SkyscraperCity Forum banner

INFRASTRUKTUR | Norske jernbaner | Railways

184K views 1K replies 81 participants last post by  Never give up 
#1 ·
#2 ·
It is now official. Norway will have a HSR network in the future between all the major cities. Stockholm and Gothenburg is also mentioned. The next 2-4 years will be planning where the tracks will go, and where the construction will start.

The cost will probably be like 250-400 billion NOK!!!
 
#8 ·
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.
 
#5 ·
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.
 
#6 ·
New roads will benefit alot more people. And is way more flexible than railways. And when the railways are there the traffic on our very outdated and dangerous roads will still be the same. Becouse these railways will mostly steal traffic from planes, and not roads. And becouse we by then have used so much money on these railways we won't get a new highway network which we need very badly.

Roads first, then railways where needed.
 
#7 ·
I see we have the road-mafia at this forum, and we can expect them to show up a lot in the comming discussions. What makes you think the road-investments will be lower than today? I think we are on the right track with increasing spendings on roads aswell - especially the main highways like E39, E16, E6 etc.

This is the best news ever! Now we need to get Sweden to agree on an Oslo - Gothenburg link :)
 
#9 ·
What makes you think the road-investments will be lower than today?
Common sence and some knowledge about economics. The goverment can't use so much money they want. If they do so we get a overheated economy and prices will rise to the skys. So using money on this railway network means that the goverment has to cut back at other posts in the budget. And the first in line will be roads.
 
#14 ·
i read about this too :)

i hope they wont make that "golden triangle" between oslo and those other small cities first, but rather start right at the most important line - oslo-bergen!!

itd be great to be able to go to oslo "whenever".. heck, if it only takes 2,5 hours i could even go there after school some days!! this would mean that i could go to many more concerts!!

and yeah, oslo-gothenburg would be amazing!! (metaltown!!) :lol:

i mean.. 2,5 hours is just enough time to watch 1 movie and listen to a few songs on your Ipod while enjoying the view. obviously id enjoy the view when still in vestlandet, then watch the movie :lol:
 
#15 ·
i mean.. 2,5 hours is just enough time to watch 1 movie and listen to a few songs on your Ipod while enjoying the view. obviously id enjoy the view when still in vestlandet, then watch the movie :lol:
With around 60% of the line running in tunnels there wouldn't be much view to watch, but that's a cheap tradeoff i think.

The lines closest to Oslo needs to be built in any case for there to be any capasity for high-speed trains. I guess a new tunnel under Oslo must be built as well.
 
#16 ·
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."
 
#18 ·
here is a map of HSR in europe



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?
 
#19 ·
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.



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:
 
#21 ·
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.
 
#20 ·
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... =)
 
#24 ·
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!!
 
#25 ·
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...
 
#27 ·
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.
 
#30 ·
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?
 
#28 ·
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.
 
#29 ·
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.
 
#34 ·
^^

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?
 
#35 ·
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.
 
#40 ·
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!!)
 
#37 ·
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.
 
#38 ·
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.
 
#47 ·
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.
 
#41 ·
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..:)



Høyhastighetsringen
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top