19th, 2009, 01:11 PM

In fact, it opened this monday, but the official opening and new services will be on december 14.

GlennHGSD

November 20th, 2009, 09:47 AM

Does this by any chance stop in the vicinity of Madla leiren?

i need to go there for fucking bullshit sesjon 1st december....

Þróndeimr

November 20th, 2009, 02:18 PM

^^ good luck, remember to choose wisely on where you want to stay during the service!

Ingenioren

November 21st, 2009, 03:15 PM

Does this by any chance stop in the vicinity of Madla leiren?

Been there - done that :P It's a long walk from the railstation/sentrum. The camp has a stop outside served by flybuss or kolumbus 29 from Stavanger S. All buses to "Madlakrossen" (3 lines.) is also not to far away :)

Spearman

November 22nd, 2009, 02:43 AM

^^ good luck, remember to choose wisely on where you want to stay during the service!
Yes. Like home.

Trust me. I know.

Ingenioren

November 23rd, 2009, 11:48 AM

Nsb wishes to run no less than 3 inter-city trains hourly Oslo - Gardermoen according to this:
http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/distrikt/ostlandssendingen/1.6876357

Flytoget fears for the competition as Nsb is 2/3 the ticketprize for adults, tough Flytoget have far superior student and childrens discount.

There is only one running today, except for rushhour trains.
It's safe to assume these additional trains would continue to Hamar or Lillehammer then?

IceCheese

November 23rd, 2009, 12:09 PM

^^Urettferdig!:( Vi vil ikke ha konkurranse!:cry::cry:

:nuts: Norway in a nutshell.
My personal view on competition in Norwegian rails, is that I understand why we today are limited by most lines only capable of running a train per hour at most. But if we in the future should have dual-line HSRs between all our largest cities, we should without a doubt also accept as many operators as possible to get:) NSB and Flytoget are far too influenced/broken by state ownership. Local rail lines should be put on anbud.

kjetilab

November 23rd, 2009, 12:21 PM

There is only one running today, except for rushhour trains.
It's safe to assume these additional trains would continue to Hamar or Lillehammer then?

Technically it's 2. Both the local train between Kongsberg - Eidsvoll as well as the Intercity train. But the former is way slower as it uses Hovedbanen on a part of the strech. Besides, it departs just 10-15 minutes after the Intercity train.

I remember NSB talked about splitting up the IC route Skien-Lillehammer so it would be Skien-Gardermoen and Drammen-Lillehammer instead, thus increasing the frequency Drammen-Gardermoen significantly. For a better service north of Gardermoen the new double track to Hamar must be completed.

IceCheese

November 23rd, 2009, 07:22 PM

edited...

KiwiRob

November 26th, 2009, 12:54 PM

^^Urettferdig!:( Vi vil ikke ha konkurranse!:cry::cry:

But if we in the future should have dual-line HSRs between all our largest cities,

Do you really think that there are enough people in Norway to be able to support HSR between all the major centers at realistic frequencies? Any HSR in Norway is going to have to be massively subsidised by the state, I don't want my taxes wasted on an uneconomical service.

The only HSR links which I would support in Norway would be Oslo - Copenhagen via Gothenberg and Oslo - Stockholm.

GlennHGSD

November 26th, 2009, 02:58 PM

We could easilty have HSR between Bergen-Stavanger-Kristiansand-Oslo i think..

Ingenioren

November 26th, 2009, 03:50 PM

Aswell as Trondheim - Oslo!

KiwiRob

November 26th, 2009, 10:26 PM

muster

November 26th, 2009, 10:43 PM

Seriously I just don't think there are enough people in centres outside Olso to make HSR viable, if it is going to happen then the Norwegian taxpayer will have to subsidise it and the govt will probably have to add more taxes to air travel to stop people flying.

You are doing the same mistake as many others, it's not about how many people living in the country, but how many traveling between A and B. The estimates for traffic in Norway is compareble with many of the HSR-lines in Europe. HSR in Norway will also include a lot of cargo transport at night to secure the economy. You also have to see this in a 50-100 year perspective.

KiwiRob

November 27th, 2009, 12:47 AM

I'm not discounting the numbers of people traveling from A to B, in Norway B is normally Oslo, a lot of people end up going to C which isn't in Norway, HSR isn't going to work for them. By cargo I hope you are only referring to parcel freight, you won't be hauling heavy equipment on HSR.

If you look at all the countries that have HSR networks how many of them have less than 5 million people? That's right none, how many of them are as isolated as Norway, none again (ok Korea but they have a lot larger pop).

I just don't see HSR working without massive subsidies and increased taxes on air transport to force people onto trains.

I like trains, I jump on a train whenever I can in Europe, they are cheap, have great frequency and are a viable alternative to air, just not in Norway IMO.

muster

November 27th, 2009, 01:01 AM

Hansadyret

November 27th, 2009, 02:13 AM

The only HSR links which I would support in Norway would be Oslo - Copenhagen via Gothenberg and Oslo - Stockholm.

Give me one good reason to build HSR between Oslo and Strockholm when a lot more people are traveling between the cities of Norway. And who would pay for it when most of the tracks would be in Sweden?

IceCheese

November 27th, 2009, 02:56 AM

Any HSR in Norway is going to have to be massively subsidised by the state, I don't want my taxes wasted on an uneconomical service.

Like Molde airport, you mean:lol:

...oh, that's right. Only us in Østlandet pay for those. My bad!

KiwiRob

November 27th, 2009, 12:53 PM

You are a funny man, you always seem to know better than the experts (in this case Deutsche Bahn). Somehow I still trust DB..:lol:

I've just been reading this study http://www.jernbaneverket.no/PageFiles/3275/Phase_1_chapter_4-_1720733a.pdf

It gets really interesting in parts especially page 15.

As it is shown in the Market Study, the potentials for High-Speed-Rail are – compared to existing Systems in Europe – relatively low and only lines with low costs and relatively high demand will offer the chance of a positive result in a cost benefit analysis. Therefore it will be useful to include the regional traffic of the existing IC-Net to increase the demand and to save operation costs and to integrate the existing or planned new lines with a speed of 160 kph to 200 kph to save investment costs.

These lines are
- the Gardermobanen,
- between Sandvika and Asker,
- along Vestfoldbanen,
- between Eidsvoll and Hamar (Sørli) and
- between Oslo and Moss (Rygge).

and page 22

6 Conclusion
The result of Phase 1 of the “Feasibility Study concerning High-Speed-Railway-Lines in Norway” shows
- that market potentials even in the core corridors are relatively low compared to other European countries;
- nevertheless High-Speed-Railway Lines seem to be possible in principle but have to be constructed with specific boundary conditions such as single-track lines;
- due to low traffic demand strong cost efficiency for infrastructure and operation is recommended.

To me it just doesn't add up.

KiwiRob

November 27th, 2009, 12:56 PM

Like Molde airport, you mean:lol:

...oh, that's right. Only us in Østlandet pay for those. My bad!

I agree Molde probably doesn't need it's own airport, but you could also make the same case against airports in Alesund and Kristiansund. What would probably be better would be a central larger airport in Molde with a check-in service in Alesund and Kristiansund and dedicated busses to Molde, but the chances of that happening are about as likely as Norway winning the football world cup.

Gsus

November 27th, 2009, 05:12 PM

Regarding Jernbaneverket being negative when it comes too HSR, I think it's because they know it's just something the storting and government says they want, but they don't want to pay for it. I think we can all see that, if we look at how long time the government wants to use rebuilding the IC-network too double track.

Thats why I think it's more realistic to rebuild the IC-network too double track (200-250km/h max), in addition too Ringeriksbanen, Grenlandsbanen, double track around the other larger cities, some modifications on existing lines (higher speed, X-tracks) , and electrifying Raumabanen and Trønder/Meråkerbanen..... Hopefully long before 2040:)

But don't understand me wrong, it's nothing that would make me more happy than Norway getting HSR lines criss-crossing our country. It's just that I don't think that our politicians is tough enough, and wants to invest that much money that HSR would require. Besides the norwegian people is not very good at getting an agreement about where thing such as HRS should be located (Hallingdal vs. Haukeli, Østerdalen vs. Gudbrandsdalen). That fight will probably never end, when it comes too a case of such size.

KiwiRob

November 27th, 2009, 05:59 PM

I'm not against rail, rail is great, if you can remove heavy trucks from the roads then I am all for freight rail and I would support upgrading the lines in Norway and extensions to move places which would support freight services, but HSR is a pipe dream and unrealistic given Norways small population. I still believe that if HSR was introduced in Norway the subsidies would be massive and it would penalise people living in areas where HSR would never reach. I only see one worthwhile line, Oslo to Copenhagen via Halden/Sharpborg/Fredrikstad and Gothenburg.

IceCheese

November 28th, 2009, 03:44 AM

Thats why I think it's more realistic to rebuild the IC-network too double track (200-250km/h max)

The problem is they're doing it so bad:ohno: Many places they just lay the new track right beside the old one, forcing them to go through the same strong curves, and bad dosings. This means that though the infrastructure is made for speeds up to 250 km/h, the trains have to deccelerate down to 100 all the time.

muster

November 28th, 2009, 03:49 AM

KiwiRob

November 28th, 2009, 07:02 AM

muster

November 28th, 2009, 11:52 AM

what's is crazy about what I said, I like rail but in the Norwegian context HSR is just a waste of money. If there were 10-15 million people living in Norway with large population centres then HSR would most probably work, but Norway has a small spread out population. By all means upgrade the lines for improved freight services, moving feight good.

Why do you never listen and keep on repeating your ignorant arguments? It has nothing to with number of people in the country, but how much these people actually travel. You should know by now that some domestic routes for air traffic in Norway are among the most trafficated in Europe. Why is that do you think?

And no, Norway doesn't have a spread population. Actually most of it is located in the bigger Oslo area and along the coast of Rogaland/Hordaland. Haukelibanen alone will give a HSR line to half of Norways population.

GlennHGSD

November 28th, 2009, 04:22 PM

Seen the Haugesund-Oslo routes on Helganes, Karmøy? they're always JAM packed.

KiwiRob

November 28th, 2009, 10:07 PM

Muster how about learing to read, see below, maybe you should read the entire report, it doesn't paint a pretty picture for HSR in Norway. As in just about every thread you respond to you are never able to see any other side of the issue. I have my opinions and I also have an open mind, if you can prove to me that HSR in Norway will not require subsidisation from the govt then I will change my point of view.

I've just been reading this study http://www.jernbaneverket.no/PageFiles/3275/Phase_1_chapter_4-_1720733a.pdf

It gets really interesting in parts especially page 15.

As it is shown in the Market Study, the potentials for High-Speed-Rail are – compared to existing Systems in Europe – relatively low and only lines with low costs and relatively high demand will offer the chance of a positive result in a cost benefit analysis. Therefore it will be useful to include the regional traffic of the existing IC-Net to increase the demand and to save operation costs and to integrate the existing or planned new lines with a speed of 160 kph to 200 kph to save investment costs.

These lines are
- the Gardermobanen,
- between Sandvika and Asker,
- along Vestfoldbanen,
- between Eidsvoll and Hamar (Sørli) and
- between Oslo and Moss (Rygge).

and page 22

6 Conclusion
The result of Phase 1 of the “Feasibility Study concerning High-Speed-Railway-Lines in Norway” shows
- that market potentials even in the core corridors are relatively low compared to other European countries;
- nevertheless High-Speed-Railway Lines seem to be possible in principle but have to be constructed with specific boundary conditions such as single-track lines;
- due to low traffic demand strong cost efficiency for infrastructure and operation is recommended.

To me it just doesn't add up.

Now since you have stated most of Norway's population is centered around Oslo then there is even less of a reason for HSR. I would also be interested in the statistics for people flying to Oslo who then catch a flight out of Norway, I bet it's a significant portion, possibly 50% or more, now those people won't use the train so that cuts down your market, plus would you rather take a 60 minute or less flight from Trondheim, Stavanger, Kristiansand, Bergen to Oslo of a 3 hour or longer train ride.

Do Norwegians really believe that HSR is going to be a successful business which will not require any subsidy from the taxpayer and will return a profit?

City of Rain

November 28th, 2009, 10:50 PM

i believe that one should not only look at this economically..

i mean, norways population is growing and it will continue to grow for a long time. in the end, this project will pay off economically, anyway.

i think we should make this HSR because it will make the lives of a huge part of the norwegian population more comfortable and in that way up our quality of life.

we should not think about money all the time. i dont want our country to be like that. we are not americans. we want everyone in this country to enjoy themselves, even if itll cost us some extra money :)

im all for building a HSR even if it wont immediately result in economical gevinst.

muster

November 28th, 2009, 11:00 PM

KiwiRob, that old "study" is just a big joke. The premises are all wrong (using old track for instance :lol:) and makes the conclusion useless.

Thats why the politicans ignored it and waited for the DB report before they made the new Nasjonal Transportplan.

You should really read the DB report instead. ;)

IceCheese

November 29th, 2009, 02:14 AM

I would also be interested in the statistics for people flying to Oslo who then catch a flight out of Norway, I bet it's a significant portion, possibly 50% or more, now those people won't use the train so that cuts down your market, plus would you rather take a 60 minute or less flight from Trondheim, Stavanger, Kristiansand, Bergen to Oslo of a 3 hour or longer train ride.

Somehow I seriously doubt that:lol::lol: Luckily we also have statistics to rely on (these are numbers for domestic traffic in October):

"Kommet/reist" Transfer Sum
Antall Antall Antall

OSLO LUFTHAVN 681 084 157 838 838 922

So transfers at OSL account for less than 19 %. Of course you can add the international transfers to, but still you wouldn't be close to 50 %:nuts: (around 33 %, actually) + you would add all people who transfer internationally at OSL.

And it's not like everyone flying between Oslo and other airports are going to Oslo either. Lots of people travel to the other cities in job relations, family visits etc.

Of course you also know that spending 60 minutes on travelling between Oslo and Norwegian cities with aeroplane is pure BS. You are lucky if you spend less than 2 hours from entering the first airport till exiting the second airport, + our airports with few exceptions lie miles (<--Norwegian meaning) away from the cities they serve, while trainstations usually are right in the city center. These are facts that are so undisputable, I can't even remotely understand why you would try to bring them up, little less ignoring them completely.

KiwiRob

November 29th, 2009, 10:18 AM

(around 33 %, actually) + you would add all people who transfer internationally at OSL..

33% is a large number, now if you were living in Stavanger and had to go to Trondheim would you rather spend 4-5 hours plus on a train or take a direct flight. So really HSR will only be useful to those traveling direct to Oslo and going no further, any living in Stavanger, Kristiansand, Bergen and wanting to go to Trondheim, Tromso or Kirkness will still be better off flying.

Of course you also know that spending 60 minutes on travelling between Oslo and Norwegian cities with aeroplane is pure BS. You are lucky if you spend less than 2 hours from entering the first airport till exiting the second airport, + our airports with few exceptions lie miles (<--Norwegian meaning) away from the cities they serve, while trainstations usually are right in the city center. These are facts that are so undisputable, I can't even remotely understand why you would try to bring them up, little less ignoring them completely

Molde doesn't neither does Kristiansund or Stavanger. I can get up at 5.30 shower, shave and shit and be in Oslo at 7.45. It takes me less than 40 minutes from leaving the house to getting on a plane. HSR isn't going to benefit me at all whereas I bet I'm going to end up having to pay for it with higher airfares.

With rail you also have to add travel time from home to the central Station, a fact many in favour of HSR like to forget. This could be up to an hour for some people.

Muster would HSR be allowed to run on Sunday's because using your argument from the thread on Sunday trading, it would be a low paid job which would impact on females and people with families. :lol: you have to be consistant. :ohno:

GlennHGSD

November 29th, 2009, 08:02 PM

Yeah, Molde, Stavanger and Kristiansand.. yep that accounts for all of Norway's cities' airport distances does it?:bash:

KiwiRob

November 29th, 2009, 08:17 PM

Just the examples I was thinking of at the time I wrote it, Bergen isn't far from the city neither is Trondheim, Tromso is also close, which pretty much counts all the major airports in Norway and none of them are very far from the cities they service.

KiwiRob

November 29th, 2009, 08:41 PM

I sure hope the ticket prices will be low. Because i'd rather use 8-9 hours to drive to Oslo for the price of 800kr fuel/food and some more time than spending a lot more money on HSR or plane. It benefit those living in Trondheim, thoseb who can walk to the train station, but for me, and 250 000 other Trøndere we will have to drive to Trondheim and pay for parking for our car before we pay for a train ticket which most likely will cost more than what your car uses in fuel on such a way.
.

What he said. Plus if Norway took some of the outrageous sums to be spent on HSR and invested it in improving the road network to European standards the time taken to drive between all cities in Norway would be significantly reduced. It shouldn't take 8-9 hours to drive Trondheim Oslo when the same distance in most other European countries or places like Canada, the USA, Australia, South Africa or New Zealand would take half the time.

As a general rule a car should be able to drive 100km in 1 hour, not possible in Norway.

IceCheese

November 29th, 2009, 08:43 PM

Stavanger sentrum to Sola airport by bus: 30 min
Oslo sentrum to Gardermoen airport by HSR: 22 min
Bergen sentrum to Flesland airport by bus: 40 min
Trondheim sentrum to Værnes airport by train: 35 min
(Oslo sentrum to Rygge airport by bus: 60 min [train: 50 min + bus]
Oslo sentrum to Torp airport by train: 1 h 45 min + bus)
(I included Rygge and Torp due to relevant offers on domestic travel)

Point is: The biggest cities come with a relevant travel time to and from airports, often with a steep price of 100-200 NOK each way! (probably even steeper if you are forced to use some sort of park-n-ride) The point is, there is little reason to conclude that people won't use HSR due to lack of attractiveness compared to airtraffic.

KiwiRob

November 29th, 2009, 09:22 PM

IceCheese

November 29th, 2009, 09:42 PM

And how long will it take people to travel to the train station or will they just appear there by magic? Unless people live within walking distance of a station they will have to pay to get to the station and if they live in an area with no public transport they will have to use a car and will have to pay for parking. Not everyone lives in the centre of town.

Well, that's the flaw with Norwegian city planing, isn't it?:nuts: Why shall we spread out so much!!! Honestly, though, in my experience it is much easier, much quicker and actually also more affordable to get to downtown than to get to some airport. Knowing that a lot of the domestic traffic in Norway is business related, classic one man with a suitcase, I can't see why getting to a central station (or other hub station) should be less practicle than going to some distant air-harbour.

KiwiRob

November 29th, 2009, 10:01 PM

Norway has a lot of land, not many people and small cities so it's only natural for people to want a bit of land of their own, we do not live in giant cities with dense populations. You will still have to get to the central station and that will still cost money and take time.

Unless the govt puts higher taxes on air routes which will compete with HSR then air will still be the prefered method of transport for the one man and a suitcase who is going to a destination beyond Oslo.

muster

November 29th, 2009, 10:23 PM

KiwiRob

November 30th, 2009, 05:35 AM

That's a pointless article written to support HSR. Rather like the DB analysis which wasn't written by an independant organistion without a potential stake in the operation. If you can't see that then you are incrediably ignorant.

54°26′S 3°24′E

November 30th, 2009, 12:42 PM

As I think I have mentioned before in this forum, I am in principle positive to HSR. However, where many people on the left side of the spectrum get it wrong, is to believe that HSR is particularly environmentally friendly. It is not. The transport sector is only a fraction of the green house gas emissions in Norway, and it is the fraction that is most difficult to reduce. If the government were really serious about the environment, which they currently clearly is not, they should do the following (in order of priority):

1. Build a lot of windpower, ON LAND. It is really a shame that Norway, which has the greatest resources, is one of the nations in Europe with the least wind power. The potential in our country is enormous. Sadly, Jens managed to stop a very positive development we had in this field during the Bondevik II government.
2. Ban the use of electricity and oil for heating / make incentives for using clean bio mass. We are really lagging behind the Swedes here.
3. Use all spare electricity to:
*Electrift all industry and offshore oil developments
*Export to substitute coal fired power plants on the continent
4. Forget about the natural gas power plants in Norway
5. Facilitate storage of CO2 from the continent on the Norwegian continental shelf.

Regarding the long distance regional transport, which is the issue regarding HSR, the most important environmental issues in Norway is:

An increadible high air transport on relative short distance, on some routes (like Bergen-Stavanger, Trondheim-Kristiansund) combined with the even less environmental friendly high speed ferries
A lot of truch traffic

The most environmental way of transporting freight on land is by far by using the railway, and the railway should be developed ASAP to be able to handle the demand.

Regarding transportation of people, I think the most environmental (in addition to the most economical) option would be to build better roads. I believe building motorways between the largest regions in Norway would be more effective in reducing the air traffic than building HSR, as the HSR with all probability would be really expensive, unless heavily subsidized. For instance, Trondheim-Oslo could be done around 4 hours on a motorway, not much more than HSR, but far more flexible and economic. The reason that HSR, and railways in general, is not terribly energy efficient compared with a car is that passanger transport involves moving a lot of air around, which is more expensive with trains because of their heavy weight. For instance, an modern diesel car with 2 people is now more environmental friendly than a diesel powered train. Buses are of course a lot better than both. For electric trains, with "green" energy the result is of course a bit different. However, this green energy is better used to phase out coal power further south in Europe. Probably, in not so many years, most cars will be electric anyway.

Another issue with HSR is that it probably will require a lot of land area, as they require a huge radius of curvature. Hence, I get really pissed each time Langeland claims how environmental friendly HSR is, whereas cars are the pest of our lifetime...

Having said all this, I however think that HSR has a niche that might be serviced in the Norwegian market: Bussiness travel. In order to get bussiness travel transferred from air to ground I think HSR is the preferred alternative. However, I am not sure if that is a big enough market, and I am also not convinced by some of the construction costs estimate that have been seen here and elsewhere. Hence, the conclusion is:

1. Take the low hanging fruit - freight transport - first.
2. Build a motorway network before or at least side - by - side with a HSR
3. Build the cheapest HSR link - Trondheim - Oslo first in order to learn more about building HSR here.

KiwiRob

November 30th, 2009, 02:25 PM

Hence, the conclusion is:

1. Take the low hanging fruit - freight transport - first.
2. Build a motorway network before or at least side - by - side with a HSR
3. Build the cheapest HSR link - Trondheim - Oslo first in order to learn more about building HSR here.

I like your conclusion it makes more sense to me than any other argument put forward.

GlennHGSD

November 30th, 2009, 03:11 PM

"Eg tykkjar det høyrast ut som ei stor helsemessig fare å køyre i over 250 km/t. Ka gjer man om eit hjul pungterar? Nei, takke seg til meir normal fart. ":nuts:

:lol::nuts:

Hansadyret

November 30th, 2009, 07:21 PM

3. Build the cheapest HSR link - Trondheim - Oslo first in order to learn more about building HSR here.

Link up the biggest and fastest growing markets first. Rogaland, Hordaland and the Oslo-area, east and west. We allready have enough experience in building long tunnels and bridges. It would be an engineering marvel. It would stand for hundreds of years and cost us a small portion of the oil fund:)

IceCheese

November 30th, 2009, 08:01 PM

^^You are right. The Bergen-area will never accept such a defeat. Especially with the Euro2016 loss so "friskt i minne". Pluss, I guess there aren't any oil outside Trondheim, so it will probably be wize to take Vestlandet first, so you don't get all that "spending our (earned) oil-money"-nagging all over again:lol:

Kjello0

November 30th, 2009, 08:09 PM

Hansadyret

November 30th, 2009, 08:24 PM

Almost 4 times the cost (3 times via Dovre), and not even double the traffic of Trondheim - Oslo. Would be a damn expensive experience if it turns out to be a failure. Then it's by far better to built Trondheim - Oslo as a test stretch. Dovrebanen is the most traveled and profitable railway in Norway for a reason.

Yeah right. 4 times the cost? Not even double according to Deutche bahn. And you have Stavanger-Oslo, Bergen-Oslo and Stavanger-Haugesund-Bergen. The deutche bahn report is pretty clear what is the most profitable for society.

Hansadyret

November 30th, 2009, 08:35 PM

^^You are right. The Bergen-area will never accept such a defeat.

This is not just about Bergen but vestlandet. It's a fact that it lives far more people in western Norway than the middle part of trøndelag. And the fact that the western coast don't allready have rail despite that Rogaland and Hordaland will pass 1 million people in 6-8 years.

IceCheese

November 30th, 2009, 08:50 PM

^^Hey, don't blame me. I'm just being realistic!

marshol

November 30th, 2009, 09:53 PM

Someone want to watch the whole 7-8 hours train journey from Bergen to Oslo? :nuts:

http://www1.nrk.no/nett-tv/klipp/581376

Þróndeimr

November 30th, 2009, 10:00 PM

^^ crazy that 1.2 million people watched that, or parts of it!

54°26′S 3°24′E

November 30th, 2009, 10:01 PM

I like your conclusion it makes more sense to me than any other argument put forward.
Sorry for not being more coherent, my time is limited....
^^You are right. The Bergen-area will never accept such a defeat. Especially with the Euro2016 loss so "friskt i minne". Pluss, I guess there aren't any oil outside Trondheim, so it will probably be wize to take Vestlandet first, so you don't get all that "spending our (earned) oil-money"-nagging all over again:lol:
In case you did not know, there is a lot of oil outside central Norway, and most new findings are from 62 N and northwards. Anyway, I guess the HSR will not transport oil.....
Yeah right. 4 times the cost? Not even double according to Deutche bahn. And you have Stavanger-Oslo, Bergen-Oslo and Stavanger-Haugesund-Bergen. The deutche bahn report is pretty clear what is the most profitable for society.
The Deutche Bahn report was not independent. AFAIK, the fact base of their report is not published, but it is a fair guess that they published whatever Norsk Bane sent them. And Norsk Bane main motivation has always been to get the HSR to the west coast (Stavanger, Bergen, Ålesund). The only independent inquiry concluded that Oslo-Trondheim (via Østerdalen) would be the most profitable project, due to drastically lower construction costs. Remember that we are not only talking about gigantic tunnels under Haukeli, but also a couple of very difficult fjord crossings (HSR has very strict limits on slope, so for instance the Boknafjord has to be crossed with an even longer tunnel than the proposed 20 km + road tunnel. My guess is that four times the cost is no exaggeration.

Looking at the air traffic numbers, both Oslo-Trondheim and Oslo-Bergen is almost identical, whereas Oslo-Stavanger is lagging 25 % or so below. Total (all routes) long distance road traffic Oslo-Trøndelag is slightly higher than Oslo-Hordaland/Haugesund-area. However, if you take local traffic into the equation and chooses Gudbrandsdalen, Oslo-Trøndelag has significantly higher traffic.

However, all of this is beside my main point, which is that cheapest project should be built first in order to get a realistic cost estimate for the significantly more expensive step number two.
This is not just about Bergen but vestlandet. It's a fact that it lives far more people in western Norway than the middle part of trøndelag. And the fact that the western coast don't allready have rail despite that Rogaland and Hordaland will pass 1 million people in 6-8 years.

It's a bit strange to compare "the middle part of Trøndelag" with all of Vestlandet. At the north side of the mountain, a HSR via Gudbrandsdalen to Steinkjer would serve Møre and all of Trøndelag, a total of roughly 660 000. Østerdalen, at a far lower price tag and better service to Trondheim would serve roughly 400 000 at the northern side of the mountain. Hordaland+Rogaland has roughly 890 000. Again, this is beside my main point:

1. Take the low hanging fruit - freight transport - first.
2. Build a motorway network before or at least side - by - side with a HSR
3. Build the cheapest HSR link - Trondheim - Oslo first in order to learn more about building HSR here.

Hansadyret

November 30th, 2009, 11:15 PM

Looking at the air traffic numbers, both Oslo-Trondheim and Oslo-Bergen is almost identical, whereas Oslo-Stavanger is lagging 25 % or so below. Total (all routes) long distance road traffic Oslo-Trøndelag is slightly higher than Oslo-Hordaland/Haugesund-area. However, if you take local traffic into the equation and chooses Gudbrandsdalen, Oslo-Trøndelag has significantly higher traffic.

Give me a break. The haukelibane has clearly the biggest potential.
Airtraffic between Oslo, Bergen and Stavanger is close to 4 million each year and that is not counting the Haugesund/Karmøy area. Haukelibanen will allso pass Drammen and Kongsberg. It makes the most sense to link up the three biggest city-areas. Remember that Trondheim is just the 4th biggest city-area in Norway.
I don't trust Jernbaneverket when it comes to costs as they clearly have been against this project from the start. I would rather trust Deutsche bahn wich have experince in HSR.

muster

December 1st, 2009, 01:02 AM

There is little chance that we will se HSR to Trondheim first. I know what's going on at Stortinget, so I'm not worried about that.

Ingenioren

December 1st, 2009, 09:44 AM

I know what's going on at Stortinget.

And you still think any major HSR project has the slightest chance? Sorry, i just don't see it with the history of lousy railway funding.... :ohno:

Spearman

December 2nd, 2009, 08:39 AM

Spearman

December 2nd, 2009, 08:56 AM

On a different note, I think this project has a snowballs chance in hell for the simple reason that even if it turns out to be profitable, it would only work as long as it bypasses most of "distriktene" (rural settlements) on its way. I think that will dawn on politicians sooner or later that while rail is often seen as "distriktspolitikk", this project is anything but.

PS I I'd like to add that I'm not a fan of distriktspolitikk in general.

GlennHGSD

December 2nd, 2009, 03:19 PM

Olabil

December 2nd, 2009, 03:34 PM

IceCheese

December 2nd, 2009, 03:48 PM

^^ The biggest problem with the HSR project is that while the DB report states this project as profitable, the numbers used are more suited to German society than Norwegian. Most importantly, the cost of construction can, in most cases, be counted as Keynsian spending in Germany because it would create jobs. Much of Germany has recently had an unemployment rate consistantly above 10%, so job created would in turn generate increased economic activity. In Norway this is not the case (at least not yet), so the effect would not be as profound, in fact, Norwegian unemployment has been so low that this project might even end up driving inflation higher. So since the case for HRS is made on in reality nonexistant grounds, the economic case for this is dubious at best.

It's cool, though. :)

Well, that's because the Norwegians are to sick to work, isn't it?;) Stoltenberg & co keeping the unemployment rate at an artificially low level.
In my eyes there is no way Norway can start thinking of HSR without planing for 95 % of it being done by European contractors. We don't have the Mannschaft, we don't have the skills and we certainly don't have all that equipment. The stretches as a whole should be put on the market to save costs + the classic Norwegian 10 by 10 km of HSR finished won't help anyone, especially since we should plan for new lines not following the old ones.

Distriktspolitikk on roads and normal railway is fine by me. but for HSR we really need to be brutal. I'm not even sure if my town could serve as a middlestop between Stavanger and Bergen for instance.

Of course it could/would. But probably at a junction outside the city. Putting an underground station in the city center would be far to expensive!!!

Why not start with Vestfoldbanen as a HSR try out? With stops in Tønsberg, Sandefjord, Larvik and Grenland it would reach about the same population as Bergen, while the distance is only a fraction. Even though it wouldnt compete with airtraffic as the distance is to short for planes, there is a huge potensial for passangers as the traffic on E18 gets heavier as we speak.

The distance from Oslo to Larvik for example is around 130 km, today the train uses 2 hrs if you`re lucky. With HSR this should be able to cut down to 30-35 minutes including stops. The mission should be to make the thousands of people who commutes between these cities and Oslo to use the train.

At least they have to fix the problems around Oslo first. No one will take the train if it's like this last week when there has been "signal errors" 3 out of 5 days during rush hours, giving delays on 20-40 min.

KiwiRob

December 2nd, 2009, 03:59 PM

Distriktspolitikk on roads and normal railway is fine by me. but for HSR we really need to be brutal. I'm not even sure if my town could serve as a middlestop between Stavanger and Bergen for instance.

If HSR really wants to compete with airtransport then IMO it needs to be point to point express services cutting out all the little stops in between, most of the TGV, AVE, S2000 & ICE trains I've been on have been point to point, I can't remember any of them stopping at an intermediate stop, that defeats the purpose of HSR from my point of view.

IceCheese

December 2nd, 2009, 04:03 PM

^^Gardermobanen stops at Lillestrøm

Hansadyret

December 2nd, 2009, 06:14 PM

If HSR really wants to compete with airtransport then IMO it needs to be point to point express services cutting out all the little stops in between, most of the TGV, AVE, S2000 & ICE trains I've been on have been point to point, I can't remember any of them stopping at an intermediate stop, that defeats the purpose of HSR from my point of view.

All trains would not stopp at the same places anyway. The bigger places in between like Haugesund, Drammen, Kongberg will get more stops.
It could be possible to do both. Maybe a morning and afternoon express and more local services between. You could build some sidetracks into a few stops for passing ex Notodden, Odda maybe? According to DB an express service would use 1h45min from Oslo-Stavanger/Bergen.

starkwell

December 2nd, 2009, 06:51 PM

Why not start with Vestfoldbanen as a HSR try out? With stops in Tønsberg, Sandefjord, Larvik and Grenland it would reach about the same population as Bergen, while the distance is only a fraction. Even though it wouldnt compete with airtraffic as the distance is to short for planes, there is a huge potensial for passangers as the traffic on E18 gets heavier as we speak.

The distance from Oslo to Larvik for example is around 130 km, today the train uses 2 hrs if you`re lucky. With HSR this should be able to cut down to 30-35 minutes including stops. The mission should be to make the thousands of people who commutes between these cities and Oslo to use the train.

as mentioned the problem would be the oslo section, but that would apply to any route from oslo, and if it happens it's pretty obvious that it would be a route connecting oslo...

but that line would ceratinly make sense, especially with the new stop at torp, it would certainly make my life easier :D

KiwiRob

December 2nd, 2009, 07:19 PM

^^Gardermobanen stops at Lillestrøm

I always catch the direct to Oslo S train, the only time I have ever caught the Lillestrom train was when I went to Norshipping this year. Boy NSB shure screwed up the trains to that event the entire week, talk about incompetence.

Spearman

December 2nd, 2009, 08:03 PM

Well, that's because the Norwegians are to sick to work, isn't it?;) Stoltenberg & co keeping the unemployment rate at an artificially low level.
True, but that is only relevant as long as they are brought back into the economy. I don't see that happening anytime soon, at least not because of this project. If the problem is solved, good, but we cannot make this big an investment based on hopes.

In my eyes there is no way Norway can start thinking of HSR without planing for 95 % of it being done by European contractors. We don't have the Mannschaft, we don't have the skills and we certainly don't have all that equipment. The stretches as a whole should be put on the market to save costs + the classic Norwegian 10 by 10 km of HSR finished won't help anyone, especially since we should plan for new lines not following the old ones.

EU regulations probably force us in that direction, and I don't think they'll contemplate doing this "stykkvis og delt". The underlying issue is, however, that as long as you don't factor in a significant socioeconomic boost as a result of the project, the project is not economically feasable. My sources are here (http://www.regjeringen.no/pages/2126779/nyttekostanalysehoyhastighetstog_20808-154.pdf) (only Norwegian. Sorry KiwiRob). Note that they do not pretend to know better than DB how to build or run a railway and take those numbers at face value, nor do they doubt the numbers on travel distance today. The difference is in how the socioeconomic impact of a shift from plane/car to train is calculated. The relevant numbers are (in net present value (million NOK)):
Line Oslo-Trondheim:
VWI:
Cost: 54 529, Benifit: 58 768 (+4 239)
Econ:
Cost: 68 046, Benifit: 14 208 (-53 838)
and Line Oslo-Gothenburg
VWI:
Cost: 14 226, Benifit: 11 978 (-2 248)
Econ:
Cost: 15835, Benifit: 6 308 (-9 526)

In fact, they conclude the numbers for Oslo - Trondheim are so disastrous that even very generous circumstances make it unprofitable. And all of this results from different ways of setting up the economic models.

At least they have to fix the problems around Oslo first. No one will take the train if it's like this last week when there has been "signal errors" 3 out of 5 days during rush hours, giving delays on 20-40 min.
What?!? "Det har desverre oppstått store forsinkelser i togtrafikken grunnet signalfeil ved Lysaker stasjon"? Never heard of it.:nuts:

PS I'm not claiming any bias on either part. Only that I'm not certain of the numbers presented!

IceCheese

December 2nd, 2009, 08:25 PM

The Norwegian tools for benefits/costs analysis have been critized in this matter, so it's hard to know who to trust fully in this matter. Econ Pöyry probably represent the "worst case" in this matter. Econ also have in their estimates that a railline may last in like 30-50 years, which is very little in Norwegian context, to say the least. And of course, Econ base large parts of their documents on VWI's plans.

Forøvrig, read the following discussion in Jernbanemagasinet, which was published right after the repport in your link: http://www.jernbaneverket.no/PageFiles/7064/Jernbanemagasinet%20nr%2010%202009.pdf I think Bo-Lennart Nelldal is the most experienced when it comes to building HSR in the Nordics, and he has some great views you can know a bit better by reading that magazine.

54°26′S 3°24′E

December 2nd, 2009, 09:46 PM

Give me a break. The haukelibane has clearly the biggest potential.
Airtraffic between Oslo, Bergen and Stavanger is close to 4 million each year and that is not counting the Haugesund/Karmøy area. Haukelibanen will also pass Drammen and Kongsberg. It makes the most sense to link up the three biggest city-areas. Remember that Trondheim is just the 4th biggest city-area in Norway.
I don't trust Jernbaneverket when it comes to costs as they clearly have been against this project from the start. I would rather trust Deutsche bahn wich have experince in HSR.
You don't get it, do you. I have not disputed that if you add the traffic between Oslo, Bergen, Haugesund, Stavanger you will get higher traffic than between Oslo and Trondheim. What I do argue, is that:

The cost per passenger km is probably higher on the Haukeli line than Oslo-Trondheim (as the only independent study on the subject concluded)
The economic RISK is higher on the Haukeli line than on Oslo-Trondheim (- Steinkjer) line

On the passenger*km cost we could probably argue to our death (I will give my last contribution below). Opponents to the HSR will probably love this discussion, as it is an excuse to do nothing.

However, regarding the risk I think there can be no doubt. Remember that risk is a product of consequence and probability. The consequences of cost overruns on Haukeli are much larger simply because the project is two to four times as expensive. The probability of overruns is also much more likely because of all the “spectacular” elements of the Haukeli line, such as:

367 km in tunnels, 35 km on bridges
9 tunnels longer than 10 km, including:

A 45 km submarine tunnel under Boknafjorden
A 29 km long tunnel under Haukelifjell

A crossing of the Hardangerfjord. The only concrete plans I have seen from Norsk Bane (a few years back now) is a 1.6 km floating bridge, which would be unacceptable for shipping. I have no clue what their current plans are, a suspension bridge would cost a lot more.

Hence, the probability of overruns would be far higher across Haukeli than for instance Østerdalen, where hardly any tunnels or bridges are required.

Don’t tell me that DB has any experience in building such a railway, because they have not. Neither do they have any experience in operating trains in the Norwegian winter. Germany looks quite different you know. Add to that the risk of that their passenger numbers are highly inflated. 26 800 per day (9.8 million per year) across Haukeli in 2025 sounds like complete madness to me. Also, they have included income from freight, which might as well could run on the old railway with addition of better terminals and more track lengths for passing.

If HSR should be built in Norway, we should decide to build it both to Bergen/Stavanger and Trondheim. However, as an insurance and in order to learn more we should build the cheapest project first.

Regarding the passenger numbers, the traffic between all connections between Oslo-Bergen-Stavanger-Haugesund was around 3.9 million, whereas Trondheim-Oslo was 1.6 million and Oslo-Ålesund was 470 000. It is true that Haukelibanen would connect Drammen/Kongsberg/Notodden (and via a sidetrack Grenland), but between Notodden and (to be nice) at least Odda the population density and hence local traffic, over a distance of 250 km. Compare that with Trondheim-Oslo across Dovre, and the only stretch with low local traffic is Dombås-Oppdal, roughly 80 km. Still, as I said earlier, the transit traffic by car (and freight) Oslo-Trondheim is higher than Oslo – Bergen/Haugesund. A sidetrack to Ålesund would collect even more transit traffic from cars car.

The car traffic in Rogaland (51%), Hordaland (42 %), and Sør-Trøndelag (47 %) have all increased much more than the national average (36 %) during the last 12 years. Among Stavanger, Bergen, and Trondheim, Trondheim has clearly had the strongest air traffic trend lately. As for future trends, it is hard to tell, but it is clear that a major economic driver in Hordaland and Rogaland, the development of new oil fields, will have a decline in the years to come.

There is little chance that we will se HSR to Trondheim first. I know what's going on at Stortinget, so I'm not worried about that.
I think you need to be very worried. As discussed above I think it would be much less likely that we get a HSR at all if the Bergen people insist on building their line first. The risk and investments would just be much more than the Norwegian politicians are able to handle. Remember that Jens is in charge now, the man who has stopped almost all the significantly cheaper ways of reducing climate emissions:

Very little focus on energy conservation
Very little focus on bio-mass heating
Stopped Norwegian biodiesl factory
Stopped all new wind mill projects
Selling CO2 quotas to the rest of Europe instead of discarding them.

Clearly, what Jens (and the farmer’s party) has in mind with the promises of a new study is to delay any progress for another four years…

On a different note, I think this project has a snowballs chance in hell for the simple reason that even if it turns out to be profitable, it would only work as long as it bypasses most of "distriktene" (rural settlements) on its way. I think that will dawn on politicians sooner or later that while rail is often seen as "distriktspolitikk", this project is anything but.

PS I I'd like to add that I'm not a fan of distriktspolitikk in general.
Actually I disagree on this. The HSR will probably be more important for the fortunate areas that lies along the line than the cities at the ends of the track. The city people might as well take the plane. However, building better roads will be far more cost effective, and will benefit larger areas.
Why not start with Vestfoldbanen as a HSR try out? With stops in Tønsberg, Sandefjord, Larvik and Grenland it would reach about the same population as Bergen, while the distance is only a fraction. Even though it wouldnt compete with airtraffic as the distance is to short for planes, there is a huge potensial for passangers as the traffic on E18 gets heavier as we speak.

The distance from Oslo to Larvik for example is around 130 km, today the train uses 2 hrs if you`re lucky. With HSR this should be able to cut down to 30-35 minutes including stops. The mission should be to make the thousands of people who commutes between these cities and Oslo to use the train.
As several other people have said here, the major problem is Oslo itself. The major point with building a HSR would be to get the business travelers from airtransport to ground transport. Buses and soon cars are almost as energy efficient as trains, and in that area Vestfold has got a lot of investments lately.

Another point is that a HSR will be very different than a HSR across Haukeli and Dovre. Vestfold is much more developed, and the per km cost will probably not be very relevant for a HSR to Trondheim, Bergen or Stavanger. Norsk Bane wants a side track from Notodden to Grenland, BTW.
Well, that's because the Norwegians are to sick to work, isn't it?;) Stoltenberg & co keeping the unemployment rate at an artificially low level.

At least they have to fix the problems around Oslo first. No one will take the train if it's like this last week when there has been "signal errors" 3 out of 5 days during rush hours, giving delays on 20-40 min.
Yeah, the high REAL unemployment rate is the biggest problem of Norway today. Regarding the Oslo problems, they have to be fixed, but remember that most of the country does not have any access to trains for their commuting at all…..
If HSR really wants to compete with airtransport then IMO it needs to be point to point express services cutting out all the little stops in between, most of the TGV, AVE, S2000 & ICE trains I've been on have been point to point, I can't remember any of them stopping at an intermediate stop, that defeats the purpose of HSR from my point of view.
Probably that was why the first study concluded that Oslo-Trondheim via Østerdalen was the only project with hope of any net profit for the society. (although it had stops in Hamar, Elverum (?) and Tynset as far as I remember). However, I think it would be an uphill battle to get something like that through. Gudbrandsdalen at least could get the support of your county…
^^Gardermobanen stops at Lillestrøm

Gardemobanen is not a true HSR
Only half the trains stop at Lillestrøm

IceCheese:
The Norwegian tools for benefits/costs analysis have been critized in this matter, so it's hard to know who to trust fully in this matter. Econ Pöyry probably represent the "worst case" in this matter. Econ also have in their estimates that a railline may last in like 30-50 years, which is very little in Norwegian context, to say the least.

They have used a lifetime of 30 years for the trains and tracks, and 60 years for the rest of the infrastructure (i.e. landfill, tunnels, bridges etc.), and assumed that after 30 years of operation, an additional investment of 9 billions in tracks is required. All in all, I don't think this is unreasonable. 60 years is a very long time, who knows how our travel habits will be then?

muster

December 2nd, 2009, 10:13 PM

I don't understand the opposition to HSR in Norway. It's like they don't want Norway to develop at all. No wonder Norway's infrastructure is shit compared to most countries when we have people like that in politics and on forums etc..Many actually thinks they will get motorways all over Norway if they just can stop HSR, they can just forget that.

The best experts thinks the economy in this project is balanced and even with a profits. If that aint true I would never say no to better infrastructure in Norway anyway, because it is needed and will make life better in Norway. The investments planned for HSR in Norway is like two years of investments in Norwegian oil industry. It is really nothing!

To me it is not motorways or HSR, to me it is both and Norway could do it if we only could agree on developing Norway instead of all the negativity.. We need another way of thinking on infrastructure in norway. Making fronts between car and train will just make it worse.

54°26′S 3°24′E

December 2nd, 2009, 10:33 PM

Believe it or not, I agree with most of what you are saying here.

Sorry if I sounded a bit negative. I am actually in favour of building both better road infrastructure and HSR. Probably, in many places, a lot of money could be saved in building the two at the same time. (And both should go through Odda!) . The Hardangerfjord bridge is a good example where the addition of a road to a dual-track railway bridge would come at a low cost. The problem is, however, that with the possible exception of Høyre (the conservative party), the people supporting HSR is not supporting motorways. IMO, motorways and better (interregional) roads in general are more important.

I doubt that economy in HSR would be balanced the way most economists see the world, but that does not mean that HSR should not be built. There are a lot of positive side effects of such a projects that economist just are not able to predict or quantify. However, I still believe that it would be better to build the projects one at a time, or at least with construction start separation of a few years, in order to gain experience. It was not a coincidence that Rørosbanen was built 32 years before Bergensbanen......

[That Rørosbanen after 133 years still is not electrified also tells something about Norwegian politicians interest in infrastructure :ohno:) ]

Hansadyret

December 3rd, 2009, 01:09 AM

I think you need to be very worried. As discussed above I think it would be much less likely that we get a HSR at all if the Bergen people insist on building their line first.

:lol:Of course western Norway will insist on getting the first line as it would benefit the most people and as long as studies show it would benefit society the most. Just because we have to build a few long tunnels and a long bridge will not change that.

54°26′S 3°24′E

December 3rd, 2009, 11:13 AM

:lol:Of course western Norway will insist on getting the first line as it would benefit the most people and as long as studies show it would benefit society the most. Just because we have to build a few long tunnels and a long bridge will not change that.
One single report ordered by a company strongly in favour of a particular outcome, and where the basis of the calculations after one year for some mysterious reason is not published is not worth shit, IMO. And the result of such Hanseatic stubborness may very well be no HSR at all, which the Oslo-based labour party hot shots probably will be very happy with. Otherwise, see my comments above.

IceCheese

December 3rd, 2009, 12:33 PM

^^Høyhastighetsringen AS has some smaller studies too. Not the most detailed ones, mostly traffic studies and such.
The company have very strong interests in western Norway, though and the west is the most important region to serve for them, it seems. When they presented the material they had and got questions about what to be done with the capacity problems in Oslo, they pretty much stated that the capacity is good enough for HSR if you only make the local traffic adjust. Don't know how that works in practice:nuts:

Yeah, the high REAL unemployment rate is the biggest problem of Norway today. Regarding the Oslo problems, they have to be fixed, but remember that most of the country does not have any access to trains for their commuting at all…..

They probably have different dynamics in their rush hours too;)

Gardemobanen is not a true HSR
Only half the trains stop at Lillestrøm

Maybe not by 2009-standards, but when it was started on in the beginning of the 90ies it surely was intended so.

They have used a lifetime of 30 years for the trains and tracks, and 60 years for the rest of the infrastructure (i.e. landfill, tunnels, bridges etc.), and assumed that after 30 years of operation, an additional investment of 9 billions in tracks is required. All in all, I don't think this is unreasonable. 60 years is a very long time, who knows how our travel habits will be then?

Well experience shows otherwise, huh?:lol:

NSB still run their trains from 1970, and by no means have Jernbaneverket changed tracks every 30 years on our poorly maintained network.:ohno:

The question really, has nothing to do with our future travel habits, but whether NSB and Jernbaneverket will keep existing in their current form in another 126 years...

Tohaki

December 3rd, 2009, 05:00 PM

It looks like Gjevingåstunnelen won't come a moment too soon.

http://www.adressa.no/nyheter/nordtrondelag/article1416552.ece

Hansadyret

December 3rd, 2009, 08:44 PM

And the result of such Hanseatic stubborness may very well be no HSR at all, which the Oslo-based labour party hot shots probably will be very happy with. Otherwise, see my comments above.

Are you sure about this? If you want political support for such large investments you need as many people as possible behind it. And Haukelibanen will clearly gain the most people.

muster

December 3rd, 2009, 10:11 PM

To all of you who thinks HSR in Norway is dead, I hope you just saw the 21 news at NRK:colgate:

Hansadyret

December 3rd, 2009, 11:49 PM

To all of you who thinks HSR in Norway is dead, I hope you just saw the 21 news at NRK:colgate:

I saw it. The only party seriously against this is Frp. The more money in the oil fund the more the money start to burn in the politicians pockets. And this will probably just cost us a few % of it. Infrastructure is very important if the country is to sucseed in the future:-) People talk about to low unemployment and inflation but Norway is now a part of the common labour market of the EU.

Spearman

December 4th, 2009, 12:28 AM

I saw it. The only party seriously against this is Frp. The more money in the oil fund the more the money start to burn in the politicians pockets. And this will probably just cost us a few % of it. Infrastructure is very important if the country is to sucseed in the future:-) People talk about to low unemployment and inflation but Norway is now a part of the common labour market of the EU.
Am I the only one who sees the irony here? FrP has consistantly been accused of using too much oil money and have a history for pushing for infrastructure investements. Now, suddenly, they don't want a project that is
1) Cool
2) Luxurious
3) Questionable economically
4) Possible to do with oil money

And in stead, they are the conservative ones and all the others are pro. Strange.....

Hansadyret

December 4th, 2009, 12:48 AM

^^ Yes i find it strange. The party has allways been for development of infrastructure but maybe they are to influenced by ecomic thinkers who think that as long as the project in it self can not turn a profit it is not worth it. These NHH economists know nothing about building a country it seems.

Tohaki

December 4th, 2009, 10:27 AM

I saw it. The only party seriously against this is Frp.Am I the only one who sees the irony here? FrP has consistantly been accused of using too much oil money and have a history for pushing for infrastructure investements.^^ Yes i find it strange. The party has allways been for development of infrastructure but maybe they are to influenced by ecomic thinkers who think that as long as the project in it self can not turn a profit it is not worth it.I don't think it's very odd at all. FrP has never been a liberal conservative party like Høyre, but rather a neoliberal party in the American sense of car driven personal independence. The infrastructure projects FrP are pushing are mostly roads for private cars. Trains do not really fit with their political ideology. Their position with regards to HSR was quite predictable.

These NHH economists know nothing about building a country it seems.Well, Siv Jensen is only a diplomøkonom from NHH's Oslo unit, not a siviløkonom from Bergen. ;)

Tohaki

December 4th, 2009, 12:00 PM

A railway to Tromsø will now be investigated.

http://www.adressa.no/nyheter/innenriks/article1418557.ece
http://www.nordlys.no/nyheter/article4742135.ece

Hansadyret

December 4th, 2009, 02:14 PM

"Vil ha fart i planene om lyntog" (http://www.ba.no/nyheter/politikk/article4741452.ece)

muster

December 4th, 2009, 02:50 PM

"Vil ha fart i planene om lyntog" (http://www.ba.no/nyheter/politikk/article4741452.ece)

Nothing we didn't already know, but it is always nice that the politicans confirm their plans officially :)

54°26′S 3°24′E

December 6th, 2009, 02:47 PM

To all of you who thinks HSR in Norway is dead, I hope you just saw the 21 news at NRK:colgate:
A railway to Tromsø will now be investigated.

http://www.adressa.no/nyheter/innenriks/article1418557.ece
http://www.nordlys.no/nyheter/article4742135.ece

"Vil ha fart i planene om lyntog" (http://www.ba.no/nyheter/politikk/article4741452.ece)

Nothing we didn't already know, but it is always nice that the politicans confirm their plans officially :)
^^Well, it's typical AP, isn't it?

"Sure we'll start an investigation on the process, but no chance in hell we'll actually fund it when they day for building it arrives!"
(copied from the Trondheim thread...)

My predictions regarding the new HSR study:
1. 90 % probability: Due to some new factors, the publication of the study is delayed to summer of 2013 (i.e., soon enough to give some vague promises before the election, too late to come into the transport plan and otherwise actually pass something through Stortinget.)
2. 98 % probability: The study concludes that the HSR will have net negative economic impact.
3. 80 % probability: The study concludes that the HSR will have a net negative impact that is equal or larger than that estimated by ECON (remember, Jens will certainly see to that is buddies in SSB and Jernbaneverket will be part of the "independent project organization")

Are you sure about this? If you want political support for such large investments you need as many people as possible behind it. And Haukelibanen will clearly gain the most people.

Given my predictions above, and the large degree of hostility towards HSR in FrP and the leadership of the labor party (also the comitment of Høyre is less than it appears sometime, if you look on what they actually say in their program), and the general scepticism in particularly the capital area, a HSR needs all the support it can. Just the south-western Norway is not enough. Reducing the risk, at least the perceived risk, is thus very important. I can only see two possibilities to get a HSR realized in Norway after the study of the independent organization, both alternatives (or something similar) with about 10-15 % chance of success:

1. Alternative before or after the election

Stortinget, with the support of all parties except FrP, pass the following plan.
a. Start constructing Gardermoen-Trondheim via Hamar and Dombås (Gudbrandsdalen). Vague promises (i.e. a new study) about Dombås-Vestnes-Ålesund and Trondheim-Steinkjer. This will ensure the support of (southern) Hedmark, Oppland, Møre/Romsdal and most of Trøndelag. Østerdalen would IMO be a better project, and next to Gardermoen-Lillehammer, Trondheim-Steinkjer would collect most traffic, but hey, this is Norway where everything is about local politics...
b. Start constructing Oslo-Kongsberg (or Hønefoss if the "independent" project organization think that would be the best route to Bergen). Further studies Oslo - Bergen/Stavanger, but with a strong promise with timetable for the actual construction of the line in the plan. Hopefully this will be ambitious enough for Hordaland, Rogaland, Buskerud and upper Telemark, and at the same time a solution the sceptics in the labor party may accept (delaying the expense of projects and reforms to later government is something they love!)
c. Start constructing Oslo-Gothenburg as soon as some sort of agreements with the Swedes are made regarding the tracks at the Swedish side. Hopefully this wil give support from Østfold.
d. Promises of much better connections between Vestfold / Telemark and Oslo due to the upgrades in the Oslo-area. Vague promises of something Oslo-Vestfold-Telemark-Sørlandet (if not "ringen" is chosen instead of Haukeli on Oslo-Bergen/Stavanger). Perhaps this will please at least some along the coastline Vestfold-Agder.
e. Start immediate electricification of the main remaining train lines. Vague promises Bodø-Narvik, something to Tromsø, and Kirkenes-Murmansk. Will secure support from Hedmark, Nord-Trøndelag, Norland, Troms and Finnmark.

With all this new lines coming to Oslo, and with most people in Oslo/Akershus having family somewhere else, also the population of Oslo/Akershus might see the benefits...

2. Alternative
After the election, if there is a new majority in the parliament, a compromise has to be made with FrP. They can probably accept HSR as long as also a motorway network is built at the same time. This may save costs for both projects, and also leads to less impact on the landscape etc. if the two are coordinated. The railway network may be a bit less ambitious than the one described above however, with upgrade of the highways instead of new railways on some stretches...

IceCheese

December 6th, 2009, 07:27 PM

^^Your realism is depressing:(

Tohaki

December 10th, 2009, 06:51 PM

Electrified Meråkerbane?

http://www.nrk.no/nyheter/distrikt/nrk_trondelag/1.6903577

It has been mentioned earlier that Nordlandsbanen to Steinkjer and Meråkerbanen are likely to be electrified at the same time, so here is hoping for a positive conclusion.

Þróndeimr

December 14th, 2009, 02:39 AM

54°26′S 3°24′E

December 14th, 2009, 01:25 PM

Nothing new here, but still interesting that facts actually sometimes do sipher down to masses:
http://www.adressa.no/vaeret/klima/article1419775.ece?index=20

Tog forurenser dobbelt så mye
Togene i Nord-Trøndelag forurenser dobbelt så mye som en buss.

CHRISTER S. JOHNSEN

Mobil: 911 20 633Publisert: 08.12.2009 kl. 08:57
Endret: 08.12.2009 kl. 08:58
Dieseltogene på Nordlandsbanen slipper ut åtte kilo CO2 per passasjer. Det er dobbelt så mye utslipp per passasjer som på bussene.

Passasjerer som tror de reiser mest miljøvennlig med tog fra Trondheim til Steinkjer, og lengre nord langs Nordlandsbanen, må tro om igjen. På grunn av at togene bruker diesel, og ikke elektrisitet slik som andre steder i Norge, er toget en klimaversting.

CO2-utslippstallene er hentet fra Vestlandsforskning, på NSB sine hjemmesider. Tallene er oppdatert på vegne av Trønder-Avisa.

Avisa skriver at fylkesleder Per Flatberg i Naturvernforbundet likevel ikke vil anbefale det mest klimavennlige alternativet.

- Banen må elektrifiseres. Vårt prinsipielle syn er at det satses for lite på tog, og for mye på veier. Vi er ikke interessert i at folk skal kjøre buss fra Steinkjer og sørover, sier Flatberg til t-a.no

http://www.adressa.no/multimedia/dynamic/01164/BussforTOG_1164534c.jpg
(The picture is a bit misleading, as the engine shown is not used for passenger traffic)

Actually, a modern diesel car is better for the climate per passenger km than diesel trains. Fully loaded freight trains are however better than trucks. In any case, electrification Trondheim-Steinkjer and Trondheim-Storlien should certainly have been made decades ago. Now they are boring a new tunnel between Stjørdal and Trondheim, but do not plan to put in any electricity :ohno:

Tohaki

December 14th, 2009, 03:29 PM

wtf, i was just looking at a military map from 1950, and it said that Oslo-Sweden railroad is electrified? And still, 60 years after that we have no electrified north of Trondheim, wow we sure live in the third world!I hate to be a pedant, but Ofotbanen runs on electricity.

edit, also Østersund-Storlien is marked as electrified, but Storlien-Trondheim have yet to be electrified.Yes, this is the case, to the great frustration of the Swedes.

Nothing new here, but still interesting that facts actually sometimes do sipher down to masses:
http://www.adressa.no/vaeret/klima/article1419775.ece?index=20

På grunn av at togene bruker diesel, og ikke elektrisitet slik som andre steder i Norge, er toget en klimaversting.

...

Avisa skriver at fylkesleder Per Flatberg i Naturvernforbundet likevel ikke vil anbefale det mest klimavennlige alternativet.

- Banen må elektrifiseres. Vårt prinsipielle syn er at det satses for lite på tog, og for mye på veier. Vi er ikke interessert i at folk skal kjøre buss fra Steinkjer og sørover, sier Flatberg til t-a.noI don't understand the logic here. First they say that bus is more environmentally friendly than train in Nord-Trøndelag because the trains do not run on electricity. Then they say that Per Flatberg does NOT recommend the most environmentally friendly option when he says that the railways must be electrified. Something is amiss in the journalist's reasoning here.

In any case, electrification Trondheim-Steinkjer and Trondheim-Storlien should certainly have been made decades ago. Now they are boring a new tunnel between Stjørdal and Trondheim, but do not plan to put in any electricity :ohno:They are not doing it as they are building the tunnel, but the option is in the national transport plan that runs from 2010 to 2019. To quote in Norwegian:

Det avsettes også midler for å kunne starte oppgradering av strekningen Trondheim-Steinkjer på Trønderbanen. I denne sammenheng vil det også bli vurdert om det skal foretas en elektrifisering av banestrekningen.Ytterligere moderniseringstiltak, som for eksempel elektrifisering av Trønderbanen, vil bli vurdert i andre del av planperioden.Samtidig med vurdering av elektrifisering av Trønderbanen vil også elektrifisering av Meråkerbanen, inklusiv behov for fjernstyring og annen opprustning av banen, bli vurdert.http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/sd/dok/regpubl/stmeld/2008-2009/stmeld-nr-16-2008-2009-.html?id=548837

This is the reason for the study in my previous post. Fingers crossed! :)

City of Rain

December 14th, 2009, 04:36 PM

Well, Siv Jensen is only a diplomøkonom from NHH's Oslo unit, not a siviløkonom from Bergen. ;)

what the heck is this supposed to mean?

Tohaki

December 14th, 2009, 06:03 PM

what the heck is this supposed to mean?Well, Hansadyret made two posts within an hour stating that "the only party seriously against this [HSR] is Frp", and the "these NHH economists know nothing about building a country it seems". I thought the latter quote, seen in the light of the former, was a reference to the the fact that Siv Jensen, the leader of FrP, is an economist educated by NHH. That her education is from NHH has led many to the incorrect conclusion that she is a siviløkonom. So, in a joking manner I wanted to stand up for the siviløkonoms, and point out that she is not one of them.

Perhaps it wasn't amusing, but clearly well within even the strictest forum rules. If, as your post seems to indicate, you felt it was offensive, that is.

City of Rain

December 14th, 2009, 06:07 PM

Well, Hansadyret made two posts within an hour stating that "the only party seriously against this [HSR] is Frp", and the "these NHH economists know nothing about building a country it seems". I thought the latter quote, seen in the light of the former, was a reference to the the fact that Siv Jensen, the leader of FrP, is an economist educated by NHH. That her education is from NHH has led many to the incorrect conclusion that she is a siviløkonom. So, in a joking manner I wanted to stand up for the siviløkonoms, and point out that she is not one of them.

Perhaps it wasn't amusing, but clearly well within even the strictest forum rules. If, as your post seems to indicate, you felt it was offensive, that is.

well, you could have just dropped the "from bergen" and "from oslo" part. it made it seem as if somefrom oslo is in any way better than someone from bergen.

Tohaki

December 14th, 2009, 06:16 PM

well, you could have just dropped the "from bergen" and "from oslo" part. it made it seem as if somefrom oslo is in any way better than someone from bergen.I didn't mean to imply that, but I would have thought that it was easier to misunderstand me the other way. I was, after all, standing up for those educated in Bergen, and ever so slightly poking fun at the degree NHH has offered in Oslo. ;)

Gsus

December 14th, 2009, 09:53 PM

wtf, i was just looking at a military map from 1950, and it said that Oslo-Sweden railroad is electrified? And still, 60 years after that we have no electrified north of Trondheim, wow we sure live in the third world!

edit, also Østersund-Storlien is marked as electrified, but Storlien-Trondheim have yet to be electrified.

Kongsvingerbanen was electrified in 1951 (Stockholm - Charlottenberg 1937), Østfoldbanen in 1940 and Ofotbanen as early as 1923. Mittbanan, as the continuing Meråkerbanen is called in Sweden was electrified to Storlien in 1945.

54°26′S 3°24′E

December 15th, 2009, 12:00 AM

^^The firste electrified railway in Norway was Thamshavnbanen (Thamshavn (Orkanger)-Løkken in Orkdal/Meldal, origin of Orkla ASA) in 1908. Most of the line is still in use as a museum railway.

It is quite odd that the Swedes made it to remote Storlien that early, while the few considerably more populated kms at the Norwegian side is still diesel
I don't understand the logic here. First they say that bus is more environmentally friendly than train in Nord-Trøndelag because the trains do not run on electricity. Then they say that Per Flatberg does NOT recommend the most environmentally friendly option when he says that the railways must be electrified. Something is amiss in the journalist's reasoning here.

I guess the journalist think that Flatberg mean that we should continue to use the diesel train rather than start operating more climate friendly frequent bus service. I think the journalist is right, you will never find anyone in Naturvernforbundet say bad things about the train, although the position, such as in this case, is clearly inconsistent. If you take into account that with enhanced power lines to the continent, Norwegian electricity could substitute coal power at the continent, even the climate argument for electrified railways (for passanger traffic) is questionable. However, HSR is great because it substitute energy wasting air traffic, and electric mass transport in the cities, be it either railway, tramway or trolley/battery bus, is a very sensible alternative as it enhances the local environment.

They are not doing it as they are building the tunnel, but the option is in the national transport plan that runs from 2010 to 2019. To quote in Norwegian:

http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/sd/dok/regpubl/stmeld/2008-2009/stmeld-nr-16-2008-2009-.html?id=548837

This is the reason for the study in my previous post. Fingers crossed! :)
This is not a promise, only wishes. Usually they hardly keep even the promises....

Tohaki

December 15th, 2009, 01:03 AM

I guess the journalist think that Flatberg mean that we should continue to use the diesel train rather than start operating more climate friendly frequent bus service. I think the journalist is right, you will never find anyone in Naturvernforbundet say bad things about the train, although the position, such as in this case, is clearly inconsistent. If you take into account that with enhanced power lines to the continent, Norwegian electricity could substitute coal power at the continent, even the climate argument for electrified railways (for passanger traffic) is questionable. However, HSR is great because it substitute energy wasting air traffic, and electric mass transport in the cities, be it either railway, tramway or trolley/battery bus, is a very sensible alternative as it enhances the local environment.Well, you may be correct, but I travel quite a bit between Trondheim and Steinkjer, and for me it is really only a choice between train and personal car. I have never taken the bus between the two cities. Shaving further time off the train journey will probably mean that I will use it more. Replacing the train with buses? Then it is personal car every time I'm afraid. But, that may just be me.

KiwiRob

December 15th, 2009, 07:39 PM

City of Rain

December 15th, 2009, 07:55 PM

Maybe Swedes are just plain smarter than Norwegians?

ive really had it with your anti-norway, norwegians and anything norwegian mentality.

maybe you should just realize that the members of this board are not suitable targets for taking out your anger on? im sure im not the only one who is sick and tired of you and your posts.

mjoks007

December 15th, 2009, 07:59 PM

Why bother to answer him? Some people love to provoke to get attention, very typically New Zealanders.

City of Rain

December 15th, 2009, 09:26 PM

Why bother to answer him? Some people love to provoke to get attention, very typically New Zealanders.

and why bother answering with the same type of racism he used to provoke you in the first place? :ohno:

youre better than that.

KiwiRob

December 15th, 2009, 11:36 PM

ive really had it with your anti-norway, norwegians and anything norwegian mentality.

maybe you should just realize that the members of this board are not suitable targets for taking out your anger on? im sure im not the only one who is sick and tired of you and your posts.

Jesus touchy aren't you, don't you understand sarcasm.

KiwiRob

December 15th, 2009, 11:39 PM

and why bother answering with the same type of racism he used to provoke you in the first place? :ohno:

youre better than that.

I don't know where racism comes into it, I'm guessing that we are all white and of European descent.

You have to admit that when it comes to infrastructure Norway is at the bottom when compared to countries in Western Europe and decades behind Sweden.

We are also way off topic, this line of discussion should be stopped.

City of Rain

December 15th, 2009, 11:45 PM

I don't know where racism comes into it, I'm guessing that we are all white and of European descent.

You have to admit that when it comes to infrastructure Norway is at the bottom when compared to countries in Western Europe and decades behind Sweden.

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

Racism may be defined as the hatred of one person by another -- or the belief that another person is less than human -- because of skin color, language, customs, place of birth or any factor that supposedly reveals the basic nature of that person.

your comment was racist.

yes, our infrastructure might not be the best, but what does this have to do with anything? im not blaming you for saying that our infrastructure is crap, im blaming you for saying that swedish people are generally smarter than norwegians.

i really love how you claim something to be sarcasm once someone reacts to it and lets you know its not tolerated. it makes you seem like a very interesting and serious person.

now that was sarcasm.

54°26′S 3°24′E

December 16th, 2009, 12:16 AM

Calm down guys, are you taking something?

I guess we can agree upon the following

Norwegian infrastructure is crap
Compared with most other developed countries, NZ has, from what I have heard, poor infrastructure as well (probably better than Norway) and a fairly low GDP.
Sweden has had and still have more visionary and not least more clever (read SMARTER) infrastructure politicians than Norway.

Well, you may be correct, but I travel quite a bit between Trondheim and Steinkjer, and for me it is really only a choice between train and personal car. I have never taken the bus between the two cities. Shaving further time off the train journey will probably mean that I will use it more. Replacing the train with buses? Then it is personal car every time I'm afraid. But, that may just be me.
As discussed above, cars is on pair with at least diesel trains climate wise, at a much lower costs for the society. If roads were better, however, also the travel time with buses could improve (and some of them are already fairly comfortable)

KiwiRob

December 16th, 2009, 12:23 AM

If you think what I said was racist then you have been living a cloistered existance. Personally I don't see much if any difference between a Norwegian and a Swede, however Norwegians tend to be overshadowed by Swedes, rather like the relationaship between Australians and New Zealanders and Americans and Canadians.

Þróndeimr

December 27th, 2009, 10:23 PM

Slik kan det også gjøres
Mens Bergensbanen står, åpner Kina verdens raskeste toglinje. Det tok dem fire år.

I dag skjedde det igjen, togene på Bergensbanen ble kraftig forsinket og flere hundre passasjerer måtte vente. Et søk i bt.nos arkiv viser at dette ikke er noen sjeldenhet.

Og mens passasjerer på Bergensbanen venter på lyntog, eller Ringeriksbanen (byggestart tidligst i 2020) eller andre oppgraderinger som kan korte ned reisetiden, som i dag er like lang som på 70-tallet, åpnet Kina denne uken verdens raskeste toglinje.

Den tok dem fire år å bygge.

7,5 timer raskere
Supertoget forbinder storbyene Guangzhou og Wuhan.

Reisen på 100 mil kan nå gjøres unna på tre timer – 7,5 timer kjappere enn før, ifølge det kinesiske nyhetsbyrået Xinhua.

Toget har en topphastighet på nær 400 km/t og går med en snittfart på om lag 350 km/t. Det gjør det til det raskeste toget i verden, ifølge kineserne selv.

Billigere fly
Anleggsarbeidet startet i 2005, og er en del av Kinas ambisiøse jernbaneprogram. Planen er å utvide jernbanenettet fra dagens 8.600 mil til 12.000 mil. Med det vil Kina få verdens største jernbanenett utenfor USA, ifølge Daily Mail.

Flyselskaper som opererer mellom de to byene har allerede kuttet billettprisene for å møte konkurransen.

- Lyntog har tre fordeler: Det er mer bekvemt, mer punktlig og har vist seg å være tryggere enn fly, sier Si Xianmin, styreleder i China Southern Airlines, det største flyselskapet i landet.

Tredobling
Men det koster å kjøre fort. Billettprisen er mer enn tre ganger så høy som det vanlige toget. Flere eksisterende linjer vil nå bli nedlagt, noe som har vakt reaksjoner.

- Vi blir plutselig tvunget til å kjøpe dyre billetter, sier Zhang Qian til avisen China Daily.

- Jeg er student og har ikke råd.

http://www.bt.no/nyheter/utenriks/Slik-kan-det-ogsaa-gjoeres-991314.html