WHAT ARE THE REAL EFFECTS OF RAILWAY ELECTRIFICATION IN
HUNGARY?1
Mattias JUHÁSZ
Széchenyi István University
Tibor PRINCZ-JAKOVICS (PhD)
Tünde VÖRÖS
Budapest University of Technology and Economics
1
INTRODUCTION
In modern transport management the promotion of environment-friendly transport
modes is a very important and constant feature. Rail transport could provide an
especially appropriate solution for environment-related issues, also being
emphasized in the guidelines of White Paper. Encouraging the shift to rail from other
modes of transport can be observed in almost every European country. In order to
reach this goal maintaining integrated, high quality rail infrastructure is
indispensable.
It seems that all around Europe electrification might have an important role to play in
the next phase of rail modernization as electric trains have several considerable
advantages over diesel-powered ones. However, there are also doubts about the
real benefits of railway electrification concerning its energy efficiency, total cost and
eco-friendliness.
The objective of this paper is to review the available knowledge about railway
electrification, to adequately assess the expected effects in Hungary through a
recent case study (Modernization and electrification of railway line no. 2. Budapest –
Esztergom) and to summarize the lessons learnt. Therefore a conclusion could be
drawn and a recommendation can be given to new EU-member states considering
railway modernization.
2
2.1
REVIEW OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF RAIL ELECTRIFICATION
International overview
As railway electrification has many advantages but also requires significant capital
expenditure for installation, several altering aspects have been playing role in
decision making whether to switch to electrification throughout the world. Financial,
economic and political factors are being considered as well resulting in different
railway systems regarding the type of haulage, power-supply or voltage.
Examining the current status of railway systems the wide range of electrification level
is conspicuous (see Figure 1). Some countries have outstanding values concerning
the degree of electrification, such as Switzerland (100%), Belgium (84%) and
Sweden (80%), or possess excellent performance regarding the total amount of
electrified routes such as Germany (33 708 km) or France (29 640 km).
Notwithstanding, we can even find Western, modern countries without remarkable
electrification like the USA (1%) or Canada (1%) and still, there are developing ones
© AET 2013 and contributors
1
owning considerable railway electrification as China (~ 46 000 km) or India (23 541
km). (World Bank, 2011)
Figure 1: Proportion of electrified railway lines around the world; Source: (World Bank, 2011)
In the following we do demonstrate different situations of railway electrification all
over the world attempting to grab the essence of various systems. While examining
countries with high and low level of electrification as well, we focus on revealing
reasons behind. Furthermore, the concise analyse of this chapter also considers new
trends, especially on-going electrification projects.
On-going developments in the UK
In Britain, the home of modern rail transport, electrification is about to play an
important role in the next phase of railway modernization.
However, approximately 40 percent of Britain’s railway network is currently
electrified, barely 15 additional kilometers were electrified between 1997 and 2010.
As a little under half of the passenger train kilometers and around 5 percent of freight
transport are carried by electrified lines, consequently much of the cross-country
network and many key freight lines are operated by diesel hauled trains which is
more costly and produces more emissions than its electric equivalent. Moreover, the
phenomenon of “running under the wires” (diesel trains operating on the electrified
lines) is of common occurrence due to the diverse range of routes, especially in the
suburbs. (DfT, 2009)
The problems mentioned above have contributed in large measure to the emergence
of governmental support. In 2010, the Labour Government first set out proposals for
electrification. After the 2010 General Election, these projects were reappraised. As
a result the railway network in the North West and the Midland Main Line between
London and South Wales except the Great Western Main Line between Cardiff and
© AET 2013 and contributors
2
Swansea were given the green light. Besides, proposals were announced for the
electrification of other commuter lines in South Wales. The public commitment to
electrify the significant part of the network has gained ground as the development of
an “electric spine” including the electrification of several other lines has been
announced in 2012.
Concerning proposed and ongoing developments in the UK it also has to be
mentioned that the significant proportion of third-rail use is suggested to be forced
back by converting them into overhead line system. Furthermore, an additional
challenge for the British rail network is the diversity of its power supply system since
36 percent of the network does not use the 25 kV AC overhead system but a variety
of other systems. The current strategies include the conversion of power supply,
such as on the South West Main Line between Southampton Central and
Basingstoke from 750V DC third-rail to 25kV AC overhead as a pilot scheme. (DfT,
2012)
The fall of the USA as a leader in electrification
Some countries, such as the United States, Canada, Australia or the South
American countries have low levels of electrification. However, in 1939 the USA was
the global leader in railway electrification with its 20 percent of the world’s total. In
addition, several drivers exist that could have encouraged pushing into background
steam and diesel-powered locomotives in the USA: namely, the legal obstacles
banning steam locos, the ventilation problem of long tunnels, the geographical
significance of mountainous terrain, traffic density and the fact that suburban
commuter trains are an ideal subject for electrification.
Instead, today electrification is of no importance throughout the States, except the
Northeast Corridor. It was switched off in the 1940s with the arrival of diesel
locomotives on the route and has not restarted for a long time. Many countries with
low levels of electrification often “have an abundance of oil, lack of other energy
resources, possess fragmented ownership of rail or are heavily influenced by lobby
groups or just not have the volume of traffic” (Aurecon, 2012). In case of the United
States specific traffic patterns (e.g. low percent of freight transport, long distances)
and the fragmented structure of ownership under the pressure of the oil lobby might
have caused the fall of America as a leader in electrification.
New technologies may bring a new era for the American railway increasing the very
low level of electrification which is currently about 1 percent. One of the most
essential ongoing electrification projects is the California High-Speed Rail project
that practically began in the early 2000s, although formal preparation had started a
decade before. Previous appraisal foresees numerous benefits such as the
significant net operating revenue by 2023, a vast number of workplaces created by
the construction, plus the newly generated vacancies due to new commuters, or the
remarkable reduction of emissions, as well as the improvement of traffic safety since
the project includes grade separation.
Instead of predicted advantages, considerable criticism has been published by
influential and highly respected opponents (Cox & Vranich, 2008). The report
questions the final cost for the complete system assuming under estimation, the
correctness of the number of riders, the speed and the safety goals predicted. As a
consequence it further argues the reduction in CO2 emissions and journey time.
© AET 2013 and contributors
3
That is to say, the project has made quite a stir in professional, political and social
circles too. Several recommendations and reappraisals have been published since
that time, including an independent peer review indicating considerable financial risk.
By 2013, this project seems to come to a standstill losing remarkable percent of
supporters (Angell, 2013).
Chinese power-supply –part of an entire supply chain
China’s rail transport volume is one of the highest in the world, having a 93 000
kilometer-long network of which 46 000 km is electrified (Ministry of Railway, China,
2012). The rate of electrification increased gradually: in 1975 it was only 5%, by now
it is about 40% as a result of a conscious central planning. This central coordination
included the development of coal mines, railways, power stations and ports too.
Accordingly, a complex and scheduled plan covered an entire supply chain. Most of
such coal rail networks are electrified and located in the northern part of the country
transporting the coal to power stations and steel plants elsewhere in China.
On the one hand, oil can be considered a scarce resource in the country but on the
other hand China is abundant in coal. Such geographical conditions seem to
determine the Chinese energy policy as a whole. The turning-point in case of China
might be the shock of the 1973 oil crisis, when the state direction started to limit its
dependence on imported oil and switched to increase the production of domestic
energy resources boosting local economy and creating opportunity for reducing
emissions, enhancing energy efficiency and decreasing energy consumption.
2.2
Railway electrification in Hungary
Hungary has an important role in rail transportation as it has good railway
connections both in north-south and in east-west directions with links to seven
neighbouring countries. The railway network consists of 7 893 km railway line, from
which 1 335 km is double-tracked (16.9%) and 3 005 km is electrified (38.1%).
However, track (and fleet) conditions are seriously lagged behind.
The notion of railway electrification came up in 1910. The first suburban test line (no.
71) was implemented in 1911. Further developments were impeded by World War I.
After that, the lack of coal supply strengthened the necessity of electrification. In
1923 another suburban line (no. 70) was electrified and new electric locomotives
were developed based on works of Kálmán Kandó. Successful operation led to
further developments: railway line no. 1. (Budapest – Hegyeshalom – Vienna
direction) had been electrified. After World War II the proportion of electrified railway
lines constantly grew: in 1971 it was only 10% and by 2000 it reached 35%. It means
that nearly all the main links in the radial rail network of the country is electrified now.
Nevertheless, missing electric connections are under development (see Figure 2).
One of these is the rehabilitation and electrification of the suburban railway line no.
2. (Budapest – Esztergom) (Andó, 2005).
In the last 10 years it was also necessary to renew the suburban electric motor-train
fleet: Stadler FLIRT and Bombardier Talent motor-trains were purchased and
strengthened the quality of rail service.
© AET 2013 and contributors
4
Figure 2: Electrified railway lines and planned railway electrifications in Hungary, Source: MÁV
2.3
Doubts on track
Despite that the superiority of electric trains is almost undeniable doubts also exist
regarding the real advantages of rail electrification especially its eco-friendliness,
energy and cost efficiency. These doubts primarily raised their head in North
America, Australia and even in India. Therefore we review the facts concerning the
comparison of diesel and electric traction prior to the assessment of a Hungarian
case study (see Table 1).
Electric trains
Diesel trains
year of invention: 1881
year of invention: 1912
number of locos: ~35000
number of locos: ~85000
Electric locomotives use electricity to
power motors, which are attached to
the wheels. It was invented by Werner
Van Siemens who firstly used a third
rail to carry the current. For safety
reasons overhead electric wires were
soon adopted.
The diesel engine was invented in
1893 by Rudolf Diesel. However,
modern diesel locomotive is in fact an
electric one which carries its own
power supply.
General
description
© AET 2013 and contributors
5
- maximum speed of 230 km/h
- efficiency figure of 90% (refinery and
transport losses + losses in the loco)
Operational
aspects
- high-speed capability, high maximum
speed (250 km/h +)
- efficiency figure of 65-80%
(losses in the power plant + during
transmission + losses in the loco)
- better regenerative breaking
performance (better reuse of energy)
- quick acceleration and deceleration
(ideal for suburban services with lots
of stops)
- lower weight (no fuel storage, causes
less damage to the track)
- additional load-bearing capacity
(higher power-to-weight ratio)
- better rolling stock availability (~3%)
due to greater service reliability
Economic
considerations
- high initial fix cost of infrastructure
- 25-30% lower operating cost
- lower maintenance need
(remote monitoring needed)
note: running cost can be higher if
electricity
is
originated
from
conventionally expensive sources.
- lower initial fix cost of infrastructure
- higher cost of vehicles
(20-25%, likely to increase due to
stricter EU emission standards)
- relatively high running cost
(due to increasing oil prices)
Environmental
effects
- 20-25 g/seat-km CO2 emission
(with around 4-500 g of CO2/kWh)
- zero air pollution at the point of use
- less noise pollution
(quieter operation, virtually silent
during waiting)
- cleaner life cycle emissions
- 30-35 g/seat-km CO2 emission
- local pollution (SO2, NOX, PM)
- noisy operation
Impacts on
passenger
- greater service reliability
(due to fewer moving parts, intercity
train could run 40% more without
failure, commuter train - 130%)
- better user comfort
(reduced cabin noise and vibration)
- better station ambience
(close-air stations)
- additional seating capacity
(multiple units)
- shorter journey times
(especially in suburban service)
Possibilities for
further
development
- possibilities of cleaner and
renewable energy sources (cleaner
and more renewable energy mix)
- CO2 emission can be reduced to 1415 g/seat-km (with 300-350 g of
CO2/kWh)
- possibility of magnetic levitation?
- despite innovative technical solutions
to reduce energy use it is unlikely to
have a significant general effect
because of the long life cycle of
trains (ca. 30 years)
- possibilities in bio-diesels
Table 1: Comparison of electric and diesel-based trains
Source: (CER, 2006; CER, 2008; Barad, 2013; Karim et al., 2010)
© AET 2013 and contributors
6
The comparison goes to show that electric rail traction has several advantages on
diesel-powered regarding operational, economic, environmental aspects as well.
However, energy efficiency could be higher with diesel locomotives if we take power
plant losses into account. The main findings are the following:
•
•
•
•
use of electric trains could be the best in passenger transport (especially in
suburban service),
current and future environmental advantages of electric traction is
unquestionable (20-40% less emission without real pollution at the point of
use) (DfT, 2009),
running cost of electric trains can be significantly less than diesel ones
with clean energy mix,
high-speed capability, better service reliability and increasing severity of
EU emissions standards makes electric trains more likely to spread out
despite the high investment cost need of railway electrification.
From the financial point of view, also taking electrification (investment) and operation
costs into consideration, it is worth running electric trains above a specific traffic
density. The location of this “break-even point” depends on several things such as
the type of service, track condition or energy mix. Figure 3 illustrates a simple
example. It shows that the electrification of routes with high traffic density cannot be
questioned financially if other circumstances can be guaranteed (e.g. clean
production of electricity). The necessary density is different in each country: it could
as high as 45-50 gross million tonne / year in India (IRFCA, 2004) but in our case
study (see Section 3) it would be around 15-20 gross million tonne / year.
Figure 3: An example on the relation of electrification cost and traffic density
Source: (Majumdar, 1985)
© AET 2013 and contributors
7
It is also important to remark that rail transport has only a minor role in the diesel
emission of transport sector and only local effects are essential especially around
very busy train stations. Comprehensive analyses revealed that it is possible to
further reduce emissions of diesel-powered rail fleet but it requires a significant cost
(therefore a low benefit-cost ratio). It means that implementing further restrictive
measures on rail emissions the costs of rail services increase. That may lead to an
unintended shift from rail to road transport which would be counterproductive. (DfT,
2009; AEA Group, 2007)
3
ANALYSIS OF A HUNGARIAN CASE STUDY
We have selected for deeper analysis the electrification of railway line no. 2 between
Budapest and Esztergom2 and the procurement of electric multiple units (EMUs) as
a complex project. This project is the second phase of the line modernization. Figure
4 illustrates its location. The first phase (which should be finished by 2014) can be
considered as an integrated part of the introduction of periodic timetable for
Budapest and its agglomeration, which purpose is the enhancement of suburban rail
services around the capital (increasing capacity with new double-track sections,
reducing travel time by increasing speed, P+R and B+R developments, etc.).
Figure 4: The Budapest-Esztergom railway line in the suburban network; Source: Princz-J., T. et al (2013)
© AET 2013 and contributors
8
Railway traffic between Esztergom and Budapest – unlike the typical suburban rail
lines – has three focuses. Besides the termini of Budapest and Esztergom,
Piliscsaba in the middle section also generates significant passenger traffic as a
university is located in the town. Along the inner sections of the line there are other
popular destinations for the suburban residents (e.g. Solymár, Pilisvörösvár).
The previous single-track line has reached its maximum capacity, however, the
traffic demand could not be fulfilled entirely. The modernization (increasing of track
capacity, electrification and the newly purchased electric trains altogether) will
probably lift the level of service while mitigation of environmental damages could
also be possible.
The modernization is closely linked to the procurement of EMUs (for MÁV-START
Plc.3) for several commuter railway lines (which are managed by MÁV Plc. 4).
Offering more attractive suburban rail service, the volume of rail passengers is
expected to increase. The areas affected by the development include mostly
settlements with urban functions or with special economic roles. Having implemented
the development, negative externalities of transport are about to decrease. The
direct air pollution will be eliminated and the noise level of rail operation will also be
diminished. Due to the estimated modal shift from road to rail, lower number of cars
on the parallel roads is expected to reduce traffic congestions.
In order to assess the combined effects and the economic efficiency of the
modernization a cost-benefit analysis has been carried out mainly based on the
national guidelines (COWI, 2011). We have separately analyzed phase I. and II. to
appraise the isolated efficiency. We also divided the costs in the second phase into
electrification costs and acquisition costs of EMUs. In the reference (“do-nothing”)
case we assumed that the current 10-year-old diesel multiple units (DMUs) will be
kept on the line.
The following economic benefits were calculated5:
 travel time cost savings,
 accident cost savings,
 road vehicle operating cost savings,
 environmental cost savings (air pollution, noise and climate change).
In order to adequately assess the environmental impacts of rail electrification several
internationally accepted specific values have been included (FTA, 2006; Metrolinx,
2010; INFRAS et al., 2008) since these were missing from the national guidelines. In
the calculation of climate change costs an improvement of the energy mix was
assumed (in CO2 emission: from 360 CO2/kWh to 250 in 30 years). Investment and
operating costs were calculated based on the feasibility study of the project (PrinczJ. et al., 2013).
© AET 2013 and contributors
9
Based on an incremental method the results of the economic analysis are shown in
Table 2 [Phase I.: column A; Phase II.: column B-D].
A
Differences based on
incremental method
Present values in million EUR
1. Economic investment costs
2. Economic operating costs
3. Replacement costs
4. Economic residual value
5. Total economic costs
(1+2+3-4)
6. Travel time savings
7. Accident cost savings
8. Road vehicle operating cost savings
9. Environmental cost savings (a+b+c)
a. Air pollution
b. Noise
c. Climate change
10. Total economic benefits
(6+7+8+9)
11. Economic Net Present Value
(10-5)
12. Benefit-Cost Ratio
(10/5)
Line
modernization
Phase I.
[2011]
B
C
D
Line modernization Phase II.
[Electrification, 2013]
Railway
Procurement of Consolidated
electrification
new EMUs
[B+C]
119.46
1.04
13.95
7.55
23.29
4.38
9.67
11.31
57.35
-28.01
-6.19
1.34
80.64
-23.63
3.48
12.64
126.91
26.03
21.81
47.85
187.50
0.12
0.00
-0.75
-0.99
0.08
0.16
20.10
0.00
0.00
37.74
22.20
15.07
0.47
186.87
57.84
59.97
9.99
1.47
1.21
Table 2: Economic analysis of Budapest-Esztergom railway line modernization based on incremental
method
As it can be seen from the comparison the electrification of the railway line causes a
26 million EUR cost in total [see cell B5 in Table 2] consisting of a significant
investment and replacement cost and a slight (10-20%) increase in operating cost of
the infrastructure. Procurement of new EMUs has a different economic effect: a huge
investment cost incurs [57 million EUR, cell C1], while the savings from vehicle
operating costs [15-20% lower cost for EMUs, 28 million EUR saving in total, see cell
C2] compensate nearly the half of it. In addition there is some savings on
replacement cost as well [cell C3].
Among the benefits there is a great saving on environmental costs particularly from
air and noise pollution [38 million EUR in total, 65% of all benefits]. There is a very
small saving from costs relating climate change [row 9.c]. In addition, travel time
saving is also significant as travel time on the line could be reduced with EMUs [20
million EUR, 35% of all benefits, see row 6]. The reduced travel time is caused by
the quicker acceleration and deceleration of EMUs.
© AET 2013 and contributors
10
The consolidated analysis shows that electrification and procurement of EMUs
require a considerably high investment cost but savings on operating, environmental
and travel time costs can be expected. Our assessment proved that electrification
compared to the “do-nothing” case is reasonable: benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is slightly
over the threshold [1.21, row 12]. It means that the economic performance of the
project is appropriate under the given circumstances, so the costs of the projects will
probably be remunerated during the assessment period (30 years).
In order to eliminate the inequality between vehicle fleets (10-year-old DMUs and
new EMUs) we have also analyzed the possible effects of the procurement of new
DMUs and it can be used as a hypothetical reference case. Comparing the results of
the second phase with this “virtual” reference case the pure economic effects of
electrification become plain. To specify the investment cost needed for new DMUs
we used data of recent procurements (Menedzsment fórum, 2010). The possible
utilization of the 10-year-old DMUs on other lines is included.
The results of this supplementary analysis can be seen in Table 3.
A
Differences based on
incremental method
Present values in million EUR
[2013]
B
C
D
Line modernization Phase II.
[Electrification]
Procurement of
new DMUs
1. Economic investment costs
2. Economic operating costs
3. Replacement costs
4. Economic residual value
5. Total economic costs
(1+2+3-4)
6. Travel time savings
7. Accident cost savings
8. Road vehicle operating cost savings
9. Environmental cost savings (a+b+c)
a. Air pollution
b. Noise
c. Climate change
10. Total economic benefits
(6+7+8+9)
11. Economic Net Present Value
(10-5)
12. Benefit-Cost Ratio
(10/5)
Railway
Procurement of Consolidated
electrification
new EMUs
[B+C]
E
Difference
between
investment
scenarios
[D-A]
67.15
-25.08
-9.28
1.57
23.29
4.38
9.67
11.31
57.35
-28.01
-6.19
1.34
80.64
-23.63
3.48
12.64
13.49
1.45
12.76
11.08
31.22
26.03
21.81
47.85
16.63
4.70
0.00
0.00
2.83
2.83
0.00
0.00
20.10
0.00
0.00
37.74
22.20
15.07
0.47
15.40
0.00
0.00
34.91
19.37
15.07
0.47
7.53
57.84
50.31
-23.68
9.99
-
0.24
1.21
-
Table 3: Comparison of electrification and renewal of DMU fleet on Budapest-Esztergom railway line
The cost difference between the procurement of new DMUs and total electrification
is 17 million EUR [cell E5 in Table 3]. The calculated benefit difference is 50 million
EUR [cell E10]. It means that electrification is more expensive but it is compensated
by higher economic benefits. So in this more fair-minded contrasting, the economic
efficiency of electrification is indisputable [difference in ENPV is 34 million EUR].
© AET 2013 and contributors
11
This hypothetical difference pointed out that electrification and procurement of new
EMUs could be much more efficient on railway lines where the current vehicle fleet
needs to be renewed. Railway line no. 142 (Budapest – Lajosmizse – Kecskemét) is
the last non-electrified line in the suburban region of Budapest. Contrary to railway
line no. 2, the current vehicle fleet is quite old, so the result of a potential
electrification project might be higher (similar to the difference in Table 3). However,
it is also possible that this line will be closed and railway line no. 100a and 140 will
take over its role in the network.
4
CONCLUSION
Several altering factors have been playing role in decision making whether to switch
to electrification on a certain railway line. As railway electrification has many
advantages it seems that all around the world electrification might have an important
function in the next phase of rail modernization. However, as electrification also
requires a significant capital expenditure for installation it needs a careful and
restrained assessment whether it is worth. From traffic density to energy mix several
factors have to be analyzed considering financial, economic and technical aspects
as well.
Cost-benefit analysis with some methodological additions (e.g. environmental impact
assessment) can be a proper tool to support the decision making process. However,
all of the presumed benefits cannot be adequately monetized (e.g. wider economic
effects). Besides, other types of evaluations can be involved like cost-efficiency
analyses or life-cycle assessments.
As railway electrification and adoption of electric trains has a complex mixture of
economic, social and environmental impacts it is difficult to analyze these effects
separately. It is even harder when isolated phases or elements of a railway line
modernization have to be appraised independently (e.g. line modernization,
electrification and procurement of EMUs like in the analyzed case study). Therefore
attention should also be paid to consecutive projects. Common effects of different
investments also need to be clearly identified in order to avoid double-counting or
confused evaluations. As the above presented case study illustrated, in some cases
hypothetical reference scenarios have to be devised to clarify the real effects of the
analyzed project. As this supplementary analysis pointed out, electrification and
procurement of new EMUs could be much more efficient on railway lines where the
current vehicle fleet needs to be renewed. That is to say, whether electrification is
worth to do, it mostly depends on local conditions including energy-mix, available
infrastructure, existing vehicle fleet and traffic demand.
Since the enhancement of public transportation is becoming more and more
important, we have to create comprehensive assessments about further possibilities
in rail modernization. Specifying the appropriate way of development, rail transport
(especially in suburban areas) can contribute to the improvement of sustainable
transport systems all around the world.
© AET 2013 and contributors
12
5
REFERENCES
AEA Group. (2007). Estimation of Rail Environmental Costs.
Andó, G. (2005). A vasúti közlekedés napjaink Európájában, avagy mi a vasút
jövője. Budapest: OTDK dolgozat.
Angell, I. (2013. March 28). Poll: Fewer Than Half of Californians Support HighSpeed Rail. Transportation Nation.
Aurecon. (2012). QR Network Electric Traction Services - Draft Amending Access
Undertaking.
Barad, M. (2013). Dízel- és villanymozdony-üzemeltetés környezeti hatásainak.
Budapest: Budapesti Műszaki és Gazdaságtudományi Egyetem.
CER. (2006). Rail Deisel Emissions - Facts and Challenges. Community of
European Railway and Infrastructure Companies.
CER. (2008). Rail Transport and Environment - Fact and Figures. Community of
European Railway and Infrastructure Companies.
COWI. (2011). Methodology guidelines for cost-benefit analysis, Transport Operative
Programme / Módszertani útmutató költség-haszon elemzésekhez, KözOP.
Budapest: COWI Magyarország Kft.
Cox, W., & Vranich, J. (2008). The California High Speed Rail Proposal: A Due
Diligence Report. Reason Foundation, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Foundation,
Citizens Agianist Government Waste.
DfT. (2009). Britain's Transport Infrastructure - Rail Electrification. Department for
Transport.
DfT. (2012). High level output specification (HLOS). Department for Transport.
FTA. (2006). Transit noise and vibration impact assessment. USA: Department of
Transportation.
INFRAS et al. (2008). Handbook on estimation of external cost in the transport
sector. IMPACT.
IRFCA. (2004). Articles on Indian Railway - Diesel vs Electric. Forrás:
http://www.irfca.org/articles/.
Karim et al. (2010. June). Toward a clean train policy: diesel versus electric. The
Journal of Policy Engagement, old.: 18-22.
Majumdar, J. (1985). The Economics of Railway Traction. Mcgraw Hill & Co.
Menedzsment fórum. (2010). Desiro, Flirt, Talent – rákaptak a magyarok a
szupervonatokra. www.mfor.hu.
Metrolinx. (2010). Appendix 8E - Noise and Vibration Impacts. Ontario.
Ministry of Railway, China. (2012). Railway Statistical Bulletin for 2011. Ministry of
Railway, People's Republic of China.
© AET 2013 and contributors
13
Princz-J. et al. (2013). Feasibility Study of the Electrification of the railway line No. 2.
Budapest-Esztergom. Budapest.
World Bank. (2011). Railways Database. Forrás: http://web.worldbank.org.
NOTES
1
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) only and should not be considered as
representative of the employers’ official position.
2
Establishment of overhead cables and telecommunication, new electronic signaling on the
Leányvár-Esztergom section, appropriate platform structure, audio and visual passenger information
(Esztergom station)
3
Passenger transport division of MÁV Plc.
4
Hungarian State Railway, the Hungarian national rail company
5
Other additional operational benefits can be assumed as electrification of this line has a positive
network effect since surrounding suburban lines are all electrified. Anyway, we did not calculate with
this in the analysis.
© AET 2013 and contributors
14