1. sports
2. skating
3. figure skating

Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure
between Scandinavia and Central Europe
About this report
After a tender procedure this job was commissioned to HTC - Hanseatic Transport Consultancy who have
entered into a partnership with data lab for this task. During the process there have been regular contacts
between the consultant and the STRING secretariat as well as two reviews/sessions with infrastructure
experts from the STRING partners.
STRING Secretariat
Alléen 15
DK-4180 Sorø
Tel: + 45 (0)2082 3459
The content, wording and conclusions in this report are solely the responsibility of the consultants.
ISBN number: 978-87-92026-31-6
The consultants
Multidimensional experience in the field of consultancy and practical expertise form the basis of our
independent and authoritative approach to consultancy, an approach geared to achieving all your
objectives. The range of expert advice on offer from HTC - Hanseatic Transport Consultancy - includes
not only classic strategy and management consultancy for businesses operating in the fields of transport
and logistics but also guidance on policies and institutions, notably in questions relating to competition
and industrial politics. The way of our approach considers the increasing requirements of our customers
with regard to economic and ecologic topics. HTC's consultancy advice is distinguished not at least by its
independence, high standards and flexibility, bringing together a tried and tested methodology with a
profound understanding of the transport sector. Innovative solutions trigger forward-looking perspectives
for companies, policy, economy and society.
As the competent assessment of high-speed networks in Northern Europe requires a multilateral
expertise regarding market and infrastructure development aspects in at least the three countries
(Germany, Denmark, Sweden), HTC has joined forces with the Danish company TDL.
Hanseatic Transport Consultancy
Dr. Ninnemann & Dr. Rössler GbR
Schopenstehl 15 (Miramar-Haus)
D-20095 Hamburg
TDL – Transport Data Lab
Henrik Sylvan
Strandhøjen 3
DK-4000 Roskilde
Dr. Jan Ninnemann, Dr. Thomas Rössler
Tel: +49 (0)40 1817 54-06/-08
info@htc-consultancy.de
Henrik Sylvan
Tel: +45 (0)2092 8040
henrik@sylvans.dk
Status: 30.03.2012
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
III
Executive Summary
►
Long term perspectives for European transport markets are very promising. Overall market
figures for Europe are expected nearly to double until 2030. Main growth driver is the
freight segment. Yet for Europe's still fairly varying transport markets (EU 12 vs. EU 15) a
strong and further growing meaning of road (passenger and freight) transport is expected
to take place during the next decades.
►
In general the infrastructures of aviation and maritime navigation can be evaluated as in
principle in adequate condition. Inland waterways are of different meaning in the member
states and of limited meaning in the given context. Road and especially the rail transport
mode show the strongest need of modernisation and enhancement investment activities.
►
More than other regions of Europe the Baltic Sea region (here Denmark, Germany,
Sweden) is focussing especially on rail transportation to meet future mobility and logistical
demands. Country by country there are different focuses to be set.
►
Three main drivers are claiming to boost and integrate infrastructure developments in
Europe and the member states especially for road and rail transportation:
− The political willingness documented in the current White Paper - Roadmap to a
Single European Transport Area to support the European unification through a focussed transport infrastructure network development programme (TEN-T).
− The overall growth perspective of the transport markets of the EU member states
(see below e.g. the EU market forecast 2030 in detail).
− The necessity to support the "decarbonisation" of the economy by applying efficient
mobility and "green logistics" concepts e.g. by focussing on more environmentfriendly transport modes like rail and inland waterways. For the reduction of only 5%
of EU 27 road freight transport services a capacity increase of 25% increase on rail
is necessary.
►
Whilst in the mentioned countries the rail networks are being dismantled for many years, a
counteracting process speeded up since the market opening process initiated in 1991.
Therefore it is little surprising that intermodal market shares of rail in Europe is declining as
well as in Denmark, Germany (decline/stagnation 1994-2010) and Sweden.
►
For Scandinavia and Central Europe the Fixed Fehmarnbelt Link (FBL) is of strong
meaning generally in order to bring both regions closer together by enabling people and
commodities to reach their targets faster and more cost-efficient. On both sides of the link
capable infrastructure interfaces are vital.
►
The demand for huge investments for the FBL itself and their hinterland connections as
well as network enhancements on the Danish and German side is evident. This affects
primarily the environment-friendly rail transport mode which has to be enabled to play a
stronger role in the European transport markets in future. As public households are short
and fiscal funding of infrastructure investments is at most to be spent for modernisation
purposes further financial sources should be generated to afford European cross-border
enhancement projects which support the unification of Europe and generate reasonable
returns on investment. Moreover efficiency of public money in this respect should be kept
as high as possible. A close look to the market requirements and an efficient infrastructure
planning and implementation process along the FBL corridor can contribute to it.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
IV
►
According to the needs of the markets adequate solutions are to be found with regard to
capacity and travelling times. For the FBL in general a double-track is to be recommended
which allows trains to connect Copenhagen and Hamburg within competitive travel times.
Forecasted train figures for 2025 (per day/2 directions) are
− 22 long distance passenger trains,
− 38 short distance public urban transport trains,
− 78 freight trains
which require together with the officially planned mixed-train-operations concept including
fast running passenger (≤160 km/h) and freight trains (≤120 km/h) a dedicated doubletrack alignment.
►
For the railway system to be consistent, weak points in the network must be repaired. The
single track sections of both Fehmarnsound bridge and Storstrømmen bridge represent
bottlenecks that must be eliminated in order to safeguard the capability of the corridor
capacity in total. For the Storstrømmen bridge a capable solution is already in discussion.
►
It is clear that a solution with the S4 and a separated S-Bahn Hamburg-Ahrensburg (Bad
Oldesloe) and thus two extra tracks is necessary in a situation where there is a significant
extra pressure caused by the opening of FBL.
►
On the Danish side extra tracks are also needed on the Øresund line in order to handle
German-Swedish cargo transit better, and because of the expectations of a future semihigh speed train service between Hamburg and southern Sweden. This requires a bypass
extension at Copenhagen Airport.
►
The Swedish rail network is heavily utilized, and therefore the entire route Malmö-Lund C
requires two extra tracks, like the Helsingborg node that requires an additional track
towards the north.
►
The motorway networks around large cities already today are heavily congested i.a.
Copenhagen or Hamburg. For both capable solutions like bypasses must be found (e.g.
eastern harbour tunnel in Copenhagen).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
V
Content
Page
1.
Initial situation
1
2.
Expectations for Traffic Volumes in the European context
2
2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
2.2
2.3
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.4
2.5
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
2.5.4
2.5.5
2.6
Current Situation of the European Transport Sector
Major Trends
Present trends within EU Rail Transport Sector
Planning Horizon 2050 - The 2011 White Book of the EU
Planning Horizon 2030 for Europe
Interim Summary for Europe
Expectations for Denmark
Expectations for Germany
General Remarks
Short-term Forecast 2015 (2011)
Transport forecast for Germany 2025
Expectations in Sweden
A North-South View into the Future
Introducing Remarks
EU Transport Forecast Planning Horizon 2030
Transport Forecast for FBL 2043
National Forecast for the Belt link 2025
Transport Forecast of Fehmern AS 2015/2025
Summary on General Infrastructure Topics
2
2
5
7
8
13
14
20
20
21
22
30
34
34
34
38
38
39
41
3.
Infrastructure development and bottlenecks
42
3.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.3
Railway infrastructure
Germany
Denmark
Sweden
Road infrastructure
Germany
Denmark
Sweden
Sea-/Air transportation
42
43
57
64
70
70
76
81
84
4.
Assessment of existing infrastructure concepts
88
4.1
4.2
General Assessment
Corridor-related Assessment
88
95
5.
Recommendations for solving infrastructure problems
99
5.1
5.2
5.3
General remarks
North-South-Corridor in Germany
North-South Corridor through South Sweden - Denmark
99
100
104
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
VI
List of Tables
Table 1
Transport Sector Development in Denmark
14
Table 2
Travel Forecast Land Transport in Denmark, 2009-2029
16
Table 3
Passenger Transport Forecast for Germany 2015 (2011)
21
Table 4
Freight Transport Forecast for Germany 2015 (2011)
21
Table 5
Freight Transport Forecast for Germany 2004-2025
23
Table 6
Passenger Transport Forecast for Germany 2004-2025
24
Table 7
Transport Sector Development in Sweden
30
Table 8
Long Term Development of Swedish Passenger Transport
32
Table 9
Rail-based Hinterland Containertransport Plannings of Sea Ports
89
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
VII
List of Figures
Figure 1
Development of EU Transport Passenger Transport Industry 1995 - 2009
3
Figure 2
Market Shares of EU Transport Passenger Transport Industry 1995 - 2009
3
Figure 3
Development of EU Transport Freight Transport Industry 1995 - 2009
4
Figure 4
Market Shares of EU Transport Freight Transport Industry 1995 - 2009
4
Figure 5
Railway Passenger Transport Services Within the EU 1995-2009
6
Figure 6
Rail Freight Transport Services Within the EU 1995-2009
6
Figure 7
Passenger Transport Services Within the EU 1990-2030
9
Figure 8
Market Share of Passenger Transport Services Within the EU 1990-2030
9
Figure 9
Rail Freight Transport Services Within the EU 1990-2030
10
Figure 10
Market share of Freight Transport Services Within the EU 1990-2030
11
Figure 11
EU Passenger Transport Indexed Services 1990-2030
11
Figure 12
EU Freight Transport Indexed Services 1990-2030
12
Figure 13
Mode Split (pkm) in Danish Transport 2009
15
Figure 14
Transport Behaviour Development, Average Citizen 1999-2009
15
Figure 15
Growth in Traffic by Vehicle-km in Denmark 1989-2009
16
Figure 16
Road traffic Scenarios for Denmark 2030
17
Figure 17
Road Traffic Network Forecast for Denmark 2030
17
Figure 18
Major Crossings Scenarios Sweden - Denmark - North Germany
18
Figure 19
Major Crossing Scenarios Sweden - Denmark - North Germany
19
Figure 20
Growth in the Freight Flows South Sweden - Denmark - North Germany
19
Figure 21
Transport Services for Germany 2004-2025
22
Figure 22
Rail Passenger Transport Forecast for Germany 2004-2025
25
Figure 23
Rail Freight Transport Forecast for Germany 2004-2025
25
Figure 24
Freight Transport on Main Corridors in Germany 2005-2025
26
Figure 25
Rail Freight Transport on Main Corridors in Germany 1999-2010
28
Figure 26
Swedish Freight Transport Development by Mode
30
Figure 27
Freight and Passenger Transport Growth in Sweden
31
Figure 28
Mode Split in Swedish Transport, person km
31
Figure 29
Transport Growth in Sweden 1997-2010, Forecasts and Realisation
32
Figure 30
Freight Transport Forecast for Sweden
33
Figure 31
Freight Transport Forecast for Sweden
33
Figure 32
Long-term Passenger Transport Forecast for Dedicated Countries -Denmark,
Germany and Sweden for 2030 (Index 1990=100)
35
Long-term Freight Transport Forecast for Dedicated Countries -Denmark, Germany
and Sweden for 2030 (Index 1990=100)
36
Long-term Rail Passenger Transport Forecast for EU 27 and Baltic Region
Countries for 2030 (Index 1990=100)
37
Long-term Rail Freight Transport Forecast for EU 27 and Baltic Region Countries
for 2030 (Index 1990=100)
37
Figure 36
Road Vehicle Forecast for the FBL
39
Figure 37
Rail Vehicle Forecast for the FBL
40
Figure 33
Figure 34
Figure 35
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
VIII
Figure 38
Fehmarn Belt Link According to TEN-T
42
Figure 39
Basic Developments of Rail Infrastructure of DB AG
44
Figure 40
Use of Railway Network Infrastructure of DB AG 1998-2010
44
Figure 41
Current Railway Network Bottlenecks in Germany
45
Figure 42
Main Train Path Corridors of the German Railway Network
46
Figure 43
Total Network Utilisation of German Rail Network 2010
47
Figure 44
Rail Infrastructure Use 2010 Directly to FBL Hinterland Connections
48
Figure 45
Railway Node of Hamburg
50
Figure 46
Expected Train per Day Paths of Lübeck Railway Node 2015
52
Figure 47
Calculated Train Path Capacity per Hour of Lübeck (including Capacity
Enhancement Hamburg - Lübeck)
53
Figure 48
Current Situation of the Railway Route Lübeck - Puttgarden
54
Figure 49
Alternatives Routes of the Lübeck - Puttgarden - Corridor
56
Figure 50
Rail Passenger (left) and Freight Flows (right) in Denmark
58
Figure 51
Capacity Utilization 2010
59
Figure 52
New Rail Line Copenhagen-Ringsted
60
Figure 53
The Ny Ellebjerg Junction
61
Figure 54
Capacity Improvement on the Øresound Line at the Station of Copenhagen Airport
61
Figure 55
The Bypass Line Built as a Fly-over at the Crossing of Øresound Highway and
Øresound Railway at Copenhagen Airport
62
Figure 56
The Upgrading Project Ringsted-Rødby
63
Figure 57
New Bridge across Storstrømmen
64
Figure 58
Rail Congestion in the Swedish Main Network, Forecast 2030
65
Figure 59
Elimination of Railway Bottlenecks in Scania
66
Figure 60
Scenarios for Freight Traffic
67
Figure 61
Øresound Crossings by Train 2030
68
Figure 62
Small and Large Infrastructure Capacity Projects in the Øresound Region
69
Figure 63
Road Vehicle Figures for Northern Germany 2010
71
Figure 64
Expected Vehicle Figures for 2025 in Context with the Extension of the Route B207
between Heiligenhafen East and Puttgarden
72
Figure 65
Annual Use of Fehmarn Sound Bridge by Vehicles 2007-2011
74
Figure 66
Monthly Use of Fehmarn Sound Bridge by Vehicles 2007-2011
74
Figure 67
Capacity of Roads as a Function of Number of Available Lanes
75
Figure 68
Car Traffic Flows in the Main Road Network of Denmark 2030
76
Figure 69
Prediction of Congestion in the Main Road Network 2030
77
Figure 70
New Western Ring Road in the Ring 5 Corridor
78
Figure 71
Eastern Ring Road via a Northern Harbour Tunnel
79
Figure 72
Reduced Traffic of Roads in the Copenhagen Region
80
Figure 73
Upgrading of Highway from Rødby to Sakskøbing
81
Figure 74
Road Capacity in Sweden
82
Figure 75
Ongoing Infrastructure Projects in Southern Sweden
83
Figure 76
Catchment Area of Copenhagen Airport
84
Figure 77
Embarking Passengers at HAM by Region
85
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
IX
Figure 78
Main Cargo Flows via Lübeck
86
Figure 79
Preparation for the Fixed Link
87
Figure 80
Main Hinterland Corridors of Seaports (growth trains/day until 2015)
89
Figure 81
GHG Green House Gas Emissions by sectors EU-27 2007
91
Figure 82
CO2 Emissions from Transport EU-27 2008
91
Figure 83
Deviation Analysis for Road and Rail Freight of Passed Forecasts for Germany
97
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
1.
1
INITIAL SITUATION
On the third of September in 2008, the Federal Republic of Germany and the Kingdom of
Denmark signed the treaty for the construction of the Fehmarnbelt crossing link. After approval by the two national parliaments, the treaty entered into force on the 15th of January
2010. With the enforcement of the FBL treaty, the German government guarantees to upgrade the hinterland infrastructure in accordance with the provisions of the treaty.
As an ongoing dissent regarding the final design parameters for both the Danish and the
German hinterland connection can currently be observed, various capacity problems for
the traffic flow in 2025 are expected if the assumed traffic growth takes place after the
opening of the fixed Fehmarnbelt link. These so called bottlenecks are locations that will
affect the traffic flow to and from the FBL. The expected bottlenecks may preliminary affect
rail and road.
With regard to the Hamburg - Øresound axis it is reasonable not just to upgrade the infrastructure in the near FBL hinterland, but moreover it is of high importance to consider a
parallel updating of the network infrastructure which increases the use of the FBL, e. g. in
the metropolitan areas like Hamburg and Copenhagen as well as bypasses opening the
possibility to reach other destinations than the metropolitan centres without interference.
Peak congestion levels of the present road and rail infrastructure during rush hours are
getting higher and longer lasting. Though investment policies of the transport authorities
focus on keeping up the speed of their capacity expansion programme some ‘warning’
indications can be found while the free movement of people and goods is constantly
threatened. Implementation of intelligent transport systems, road pricing measures for
trucks and political considerations of the need to introduce congestion charging for all vehicles reflect the challenges that still more regulations of mobility could be a possible scenario. The FBL itself results in a travel time reduction of one hour giving higher accessibility to the markets on "the other side", but total travel time of point-to-point cross border
flows is increasingly depending on specific system effects.
As the aim of the STRING partnership is to jointly develop the potential of the partner regions and, in the light of the global and rapidly changing economy (and ecology), work out
joint strategies, the elimination of infrastructure bottlenecks plays an important role in today’s (political) discussion. To be able to give the politicians a full overview of existing and
expected bottlenecks in the infrastructure on the Hamburg - Øresound axis STRING partners have asked for a comprehensive cross-border analysis based on existing reports. The
following analysis of bottlenecks on the corridor between Hamburg and Copenhagen/Malmö generally covers the following aspects:
► Long-term expectations for traffic volumes in the European context,
► Infrastructure development and bottlenecks,
► Assessment of existing infrastructure concepts,
► Recommendation for solving infrastructure capacity problems.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
2.
2
EXPECTATIONS FOR TRAFFIC VOLUMES IN THE EUROPEAN CONTEXT
To better understand distinctions in infrastructure development along the HamburgØresound corridor this chapter gives a brief assessment of the framework conditions by
analysing future expectations for traffic volumes on the main European north-south corridors.
In order to give a brief introduction to this issue firstly a view from the European Level on
the present and the past of the transport sector will be done. Afterwards some investigation on the expected future of the transport sector will be executed. Both elements shall
contribute to describe the future demand of infrastructure capacity in Europe in general and with special interest on the North-South Corridor. A focus will be put especially on those transport modes such as road and rail where capacity restraints are most
likely.
Before a political or economical assessment of transport infrastructure restraints is possible, the current situation on the transport markets, the different modes and types (passenger, freight) are to be described in general and in some respect including more detailed
analyses. Therefore the "expectations" were put into front. After having analysed the general capacity situation and in addition to that especially regarding road and rail on the
North-South-Corridor, a valid evaluation is possible which should include priorities and
some likelihoods considering lessons learned from the younger past. This approach shall
contribute to distinguish between on the one hand "urgent" requirements being published
by different (interested) parties and "wishful-thinking-options" on the other hand.
2.1
2.1.1
Current Situation of the European Transport Sector
Major Trends
The following Figure 1 shows some major relevant trends of the passenger transport sector to be stressed here. One is a continuous growth path in the passenger market segment
during the last circa 15 years but also a certain "zenith-like indication" since 2007. Especially the passenger-car based mobility flags saturation. Behind the figures some fundamental behavioural changes like concentration of people in the metropolitan areas (favouring bus and tram/metro transports), growing average age of European population and a
lower interest especially of young people regarding the use of (own) cars are of relevance.
Second trend is, that still there are no signals reflecting a serious intermodal change
towards more energy-efficient public transport or rail transport or so e.g. as a reaction to
climate change challenges. During the whole discussed period there is a stabile 73%share of individual mobility (car-based). As the figure demonstrates the general understanding of mobility in Europe is remaining "conservative" up to date (see Figure 2).
In comparison with the passenger sector the freight transport operations emerge as the
real growth driver instead there are only limited investments dedicated especially to (at
least rail and inland waterways) the freight business. Market growth until 2007 exceeds
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
3
one third of total volumes in 1995. 2009 figures show the sharp decline caused by worldwide commercial distortion as Figure 3 demonstrates.1
Figure 1
Development of EU Transport Passenger Transport Industry 1995 2009
7 000
6 000
1000 Mio. pkm
5 000
4 000
3 000
2 000
1 000
0
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Years
Passenger Cars
Powerd 2 Wheeler
Bus & Coach
Railway
Air
Tram & Metro
Sea
Source: ETIF - Energy and Transport Figures 2011. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Figure 2
Market Shares of EU Transport Passenger Transport Industry 1995 2009
100%
1000 Mio. pkm
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Years
Passenger Cars
Powerd 2 Wheeler
Bus & Coach
Railway
Air
Tram & Metro
Sea
Source: ETIF - Energy and Transport Figures 2011. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
1
The picture uses all modes of transport. Reduced on land transport mode two the road sector increased his
meaning in the markets form 67.4% to 73.8% in the relevant interval.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 3
4
Development of EU Transport Freight Transport Industry 1995 2009
5 000
1.000 Mio. tkm
4 000
3 000
2 000
1 000
0
1995
Road
1996
1997
1998
Rail
1999
2000
2001
2002
Inland Waterways
2003
2004
2005
Pipelines
2006
2007
Sea
2008
2009
Air
Source: ETIF - Energy and Transport Figures 2011. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
0 shows the market shares 1995 to 2009 reflecting a growing trend towards road based
transports and logistics. This effect is mainly influenced by changes within the commodities' structure ("logistics effect") and the manufacturing industries as well as their international cooperative relations. Demand oriented logistic concepts like "just-in-time" and "justin-sequence" gain meaning as they contribute to reduce storage capacities and thereby
capital cost.
Figure 4
Market Shares of EU Transport Freight Transport Industry 1995 2009
100%
1.000 Mio. tkm
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1995
Road
1996
1997
Rail
1998
1999
2000
2001
Inland Waterways
2002
2003
2004
2005
Pipelines
Source: ETIF - Energy and Transport Figures 2011. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
2006
Sea
2007
2008
2009
Air
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
5
The drafted situation of the overall transport sector on the EU level has to be considered in
the context of the current forecasts for the planning horizons 2030 or 2050.2 For Europe in
fact any kind of change regarding the intermodal structures is not very likely at least until
2030 (see below). This might be different if it comes to drastic price increases for energy
and staff or ecological requirements to be implemented in the meantime.
In Germany many of the politicians and opinion leaders since about 20 years are arguing
in favour of an intermodal shift towards rail and assume according substation effects
promoted e.g. by a better rail infrastructure capacity offer.3 Some of the results of the well
known intermodal-change transport doctrine are described in the following.
2.1.2
Present trends within EU Rail Transport Sector
In general there are many political expectations in rail to solve the growing ecological and
transport growth challenges. For the better understanding of the principle ability of rail to
match that anticipations the current situation of the European rail transport industry the
following graphs are to be considered as they to a certain extent describe the likelihood
and the ambitions of current transport e.g. infrastructure planning of the European Commission (EC) at least for the railway sector.
As shown in the following figures in the EU - instead of market opening process - generally the market share of rail transport services declined in the past. The overall market
growth exceeds the growth path the railway sector took during the last about twenty
years.4 Accordingly the rail passenger sector lost market share from 6.6% in 1995 to
6.2% in 2009 (see Figure 5) by at the same time growing absolute service figures (slight
exception 2009 due downturn effects caused by world-wide finance crisis).
The rail freight sector in the same period suffered tremendously by various effects like
tough intermodal competition and upcoming intramodal competition, macro-economic
changes like "logistics effect" and "goods-structure effect" (more lightweight goods instead
of bulk), the growing trend to demand-based "just-in-time" and "just-in-sequence" logistics
and yet in general a non-adequate service offer to the markets (travelling time, absence of
damage of goods, IT-based logistics (e.g. track & tracing systems)).
2
3
4
See the latest paper of strategic long-term meaning of the European Commission: White Paper. Roadmap
to a Single European Transport Area – Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system,
COM(2011) 144 final. Link: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0144:FIN:
EN:PDF (25.01.2011).
A growing proportion of politicians in the meantime today begin to re-think modal-shift policy due to very
limited effects.
From that fact based perspective it can hardly understand why certain representatives and politicians are
still arguing the market opening process shall be a success story. See "Liberalisation-Index" developed on
behalf of DB AG, current version under link: http://www.deutschebahn.com/site/shared/en/file__attachements/position__papers/study__rail__liberalisation__index__2011__complete__version.pdf (16.01.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Railway Passenger Transport Services Within the EU 1995-2009
500
9
400
8
300
7
6,6
6,2
200
6
100
5
0
Market share (pkm in %)
Passenger Transport (Mrd. pkm)
Figure 5
6
4
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
EU 27 Member States
Market Share Rail Passenger
Source: ETIF - Energy and Transport Figures 2011. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Figure 6
Rail Freight Transport Services Within the EU 1995-2009
14
500
13
12,6
300
12
200
11
10,0
10
100
0
9
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
EU 27 Member States
Market Share Railfreight
Source: ETIF - Energy and Transport Figures 2011. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Marketshare (tkm in %)
Railfreight Transport (Bln. tkm)
400
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
7
Additionally there are some hints seriously to be taken into account that the market opening process in fact did not foster a "revitalisation" of rail on the European level. Of course
there are some positive examples which can be found within the EU but the improvements
there are counterbalance by deficits e.g. in the economies of the new Member States
where transport policy focuses on road transport and infrastructure while at the same time
state-owned railway companies (incumbents) remain state-owned organisations. They are
not forced to become successful acting service providers like private entities as they are in
fact to big to fail and funded by the state household.
The pressure in total of the described challenges led to an reasonable growth path (e.g.
caused by growing globalization of manufacturing industries) for rail freight but at the
same time a loss of market share from about 13% in 1995 down to than 10% in 2009.
See accordingly Figure 6.
Nevertheless the EC argues that infrastructure improvements will bring the railway sector
ahead in the long run. At the same time the struggling in the European Parliament about
the "Recast" reflect the real lever to be taken into account and explain the lobbying activities of some of the major market members. As there is in fact no level playing field in the
European railway industry at all infrastructural measures to improve cross-border transport
flows will always loose some of their potential effectiveness.
To get a sustainable future picture these principle circumstances of the transport sector's
situation in the EU should be kept in mind and considered also in the context of evaluating
future infrastructure development measures on the Scandinavian - Continental-Europe
respectively on the North-South-Corridor.
2.1.3
Planning Horizon 2050 - The 2011 White Book of the EU
The most relevant address to publish transport forecasts on a European Level is the EC.
Currently there are a few studies available regarding dedicated long-term views on future
passenger and freight transport issues. The most important statements will be collected as
far as they are of general relevance with the North-South-Corridor and the bottleneck
analysis especially of the railway network.
Most relevant for all future activities as far as transport policy issues are affected is the
White Paper - Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area published in March 2011.
There a broad range of targets is designed. Relevant in the context of infrastructure bottleneck are the following aims:
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
8
► Between cities 50% of the middle-distance passenger and freight transports shall
switch from road to rail and ship,
► Until 2050 the majority of passenger transports on routes of >300 km distance shall
take place on rail,
► Until 2050 50% of freight transports on routes of >300 km distance shall take place on
rail and ship. The interim target of 2030 is a 30% share,
► Development of an efficient EU-wide core net of transport corridors allowing an intermodal change at the expense of the road sector until 2030. Until 2050 moreover required IT-solutions shall be in place,
► Integration of all airports within the EU preferable in a high-speed rail network and sufficient integration of all seaports in the core rail freight networks and if possible integration in the inland waterways system.
If these plans would become reality the rail freight transport volume is likely to grow by
more than 80% during the next decades. So the first priority of EU infrastructure policy is
the enhancement the capability of the rail sector.
On the other hand long-distance passenger transports and intercontinental freight services
furthermore will predominantly be an issue of the airline and the maritime sector. A clear
differentiation between the mentioned long distance and medium distance services is not
given. It can be estimated that e.g. the rail freight transport services will increase enormously5 mainly driven by policy, on the other hand the requirements of the markets will be
completely different than today.
Whether the sector in deed will be in the position to meet these two major expectations
has to be left open. The ability of the sector in total to "reinvent rail" is as well decisively as
the future regulatory framework (e.g. "Recast" initiative) demanding the complete sector to
revitalize all kind of customer-related, operational and managerial processes of rail transport and rail infrastructure business.
One fact remains important that there is a strong political will within the EU to modernise
the whole transport sector including i.a. to make him more independent from fossil energy
sources and to favour rail and inland waterways to boost ecological-friendly transport
modes. The analysis of bottlenecks in the infrastructures between Scandinavia and Central Europe has so far to consider current bottlenecks and at the same time consider future
shortcomings caused by a rise of demand affected by political or commercial levers.
2.1.4
Planning Horizon 2030 for Europe
In 2008 the EC published an updated forecast for transport service developments until
2030. Figure 7 shows the commonly expected development in the field of passenger
transports between 1990 and 2030. Accordingly the passenger market in total will grow
by about 85% up to 8.9 Billion pkm, the average growth rate is 2.1%. Aviation will quadruple the service volume up to 1.1 Billion pkm 2030. Transports with private cars will grow by
more than 86% and rail as well is expected to grow significantly by nearly 44% until 2030.
The public road transport sector accordingly shall grow only by about 11%. The absolute
5
EU officers stated 2011 during a transport conference that the growth of rail freight services will more than
double until 2050 compared to 2007 (+ >110%) due to the potential changes described above.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
9
figures for rail passenger transport will grow up to 668 Billion pkm 2030 which means a
plus of about 44% compared to 1990. Average growth rate is expected to be 1.1%.
Figure 7
Passenger Transport Services Within the EU 1990-2030
10.000
Bln pkm
8.000
6.000
4.000
2.000
0
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Private cars and motorcycles
Public road transport
Rail
Aviation
Inland navigation
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Figure 8
Market Share of Passenger Transport Services Within the EU 19902030
100%
Bln pkm
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Private cars and motorcycles
Public road transport
Rail
Aviation
Inland navigation
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
So mobility with private cars will dominate the market (Figure 8) furthermore with an average share of about 75%. For the rail mode a typical hockey-stick planning can be seen.
Until 2015 and beginning in the past (1990) rail transport's market share will decrease
down to less than 7% but afterward a revival is forecasted.6
6
The rationality of this argumentation of the EC could not be evaluated within this study.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
10
The meaning of passenger aviation services will increase sharply. Starting with a share
about 5% in 1990 in 2030 more than 12% are expected by the EC's advisors. According to
their judgement inland waterways will probably loose one half of their market share. 0.6%
of all passenger transport services are expected to be produced there.
With a total growth rate of nearly 98% the freight transport industry in Europe will nearly
double the business volume until 2030. Total growth accordingly exceeds the passenger
sector (+85%) definitely. Between 1990 and 2030 the truck based logistic area will nearly
triple their volume up to 2.800 Billion tkm (+156%). The European rail freight business
is expected almost to stagnate. Total growth rate for the 40-years-interval is calculated
with 6.5%, annual average growth shall be 0.2%.
Looking at the market shares the main structural change is obvious. Truck based transport
raised their meaning in the market and will also do in the future. More than 75% of the
market in 2030 will be served by the road sector. First aggrieved party is the railway sector
by losing market share of about 46% until 2030. Rail is expected to achieve a future
share of 15%, in 1990 the share still was nearly 28%. Inland waterways will loose further market meaning according to the EC's consultants. There share of the market will go
down by more than 30%. In 1990 the share was nearly 14% of all transport services within
the EU-27, in 2030 the share will decrease to less than 10%. See in detail Figure 10.
Figure 9
Rail Freight Transport Services Within the EU 1990-2030
4.000
Bln tkm
3.000
2.000
1.000
0
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Trucks
Rail
Inland navigation
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 10
11
Market share of Freight Transport Services Within the EU 1990-2030
100%
Bln tkm
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Trucks
Rail
Inland navigation
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
The following Figure 11 and Figure 12 summarize the structural effects on the EU transport sector currently expected by the EC. The differences between the forecast discussed
here in comparison with the EC's long-term policy paper published in 2011 are evident.7
Figure 11
EU Passenger Transport Indexed Services 1990-2030
Bln pkm Index 1995=100
200
150
100
50
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Development Passenger Tansport (Gpkm) EU 27
Development Public Road Transport
Development Private Cars and Motorcycles
Development Rail Transport
Development Aviation Transport
Development Inland Navigation Transport
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
The overall market development is primarily driven by the private car and motorcycle sector. As shown on the European level rail transport activities are declining between the early
1990ies and 2009, but it is projected according to the mentioned forecasts to display ac7
Figure 11 ignores the future aviation development for transparency reasons to ease understanding of the
development of other transport modes.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
12
celeration of growth from 2015 onwards (+1.2% p.a. in 2005-2030) as a result of new and
upgraded infrastructure projects facilitating networks of high train speeds.8 Whether this is
a viable strategy ("hockey-stick" planning) especially for the rail sector has to be left open.
Due to the inadequate situation regarding sufficient financing of high-speed network investments doubts has to be seen. As other sources of reasonable amounts yet are in fact
not available besides a tax-based financing, state-owned incumbents claim to have best
credit rating which can not be topped by PPP or other private funding.9 Nevertheless according to EU officers the EC is decided to simplify funding for the core rail network in
the long term. The capacity requirements will rise significantly when it comes to intermodal
changes on medium-distant routes in favour of rail.
As already mentioned the freight market is estimated to grow significantly stronger compared to the passenger market. The main driver and real winner in the coming years is the
truck-based freight and logistics branch. As inland waterways can slight increase the volume of transport services on a level higher than in 1990, the rail sector at the same time
again is expected to loose further meaning in the market. Only in the very long run rail is
seen to be in the position to top the transport volumes of the past (1990: 525 Billion tkm)
with nearly 560 Billion tkm in 2030 ("hockey-stick" likely here again).
Figure 12
EU Freight Transport Indexed Services 1990-2030
Bln tkm Index 1995=100
250
220
190
160
130
100
70
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Development Freight Transport
Development Truck Transport
Development Rail Transport
Development Inland Navigation Transport
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
In October 2011, the EC has adopted a funding plan for investments worth 50 Billion Euro
aimed at improving transport, energy and digital networks in Europe. A Connecting
Europe Facility, in force starting with January 2014, shall be created to order to finance
8
9
European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport Trends to 2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008, p.33. Link: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/energy_transport/figures/trends_2030_update_2007/energy_transport_trends_2030_update_2007_en.pdf (16.01.2012).
This kind of argumentation was put into question due to the Europe wide debt crisis. E.g. Austria has
stopped rail network investments (i.a. Brenner tunnel) due to credit ranking difficulties. Until mid of January
2012 Austria had triple A but yet is ranked with AA+ by S&P. See Österreich will Top-Bonität rasch zurück,
Der Blick, 16.01.2012. Link: http://www.blick.ch/news/wirtschaft/oesterreich-will-top-bonitaet-rasch-zurueck128382 (26.01.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
13
projects that will eliminate the missing links in the transport networks. Optimising the performance of multimodal logistics chains, including by making greater use of more energyefficient modes is absolutely necessary.
The Connecting Europe Facility will finance projects that will eliminate the missing links in
the transport networks (see targets of the White Paper 2050 mentioned above). The transport systems in Europe have traditionally developed along national lines. The EC proposed
to create corridors to cover the most important cross-border projects. It has estimated that
by 2020, 500 Billion Euro will be needed to realise an effective European network, including 250 Billion Euro to eliminate the bottlenecks and completing missing links of the core
freight network.
It is intended for the next financial period 2012-2020 that the Connecting Europe Facility
makes available for transport infrastructure 31.7 Billion Euro. About 80% of this budget will
be used to foster the development of the mentioned core network priority projects, projects
along the 10 implementing corridors on the core network.
In the transport sector, a Europe-wide "core network" has been identified using a panEuropean planning methodology. This core network with corridors, carrying freight and
passenger traffic with high efficiency and low emissions, makes extensive use of existing
infrastructure. By completing missing links and alleviating bottlenecks and with the use of
more efficient services in multimodal combinations, it will handle the bulk of transport flows
in the single market. The cost of EU infrastructure development to match the demand for
transport has been estimated at more than 1.5 Trillion Euro for 2010-2030 for the entire
transport networks of the EU Member States.
2.1.5
Interim Summary for Europe
As a preliminary summary of the previously mentioned infrastructure and transport issues which are not in all respects coherent - of the past, the presence and the future the following seems noteworthy:
► EC continually with a preference on rail transport mode in current White Book for 2050
► Vision for 2050 includes ideas of modal shift under the assumption of a strong growth
in rail transport services,
► Transport infrastructure policy in Europe with a total cost amount estimate of 1.5 Trillion
Euro for the period 2010-2030,
► Strong efforts to safeguard funding of the investments (pending issue)
► Development of different core networks dedicated for passenger and freight transport
on rail within the current White Paper,
► Until 2050 the majority of passenger transports on routes of >300 km distance shall
take place on rail (political perspective),
► Official forecast with reduced importance of rail on future transport markets and limited
growth potential until 2030 (annual average growth rate +0.2%) (commercial perspective).
According to various forecast studies the growth perspective likely to take place in Europe
are most challenging regarding the adequate supply of capacity and as well as the adjustment of the whole economy as far as ecological aspects are concerned. Growth driver
number one in the passenger transport area will be the air transport industry. Due to abso-
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
14
lute figures the road transport will dominate the overall development. The likelihood of an
intermodal change favouring rail or public transport services can be evaluated as limited.
In the freight area the road sector will increase its market share and rail will probably loose
further market shares. The macroeconomic renovation in the direction of e.g. future "decarbonisation" and "green transport" can not be discovered on a reasonable level.
2.2
Expectations for Denmark
During the period 1995-2010 the domestic traffic in Denmark passenger traffic increased
annually by 0.5% in the road network and by 2% in the rail network. Thus occurs the policy
to promote the railway to be successful, but the starting point is low.
When looking at the national freight transport flows are increased by 1% p.a. both in the
Danish road and rail network.
Table 1
Transport Sector Development in Denmark
ton km billion
1995
2010
∆
rail
2.0
2.3
+15%
road
9.2
10.6
+15%
1995
2010
∆
rail
4.9
6.6
+35%
road
48.0
51.8
+8%
person km billion
Source: Denmark Statistics, 2011.
The individual traffic by car is dominant in Denmark with 66% of the total travel market.
Public transport comprises trains and buses, carrying 8% and 9% of the passenger transport.
Predictions for the future traffic can be based on several methods. An interesting data
base at TU-Denmark deals with sociological and behavioural changes in transport consumption measured over a longer period and with a large and representative sample.
An average Dane now uses 1 hour (57 minutes) per day for transportation purposes. This
is an extension at no less than 22% during 10 years. It reflects, of course, economic
growth, the continued development of a dynamic labour market and general increase of
leisure time activities associated with being able to reach more destinations.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 13
15
Mode Split (pkm) in Danish Transport 2009
Source: TU-data, Future of the transport sector, Ministry of Transport, 2010.
Figure 14
Transport Behaviour Development, Average Citizen 1999-2009
Source: TU travel data base from TU-Denmark.
The average citizen travels 39 km. Radius of action for the individual person is thus increased by 17%, but the effectiveness of the journey have fallen, the average travel speed
has gone from 42.7 km/h to 41.2 km/h. Social mobility is increased but congestion may
explain that the accessibility and availability to reach an average of destinations has fallen
by 3.5%, which all in all reduces the welfare economic gain stemming from transport sector.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Table 2
16
Travel Forecast Land Transport in Denmark, 2009-2029
Personkm, billion
1989
2009
2029
2009-2029
Road
47,5
55,0
58,5
+6%
Rail
4,9
6,6
13,0
+97%
Bus
3,0
3,0
4,4
+47%
Total
55,4
64,6
75,9
+17%
Source: Future of the transport sector, Ministry of Transport, 2010 (excl vans and mini-trucks).
These figures reflect, of course (mostly the former) government's goal of developing the
transport sector. Only a green road pricing policy could keep the car transport at that low
level of growth.
On the other hand demand does not grow by itself. New services, especially within public
transport need to be developed for the railways to be able to lift as large a share of growth
in the coming years. Revitalization of the railway through major investment programs for
improving the infrastructure has been initiated. The target is a doubling the railway transport by 2030.
Road traffic is dominant in terms of overall traffic. In the Danish road network now runs 50
billion vehicle-kilometres per year representing a growth of around 50% over a period of 25
years.
Figure 15
Growth in Traffic by Vehicle-km in Denmark 1989-2009
Source: Danish Statistics, 2010.
Figure 15 also reveals that transport by car include fewer and fewer people per car. Because of the continued motorization, we see a relatively larger increase in vehicle-km than
growth in passenger-km.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 16
17
Road traffic Scenarios for Denmark 2030
Source: Danish Infrastructure Commission (2030). Vehicle-km for cars, vans and small trucks for commercial purpose.
The Danish Infrastructure Commission has envisaged a general 40% increase in vehiclekm towards 2030 (low scenario) or 60% increase (high scenario). On the main road network the increase would even get up to 70% for cars and almost 90% for trucks. Although
these calculations are done before the financial crisis, and the model is calibrated on 2005
data, did the actual traffic reached the "high growth" level in 2010.
Figure 17
Road Traffic Network Forecast for Denmark 2030
Source: Danish Infrastructure Commission report 2030.
Development in car traffic, however, covers a more complex picture where local road network only sees about half of the growth shown on the illustration above, while especially
the part of the state road network consisting of highways experience point wise twice the
growth, particularly in "hotspots" around the major cities.
The financial crisis has momentarily put growth to a halt. Initially there was a slight decline
in passenger and truck traffic, but rail transport seems to grow in certain corridors. More
recently truck traffic again experiences the upturn.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
18
Overall can road traffic development in absolute terms be expected to pass the equivalent
on the railway side. Thus, it is also on the main road network, that the biggest challenge in
the form of increased congestion be expected. But the rail system is similarly congested
and characterized by a number of bottlenecks on main lines, as well as in junctions and on
stations. These capacity constraints will be dealt with later in this report.
In the following the consultants will look a little more closely at the expectations of person
and goods in principal corridors (border crossings, bridges and ferries). A quick overview
on transport volumes in corridors shows a continued and significant growth in passenger
as well as freight traffic.
With respect to the passenger flow can be seen that the main traffic flows comprise eastwest traffic in Denmark, the traffic across Øresound (either via the Øresound Bridge or the
Helsingør-Helsingborg ferry line) and traffic across the Danish-German border (North
Schleswig). This picture is illustrated by a simplified projection to 2030, which partly relies
on forecasts and, if these do not exist, a linear projection of +2% p.a.
Figure 18
Major Crossings Scenarios Sweden - Denmark - North Germany
Source: RUP 2.0 Strategic Development Studies, Capital Region Denmark, TDL
For freight it is seen that especially the German-Danish border accounts for most of the
traffic. We also see that the Baltic Sea routes directly from Sweden to Germany, also in
2030 play a major role in the freight area, although the FBL can be expected to attract both
trucks and especially a lot of rail freight (if there is sufficient capacity to it). The 2030-case
scenario is partly based on forecasts mainly documented in the IBU study, and if data not
available, has a linear projection of 4% p.a. been chosen.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 19
19
Major Crossing Scenarios Sweden - Denmark - North Germany
Source: RUP 2.0 Strategic Development Studies, Capital Region Denmark, TDL
Regarding the international freight flow it seems like the most Western corridor will experience the largest change in absolute figures even though majority of rail freight will shift to
the FBL. Road freight will continue to grow quite extensively.
Figure 20
Growth in the Freight Flows South Sweden - Denmark - North Germany
Source: TU-Denmark model (GORM 2005) growth output road freight 2000-2025 international goods to/from/through Denmark. Danish Industry (Transport & Mobility 2010).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
2.3
2.3.1
20
Expectations for Germany
General Remarks
On the national level traffic forecast issues are in fact exclusively steered and managed by
the representatives of BMVBS for the transport on long-distance road, rail and inland waterways. Regarding the railway sector object of development steps is only the Federal railway network currently part of the DB Group. In Germany a lot of municipal railways also
have own rail infrastructure. Some of them have relevance for cross-regional or national
transport flows, most of them have a strong lack of capacity through inadequate technique
like maximum speed or axle load, signalling, operating software and so on. Municipal railway companies are not in the position to invest and finance from own accounts in infrastructure and the public owners in fact regularly are not willed to support their own subsidiary companies.
The national forecasts are basis for the future development of Federal transport infrastructures for all of the four modes documented regularly in the so called "Federal Transport
Investment Plan" (FTIP).10 The FTIP is result of the planning work done by various parties
during its development and is concreted by the Federal Government for a defined period of
time (a 10 years period is commonly applied). The projects of the FTIP become part of the
so called requirement plan ("Bedarfsplan") for transport modes rail and road and legally
documented in the "Bundesschienenwegeausbaugesetz" (BSchwAG).11
Basis for all transport infrastructure development projects of the FTIP are § 5 "Bundesschienenwegeausbaugesetz" resp. § 5 "Fernstraßenausbaugesetz", these rules transform
former common projects into demand related (prioritized) planning ("Bedarfspläne"). This
planning is binding and has the character of law. The investment framework plans "Investitionsrahmenplan" for German transport infrastructure investments in general is no financing scheme but he gives a certain medium-term indication about the amounts of possible
investments in Federal railway networks, long distance transport roads and inland waterways. Current time frame is 2011-2015.
Beside these official documents according further statements of selected transport industry
companies (position papers) are available and more or less standard at least in the railway
sector. Reasons for that are the unique market structure more or less close to a monopole
- with market shares between 99% (passenger long distance transport) and 75% (freight
transport)12 and the very specific way of cooperation and division of work between BMVBS
(representing the interests of the Federal owner) and DB AG as a commercial entity according to AG-Law.13 To deepen overall work specific analyses are possible like the "Cor-
10
11
12
13
See current version under http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/34254/publicationFile/10825/bundesverkehrswege-plan-2003-beschluss-der-bundesregierung-vom-02-juli-2003.pdf (16.01.2012).
Between the Federal State of Germany and DB AG according financial documents are to be agreed upon.
See 8.1 BSchwAG.
In general a market dominating position is assumed by anti trust law if market share is above about 35%.
At least regarding rail freight business it is not clear how the future of that sector will develop after incumbents of the rail industry stroke back against the emerging intramodal competition and took over most of the
noteworthy German private railway companies between 2006 and 2008. See Thomas Rössler, Struktureller
Wandel des Wettbewerbs - Quo vadis Schienenverkehr?, Internationales Verkehrswesen, November 2009,
p.584ff.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
21
ridor A" investigations to be executed in 2012 and onwards initiated by major railway and
seaport companies.14
2.3.2
Short-term Forecast 2015 (2011)
The current plan for German Federal transport infrastructure investments ("Investitionsrahmenplan") is the basis for the development of the Federal railway networks, the long
distance transport roads sector and inland waterway system. Planning horizon is 20112015. The framework catalogue was published in December 2011.
Table 3
Passenger Transport Forecast for Germany 2015 (2011)
1997
2010
Forecast 2014
Bln pkm Share Bln pkm Share
Road
Bln pkm
Share
Forecast 2015
Bln pkm
Share
833
81.4
905
79.2
939
79.6
970
79.2
Rail
72
7.0
84
7.4
88
7.5
96
7.8
Tram, Bus
83
8.1
77
6.6
77
6.5
86
7.0
Air
36
3,5
62
5.5
75
6.4
73
6.0
1.024 100.0
1.156
100.0
1.130
100.0
1.225
100.0
Total
Source: BMVBS (Edit.): Investitionsrahmenplan 2011 - 2015 für die Verkehrsinfrastruktur des Bundes (IRP), 2011, p.8ff.
Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/76848/publicationFile/49522/investitionsrahmenplan-2011-bis-2015irp.pdf (15.12.2011.). Calculations: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Table 4
Freight Transport Forecast for Germany 2015 (2011)
1997
2010
Bln tkm Share Bln tkm
Road
Forecast 2014
Share
Bln tkm
Share
Forecast 2015
Bln tkm
Share
302
69.1
434
72.0
527
73.3
484
70.2
Rail
73
16.7
107
17,7
125
17.4
115
16.7
Inl. Water.
62
14.2
62
10.3
67
9.3
90
13.1
437 100.0
603
100.0
719
100.0
689
100.0
Total
Source: BMVBS (Edit.): Investitionsrahmenplan 2011 - 2015 für die Verkehrsinfrastruktur des Bundes (IRP), 2011, p.8ff.
Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/76848/publicationFile/49522/investitions-rahmenplan-2011-bis-2015irp.pdf (15.12.2011.). Calculations: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
The comparison with the forecast for 2015 elaborated in 2003 the figures of the second
forecast for 2015 vary significantly. Responsible for that is i.a. i) the grown expectations in
transport issues in general, but ii) the limited quality of public statistic figures. They had
been updated from time to time. These circumstances lead to different real figures for 1997
and subsequently to hardly comparable development paths for 2015.
14
The tender procedure started in December 2011.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
22
Regarding the new figures for 2010 it can be realized that these figures are already higher
than the previously expected figures for 2015. Most important changes are the significantly
higher target figures for passenger and freight services on road and at the same time the
abdication of noteworthy growth paths for rail services causing decreasing shares of the
market.
This new forecast approach obviously considers the German experience, that the rail
(freight) sector at least under the prevailing conditions is more or less not able to realize
adequately the political expectations like "More Traffic on Rail" proclaimed since the
1990ies.15
Transport forecast for Germany 2025
In 2007 the current forecast document named "Verflechtungsprognose" for transport services in Germany was published.16 Accordingly the freight services in total are expected to
grow by more than 70% and passenger services by nearly 20%. The proportion of different
growth rates underlines the experience of the last years of the "Bahnreform"17 in Germany
where rail freight business became the real growth driver of the rail sector (profitable
core business "freight").
Figure 21
Transport Services for Germany 2004-2025
1600
1200
Bln tkm
2.3.3
800
1302,6
1091,4
936,5
400
548,1
0
2004
2025
Years
Total Freight Transport Services
Total Passenger Transport Services
Source: See Figure 6 and Figure 7.
See the following figures regarding passenger transport services in Germany for the years
2004 and 2025 on the basis of Table 5. Although many politicians argue in favour of rail
15
16
17
Interesting detail: The new market shares of the transport modes for 2015 are only published in absolute
figures and not in relative figures.
See BMVBS documents regarding Transport Forecast 2025. Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/SharedDocs/DE/Artikel/UI/verkehrsprognose-2025.html (01.03.2012).
"Bahnreform" is the common abbreviation for the way of Germany's adoption of the rules of the EU to open
st
th
the railway markets for competition. Rules 440/91 and the following like 1 to 4 Railway Packages.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
23
services as they are more efficient than others, there is only little movement to substitute road based individual traffic. But even the small change of modal split given below
can be evaluated as a real challenge. Today the infrastructural requirements of more
rail services are not fulfilled, moreover the whole structure of the railway industry and
service sector seem to have strong inefficiencies (quality, price, communication and so on)
as the figures for Germany show. Obviously the customers yet do not feel to have a real
alternative for road based passenger and freight services and today and in the future will
prefer increasingly non-rail-based services (see e.g. Figure 5 and Figure 6 regarding
Europe).
Table 5
Freight Transport Forecast for Germany 2004-2025
Absolute
Modal split (%)
2025
Total %
% p.a.
Ø Distance (km)
(Bln tkm)
2004
2025
Rail
91,9
151,9
17.6
16.7
65
3.1
285
353
Combined
Transport
24,4
55,9
26.6
36.8
129
6,1
466
493
Road long
distance
366.5
675.6
70.2
74.4
84
4.0
253
300
Rd. Short
Distance
25,9
28,8
4.5
3.1
11
0.5
16
17
Road total
392.5
704.3
71.6
75.2
79
3.8
18
180
Inland
Waterways
63.7
80.2
12.2
8.8
26
1.2
270
284
Hinterland
Transport
57.2
153.1
11.0**
16.9**
168
8.0
293
339
548.1
936.5
100
100
74*/71
3.5*/3.4
151
203
Total
2004
+/- 2025 : 2004
2004
2025
Remark: * Total with road long distance. Grey figures: Not included in total amount. ** Shares calculated on total basis without road short distance transport.
Source: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau- und Wohnungswesen (Hrsg.): Prognose der deutschlandweiten Verkehrsverflechtungen 2025, München 2007, p.12ff. Link: http://daten.clearingstelle-verkehr.de/ 220/03/FE_96_857_2005_Verflechtungsprognose_2025_Gesamtbericht_20071114.pdf (31.01.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Table 6
24
Passenger Transport Forecast for Germany 2004-2025
Motorized Transport
Absolute
Modal split (%)
Change 2025 : 2004
2004
2025
2004
2025
887.4
1029.7
81.3
79.0
16.0
0.7
Rail
72.6
91,2
6,7
7.0
25.6
1,1
Tram, Bus
82.7
78.7
7,6
6.0
-4.8
-0.2
Air
48.7
103.0
4,5
7.9
111,5
3.6
1091.4
1302.6
100
100
19.4
0.8
(Bln pkm)
Road
Total
Total %
% p.a.
Source: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau- und Wohnungswesen (Hrsg.): Prognose der deutschlandweiten Verkehrsverflechtungen 2025, München 2007, p.6ff. Link: http://daten.clearingstelle-verkehr.de/220/03/FE_96_857_2005_Verflechtungsprognose_2025_Gesamtbericht_20071114.pdf (31.01.2012).
The meaning of tram and bus services is seen to decrease in future. This is a little bit astonishing so far as for many years it is obvious that a growing part of people prefer to live
in urban agglomerations like Hamburg, Munich or Berlin and therefore leave their home.
This trend produces a reduction of population especially in rural regions and as well should
lead to a growing demand for public urban transport services. Yet this trend seems not to
be considered. Figure 22 explains what the long-term expectations are regarding railbased passenger transports.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Rail Passenger Transport Forecast for Germany 2004-2025
200
9
150
8
7,0
100
7
6,7
50
91,2
Marketshare Rail (%)
Bln pkm
Figure 22
25
6
72,6
5
0
2004
2025
Years
Rail Passenger (le.)
Marketshare Rail (%) (ri.)
Source: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau- und Wohnungswesen (Hrsg.): Prognose der deutschlandweiten Verkehrsverflechtungen 2025, München 2007. Calculations: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Rail Freight Transport Forecast for Germany 2004-2025
200
20
Bln tkm
16,8
16,2
150
15
100
10
151,9
50
Marketshare Rail (%)
Figure 23
5
91,9
0
0
2004
2025
Years
Rail Freight (le.)
Marketshare Rail (%) (ri.)
Source: Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau- und Wohnungswesen (Hrsg.): Prognose der deutschlandweiten Verkehrsverflechtungen 2025, München 2007. Calculations: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
26
Basis for the illustrating Figure 22 are the following Table 5 and Table 6 regarding the
forecast for passenger and freight services in Germany until 2025 in Figure 22.
Due to small figures 2004 the relative change of air services until 2025 regarding passenger transports is the largest one.
As already mentioned before regarding infrastructure the more challenging issue in future
requirements is probably the freight topic. Freight services are expected to grow by ca. 7075% regarding to the forecast. Most demanding mode is the road sector as he will grow by
about 84% up to 676 Billion tkm 2025. Rail freight services will increase by "only" 65%
according to Table 5 and Figure 23.18
Because the future growth of the rail freight sector will likely remain under average the
future market share will decrease and this despite of all statements regarding required
intermodal change for cost, traffic jam and ecology reasons, the potential of "green logistics" and so on. The expected market share for 2025 is 16.7%. This level is comparable to
the market share of the past years (Figure 23).
Besides the facts discussed here the forecasters in general expect a growing share of international respectively cross-border transports of all transports. This is including the premises of growing average transport distances (see Table 5) as one of the main drivers of the
overall development. The content of Figure 24 is only available in German, but the message is clearly the meaning of inland transports (blue bar) in general will decrease.
Whether this is the case for all kind of land transport modes or not, at least for the railway
sector a different picture can be observed in the past years.
Figure 24
Freight Transport on Main Corridors in Germany 2005-2025
Source: BMVBS, Prognose der deutschlandweiten Verkehrsverflechtungen, München/Freiburg 2007, p.15. Link: http://daten.
clearingstelleverkehr.de/220/03/FE_96_857_2005_Verflechtungsprognose _2025_Gesamtbericht_20071114.pdf
(31.01.2012).
18
The current version of the German "Investitionsrahmenplan" also considers the long-term target 2025. As
the statements there are the same as in the official forecast paper, this document was neglected here.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
27
In case of more cross-border transports of all modes in future this situation would make it
probably necessary to (re)focus investments in dedicated corridors than being used intensively. Today there is no coherent infrastructure planning on the European level
committing the member states effectively. Instead bilateral contracts between different
states are the basis for mutual infrastructure development. Nevertheless Germany belongs
to the member states which do not understand themselves obliged to realize such projects
on schedule. At least for the railway there are about 12 projects between e.g. Switzerland
(NEAT), Poland or Denmark with noteworthy delay due to missing funding.
The thesis of a growing internationalisation of freight transports can be put into
question at least for the railway sector. A common hypothesis of representatives of major market players is concerning the growing level of internationalisation of the rail freight
sector in Germany respectively Europe (EU 27). Background is the idea that the market
opening initiative of the EC and (already) the (current) steps of implementation are sufficient to revitalize the sector i.a. by increasing especially the international business (see
Figure 2 and Figure 4 with contradicting messages).
At least for Germany this result is not applicable yet.19 The logic behind is the knowledge
that growing intramodal competition on rail fosters both cross-border as well as inland
transport market segments. Accordingly the proportion of inland and international transports is remaining nearly unchanged since two decades and amounts about 50% inland
and 50% cross-border plus rail transit transport services. Especially the last ca. five years
show a slight decrease in international transports. For more details see the following illustration.20
Of relevance for the future capacity planning works is the question, where these growing
transport volumes shall take place. It can be assumed that the current major corridors of
the road and rail networks as well will have to bear most of the future transports. It is likely
that this fact will aggravate the consequences of already existing bottlenecks on highways
and railway corridors and major railway network nodes.
One part of the strategy of DB Netz AG is to concentrate more transport on a fewer infrastructure.21 This target will be supported regarding passenger services by the growing
importance of the agglomerations accompanied by a sharp decline of the number of citizens especially in the less-densely populated Eastern regions of Germany.
19
20
21
The meaning of rail-based cross-border transports differs from country to country. Public statistics for
Europe in this respect are not known. But for countries like Austria and Switzerland the meaning of crossborder transports is significantly higher than for Germany. E.g. in Italy cross-border rail transports have a
comparably little significance.
Nevertheless there are exceptions possible. DB AG states to have a 70% share in international transports.
See Ute Plambeck, Deutsche Bahn AG - Nachhaltige Infrastruktur schaffen, Presentation, Hamburg,
23.01.20212. Link: http://www.hk24.de/linkableblob/1724032/.4./data/Vortrag_Ute_Plambeck-data.pdf;jsessionid=E1C72C1C55D21BCB141FB38D4A7BFB0F.repl2 (16.03.2012).
See chapter 3.1.1.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 25
28
Rail Freight Transport on Main Corridors in Germany 1999-2010
Rail Freight Transport (Bln tkm in %)
100%
10,2
10,5
10,1
10,1
10,6
10,2
11,4
10,7
11,3
11,1
9,8
10,4
40,9
42,4
42,0
41,6
42,3
43,6
42,0
42,1
41,8
40,5
38,5
38,8
48,9
47,1
47,9
48,3
47,1
46,2
46,5
47,2
46,9
48,4
50,8
50,8
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
50%
0%
Years
Inland
Cross-border
Transit
Source: Destatis, Series 8.1.1. Calculations: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
The freight sector is increasingly affected by the growing meaning of combined and seaport hinterland transports (in Germany at most operated by road and rail, at a lower extent
by inland waterways). International and national transports of containers have in principle
fixed starting and final destinations beside defined hub for interchange. According to this
the infrastructure corridors being used are in most cases more or less the same.
The expectations in future combined transports are far above average. Annual growth of
combined transports is expected to be more than 6% per annum, hinterland transports
shall even grow by 8% per year. The trend of a growing meaning of seaports regarding to
the overall market development is not new. About 20% of total rail freight services 2010 did
have their starting point or final destination in Hamburg and Bremen/Bremerhaven. This
share of the market will significantly grow in future regarding to the current forecast for
maritime business as the seaports will increase their freight handling business faster
than the rest of the hinterland transport market segments.22
This structural change of growth of rail freight transports primarily to take place on
certain corridors has the consequence that other parts of the railway network probably
become underutilized or – worst case – could be shut down in the long run. This effect can
be observed in the railway sector already today. Here since many decades the network
length is reduced nearly every year. The continued reduction of rail network means at the
same time that many of the potential customers especially in the freight sector in fact will
never have a chance to become customers of railway companies again (loss of sidings).
They more or less are forced to continue organizing logistics with the help of truck forwarders or in case of a direct shut down of rail infrastructure these carrier have to arrange
new logistic road-based logistic systems instead of the former rail-based one.
22
According to this planning work e.g. the future handling of containers in German seaports measured in
standard containers (TEU) will more than quadruple from 2004 and 10.8 Million TEU up to 45.3 Million TEU
until 2025. See BMVBS: Seeverkehrsprognose 2025, 2007. Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/SharedDocs/DE/Artikel/WS/seeverkehrsprognose-2025.html?nn=35986 (31.01.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
29
Due to cost and time expensive planning work to be done in German planning laws in advance of building a new railway line it is more than unlikely to attract carriers to prefer rail
services in future even if they are located far-out the existing main railway routes.
Considering these "administrative hurdles" together with an inadequate regulatory framework for private railway companies it can be summarized that the road sector will have
enormous demands (probably more than today) regarding an adequate capacity offer on
highways and replenishing federal roads. Comparably low the requirements of the rail sector may develop as this sector will grow in general but under average compared to the
whole market. Moreover - according to status quo - the network structure will continuously
change with i.a. a stronger focus on main routes and a focussed enlargement of capacities
there.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
2.4
30
Expectations in Sweden
Looking at the domestic traffic in Sweden has passenger traffic increased annually by
0,8% in the road network and by 4.4% in the rail network during the period 1995-2009.
Compared with the official forecasts from the 1990s, it is interesting to see that the road
did not grow as much as expected. Conversely, rail traffic in greater progress than anticipated, but after all, from a relatively low level.
Table 7
Transport Sector Development in Sweden
ton-km billion
1995
2009
∆
rail
19.4
23.1
+19%
road
35.0
42.4
+21%
person-km billion
1995
2009
∆
rail
6.8
11.3
+66%
road
97.0
109.0
+12%
Source: SCB.
National freight transport flows increased during the period by 1.3 respectively 1.4% p.a. in
the Swedish rail and road network. With a market share for rail by 35% Sweden is still one
of the best class in Europe although the heavy ore rail transport explains a great deal of
this performance.
Figure 26
Swedish Freight Transport Development by Mode
Source: Swedish transport capacity plan, Trafikverket 2012.
Freight volume in tons transported in Sweden has for many years proved to be relatively
stable. Transport performance in ton km is showing an upward trend due an increase in
the average transport length increases. This is closely related to the character of Swedish
industry which promotes economies of scale in production, just-in-time manufacturing and
a steady growth in demand for small frequent shipments.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 27
31
Freight and Passenger Transport Growth in Sweden
Source: Swedish transport capacity plan, Trafikverket 2012.
In the 1970s and 80s was the Swedish freight transport development slightly behind the
passenger development. Since then, the need for freight transport has grown with the
same upward trend although the financial crisis caused a temporary decline.
Car usage dominates strongly. For passenger transport, there is a certain upper saturation
point seems to be reached, since transportation choices distribution has been stable for a
period.
Figure 28
Mode Split in Swedish Transport, person km
Source: SCB.
Swedish Trafikverket has made a comparison of the predicted transport development and
realized development. Growth in car traffic in the period 1997-2010 was only half the expected, namely 13% instead of 29% as the forecast suggested. One explanation is that the
number of persons per car decreased during this period.
At the same time, rail traffic grew more than expected, while both bus and surprisingly domestic air traffic went back.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 29
32
Transport Growth in Sweden 1997-2010, Forecasts and Realisation
Source: Swedish Capacity and Efficiency investigation 2012, Trafikverket.
Even for freight was produced a forecast for 2010, which was based on the volume of
goods in 1997, measured in tonne-kilometres. The largest increase was noted for the railway, which increased by around 22%, which is double the rate of increase in the forecast.
The figure also shows that the transport by sea not reached the projected increase. Tonnekilometres by truck fell 17% between 2008 and 2009 and have still not recovered. This
meant that the truck traffic is still below the 1997 level. Accordingly to Trafikverket it is
likely that the recovery of the truck traffic will take a few years. The deviation from the forecast should therefore be less if we compare it to a later year, and take account of the present strong economic growth.
In the long perspective, there are now new forecasts available on the transport sector by
2050.
Table 8
Long Term Development of Swedish Passenger Transport
Person km (billion)
2006
2050
2006-2050
Road
89.2
149.2
67 %
Railway
14.5
26.0
80 %
Public Transport (Bus)
10.4
11.9
15 %
Air
3.1
5.9
91 %
Cycle - walk
3.8
4.6
22 %
120.9
197.6
63 %
Total
Source: Swedish transport capacity plan, Trafikverket 2012.
The forecast will increase the total passenger transport between 2006 and 2050 by 63
percent. Car travels will increase by 67% and travel by rail by 80%. The corresponding
overall increase is 1.1 percent per year, the growth of car and rail traffic was a little bit
higher with 1.2 and 1.3 percent per year. It reflects that walking and bike trips appear to be
constant, but the other modes of transport increase the travel length except for the bus
which loses its relative share.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 30
33
Freight Transport Forecast for Sweden
Source: Swedish Capacity and Efficiency investigation 2012, Trafikverket.
As regards freight transport the Swedish Transport authorities have made forecast for
2050. Compared with base year 2006 is assumed freight transport performance increased
by about 53 percent in total between 2006 and 2050. This forecast does not add as much
necessary rail capacity for freight trains in order for this transport mode to develop without
restrictions. This means that almost all the increase for 2050 is at sea and road. There is a
2050-scenario which shows the potential for railway freight with less capacity limitation on
the rail network. This alternative gives a clear possibility to enhance the rail freight by 45%
as can be seen below, although truck traffic and sea traffic seem to develop faster.
Figure 31
Freight Transport Forecast for Sweden
Source: Swedish Capacity and Efficiency investigation 2012, Trafikverket.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
2.5
2.5.1
34
A North-South View into the Future
Introducing Remarks
The North-South View to the future done here in general comprises the analyses regarding
the planning horizons 2030, 2025 and 2015. For 2030 there are official documents available to give a European framework in order to give an idea whether the relevant member
states of the Baltic Region Denmark, Germany and Sweden can be evaluated as growth
driver or as average performers.
Some forecast work was also done by Fehmern AS for the planning horizon 2015 with an
outlook 2025. Planning work is stated to be done mainly since 2003 in close cooperation
between the Ministries of Transport of both countries, Denmark and Germany. This will be
considered as well. Also a principle outlook covering the first 25 years of FBL daily business is possible as well. In 2009 FBL presented some details regarding the period from
2018 till 2043. They will be considered as well.
As Germany is seen to be the most relevant logistics turntable within the EU 27 this country as well is also part of the relevant region regarding the North-South view to be done in
this chapter. Please accordingly refer to chapter 2.2.
One of the projects competing with FBL is the SoNorA.23 This road and rail project is not
considered here in detail as the regional focus (i.a. reflected by the available list of participants) as it concerns an Eastern German-Polish border region serving partly other geographical market segments and focuses operationally on the combined transport. Nevertheless some competition against FBL might be possible at least regarding transport flows
starting/ending in the South of Sweden ending/starting especially in Middle and East European countries like Bulgaria or Hungary.
2.5.2
EU Transport Forecast Planning Horizon 2030
Firstly the EC provides general framework figures regarding the expected situation of EU
passenger and freight transports in 2030.
Regarding EU passenger transports of all modes it can be underlined that compared with
the EU average the passenger transport sector of the member states Denmark, Germany
and Sweden probably develops in a specific way. As Figure 32 shows the passenger
transport of the mentioned countries will develop below average, in parts significantly
lower. Until 2030 the overall market volume will increase by 85.2%, but in Germany a
growth of "only" 75.3% is seen to be possible. Sweden might reach a plus of 69.1% and
last but not least for Denmark the target figure is 46.4%.24 As Figure 32 shows the general
momentum of Swedish passenger transports is becoming stronger than of the Danish during the years 2010ff. So the final target values vary about a 50% difference of growth
rates.
23
24
See the official website of the project http://www.sonoraproject.eu/ (06.02.2012).
The likelihood of this forecast cannot be discussed here. It is obvious that the premises being set are decisive. For Germany and probably other member states already since some years signals of saturation are
given especially in the passenger transport sector.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 32
35
Long-term Passenger Transport Forecast for Dedicated Countries Denmark, Germany and Sweden for 2030 (Index 1990=100)
Mrd. pkm (1990=100)
200
150
100
50
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Development Passenger Tansport (Gpkm) EU 27
Development Passenger Transport DE
Development Passenger Transport DK
Development Passenger Transport SWE
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure and Calculations: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
One of the interim conclusions is that is likely that the mentioned EU member states in the
Baltic-Sea-Region will see an absolute market growth in passenger transports but they
probably will not boost the development.
The situation of the EU freight sector in total will be according to the cited forecast in
some respect similar to the passenger transport sector. For more details see Figure 33.
The future of passenger and freight transports will develop below EU average and the discussed countries can not be classified as parts of Europe boosting the transport sector.
For all 27 measured EU countries the expected growth of freight transport of all modes
will nearly double compared to the 1990 figures (+97.8%). The meaning of rail transport
of all modes will increase in noteworthy way. For Sweden the forecast figure is +89.2%
compared to 1990. Germany follows with +78.5% and Denmark with a plus of 77.4%.
The spread of future target values for 2030 is not as strong as in the passenger sector.
Remarkably moderate are the growth figures for Germany, again Sweden expects ambitious figures more than other states.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 33
36
Long-term Freight Transport Forecast for Dedicated Countries Denmark, Germany and Sweden for 2030 (Index 1990=100)
Mrd. tkm (1990=100)
250
200
150
100
50
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Development freight transport (Gtkm) EU 27
Development Freight Transport DE
Development Freight Transport DK
Development Freight Transport SWE
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure and Calculations: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Beside the result that the Baltic Region-based transport markets in the long run will perform under EU average a further structural difference is to be stressed. More than other
countries rail passenger transport services are of importance for the regional development.
Here the intermodal situation obviously is seen different to the EU's total view. Figure 34
shows that in general the EC expects relatively only less for the rail passenger sector in
the coming decades. In the Baltic Region the estimation in future rail opportunities is much
stronger.
On the EU level there is only limited fantasy in future rail service. In comparison with
1990 a growth of only 43.6% is stated to be likely for 2030. Nevertheless the Baltic Region (here only Denmark, Germany and Sweden) have a strong view on this transport
mode with a plus of 72.7%. Especially for Sweden the growth perspective shall be quite
close to double the market volume (+91.9%). Germany is expected to develop close to the
regional average due to his overwhelming market share.25
25
Germany's share of the market region Baltic Region as defined her is about 85%.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 34
37
Long-term Rail Passenger Transport Forecast for EU 27 and Baltic
Region Countries for 2030 (Index 1990=100)
Mrd. pkm (1990=100)
200
150
100
50
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Rail Transport EU
Rail Average Baltic Region
Rail DK
Rail DE
Rail SWE
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure and Calculations: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
Commonly the hope in the future performance of the rail freight service sector is significantly weaker as for passenger transports on rail. See the overview in Figure 35.
Figure 35
Long-term Rail Freight Transport Forecast for EU 27 and Baltic Region Countries for 2030 (Index 1990=100)
Mrd. tkm (1990=100)
200
150
100
50
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Years
Rail Transport EU 27
Rail Average Baltic Region
Rail DK
Rail DE
Rail SWE
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: European Energy and Transport - Trends to
2030, Update 2007, Brussels 2008. Figure and Calculations: Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
For all 27 measured EU member states the expected development path of rail freight
transport will only suffice to reach shares of the market of 1990 after the year 2025.
As the Baltic Region average figure is strongly influenced by the in comparison very large
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
38
market volume a growth of 23.6% is expected for 2030.26 A significant higher growth is
expected for Denmark27 (+58.8%) and Sweden (+78.0%).
To close the analysis of future transport developments and the inherent capacity requirements a brief view follows on the future distribution of intermodal shares of the market.
Regarding passenger transport matters a step by step decrease of road transport is expected beginning in 2010. Until 2030 the decrease is expected to reach some 4%-points
meaning for Germany a 76% market share (pkm), for Denmark 63% and for Sweden 67%.
For EU 27 2030 in general the same market share for car-based mobility is forecasted as
seen in 1990. In the freight area truck transports (tkm) will enhance his role in the market
by raising its market share from 58% 1990 to 75% 2030. Rail is expected to decline to
7.5%. Absolute transport figures in 2030 will remain close to those of 1990.
2.5.3
Transport Forecast for FBL 2043
In 2009 a hearing took place at the transport council of the German Federal Parliament.
FTC commented on the expectations for the Fehmarnbelt link for the first 25 years of beginning of operation in 2018 (to be adjusted). The road sector is expected to grow by 1.7%
per year 2018-2043 compared with the historic development of an average growth of 3.8%
per year 1970-2008. Accordingly for 2043 about 15.000 vehicles per day are forecasted.
FBL as well expects rail transports to grow. The figures for 2043 are ~14.600 passenger
trains and ~15.700 freight trains meaning about 58 passenger and about 63 freight trains
per day.28 See accordingly Figure 36.
2.5.4
National Forecast for the Belt link 2025
Relevant document regarding the single evaluation of the rail-based FBL hinterland connection is the " Überprüfung des Bedarfsplans" published by BMVBS at the end of 2011.29
General future expectations of this document are as follows. The statements given in the
"Verflechtungsprognose" are with regard to content general guideline30 for the market
participants and the revised demand requirements check ("Überprüfung des Bedarfsplans"). In comparison to former forecasts the expectations were modified. Besides quality
issues one reason was a change of the statistical methodology which led to reasonable
changes (see chapter 2.3.3). The "Integration" scenario for passenger transports was the
official political lead scenario forecasting an overall annual growth rate between 1997 and
2015 of 1.0%. This rate was modified to 0.8% for the interval 2004 to 2025.
As statistical figures regarding freight are of better quality the forecast results for 2015 remain very similar to 2025. Growth rate of the intervals 1997-2015 and 2004-2025 remains
with 2.6% annual growth on the same level.
26
27
28
29
30
For Germany it can be asked, whether the figure are not too optimistic. In 2010 rail's share in the market
was for the first time higher than in 1994 when the "Bahnreform" was getting started.
This is somehow surprising as the former DSB rail freight business is now owned and operated by DB
Schenker Rail (DB AG).
Calculated on the basis of 250 traffic days per year.
See BMVBS, Überprüfung des Bedarfsplans für die Bundesschienenwege, final report Nov. 2011, p.9-357ff
(644ff). Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/59400/publicationFile/30928/schlussberichtschienen-de.pdf (06.02.2012).
See BMVBS documents regarding Transport Forecast 2025. Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/SharedDocs/DE/
Artikel/UI/verkehrsprognose-2025.html (01.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
39
According to the single project evaluation method in the revising " Überprüfung des Bedarfsplans" the available figures of future transport development differ from those documented in other forecasts. For the road sector there are no figures available in general.
In the revising document regarding the FBL the main assumption for rail transports is the
complete availability of the required hinterland connections.
Therefore the expected total number of long distance passenger (44) and freight trains
(63) is 107 per day for 2025 and so far basis for the commercial evaluation of this investment project.
Transport Forecast of Fehmern AS 2015/2025
Core element of the North-South-Corridor is the FBL building and its road and rail hinterland connections. A lot of forecast work was done since 1999 on behalf of the FBL and the
Transport Ministries of Transport of Denmark and Germany. The main results regarding
the vehicle-based forecast have been published directly or had to be backward projected
by the consultants.
The early forecast of 2002 included two base cases "A" (favouring rail) and "B" (favouring
road) describing the year 2015. For the base case "B" four scenarios (green/grey) were
calculated which considered various levels of competition between the fixed crossing and
the ferry sector.
Figure 36
Road Vehicle Forecast for the FBL
14.765
15.000
11.683
12.000
10.779
10.124
7.694
8.258
8.014
Scenario 2
8.757
9.000
9.516
9.449
9.153
Scenario 1
Road Vehicles / day
8.041
6.000
4.557
3.000
Outlook
2043
Base Case B
2025 high
Base Case B
2025 low
Base Case A
2025 high
Base Case A
2025 low
Scenario 4
Scenario 3
Base Case B
2015
Base Case A
2015
Forecast 1999
for 2010
0
Road Vehicles
2001
2.5.5
Source: FTC. Calculations Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
On the basis of German forecast documents for the year 2025 the base cases have been
developed further with an optimistic and a pessimistic approach (blue, green). In the year
2009 a hearing took place in Berlin, where the FTC gave a draft picture of the expectation
of the first 25 years of operation.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
40
Depending on the mentioned various surrounding conditions the growth perspective differs. In principle a tripling of the number of road vehicles is expected in a time frame of
about 40 years. Historic average growth rate of the road sector between 1970 and 2008
was +3.8% per year. The Fehmarn consortium expects the market to grow only by
+1.7% per year from 2018 till 2043. Accordingly the annual figure is expected to increase
from 7.700 in 2018 up to 14.675 vehicles (road + bus) in 2043.31 See accordingly Figure
36.
Figure 37 shows for various planning horizons the expected development of trains per day
on this corridor. Today only passenger trains run between Denmark and Germany using
the ferry. In future total number of trains shall increase significantly because of the reintroduction of freight services which were closed down in the 1990ies. Depending on the assumptions for 2015 and/or 2025 the total figures vary between 90 and 110 trains per day.
In case of the rail-optimistic base case "A" the figures might increase up to nearly 140
trains per day, accordingly the figures are lower in case of road-optimistic base case "B".
See accordingly Figure 37.
Compared to 2010 and 2015 with about 90-100 trains per day, a growth potential of about
25% until 2043 is expected to be likely.
The interpretation of these figures regarding bottlenecks and other capacity aspects will be
examined in the following chapters.
Figure 37
Rail Vehicle Forecast for the FBL
150
137
121
114
120
83
92
Scenario 2
Trains / day
90
94
Scenario 1
101
96
101
92
89
83
60
30
9
Outlook
2043
Base Case B
2025 high
Base Case B
2025 low
Base Case A
2025 high
Base Case A
2025 low
Scenario 4
Scenario 3
Base Case B
2015
Base Case A
2015
Forecast 1999
for 2010
Rail Vehicles
2001
0
Source: FTC. Calculations Hanseatic Transport Consultancy.
31
Figures are to be adjusted in case of delays. Deduction of daily figures from annual figures divided by 250
traffic days per year.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
2.6
41
Summary on General Infrastructure Topics
The previous chapters in detail analysed some of the documents tackling with future expectations of the transport sector in the EU with a focus on Denmark, Germany and Sweden (Baltic Region). Here the growth perspectives are very positive but remain under
average of the EU 27 member states in total.
Primarily the EU freight sector is expected to grow significantly. This growth will be
generated mostly by truck-based logistics. Rail is expected to grow but for 2030 the
total figure of transport services (tkm) is expected to be only a little bit higher than in 1990.
Logically the rail freight market share probably will continue to decrease.
In contrast with the general market trend for 2030 in the EU 27, for the Baltic Region rail
is expected to significantly regain meaning in the market. But it has to be stressed that
the conditions assumed by the forecast experts in order to revitalise rail remained largely
unarticulated. So it has to put attention to whether this kind of planning includes some
"wishful thinking" or not.
Also with relevance for the future of railway- and road-based transports is the level of
cross-border business of the various modes. At least for the rail sector in Germany, one
of the most important regional market segments of European railway business it has to be
summarized that the level of international business is stagnating since a lot of years.
This situation may include the circumstance that there is limited cross-border infrastructure
capacity (e.g. Polish-German crossing at Horka) but at the same time it can be interpreted
as indicator for a in principal failed market opening process with as hitherto mainly regional
(national) markets (member states) each with dominating incumbents defending primarily
each others historic home markets.32
Nevertheless regarding to the long-term necessary reorganisation ("decarbonisation") of
the whole transport and mobility industry it has to be emphasized that an according intermodal shift requires in advance huge investments in infrastructure to offer more ("slots")
and better capacity (no traffic jams, "punctuality") to the market participants (road, rail, air,
public transport). The requirements will be examined in detail in the following.
32
Exceptions are the Netherlands and Denmark: NS Cargo was sold to DB AG in 1999 (DB Cargo), DSB
Freight division was sold to DB AG (Railion GmbH, former DB Cargo) in 2001.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
3.
INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND BOTTLENECKS
3.1
Railway infrastructure
42
With the enforcement of the FBL treaty, the German government guarantees to upgrade
the hinterland infrastructure in accordance with the provisions of the treaty. Furthermore,
the establishment of the fixed link across the Fehmarnbelt has been mentioned in the Federal Transport Infrastructure Plan (FTIP) as a project for strengthening the transport infrastructure in Europe. Also in the national planning for a coherent Danish Transport network,
and the similar Swedish national long-term planning, the fixed link in the South-Western
part of the Baltic Sea plays an important role. In the revised EU TEN-T guidelines under
the new programme initiative "Connecting Europe" the FBL and the hinterland infrastructure constitutes a priority in the corridor (Helsinki-) Stockholm - Øresound - Fehmarn Hamburg - Valetta (in Italy). See accordingly Figure 38.
Figure 38
Fehmarn Belt Link According to TEN-T
Source: The Trans-European Transport Networks "TEN-T": Fehmarn Belt Axis.
Link: http://ec.europa.eu/ten/transport/maps/doc/axes/pp20.pdf (05.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
43
The railway map for the FBL currently available is principally of 2005. It considers the highspeed "Y-route" to continue the FBL between Hamburg / Bremen and Hannover. This infrastructure project at the moment is under strong discussion. The former dedicated highspeed line now shall solve capacity problems of seaport hinterland freight trains. Therefore
the alignment has to be adjusted. CEO of DB AG, Rüdiger Grube, assured in Walsrode in
January 2012 to investigate alternative routes in the same way as it was done regarding
the "Y-route" in order to come to more efficient and cost-effective (mixed train operations)
cost positions respectively capacity solutions especially for strong growing freight hinterland transports. In the meantime the statement not only was relativised by BMVBS but it
was stressed the validity of the current infrastructure development projects.33
3.1.1
Germany
3.1.1.1
General situation
The general situation of rail infrastructure comprises actually three main elements:
a) Overall decline of infrastructure supply (tracks, marshalling yards, sidings, passenger
and freight stations, locomotive parking lots, passing lanes). The reductions here have
been continued after the "Bahnreform", begun in 1994 with the founding of DB AG (fusion of Deutsche Bundesbahn (DB) and Deutsche Reichsbahn (DR)):
► Network length -18.4%
► Passenger stations -34.0%
► Crossings and switches -51.9%
► Sidings -68.7%.
b) Growing demand for train paths with at the same time growing transport service figures
(pkm and tkm) and
c) The railway network is becoming more inflexible and less capable.34
This situation counteracts the political target to substitute road by rail transports more successfully than in the past. Due to the drastic reduction of sidings and network routes a lot
of medium-sized cities are no longer directly linked to the long-distance passenger trains
network and production and logistics companies can use rail in fact only by using combined transports. This market segment has only little margins and most of the market participants do not earn money here. The likelihood to gain customers back by rebuilding new
infrastructure (sidings) is very limited in relation to potential total market volume. Figure 39
shows in detail the main structural changes. One result of the parallel trends of growing
utilisation and declining network is a noteworthy number of bottlenecks already today.
Since 1998 also the use of the networks is being published. Until 2010 the sum of "train
path kilometres" was increased by 9.2%. Figure 40 illustrates the sidewise development of
the demand of train path kilometres since 1998.
33
34
See See Deutscher Bundestag, Alternativen zur Y-Trasse, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine
Anfrage der Abgeordneten Dr. Valerie Wilms, Sven-Christian Kindler, Dorothea Steiner, weiterer Abgeordneter und der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN - Drucksache 17/8649 - Drucksache 17/8750,
28.02.2011. Link: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/087/1708750.pdf (14.03.2012).
Doubtless in general the network's length and structure has to follow the needs of the markets like closing
down the mining plants in the Rhine-Ruhr-Region or the economy restructuring of the whole East German
national economy. This may explain to a certain extent the continuous giving up of rail infrastructure. But up
to date this process is continued instead of surely necessary future shifts of transports towards rail or other
highly energy-efficient transport modes.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 39
44
Basic Developments of Rail Infrastructure of DB AG
Network Length
Crossings and Switches
45.000
150.000
120.000
30.000
90.000
139.069
40.210
33.723
15.000
60.000
66.875
30.000
0
0
1994
2010
1994
2010
Sidings
Stations
8.000
12.000
10.000
6.000
8.000
4.000
6.000
11.913
6.500
4.000
4.288
2.000
2.000
0
3.726
0
1994
2010
1994
2010
Source: DB AG, Daten und Fakten, various volumes.
Figure 40
Use of Railway Network Infrastructure of DB AG 1998-2010
1.200
1.000
Mio. Trkm
800
600
400
200
0
1998
2000
2002
Source: DB AG, Daten und Fakten, various volumes.
2004
2006
2008
2010
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
3.1.1.2
45
Principle infrastructure use
As Figure 41 shows most of the bottleneck today are already on the strategic mostly relevant North-South-Corridor: Rhine-Corridor Karlsruhe - Basel, the Rhine-Hessian-Region
(node Frankfurt), railway node Würzburg, corridor Göttingen - Kassel and the nodes in
North Germany, Bremen/Bremerhaven, Hamburg and Hannover.
The distribution of bottlenecks already now causes disturbances on the major NorthSouth- and East- West-Corridors. The freight trains from/to Rotterdam are suffering from
capacity shortcomings and noise problems along the Rhine Corridor and the supply of the
East European countries via Rotterdam or Antwerp is affected by traffic jams at the node
of Hannover. It's the same with the rapidly growing hinterland transports of the German
seaports like Bremerhaven or Hamburg.
Figure 41
Current Railway Network Bottlenecks in Germany
Source: DB AG.
The future growth of train path demand will not cover the whole network but challenge
mainly those corridors already being short of capacity today. Figure 42 illustrates in principle the growing line diameter (reflecting the increasing train path figures) especially on the
North-South- and the East-West-corridors. Other parts of the network like e.g. trunk routes
in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, in Thüringen or other Eastern regions are in danger to be
closed down due to reduced use through local passenger trains caused by decreasing
pupil figures. Whether the strategy of reduced infrastructure (Figure 39) which is used
more intensively still works in the long run has to be left open. An enhancement from four-
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
46
to six-track or two- to four-track lines is in many respect not imaginable (critical nodes, space and noise problems, urban development and so on). Also such a super-efficient system
does need a fall-back-option (bypasses, parallel lines) to ensure capability even in case of
accidents or failures.
Figure 42
Main Train Path Corridors of the German Railway Network
?
2004
2015
2025
Source: DB AG. Display 2025 HTC.
Most recent figures allow the measurement of network utilisation for 201035 (see accordingly Figure 43). Many of the important railway nodes like Hamburg, Bremen, Hannover,
Frankfurt, Mannheim, the Cologne-Düsseldorf area, Karlsruhe, Stuttgart, Munich and Nuremberg are already intensively used with train figure per year of more than 100,000 units
(black lines). Also some routes between those important nodes like Düsseldorf - Hannover,
Bremerhaven - Bremen - Hannover, Kassel - Frankfurt and so on) are more or less critical
regarding capacity reserves for future growth of train operations.
In comparison with the total network utilisation figures for 200536 the critical role of capacity
shortcomings in main nodes and on the important corridors becomes evident highlighting
the necessity of capable parallel bypasses. Beside the current main corridors (dark blue)
e.g. shown in Figure 41 the meaning of bypasses (pale blue) increased significantly with
only five years. From the consultants perspective this is a clear signal for capacity problems on main North-South-Corridors and re-routing especially of freight trains on secondary lines and/or loop ways and a strong argument to favour a multi-corridor concept
what allows intensively utilized railway lines and parallel routes at the same time in order to
safeguard a capable offer to the markets largely independent from accidents and other
incidents.
35
36
See Destatis, Eisenbahnverkehr, Betriebsdaten des Schienenverkehrs 2010, Series 8, File R.2.1, Wiesbaden 2011. Link: http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Content/Publikationen /Fachveroeffentlichungen/Verkehr/PersonenverkehrSchienenverkehr/BetriebsdatenSchienenverkehr2080 210107004,property=file.pdf (05.03.2012).
See Destatis, Eisenbahnverkehr, Betriebsdaten des Schienenverkehrs 2006, Series 8, File R.2.1, Wiesbaden 2007. Link: https://www.destatis.de/DE/ZahlenFakten/Wirtschaftsbereiche/TransportVerkehr/_Grafik/SchienennetzGueter.html (19.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 43
47
Total Network Utilisation of German Rail Network 2010
Source: Destatis, Eisenbahnverkehr, Betriebsdaten des Schienenverkehrs 2010, Series 8, File R.2.1, Wiesbaden 2011, p.6.
Link:http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Content/ Publikationen/Fachveroeffentlichungen/
Verkehr/PersonenverkehrSchienenverkehr/BetriebsdatenSchienenverkehr 2080210107004,property=file.pdf (05.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
3.1.1.3
48
General infrastructure and capacity situation in northern Germany
The triangle Bremen/Bremerhaven, Hannover and Hamburg and its available capacity is of
strategic meaning not only for the German Seaports already mentioned but as well for the
"transit" flows from/to Denmark, the seaports of Schleswig-Holstein (Kiel, Lübeck) and
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Rostock, Wismar, Sassnitz). See the according Figure 44. All
long-distance train operations between the triangle nodes take place on electrified routes.
With 162/3Hz and 15kV the energy supply is different to the Danish system with 50Hz and
25kV.
Figure 44
Rail Infrastructure Use 2010 Directly to FBL Hinterland Connections
Source: Destatis, Eisenbahnverkehr, Betriebsdaten des Schienenverkehrs 2010, Series 8, File R.2.1, Wiesbaden 2011, p.13.
Link: http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Content/Publikationen/Fachveroeffentlichungen/
Verkehr/PersonenverkehrSchienenverkehr/BetriebsdatenSchienenverkehr 2080210107004,property=file.pdf (05.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
49
Regarding to former investigations done by capacity planning and simulation consultants in
2008,37 the line Hamburg - Lüneburg is used with an utilisation level of ≥130%.38 The capacity of the whole corridor Hamburg - Bremen and Bremen - Hannover was used between 100% and 130%. So far the triangle is not well prepared to provide hinterland capacity for freight trains required by the mentioned seaports according to their forecasted
business development plans.
Seaport related train operations are of high relevance for the seaports. The share of goods
handled in the port and transported via rail from and to the port of Hamburg is of more than
30%. A further 20% is of local meaning (refining, finishing, …) moved by road. In total
there are more than 210 trains per day transporting containers plus trains moving bulk like
grain, coal, iron ore etc.
Of considerable meaning for the Danish-German cross-border rail freight transport flows is
the corridor Hamburg - Neumünster - Rendsburg - Flensburg/Padborg. Between Hamburg
and Neumünster this corridor is used by more than 81.000 trains per year, the remaining
part of the routes covers some ≤50.000 trains per year. Yet the current number of freight
trains there is not published by DB AG, but estimated figures of the consultants are between 60 ad 70 freight trains per day.
One of the critical parts of this corridor is the railway bridge located in Rendsburg crossing
the Kiel Canal. The bridge is 42m high and of metal construction. It was built in 1911/1913
and is not in good condition i.a. because of delayed maintenance works now being executed since a couple of years. Main remaining problem was the limited capability of this
bridge regarding current requirements of heavy loaded freight trains (on this corridor often
to be seen due to Swedish paper transports). Maximum axle load today is ≤22.5t, at the
beginning of the last century it was about ≤18t axle load. For that reason the bridge and
the belonging ramps are to be refurbished for track class D4 (meter load is ≤8.0t) single
track and D2 (meter load is ≤6.4t) double track operation. During the construction works
expected to be finalized in 2013 the whole bridge actually allows only single track train
operations.
Within the railway node of Hamburg the marshalling yard of Maschen is of highest operational importance. Most of the freight trains are starting respectively ending at the port of
Hamburg use that facility. The limited capacity of the total node influences the capability of
Maschen. Figure 45 shows the current infrastructure situation of the Hamburg node.
The marshalling yard Maschen is located in the south of the city of Hamburg. The facility is
connected via dedicated tracks for freight trains with Hamburg-Harburg, where freight
trains coming from the South can enter the Western part of the port of Hamburg via the
double-track Hamburg-Neugraben crossing. Trains coming from the North have to change
direction in Maschen before they run towards Port of Hamburg-West. The freight train
tracks led freight trains directed to Northern Europe via "Oberhafen"-Bridge and the single
track section in Hamburg-Wandsbek. This bottleneck reduces the capacity significantly
37
38
IVE in Hannover. As the train figures today are already on the level before the crisis, their judgements are
still valid. A utilisation level >100% is possible because of e.g. postponed maintenance works.
This is only possible by neglecting the maintenance demands as done here regularly by DB Netze AG.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
50
and causes delays. In order to keep punctuality and flexibility high some sidings to park
trains were erected during the last years at Hamburg-Tiefstack.
Second major bottleneck within Hamburg is Hamburg central station which for freight
train operations is only indirectly of relevance as freight trains usually do not use the "Verbindungsbahn" to Hamburg-Altona on their way to Schleswig-Holstein respectively Denmark via Padborg. Instead freight trains have to run via Hamburg-Wandsbek to HamburgEidelstedt via the single track "Güterumgehungsbahn" (dashed red in Figure 45) which is
of very limited capacity.
Third major bottleneck within the Hamburg rail way node is the crossing of Hamburg
Harburg ("Lower-Elbe-Crossing") with the passenger station and huge (mixed passenger
and freight) train crossings (North-South, East-West) on the same track level. The capability of this crossing is essential for the whole port as all trains serving the western and/or
the eastern part of the port have to pass that node.
Other shortcomings within the node are known but of lower meaning. E.g. all the freight
trains coming from the North to enter the Eastern part of the Port (station HamburgWilhelmburg) have to cross passenger tracks on equal level, a fact which causes stop
times for other trains of about 10 minutes each.
Figure 45
Railway Node of Hamburg
Remark: Line Central Station - Rahstedt (- Lübeck) already electrified (red coloured instead of black by HTC).
Source: Eisenbahn-Atlas Deutschland digital 2008.
3.1.1.4
Infrastructure and capacity situation on the corridor Hamburg-Puttgarden
This corridor can be divided into two principle segments: i) Segment Hamburg - Lübeck
and ii) Segment Lübeck - Puttgarden. The route between Hamburg and Lübeck is 85 km
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
51
long. On the basis of planning works started in the year 2000 it was published in 2005 by
DB AG to electrify this route. This announcement was realized during the years 2006 and
2008. Total investment for electrification was 165 Million Euro. The travel time could be
reduced by 5 minutes to 40 minutes.39
The central station of Lübeck was modernized at the same time. The station is seen to be
the most important one in Schleswig-Holstein with about 31.000 passengers per day.
Today regional and long distance passenger trains run regularly between both cities. Regional trains run every 30 minutes during main transport time40 completed with a 5 ICE
train pairs running every 4 (2) hours. With about 210 train pairs per day running between
Hamburg and Lübeck the corridor in principal has no capacity reserves.41
Main step to enable the route Hamburg - Lübeck to match with growing requirements of
the transport markets including FBL is the new-built of tracks between Hamburg and Bad
Oldesloe. On February 28th, 2012 two offices had been authorized to do the pre-planning
work (value 2.5 Million Euro) within the next 12 months. The results will be basis for negotiations of distribution of cost, financial sourcing and so on between Hamburg, SchleswigHolstein and the Federal government of the 350 Million Euro project.42 The realisation of
this project is expected to take place as of 2018.43
As far as known the preferred layout is a separate double track enhancement for the S4trains between Hamburg-Hasselbrook and Ahrensburg including some improvements on
the route and five new stations for the suburban railway.
The improvement regarding train path capacity can not be measured actually as the final
layout of the route and the train operating program still have to be fixed. Especially with
regard to the freight train figures for 2025 published by DB AG early 200944 the IHK
Lübeck recommended i.a. a four-track alignment of the total route between both cities and
a significant improvement with reference to capacity supply within the nodes of Lübeck and
Hamburg.45
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
See Elektrifizierte Bahnstrecke Hamburg-Lübeck eingeweiht, Hamburger Abendblatt, 13.12.2008. Link:
http://www.abendblatt.de/region/norddeutschland/article957786/Elektrifizierte-Bahnstrecke-HamburgLuebeck-eingeweiht.html (06.03.2012).
Period on labour days: 06:00 - 21:00.
See Hansestadt Lübeck, ISEK IntegriertesStadtEntwicklungsKonzept, 2009, p.139. Link: http://www.luebeck.de/files/isek/Anlagenband1_ISEK_Analyse.pdf (06.03.2012).
See Vorplanung für S4 nach Bad Oldesloe beginnt, Nahverkehr Hamburg, 28.02.2012. Link:
http://www.nahverkehrhamburg.de/s-bahn/321-vorplanung-fuer-s4-nach-bad-oldesloe-beginnt
(06.03.2012).
See Finanzierungsgespräche über S4 Hamburg - Bad Oldesloe - weitere Schritte vereinbart. Joint press
release of Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Wirtschaft und Verkehr des Landes Schleswig-Holstein and Hamburg, Behörde für Wirtschaft, Verkehr und Innovation, 24.07.2011. Link: http://www.hamburg-hansestadt.de
/siteprint.php?site=news&news_ID=2195 (06.03.2012).
First forecast was 150 freight trains, second forecast was 78 freight trains for 2025. See Beltbrücke bringt
Stormarn nur wenig, Hamburger Abendblatt-Ahrensburger Zeitung, 06.07.2010. These figures have been
withdrawn after signing the Danish-German treaty.
See IHK Lübeck, Entwicklung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur auf der Achse Hamburg - Puttgarden im Zuge einer
festen Fehmarn-Beltquerung, 2009, p.85ff. Link: http://www.ihk-schleswig-holstein.de/linkableblob/1054234/.3./data/gutachten_langfassung-data.pdf (06.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
52
Some years ago the City of Lübeck published a report dealing with shortcomings of local
railway routes.46 For 2015 the existing capacity will probably not cover the expected demand situation which does not include possible transport increases caused by FBL. See
Figure 46 showing the expected figures of train paths per day. The capacity of Lübeck central station is declared with 11 trains per hour and direction. The capacity here should be
sufficient enough for satisfying operations in the range mentioned above. Precondition is
that delays or deviations from the planned schedule are being avoided.
Figure 46
Expected Train per Day Paths of Lübeck Railway Node 2015
Source: IHK Lübeck, Entwicklung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur auf der Achse Hamburg - Puttgarden im Zuge einer festen Fehmarn-Beltquerung, 2009, p.84. Link: http://www.ihk-schleswig-holstein.de/linkableblob/1054234/.3./data/gutachten_langfassung-data.pdf (06.03.2012).
As far as known there are no more current investigations available regarding the capability
of the node of Lübeck in total. But in general with growing train figures the section Bad
Schwartau station - Lübeck central stations will become critical first. Public passenger
transports between Kiel and Lübeck had been intensified during the last years. Actually
there is a 30 minute schedule with diesel light-weight trains which requires regularly train
path capacity between Bad Schwartau and Lübeck central station as well. Moreover the
port of Lübeck now is connected with the hinterland via a new electrified double track line
instead of the former single track one. So it has to be considered that in future there will be
a reasonable increase of transport volume run by trains from/to the port of Lübeck. Within
the mentioned section passenger (Kiel - Lübeck) and freight trains (Lübeck - Hinterland) in
future will have to share the limited capacity with the node with trains of FBL.
46
See accordingly IHK Lübeck, Entwicklung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur auf der Achse Hamburg - Puttgarden
im Zuge einer festen Fehmarn-Beltquerung, 2009, p.84.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
53
The official seaport forecast for 2025 expects the port of Lübeck to grow significantly. Total
handling volume 2025 is expected to amount to 64.4 Million t.47 The hinterland transport
shall grow by +5.4% per year (conventional freight) and +2.9% (combined transport). According to documents of DB AG48 the total number of freight trains per day was 42, about
50% conventional and ~50% combined transport. This total amount is expected to grow by
+138% until 2015. That leads to 100 trains per day of which some 60% is of conventional
and 40% of combined freight (container).
Figure 47
Calculated Train Path Capacity per Hour of Lübeck (including Capacity Enhancement Hamburg - Lübeck)
Source: See Figure 46.
Third and last segment of the FBL corridor in Germany is the corridor Lübeck - Puttgarden.
Figure 48 shows the current situation (red line). The route has a length of 88 km, it is single track non electrified und allows trains to run ≤120 km/h. Most of the major seaside resorts of the Ostholstein administration area ("Lübeck Bay") are connected with the rail hinterland network. Many tourists have the choice to take comfortable rides per car or to go
by train. Most of them prefer to go by car and public transport is already of reduced meaning.49
47
48
49
See BMVBS, Prognose der deutschlandweiten Verkehrsverflechtung - Seeverkehrsprognose 2025, 2007,
Los 3, Anlagenband zum Endbericht, p.A-96. Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/29554/publicationFile/299/seeverkehrsprognose-endbericht-teil-3.pdf (06.03.2012).
See DBAG, Masterplan Schiene Seehafen-Hinterland-Verkehr, 2007, p.9.
See the according hints at Kreis Ostholstein, "Betroffenheitsanalyse Schienenhinterlandanbindung" in Folge des Baus einer festen -Querung, 2009, p.159. Link: http://www.kreis-oh.de/index. phtml?
La=1&sNavID=1914.110&mNavID=1914.12&object=tx|1914.458.1&kat=&kuo=1&sub=0 (06.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 48
Source: DB AG.
Current Situation of the Railway Route Lübeck - Puttgarden
54
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
55
As the region is of strong agricultural structure (as well as tourism) there are many bridges
and level crossings to ease e.g. the daily care of the agrarian plants. The requirements of
the farmers will be negatively affected by growing train figures if there is no adequate solution available for future railway crossing by bridge or tunnel.50
Due to higher operational requirements and the obligations of the Danish-German treaty
the route shall developed further. In May 2010, the Federal State of Schleswig-Holstein
decided to carry out a regional planning procedure ("Raumordnungsverfahren") for the rail
linkage of the FBL. The Ministry of Interior Affairs of Schleswig-Holstein is responsible for
the regional planning procedure.
All alternative routes included in the documents51 are to be considered and evaluated during this procedure. A real high-speed line (Vmax >230 km/h) which in fact would be significantly separated from the existing line is not part of the planning procedure. All alternative
routes being part of the "Raumordnungsverfahren" are in most cases close to the existing
line.
There are as well alternative lines which had been designed by DB AG already in 2009. At
that time nine alternatives existed which were more or less described in detail and tagged
with cost estimations. Three of them were assigned for future discussions. During an investigation on behalf of the county administration of Ostholstein52 a fourth alternative was
elaborated and was amended to the official planning documents.
Figure 49 shows the remaining three alternatives of DB AG ("A", "1A", "E"), the so called
"X"-route (green line) designed within the mentioned project and the existing route (blue
line). The deciding argument for the "X"-line was the general political and functional result
gained in that project, that socially more acceptable alternatives are possible than those
presented by DB AG.53 The "X"-line was designed in order to minimize noise annoyances
of the inhabitants along that North-South-Corridor.
50
51
52
53
German law foresees that maintenance cost for bridges ("quite" passing of trains) have to be born by local
administrations; for bridges ("loud" passing of trains) DB AG would have to pay the according bills.
See Land Schleswig-Holstein, Raumordnungsverfahren zur Schienenhinterlandanbindung der festen querung, 11.11.2010. Link: http://www.schleswig-holstein.de/IM/DE/Landesplanung/Raumordnung/festlegungsprotokoll__blob=publicationFile.pdf (06.03.2012.).
See Kreis Ostholstein, "Betroffenheitsanalyse Schienenhinterlandanbindung" in Folge des Baus einer festen -Querung, 2009, p.9. Link: http://www.kreis-oh.de/index.phtml?La=1&sNavID=1914.110&m
NavID=1914.12&object=tx|1914.458.1&kat=&kuo=1&sub=0 (06.03.2012).
With a brief description DB Netze AG, Raumordnungsverfahren Schienenhinterlandanbindung Feste
querung (FBQ), Erweitertes Handout, Gesamtunterlage zur Antragskonferenz zum Raumordnungsverfahren gemäß §14a Abs.1 Landesplanungsgesetz (LaPlaG), 22.06.2010, p.11ff. Link: http://www
.deutschebahn.com/contentblob/2199032/__erweitertes__handout/data.pdf (22.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 49
Alternatives Routes of the Lübeck - Puttgarden - Corridor
Source: Land Schleswig-Holstein, Raumordnungsverfahren zur Schienenhinterlandanbindung der festen Fehmarnbeltquerung, 11.11.2010. Link: http://www.schleswig-holstein.de/IM/DE/Landesplanung/Raumordnung/festlegungsprotokoll__blob=publicationFile.pdf (06.03.2012.).
56
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
57
The overall target of the infrastructure improvement is to match the requirements of the
treaty including an electrified, double track railway line and speed Vmax <160 km/h for
passenger trains and for freight trains Vmax <120 km/h. According to the rules of the infrastructure manager in charge DB AG the "new" line will be classified as "M160". Therefore
line adjustments are necessary to reach Vmax without tilting technology. Railway lines
belonging to the TEN-T have to apply ETCS Level 2 at least but also will have to use national signalling components like PZB-90 signalling and so called combination signals
("KS-Signale"). Beside this the whole TSI rules have to be applied as well (e.g. stations).
One important element of the layout of the line is the maximum train length of 835 m for
freight trains. This rule is different to the common standards of the whole network of DB
AG (West (DB); ≤750 m, East (DR): ≤600 m) and trains so far have to be splitted at the
latest in Hamburg-Maschen under the precondition that the whole corridor Hamburg Puttgarden has been adopted before.
The necessary total investment for the rail-based link of the FBL is currently under discussion. According to official documents total investment will amount 817 Million Euro.54 The
out-dated cost estimations were criticized by the Federal Board of Audit ("Bundesrechnungshof") in April 200955, this organisation expected the cost to increase by ca. 60%.
As the FBL hinterland linkage has been declared to be part of TEN-T high-speed priority
projects the EU will support this project during the years 2007 and 2013 with about
339 Million Euro.56
3.1.2
Denmark
The railway stretches in Denmark had its greatest extent in 1930, but in the period 19502000, 40% of railway lines closed. The network now has a length of 2,600 km, which is 5%
less than 10 years ago. Among other railway lines Nykøbing F-Gedser closed recently. But
there are also built new rail lines, and on the old ones are 40% of level crossings closed or
replaced by bridges.
There is however a huge refurbishment and revitalization program to be done in the coming years, because capacity is scarce in the network and infrastructure must be expanded,
with the number of train starts to come into conflict. Never has the traffic been greater on
the lines than now, and transported volumes measured in passenger kilometres and tonne
kilometres have never been greater (Figure 50).
54
55
56
The price basis is 1998 which was updated in 2008. See BMVBS, Überprüfung des Bedarfsplans für die
Bundesschienenwege, final report Nov. 2011, p.9 (1-2) and 7-2 (181). Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/59400/publicationFile/31198/schlussbericht-schienen-de.pdf (07.03.2012). In case of construction begin later than 2014 total cost will increase to 907 Million Euro. Total cost for the hinterland corridor enhance can amount to 1.7 Billion Euro including the S4 investments. See Bericht an den Rechnungsprüfungsausschuss des Deutschen Bundestages vom 21. Januar 2010 zum Bericht des Bundesrechnungshofes nach § 88 Abs. 2 BHO über die feste Verbindung über den mit Hinterlandanbindung vom
30. April 2009, p.3. Link: http://www..riechey.de/uploads/media/16WP385__3__02.pdf (09.03.2012). Current cost-benefit-ratio is 6.7.
See Rechnungshof sieht Risiken, Fehmarnsches Tageblatt, 06.05.2009. Link: http://www.fehmarn24.de/ereignisse/beltquerung/rechnungshof-sieht-risiken-665523.html (07.03.2012).
See Staatsvertrag über die Feste querung unterzeichnet, German Federal Government press release,
03.09.2008.
Link:
http://www.bundesregierung.de/Content/DE/Magazine/MagazinInfrastrukturNeueLaender/012/t6-feste-querung.html (06.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 50
58
Rail Passenger (left) and Freight Flows (right) in Denmark
Source: Banedanmark, 2010.
If one takes a closer look at passenger and freight flows, it is especially in the metropolitan
area that rail transport has a large market impact, which is also the case in the east-west
corridor. For passenger traffic can be seen a great integration with Sweden across Øresound, but no great traffic to the south, i.e. to Schleswig and to Fehmarn / Holstein.
For freight transport dominates the German-Swedish traffic passing through the Great Belt
and down through Jutland to Northern Schleswig. When the Fehmarnbelt link will open in
2020, freight trains are scheduled to have a 160 km shorter route Hamburg-Copenhagen.
The number of trains in the coming years will be expanding in order to meet an increase in
passenger and freight demand. The number of trains will also be expanding due to the
general transport policy that transport by rail expected to double in 20 years. Some of the
demand can be managed through longer trains with more seating capacity, but there is a
customer expectation about a doubling of frequency on a number of rail lines. The simple
concept for better trains is more frequent and faster service, which in turn requires more
capacity. See accordingly Figure 51.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 51
59
Capacity Utilization 2010
Source: Ministry of Transport, Future Transport 2010.
On many rail lines there is no more capacity left in order to run more frequent or faster
trains. In the coming years, this situation will tighten in particular on Zealand. Bottlenecks
on the rail network include, for example
► the rail section between Copenhagen and Ringsted, which is in construction phase by
adding two new tracks opening in 2018,
► the rail section Roskilde-Holbæk, which is also undergoing a track doubling,
► the rail section Copenhagen Central-Copenhagen Airport, which is in the need for new
track and new platforms.
The illustration above is not showing a capacity problem on the south railway line between
Vordingborg, the Storstrømmen Bridge and Rødby, where the line is now single track. Previously, this line had a more critical classification as international freight traffic used this
route, but this traffic is routed today via the Great Belt. When most of the freight, which is
growing significantly in these years, returning in 2020, a single track Storstrømmen Bridge
poses a serious bottleneck in the international corridor. These challenges will be dealt with
below.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
60
Copenhagen-Ringsted
The new Copenhagen-Ringsted line consists of a main section of 55 km that does not include the approach lines to Copenhagen and Ringsted station. These small sections of 5
km are managed under their own construction program and will be finalized well before the
main section opens in 2018.
Figure 52
New Rail Line Copenhagen-Ringsted
Source: Banedanmark, 2011.
From Copenhagen to the west / southwest, there are currently 2 main tracks to Roskilde.
In parallel is the S-train line that is completely separated and also double tracked. In the
direction towards Køge are S-trains running on the double track line along the coast. The
new path to Ringsted adds extra 2 main tracks.
The complete line will be equipped with existing traffic management systems in order to
have the present train fleet to running at the new line at an allowed max speed of 200
km/h, but the line will also be equipped with the new ETCS-II. For maximum operational
flexibility it is possible to run trains in from or out on existing lines at Køge North / Køge
stations.
Connection to Øresound/Sweden
There is in the current construction phase not included a fly-over by the connection of the
new high-speed railway line in Ny Ellebjerg which constitutes a major problem. This means
that the line is underused because trains in different directions at this intersection will slow
each other, resulting in delay time. Further, it is difficult to run trains between Roskilde and
Airport after opening of the new line. If capacity should be utilized more efficiently, it is absolutely necessary to supplement railway junction Ny Ellebjerg with a fly-over at its northern end.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 53
61
The Ny Ellebjerg Junction
Source: Level crossing analysis Atkins/ TU-Denmark, and IBU capacity project 2010 (Vectura).
The approach line to the Øresound link has also other weak points, the largest be the station at Copenhagen Airport. As part of the law package for the Fehmarnbelt hinterland infrastructure it has been decided to start a plan approval process for expanding capacity on
the Øresound line through the station at Copenhagen Airport. Background for this is a bottleneck situation caused by too little station capacity for passenger trains and difficulties
due to an increase in operations of freight trains between Germany and Sweden.
Figure 54
Capacity Improvement on the Øresound Line at the Station of Copenhagen Airport
Source: Danish Railway Authority, Banedanmark 2011 (Environmental Impact Assessment, technical part).
There are different alternatives in discussion. A fly-over solution is representing the most
costly solution, but does not give optimal capacity improvement. It would be wise to direct
freight trains from Denmark to Sweden through the existing station. In the other direction it
is not necessary. Looking at a longer perspective with a new fixed HH-link across Øresound, or another long lasting solution, it could relieve the present Øresound line. The station must optimize capacity utilization in order to accommodate for an introduction of highspeed trains Sweden-Denmark-Germany in 2020.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 55
62
The Bypass Line Built as a Fly-over at the Crossing of Øresound
Highway and Øresound Railway at Copenhagen Airport
Source: Banedanmark 2011. (Environmental Impact Assessment, technical part).
Other actions on the Øresound railway line, which today has been declared overloaded (in
terms of lacking capacity) are also necessary in the long perspective. Studies have been
conducted regarding the possibility to expand the Ørestad station by adding a new platform, and with a 3rd and 4th track. This will be difficult to avoid, if transport should be doubled in 2030.
Connection from Ringsted to the Fehmarn Belt Link
The main capacity problem on Zealand is solved with the new railway Ringsted-Copenhagen. Fast trains will have priority on the new line, while the existing will be relieved giving more space for regional and freight trains. From Ringsted to the tunnel (Rødby) the
railway line will be upgraded, electrified and fully equipped with ETCS-II and rebuild to
double track - except for the passage of the Storstrømmen Bridge, which is undergoing
separate investigations. The railway line is according to the ongoing planning act intended
to be decided in details in order for the section to be in full operation in 2020.
The standard is most likely to be decided for 200 km/h. The Ringsted-Vordingborg stretch
does not constitute a capacity constraint as such. But the new ETCS-system and the total
line upgrade will improve capacity from 2020. From Vordingborg to Rødby the line today
does not provide the capacity for future traffic, and therefore the line will be upgraded.
This implies as minimum an extra track and some overtaking tracks (freight) on the 64 km
line, if the crossing of Storstrømmen is included. The construction of the double track is
sectionized Orehoved-Holeby, and from Holeby south the new line will be part of the Fehmarn Belt link. Between Vordingborg and Orehoved the main challenge is the Storstrømmen bridge.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 56
63
The Upgrading Project Ringsted-Rødby
Source: Banedanmark, 2011.
A weak point in the Danish rail corridor Øresound-Fehmarn is the existing single tracked
Storstrømmen Bridge. Transport scientists e.g. TU-Denmark and a number of research
institutions have pointed at the need to enhance capacity by building a new link across
Storstrømmen.
Inspections of the bridge have now revealed severe wear. At the same time it is feared that
the life time of the bridge will be dramatically affected and reduced when the operation of
the Fehmarn Belt (freight) traffic begins. Therefore it has top-priority to find a solution as
soon as possible.
Due to a political agreement at national level investigations of 5 technical alternatives for a
new crossing are underway.
The studies include the following alternatives:
I.
A major renewal of the existing bridge, i.e. the existing single track and 2 lane road
II. A major renewal, but only railway modernized and the road section closed
III. New railway bridge, the existing bridge is kept for car traffic
IV. New railway bridge, the existing bridge ends its days for traffic
V. New combined railway and road bridge, the existing bridge ends its days for traffic.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
64
The specifications at the moment indicate a design solution for 200 km/h for passenger
trains and 120 km/h for freight according to the investigation program.
The schedule is to finalize technical and environmental investigations, as well as the planning and decision process in order to re-build the Storstrømmen Bridge or to open a new
link in 2019. The traffic across the Fehmarn Belt will from that time be able to flow unhindered.
Figure 57
New Bridge across Storstrømmen
Source: Banedanmark 2012, illustration from ongoing investigations.
The schedule is to finalize technical and environmental investigations, as well as the planning and decision process in order to re-build the Storstrømmen Bridge or to open a new
link in 2019. The traffic across the Fehmarn Belt will from that time be able to flow unhindered.
3.1.3
Sweden
During the '90s was the main railway network in Sweden renovated and upgraded, so that
the technical standard was brought up-to-day, and great progress was actually reached
with the main lines step by step upgraded to 200 km/h and where the train fleet offers a
relatively good level of service. Sweden belongs to the countries with the largest degree of
electrification, and puts emphasis on sustainability principles in the planning of infrastructure investment. Transport for both freight and passengers is of relatively little environmental impact compared with other modes. But major parts of the network is now suffering
of capacity problems, as traffic has increased >60% in 15 years.
Although this may be seen as positive problems, they give a picture of the growing challenges for the sector. A calculation of the congestion situation on the railway lines in 2030
indicates the need for investment in infrastructure, if there actually be realized a ‘growth
track’ in the future of Swedish railways.
Statistics for a number of main lines can tell that punctuality and reliability leaves much to
be desired. There are several sections where only 75% of trains arrive on time, and this
performance has been fairly unchanged in recent years. It is explained that the main reason for this is the increase of freight and commuter trains.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
65
The prospect of rail to take a larger share of the transport market growth has therefore
established a number of proposals for strengthening the rail infrastructure. This means that
the passive projection of capacity utilization for 2030 with indication of major congestion
problems ahead may change for the better. In the following we shall mainly concentrate on
the southern part of Sweden. See accordingly Figure 58.
Figure 58
Rail Congestion in the Swedish Main Network, Forecast 2030
Source: Swedish Capacity and Efficiency investigation 2012, Trafikverket.
In the Scania region in southern Sweden, there has been a long series of major challenges
to the modernization of the rail system.
First and foremost represents the completion and opening of the City tunnels and the new
underground station an important supplement to the existing dead-end station, which has
also been modernized. Overall, capacity of the node Malmö C thereby has increased significantly.
On the main route up north on the west coast line is there a single track section from
Helsingborg to Båstad. Here the 9 km long tunnel through Hallandsåsen constitutes a decisive improvement. From the current track with a max speed of 80 km/h to a complete 200
km/h line, there will be scope for both passenger and freight trains in the future now expelled from this route due to insufficient train paths.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
66
Construction work started in 1992 and is expected to be completed in 2015. Budgets are in
this period more than doubled while severe geological problems occurred. Unfortunately,
this also drained the financial resources to go ahead with other needed capacity expansion
projects. Double track sections are ready for use or under construction on both sides of
Hallandsåsen. But the chain still has weak spots, especially the single track section between Maria station and the central station in Helsingborg.
Figure 59
Elimination of Railway Bottlenecks in Scania
Source: Banverket 2010, West coast mainline upgrade projects, TDL.
Train paths in and out of the Helsingborg node and stretches with missing double track
contribute to a severe reduction in the overall utilization of the west coast mainline to
Gothenburg. On the last section – where the mainline from Stockholm and from Gothenburg meet – between Lund and Malmö the situation is critical.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 60
67
Scenarios for Freight Traffic
Source: Trafikverket, Hallandsås-projektet.
The Arlöv-Flackarp project deals with a partial double track Malmö-Lund to be realized
before 2019. It involves the construction of a 3rd and 4th track from Malmö to a point a few
kilometers from Lund central station. Therefore, this seems to be a very inappropriate development process, if the new double track stops here.
The missing Flackarp-Lund section forms a major bottleneck and contributes to reducing
the functionality and the ability to leverage the investment in the first capacity expansion.
Other upgrade projects are underway in Scania already decided in the context of the present national investment plan until 2021:
► among the most important is the upgrading of the freight corridor (Godsstråket) on the
line Åstorp-Teckomatorp which bypasses Helsingborg and avoid the west coast line,
► further upgrading of the railway line Malmö-Trelleborg and thus the port of Trelleborg is
underway,
► in the longer term, there are ambitions to build a new railway from Malmö via Staffanstorp to Simrishamn on the east coast, but this does not contribute directly to eliminate
bottlenecks on the main Triangle lines Stockholm-Malmö and Gothenburg-Malmö.
The integrated Øresound train system is currently experiencing capacity problems. Over
the next 20 years it is expected that inter-regional trains and long distance trains will increase from now 30,000 to 50,000 daily cross-border travelers.
This development is partly due to the opening of the FBL and the introduction of semi-high
speed passenger trains between southern Sweden and Hamburg as well as general
growth in the region.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 61
68
Øresound Crossings by Train 2030
Source: IBU and Øresundsbron, 2011.
It provides massive challenges for how capacity should be expanded in the corridors
through southern Sweden. Two projects are underway:
►
A new fixed Øresound link Helsingør-Helsingborg is investigated and proposed by the
Region in order to enhance the international corridor Øresound-Fehmarn and to relieve
the existing Øresound bridge, but only about 5 percent of passenger traffic is predicted
to moving to a new link. However, a direct capacity relief could have a broader perspective with respect to the relatively large quantities of rail freight in this corridor, including the transit Germany-Sweden, if this new link would be established.
►
There is also another investigation for a 30 km long Øresound tunnel underway. This
project constitutes an Express Metro link Copenhagen-Malmö, mainly focusing on establishing a new fast and more reliable connection for the citizens of the two cities. But
it may reduce the present pressure on the bridge in order to fit in new train paths which
could serve for freight, and future high speed trains.
In the short term there are also opportunities to improve the existing Øresound line. We
have previously examined the Danish side, which is quite extensive measures to be undertaken in the coming years, to improve capacity across the Øresound-Fehmarn corridor. On
the Swedish side it could be appropriate to construct level free crossings on the railway
line passing at Malmö Syd and at the junction between the so-called Continental ring line
in Malmö and the Ystad/Trelleborg lines. This gives possibility for trains to bypass the Citytunnel which in a few years seem to be completely utilized according to the operational
plans.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 62
69
Small and Large Infrastructure Capacity Projects in the Øresound
Region
Source: Øresund capacity project, Copenhagen-Malmö study 2011, TDL.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
3.2
3.2.1
70
Road infrastructure
Germany
The Danish-German treaty foresees only the extension of the B 207 between Heiligenhafen (Ost) and Puttgarden up to four lanes. The extension works are to be finalized until
the opening of the FBL at the latest. The Fehmarn Sound Bridge - as a listed building - is
excluded from the extension plan, the bridge shall remain unchanged with 2 lanes.
The following figure explains the principle situation of the road infrastructure in Northern
Germany. Most relevant corridors are the highways A1, Hamburg - Lübeck (up to 75.000
vehicles per day) and A7, Hamburg - Hannover (>90.000 vehicles per day) respectively
Hamburg - Kiel. Primarily the nodes of Hamburg and Hannover are heavily utilized
(>90.000 vehicles per day). In Hamburg most critical is the situation of the A7 corridor with
the tunnel57 (>130.000 vehicles per day) crossing below the river Elbe and the crossing
with the A 23 ("Nord-West-Kreuz") (>90.000 vehicles/day).
Especially the western part of the node of Hamburg actually is to be judged as critically.
The highway "Y" comprising the A7, A23 ("North-West-crossing") in the direction towards
the A1 is extremely used. Traffic jams of about 900 hours per year have been measured in
2010.58 Accordingly plans are in development to enhance the A7 up to 6 lanes including a
roof construction for the section between highway exit Hamburg-Othmarschen and Hamburg-Stellingen.59 Last newspaper reports say that total of this cost project will probable
amount to 550 Million Euro.60
Beyond this "end of the spouts" of A 23 and A7 like Itzehoe, Kiel-Blumental or Lübeck/Bad
Schwartau the transport flows being measured officially in most cases decline sharply. See
Figure 63 showing more details of the situation in Northern Germany as of 2010.
The figures on the remaining part of the A1 until Heiligenhafen are about <30.000 vehicles/day and on a significant lower level than in the hot spots. In Heiligenhafen the highway
A1 changed into federal road B207 which is currently under construction. Bottleneck on the
way to Puttgarden and v.v. is the Fehmarn Sound Bridge.
57
58
59
60
The tunnel is used by ~130.000 vehicles per day. See Baustelle in Hamburg: Staus am Elbtunnel noch bis
2020, Hamburger Abendblatt, 15.10.2011. Link: http://www.abendblatt.de/hamburg/article2060585/Baustelle-in-Hamburg-Staus-am-Elbtunnel-noch-bis-2020.html (09.03.2012).
See Arbeitskreis Innovative Verkehrspolitik der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Eckpunkte für eine zielorientierte,
integrierte Infrastrukturplanung des Bundes, Vom Bundesverkehrswegeplan zur Bundesverkehrsnetzplanung, 12-2010, p.20. Link: http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/wiso/07697.pdf (09.03.2012).
See Auch dritter A-7-Deckel teurer - Kosten steigen auf 550 Millionen, Hamburger Abendblatt, 12.01.2012.
Link: http://www.abendblatt.de/hamburg/article2155284/Auch-dritter-A-7-Deckel-teurer-Kosten-steigen-auf550-Millionen.html (09.03.2012).
See Auch dritter A-7-Deckel teurer - Kosten steigen auf 550 Millionen, Hamburger Abendblatt, 12.01.2012.
Link: http://www.abendblatt.de/hamburg/article2155284/Auch-dritter-A-7-Deckel-teurer-Kosten-steigen-auf550-Millionen.html (09.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 63
71
Road Vehicle Figures for Northern Germany 2010
Source: Modified map provided by Bundesamt für Straßenverkehr, Verkehrsmengenkarte 2010. Link: http://www.bast.de/cln
_033/nn_42248/DE/Statistik/Verkehrsdaten-Downloads/2010/verkehrsmengenkarte-2010,templateId=raw,property=publicationFile.pdf/verkehrsmengenkarte-2010.pdf (05.03.2012.).
The Fehmarn Sound Bridge was built in the early 1960es and was opened in April 1964.
The Sound Bridge is likely to be a seasonal bottleneck. During vacations on the A1/B 207axis the number of vehicles is significantly higher than during the rest of the year as most
tourists go on holidays by car. The number of vehicles during summer holidays can reach
70-90% more than average.61 Accordingly there are seasonal traffic jams - particularly during the summer vacations - to be seen on the Sound Bridge and their relevant access
roads as well as in the port of Puttgarden.
In context with the extension works of B 207 between Heiligenhafen and Puttgarden the
local road infrastructure administration of Schleswig-Holstein ("Straßenbauverwaltung")
made some investigations about future road transport flows. One result is that the number
of vehicles i.a. using the B207 is expected to grow by +5.5% between 2008 and 2025.62
See accordingly Figure 64 illustrating the expected vehicle development until 2030 on the
B207.
61
62
This figure is depending on the exact geographic point of measurement. For the Sound Bridge (section
Heiligenhafen - Großenbrode) the relevant figure is about +70% of daily vehicles on average, on the quays
of Puttgarden the factor is about +90%. See Straßenbauverwaltung Schleswig-Holstein, Verkehrsgutachten
für den vierstreifigen Ausbau der B207, 2010, p.52. Link: Not available on the internet.
"Common increase of transport activities": All road traffic within the planning area is considered but not the
traffic crossing the Belt.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 64
72
Expected Vehicle Figures for 2025 in Context with the Extension of
the Route B207 between Heiligenhafen East and Puttgarden
Source: Straßenbauverwaltung Schleswig-Holstein, Verkehrsgutachten für den vierstreifigen Ausbau der B207, 2010, p.17.
The forecast for road transport rests upon the FTC Forecast 2002, which is cited already
within this study.63 Starting in 2008 with 5,752 vehicles per day target figure for 2025 is
9,694 vehicles per day (+4% per year). On the basis of all future road traffic within the region plus the transit passenger transports initiated by the FBL a "general increase of the
forecasted transports" is expected of about 68.5%.64
In this investigation also information is available regarding future heavy traffic by trucks.
During the given interval 2008 - 2025 the number of trucks is forecasted to develop from
1,100 up to 1,989 vehicles per day (+4.9% per year). Total growth rate is +80.8%.
Besides the German source for road transport figures also the Danish FTC is to be considered. The general expectation for the cross-border road transport sector (busses and
cars) is as presented in the FBL hearing in Berlin 2009 that the number of vehicles using
the FBL will grow frequently. For the first 25 years of operation an average annual growth
rate of +1.7% is expected. See accordingly chapter 2.5.5. Total figure for 2043 is <15,000
vehicles per day (~+91% in total).
Finally the question is to be answered how to evaluate the seasonal traffic jams especially on the Fehmarn Sound Bridge preferably during the summer months? The bridge
with a length of 963 m and currently with two lanes likely is the "weak point" of the Lübeck
- Puttgarden corridor. Cars with 90 km/h need 40 seconds to pass the bridge, in case of a
speed limit of 60 km/h this will last about 1 minute. This "delay" in general seems to be
manageable. The Bridge may become a principal problem in case of periods of strong
63
64
See chapter 2.4.
See Straßenbauverwaltung Schleswig-Holstein, Verkehrsgutachten für den vierstreifigen Ausbau der B207,
2010, p.18.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
73
wind and vehicles have to stop on route causing traffic jams. The likelihood for these
weather phenomenon commonly is expected to increase in future. In the past traffic restrictions of about 200 h/year had to be imposed65 but as the number of strong wind periods is
to grow the likelihood of imposed restrictions will increase as well.66
According to current official statistics since a couple of years the number of vehicles passing the Fehmarn Sound Bridge is in a sidewise development. As Figure 65 shows the annual volumes vary between 168,000 and 159,000 road vehicles per year.
This monthly distribution for the analyzed years is robust and - see Figure 66 - shows each
year the so to say typical peak for regions with a strong touristy character respectively for
regions which are at the same closely located to major long distance motorway corridors
(e.g. Sweden - Italy). Peak figures of July are about 23,000 vehicles a day. Significant
lower levels can be assessed for winter months January and December where only about
10% of the reported traffic can be recorded. The peak figures in July are temporarily about
175% of average (2010). The average annual use is 13,494 vehicles per month.
The traffic forecast for B207 in 2025 does consider the regional road infrastructure but not
the direct utilisation of Fehmarn Sound Bridge itself. Accordingly the assumed infrastructure improvements and recommendations concern roads around the crossing. The traffic
within the region of Ostholstein and Fehmarn is expected to grow between 2008 and 2025
by 8.5% up to ~35,700 vehicles per day.67 The segment with the lowest growth expectations is the transit with +5.5% or 7,700 vehicles per day. This assumption principally is in
line with the moderate growth outlook of the FTC.
65
66
67
See Risø National Laboratory, Deutscher Wetterdienst (2005): Traffic restrictions due to wind on the Fehmarn Belt bridge, S.6. Link: http://www.femern.com/Material+folder/Documents/2005+publications/Traffic+restrictions+due+to+wind+on+the+Fehmarn+Belt+bridge.+Report (07.03.2012).
The situation on the Belt corridor in total might become more critical in case of the erection of a bridge to
cross the Belt. In that case there are three interdependent "weak points" (Belt crossing itself, Storstrømmen
Bridge and Fehmarn Sound Bridge) regarding strong wind related transport restrictions especially for empty
trucks, long vehicles and so on which requires more precautions.
See Straßenbauverwaltung Schleswig-Holstein, Verkehrsgutachten für den vierstreifigen Ausbau der B207,
2010, p.22.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 65
74
Annual Use of Fehmarn Sound Bridge by Vehicles 2007-2011
DTV pro Jahr (Kfz Mo-So)
200.000
150.000
100.000
167.774
162.045
159.198
158.739
50.000
0
Jahre
2007
2009
2010
2011
Source: Straßenbauverwaltung Schleswig-Holstein, monthly reports, calculation HTC.
Figure 66
Monthly Use of Fehmarn Sound Bridge by Vehicles 2007-2011
25.000
DTV Kfz Mo-So
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Monate
2007
2009
2010
2011
Source: Straßenbauverwaltung Schleswig-Holstein, monthly reports, calculation HTC.
Assuming a growth analogue to the B207 forecast the average daily number of vehicles in
2025 is nearly 15,000 units which is somewhat more than expected (Figure 36).
Figure 67 shows the principal capacity of roads/highways with 2 to 6 lanes. Typically the
total of circa 15,000 vehicles/direction can be managed on a two-lane road in a "good
quality". In case of more traffic, congestions are likely. 4 lanes typically last for about
50,000 vehicles/day in operated "good quality", the 6 lane solution offers capacity for circa
75,000 vehicles/day.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 67
75
Capacity of Roads as a Function of Number of Available Lanes
Source: BSVI, Bundesvereinigung der Straßenbau- und Verkehrsingenieure e.V., Straße und Schiene, Partner zur Sicherung der Mobilität, Daten und Fakten, 2006, p.12. Link: http://www.bsvi.de/joomla/index.php?option= com_docman&task=doc
_download&gid=11&Itemid=58 (06.03.2012).
With the utilisation level of the Fehmarn Sound Bridge described above the capacity of the
building is likely to be uncritical and "daily business" seems to be manageable.
If the number of cars will be growing by about 70% (FBL vehicle forecast 2025 9,694 vehicles/day or +68.5% of 2008: 5,752) the Fehmarn Sound Bridge will be affected as well.
The average utilisation in 2025 would be 23,800 vehicles/day with a seasonal peak of approximately 40,000 vehicles/day in July. In that case the bridge as a 2-lane crossing would
be overstretched and the quality of transports would be worse with likely regular traffic
jams (Figure 67). Peaks with circa 40,000 vehicles/day are not manageable with a 3-lane
in "good quality" but with a 4-lane bridge.
In case growing demand for the Fehmarn Sound Bridge in line with the regional perspective for 2025 (<15,000 vehicles/day) the Sound Bridge likely is a sufficient solution. Primarily it is a political consideration whether traffic jams especially in summer (in July) is reason enough to enlarge capacity for the remaining 11 months which is likely not to be used
sufficiently during the rest of the year.
If future volumes are significantly above the described level (>>15,000 vehicles/day) the
bridge would have to be enhanced to 3 lanes of which could one could be used bidirectional depending on the concrete traffic situation. Suitable telematic techniques should be
applied to contribute to better information and transport flows.68 Due to limited space on
the bridge the width of the lanes probably would have to be reduced as well as maximum
speed to reduce the potential of accidents and damages. These operational limitations
during selected periods of time (peak month July, periods of strong wind, certain speed
reductions on a 1.000m distance) seem to be arguable as at least a mid-term solution.
68
The IHK Lübeck summarized the situation very similar in 2009 and did not argue in favour of a new Sound
Bridge. See IHK Lübeck, Entwicklung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur auf der Achse Hamburg - Puttgarden im
Zuge einer festen Fehmarn-Beltquerung, 2009, p.94.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
3.2.2
76
Denmark
The dynamics of road traffic flow - understood as the average speed at which you can
move in / out or across the metropolitan area - is unlikely that it could improve when we
look further ahead. This is due to congestion that occurs in the network, which is difficult to
expand in the same pace as traffics grow.
There is a calculation of different scenarios of traffic congestion in 2030. Here, all new capacity would be exhausted in the upgraded M3, and despite the expansion of the South
motorway in the corridor Øresound-Fehmarn there will be a lot of motorists every day who
are experiencing critical congestion, defined at travel speeds of 25-30 km/h, and hence
more than a doubling of travel time.
Figure 68
Car Traffic Flows in the Main Road Network of Denmark 2030
Comment: Figures without trucks.
Source: Infrastructure Commission, Long term road traffic projections, TU-Denmark (DTF) 2008.
In the 2030-scenario occurs incipient congestion when road capacity is utilized 70%, which
directly leads to a fall of approx. 5 km/h. In critical congestion periods the capacity is utilized 95%. Traffic forecasts indicate that the cars especially in the metropolitan area in and
around Copenhagen are exposed to queue for more than 200,000 hours per day in 2030,
doubling from 2000. Large investment initiatives will be able to reduce this but not eliminate congestion.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
77
These measures include a western ring road M5, an eastern ring road through a harbour
tunnel, road pricing or congestion charging, better public transport including new regional
services, high-speed rail, metro expansion and new light rail lines, etc.
Figure 69
Prediction of Congestion in the Main Road Network 2030
Source: Infrastructure Commission, Long term road traffic projections, TU-Denmark (DTF) 2008.
As can be seen, there is great pressure on the roads around Copenhagen, in the northern
direction, in central Zealand between the Great Belt Bridge and Copenhagen, but also
around Roskilde and south. However, traffic volume is not critical on Lolland and Falster.
In Jutland in the Triangle Kolding-Vejle-Fredericia, there is great road network pressure,
where need for a new bridge over Vejle Fjord and a tunnel or bridge over the Little Belt is
under consideration. Likewise, the whole east Jutland band up to Aarhus, Randers and
Aalborg has partially a high traffic load. Also on the highway across Funen shows a fairly
large car volume.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
78
The western bypass (Motorring 5)
In the long term could be expected an even stronger pressure on the radial roads north,
west and south of Copenhagen. Also from Sweden via the Øresound Bridge, traffic volume
is much higher when we look towards 2030 or longer. In addition, traffic is expected to
grow in the north-south direction. To meet these challenges are studied both western and
eastern bypass options for improving traffic flow in terms of capacity as well as speed.
Figure 70
New Western Ring Road in the Ring 5 Corridor
Source: IBU 2010, Ring transport corridor analyses, Tetraplan 2010.
One solution is to establish a western ring road around Copenhagen in the transport corridor Ring 5 with already reserved land acquisition. Ministry of Transport has proposed a
new 1.2 billion EUR expensive 70 km long Ring 5-highway as a solution that provides an
extremely high congestion relief in the form of 17,000 hours driving time saved daily. Traffic models indicate clearly that the Ring 5 not only provides up to fifteen minutes shorter
running time on the stretch Elsinore-Køge, a Ring 5 corridor also includes a relatively
broad regional relief of the radial road network.
Together with a new fixed link across the Øresound between Helsingør and Helsingborg,
which in the long term creates new capacity across the Sound, would these new infrastructure projects make a substantial relief in the emerging bottlenecks.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
79
At the southern end of the ring 5, the new highway to reduce traffic by 32,000 cars on the
existing one, which is Denmark's most congested. The motorway has been expanded up
to 10 lanes, and further capacity improvements have to be implemented if congestion
should be kept under control. In peaks hours the average speed is more than halved compared with normal free flow. New construction work starts in order to add extra lanes to the
existing motorway, but in the long run another solution has to be found.
The eastern bypass road (including the northern harbour tunnel)
An eastern ring road through the northern harbour of Copenhagen is also on the political
agenda. This 3.3 billion EUR project relieves congestion in the centre of Copenhagen, but
it also re-route some of the interregional flows. The benefit of the project is also seen as
part of a strategic town development plan.
Figure 71
Eastern Ring Road via a Northern Harbour Tunnel
Source: Copenhagen City, Strategic master plan (2009).
Regulation of traffic and congestion
A toll ring system in Copenhagen will dramatically reduce congestion due to a substantial
decrease in car traffic of 20-25% in the centre of Copenhagen. The consequences can be
seen both inside and outside Copenhagen.
A toll ring line or a green zone with a combination of parking or a kind of town zone fee will
ceteris paribus have less effect on overall congestion than the imposition of payment on all
roads in the region or nationally.
In general there is a political agreement in the Danish parliament to introduce green road
user charges. This will be able to control the congestion more effective, particularly if it is a
GPS-based system dependent on the peak traffic times. The system is however not yet in
order that it is both efficient and has low transaction costs.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 72
80
Reduced Traffic of Roads in the Copenhagen Region
Source: Toll ring Copenhagen, Kommuneforum, 2009. Alternative O2.
Other projects
Growth in demand for transport may be met with some expansions of new infrastructure in
line with national policy.
The pressure will obviously be heaviest in the metropolitan region, but as can be seen on
the map of traffic volumes on Zealand 2030 there will also be congestion outside the motorway network, e.g. between the highway and Næstved in South Zealand.
Against this background, there are concrete infrastructure plans to invest in a high class
road link via Næstved to Slagelse and Kalundborg. First section of this road is agreed,
which will give better accessibility between the Great Belt link and the south motorway E47
towards the Fehmarn Belt link.
In the short term, preparing for the fixed Fehmarn Belt link started for the road connection.
In this context it is necessary to convert the existing 4-lane highway from Rodby to Sakskøbing. It was inaugurated in 1963, but built with a relatively narrow profile with no emergency lanes, and speed is currently limited to 110 km/h.
The investment budget is 70 million EUR that can bring the technical and safety standards
up to date. The Danish traffic police authorities will finally decide whether the upgrade can
be approved for driving with a normal maximum speed of 130 km/h.
The Danish Road Administration does not see significant congestion problems on the
highway after its reconstruction in 2018. The current forecasts for the number of vehicles
for the fixed Fehmarn Belt link is taken as the input basis (2025) for design of the refurbished highway.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 73
81
Upgrading of Highway from Rødby to Sakskøbing
Source: Danish Road Administration: Opgradering af E47 Sydmotorvejen, report 389, 2012. Numbers of cars Year 2009 in
black and 2025 in red letters.
When looking at the road network towards Sweden in recent years a critical congestion
point on the Øresound motorway has been i.e. where Amager highway branches into E20
to and from the Øresound Link and Copenhagen Airport.
The highway has been rebuilt during the last couple of years and is now partially expanded
to 6 lanes between the urban development area Ørestad, the Tårnby tunnel and the airport
site. It is not likely to upgrade the fixed Øresound link to a 6 lane motorway on the basis of
the dimensions of the bridge and the tunnel.
3.2.3
Sweden
If we look at the main road network in Sweden, it is particularly around the 3 major cities
Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö that can be observed very high traffic volumes. As
elsewhere significant congestion is present, and the socio-economic losses due to the
queuing time cost € 1 billion annually, according to analyses for the Trafikverket.
The pressure on the roads around Malmö is just as dominant as in other places in Sweden. Nearly 70 percent of all Swedish export goes through Skåne on the railroad or by
truck on to the ferry or over the Øresound Bridge. In rush hour it can be seen that the volume of trucks are quite numerous, and in periods it is possible to register up to 20% trucks
of total vehicles.
Regarding the road network in Scania there has been nationally designated a number of
routes with priority investments for upgrading the capacity.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 74
82
Road Capacity in Sweden
Source: Swedish National Transport Authority, Capacity Plan 2012
These are:
► Highway E6:
A new highway built partly in parallel with the existing route Malmö-Trelleborg which
could be expanded further later on (harbour connection). This project is indicated at the
map as no. 10 (see figure next page).
► Highway E65:
In the middle section of the route Malmö-Ystad will be built motorway. A partially new
alignment is considered among the alternatives, see project no. 11.
► Highway E22:
Several sections of the main road Malmö-Kristianstad will be converted either to 4-lane
expressway or highway, and several parking facilities - including those for trucks - will
be established along the route, indicated as project no. 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 on the
map.
► Highway E4:
Connecting the inner ring road of Helsingborg south of E4/E6 it is the intension to build
a new road link towards the harbour of Helsingborg, see project no. 3.
Looking at the projects in total it is seen that on the main route E4 to E6 towards Stockholm respectively Gothenburg there are not any major expansion plans for sections of
these main corridors within the Scania region.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
Figure 75
83
Ongoing Infrastructure Projects in Southern Sweden
Source: Swedish National Transport Plan, Actions 2010-2021.
The international traffic is especially significant as regards the freight flows between South
Sweden and Germany. The total amount includes 32 million tonnes, of which 41% goes
through Denmark, ie. across the Øresound Bridge or the Helsingborg-Helsingør ferry line.
The rest of the traffic is distributed on several ferry routes including Trelleborg-Rostock,
Trelleborg-Travemünde etc.
There is a daily shipment of total 2200 vehicles (cars and trucks) via the direct routes from
southern Sweden to Germany.
A substantial part of the Swedish traffic goes via Denmark. For comparison the DanishGerman routes Rødby-Puttgarden and Gedser-Rostock have a daily transfer of 6500 vehicles. This number is expected to increase significantly when the fixed link is opened in
2020/21.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
3.3
84
Sea-/Air transportation
Catchment areas of Copenhagen and Hamburg Airport
The infrastructure of the future plays a significant role for the growth potential and the
catchment areas of Hamburg as well as Copenhagen Airport. If Copenhagen Airport is to
retain its status as the traffic hub of Scandinavia, it is important that the number of potential
passengers is increased substantially in the years to come. Therefore the attraction of additional passengers outside the current catchment area of four million people is of high
importance. The vision for the next 10 to 15 years must therefore be to double the catchment area to 8 million people with less than two hours’ transport to the airport.
Figure 76
Catchment Area of Copenhagen Airport
Source: Copenhagen Airport.
This will be possible through expansion of infrastructure as well as the elimination of bottlenecks. Various studies emphasize that there is a clear correlation between the size of
the catchment area and the number of passengers and routes. Today almost 90 % of the
traffic is international, while many of Nordic competitors have around 40-50 % domestic
traffic. The decision by Finnish-based Blue1 to use Copenhagen Airport as a hub beginning in March of this year, the coming SAS and Air China routes to Shanghai and Beijing
as well as the existing inter-continental routes e.g. to Bangkok, Singapore, Chicago, Tokyo, New York and Colombo may help to attract further passengers. As the following map
indicates Copenhagen is generally the airport which most citizens can reach in less than
half an hour, 1 hour, 1.5 hours and 2 hours respectively. The catchment area covers most
of Denmark and all of Southern Sweden which accommodates 40 % of the entire Swedish
population. With an improved infrastructure connection via FBL further passengers from
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
85
Germany could also be attracted. Further impacts on the air cargo volumes can also be
expected.
Amongst the largest unserved inter-continental destinations from Hamburg several CPH
destinations can be found:
► Bangkok: Annual market size HAM-BKK: 65,500. Largest unserved market from HAM
catchment area
► Singapore: Annual market size HAM-SIN: 36,200. Reason for travel: 72.1% business
(Hamburg Airport Passenger Survey)
► Chicago: Annual market size HAM-CHI: 33,700. 39.5% of traffic to Chicago is business
(Hamburg Airport Passenger Survey)
► Shanghai: Annual market size HAM-PVG: 29,100. Reason for travel: 55% business
(Hamburg Airport Passenger Survey).
On the other hand there are also new opportunities for Danish passengers due to an easier access to Hamburg airport. Currently 3.7 million people can reach Hamburg Airport
within one hour, 4.9 million in 1.5 hours and 7.5 million in two hours. This catchment area
is supposed to be further extended by a Fehmarnbelt fixed link. Hamburg Airport’s timetable covers 115 domestic and international direct routes. On the following map showing the
embarking passengers at HAM by region the importance of the Danish market Jutland for
the airport can be observed, the Copenhagen region is currently untouched.
Figure 77
Embarking Passengers at HAM by Region
Source: Hamburg Airport.
Due to the ongoing passenger loss the airport of Lübeck plays a minor role in this discussion. Being the only Ryanair base along the corridor Lübeck might be able to attract additional Danish passengers due to cheap rates, but the total volume is expected to be negligible compared to HAM or CPH.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
86
Ports Copenhagen Malmö, Lübeck
The Ports of Lübeck are the farthermost south-western transhipment hub located in the
Baltic Sea and act as the central turntable especially for the traffic between the traditional
economical metropolis in west- and central Europe and the fast developing economical
region of the Baltic Sea. One of the most important factors for the success of the largest
German port at the Baltic Sea is the extremely dense departure rate of the liner services.
The Ports of Lübeck offer more than 130 departures per week serving almost all important
Baltic ports. The following figure shows the main cargo flows via Lübeck and underlines
Lübeck's turntable function for the Baltic Sea region.
Figure 78
Main Cargo Flows via Lübeck
Source: Lübecker Hafen-Gesellschaft, Railhub Lübeck, Presentation, 05.10.2011. Link: http://www.de.fbbc.eu/index.php/bisherige-veranstaltungen/articles/logistikbranche-steht--querung-positiv-gegenueber-192.html?file=tl_files/downloads/Logistikkonference%204%20okt/Port%20of% 20Luebeck%20Heinrich%20Beckmann.pdf (07.03.2012).
Additionally, the Lübeck ports offer all advantages of a logistic centre, as well as a wide
range of hinterland-connections. The three-lane motorway "A1" in direction of Hamburg
connects Lübeck with the main economic centres in Europe. The rail net offers an especially high efficiency in the carload traffic as well as in the combined traffic. In addition, the
Elbe-Lübeck-Canal provides a link to the European "inland waterways" network. With a
modal share of 15 % and more than 50 trains per week (2011, combined and conventional
transport) to 40 destinations across Europe (e.g. Basel, Duisburg, Ludwigshafen, Verona,
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
87
Novarra) the railway transport mode plays an important role in hinterland transportation.
Lübeck is proposed to be part of the TEN core-net. Over the recent years the port of
Lübeck has made considerable infrastructure investments i.a. to create additional marshalling yards and intermodal terminal facilities to be prepared for the coming FBL.
Figure 79
Preparation for the Fixed Link
Source: Lübecker Hafen-Gesellschaft, Railhub Lübeck, Presentation, 05.10.2011. Link: http://www.de.fbbc.eu/index.php/bisherige-veranstaltungen/articles/logistikbranche-steht--querung-positiv-gegenueber-192.html?file=tl_files/downloads/Logistikkonference%204%20okt/Port%20of%20Luebeck%20Heinrich%20Beckmann.pdf (07.03.2012).
The fixed link is expected to improve Lübeck's position as transhipment hub in the Fehmarnbelt region, as Danish cargo also can be consolidated here. On the other hand LHG
estimates that, the fixed link will lead to a decrease of approximately 10 % of the total volume shipped via Lübeck, mainly on the Swedish trade.
The Port of Copenhagen is a major port for transport of cargo and for ferries. The port is
also known as a major destination for cruise ships. To strengthen the port’s position as the
gateway to the Baltic Sea, the Port of Copenhagen merged in 2001 with the Port of Malmö
in Sweden to become Copenhagen Malmö Port. Not only Danish and Swedish cargo but
also other European consignments move in transit via Copenhagen Malmö Port, either
directly from truck, rail or ship. Therefore the Copenhagen Malmö port is expected to benefit from an efficient (railway) link to central Europe.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
4.
ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE CONCEPTS
4.1
General Assessment
88
For Germany the general judgement of existing infrastructure concepts - at least regarding
road, rail in inland waterways - is ambivalent. Germany's national and political self-understanding comprises to be a global leading industry country with excellent infrastructure
supply and at the same time the leading logistics platform of Europe. The fulfilment of this
self-defined role is getting harder from year to year.
At first it has to be brought in mind again that rail freight shall increase by 65% until 2025.
The expected 152 Billion tkm can be judged as conservative because significant changes
like significant intermodal changes are no longer assumed to be likely with regard to the
experiences with the former BVWP and will accordingly not be included as targeted figures
of the future market development in Germany. Nevertheless these absent changes will
become very likely as future requirements will force transports and logistics to become
significantly better in energy efficiency as well as in cost efficiency in general.
Since decades Billions of Euros had been invested in transport infrastructure according to
official planning documents. The level of modernity of the German railway network is on
record level, at the same time road infrastructure, the most important backbone of the
whole transport sector is adversely affected by less maintenance and a bow wash of necessary re-investments of existing highways, bridges and so on.
Regarding rail the content of the BVWP is extremely influenced by federal and local political views and is expresses a national approach of infrastructure development ignoring
widely bilateral or comprehensive requirements. The rail connections of the Betuwe-Line or
the border crossing at Horka are only two examples.
At the same time the funding of the BVWP is too little since many years according to the
introduced requirements.69 DB AG as main infrastructure manager is investing about
4.5 - 5 Billion Euro per year in rail infrastructure in fact solely funded by the Federal Government.70 According to official statistics, the degree of up-to-dateness of the rail networks
in total is higher than ever, at the same time DB AG has to increase maintenance activities
significantly due to neglected elimination of deterioration in the forefront of the intended
privatisation of DB AG Group some years ago.
Investments in rail infrastructure focus only on high-speed passenger transports. Here DB
AG still has a monopoly and can boost this business segment accordingly. There are no
dedicated rail freight projects included in the BVWP because rail freight is commonly seen
to be a co-user of (new) lines primarily designed for passenger transports.71 High-speedline projects like Nuremberg - Erfurt or Stuttgart - Ulm including "Stuttgart 21" consume de
facto nearly all of the available funding of the coming years.72 The benefit of these invest69
70
71
72
So called "demands of the associations" amounting up to 5 Billion Euro per year. See Gleisnetz: 5 Milliarden jährlich für Ausbau und Pflege nötig, Allianz pro Schiene, press release, no date. Link:
http://www.allianz-pro-schiene.de/infrastruktur/investitionen-schieneninfrastruktur/ (07.03.2012).
See DB AG, Daten und Fakten, various volumes.
Single counterexample: High-speed-line Frankfurt-Cologne. Gradients do not allow freight trains to run
there.
Estimations say that due to the high-speed focus the budget of the next more than twenty years are already
reserved before sound infrastructure projects could be initiated as well.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
89
ments is in question as many assumptions of the commercial evaluations emerged to be
too optimistic73 and the number of train paths available today is too small.74
Contrary to that especially the rail hinterland transports of the seaports require more and
more capacity. As shown above due to the growing global exchange of products and services the land-based transport in Europe respectively Germany as well is increasing rapidly here. Already now the seaports of Bremerhaven and Hamburg are generating about
20% of total rail freight services in Germany and this share is to grow in future as well.
Table 9
Ports
Rail-based Hinterland Containertransport Plannings of Sea Ports
Time Frame
Mio TEU on Rail
Growth
Trains per year
Rotterdam
<2035
3.6
+~700% (2009)
~45.000
Antwerp
<2020
2.3
+~100% (2006)
~29.000
Zeebrügge
<2030
2.2
+~600% (2009)
~27.000
Hamburg
<2025
3.2
+~100% (2009)
~100.000
Bremerhaven
<2025
1.6
+~100% (2009)
~28.000
Source: Ports. Analysis HTC.
Figure 80
Main Hinterland Corridors of Seaports (growth trains/day until 2015)
Source: Godehard Weber, DB Netz AG, Regionalbereich Nord, Seehafen - Hinterlandverkehr - Entwicklung der Eisenbahninfrastruktur in Norddeutschland, Presentation 12.09.2008, p.7. Link: http://www.enno-hagenah.de/cms/default/dokbin/251/251178.vortragsfolien_db_ag.pdf (10.03.2012).
Table 9 gives and overview for major seaports in Europe and Germany and what is
planned there to increase hinterland logistics on rail in order to safeguard their own competitiveness as a seaport.75 If these planning become reality the rail networks will have to
73
74
75
This is a prior problem of past forecasts in Germany regarding rail (freight). Comparable forecasts for the
road transport mode normally matched with the later reality of the mobility markets in principle.
An attribute of mixed train operations: The larger the difference between on the one hand maximum speed
of freight or short-distance passenger trains (80-120km/h) and on the other hand high-speed trains the
lower the capacity available on a certain line. Rule of thumb: 1 high-speed train path ≡ 2 common train
paths.
According to Dr. Ninnemann capable hinterland connections are decisive for a seaport to keep a strong
international competition position. See Ninnemann, Jan, Seaport competition in Europe, p. 205ff.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
90
bear further burden. More than today it is likely that the boosting demand of seaports for
rail transports from/to the ports will drive the whole market. As their catchment areas are
mainly in the East and South of Europe (see Figure 80) these transports will take place on
the already today strongly use North-South- and East-West-Corridors.
Nonetheless most of the activities to improve hinterland corridors need more political and
commercial attention. Mainly the funding of new project beside the existing investment
programs (e.g. "Wachstumsprogramm" of DB AG) still is difficult. Measures of the ad-hocprogramme to improve the situation in the hinterland area in dedicated nodes and on certain hinterland lines cover only to some extent the market needs.
In total further shortcomings are likely especially if the seaports can realized their targets.
Therefore "quick hits" are to be achieved in order to improve network capacity as soon as
possible at minimal cost. A positive step in the right direction was initiated in 2011 by DB
AG with the so called "Netzfonds"-model – financed by DB AG on its own because of bettered profitability - in order to come to maximum capacity increase at lowest budgets. Until
2015 50 small measurements shall be realized with a budget of about 130 Million Euro.76
An additional challenge of the future will be on the EU-level as well on the level of the
single member states - to manage the coming necessary reconstruction of the whole
transport and logistic sector in order to support the "decarbonisation" of nearly all kind
of industries and service sectors of the world leading economies as far as possible. Today
some 98% of all logistic processes lead to consumption of fossil resources. As the resources are limited and prices already today are on historic levels and still strongly increasing the question of efficient and sustainable ways (not only) of transport and logistic
matters has to be raised again.
In comparison with other industry sectors the transport sector does has its difficulties to
match efficiently with the reduction targets fixed e.g. on the Kyoto-Conference to limit consequences on climate change. As Figure 81 shows, all sectors within the EU reduced
emissions during the last nearly two decades with the exception of the transport
sector which increased emissions by about 25% compared to 1990. In 2007 the transport
sector contributed nearly 20% of total green house gas emissions within the EU 27.
Within the transport sector main drivers of this critical development are the segments aviation" and "navigation". Increasing transport volumes were not compensated totally by technical improvements (i.a. engine's efficiency) so that market growth led to further emissions
e.g. of CO2 (total transport 1990-2008: +33.7%). Main responsibility for emission still has
the road sector with more than 70% of total CO2 emissions of the transport sector. See
accordingly Figure 82.
A further challenge especially for the rail transport mode in general is noise - an underestimated issue since decades. Today noise problems become severe and are reason for
public resistance against especially rail transport (first of all freight trains), new lines or
modernisation measures. In Germany Politicians argue in favour of abolition of the so cal76
See DB AG, DB Netz AG investiert zusätzlich in Strecken und Anlagen, press release, 06.09.2011. Link:
http://www.deutschebahn.com/de/presse/presseinformationen/pi_it/2209510/ubd20110906.html
(08.03.2011).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
91
led "noise bonus" of rail. On the other hand there is limited willingness i.a. within the transport sector to handle noise reduction steps demanded by the public proactively. One fo the
main actors here are the Federal Government (Ministries of Finance and Transport) and
DB Netz AG as federal-owned company and main infrastructure provider in Germany.
Figure 81
GHG Green House Gas Emissions by sectors EU-27 2007
Source: European Commission, EU transport in figures, Statistical pocketbook 2010, p.184f. Link: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/publications/statistics/doc/pocketbook2010_contractor.pdf (08.03.2012).
Figure 82
CO2 Emissions from Transport EU-27 2008
Source: European Commission, EU transport in figures, Statistical pocketbook 2011, p.124f. Link: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/publications/statistics/doc/pocketbook2010_contractor.pdf (08.03.2012).
If there is any belief in future modal shift towards rail (and inland waterways) fostered by
politics and supported by the economy, infrastructural preparations clearly have to take
place in advance. If e.g. inland waterways or rail transport modes in future shall be of a
larger intermodal meaning the precondition of adequate capacity supply has to be fulfilled.
As the infrastructural capacity offers grow slower than the demand of transport markets is
commonly increasing today tremendous investments are necessary. To enlarge capacities
e.g. of rail infrastructure significantly operation processes have to be revised in order to
increase efficiency as well as new lines have to be build. If freight transport on road in
Europe (EU 27) shall be reduced by only 5% the railway sector would have to be increased by almost 25%. An unchanged efficiency assumed network capacity at the
same time would have to be enlarged by one fourth77 as well as staff, traction and rolling stock fleet of the railway companies.78 It is evident that such important steps - which
77
78
Corridor-wise this increase will have to be significantly higher as growth of demand of train paths will focus
on a few main corridors.
Neither railway companies nor the supply industry will be in the position to fund respectively to deliver such
quantities of rolling stock and locomotives without any preparation. Moreover staff in general and especially
train drivers will remain short as already today and also here a market oriented source will be a real challenge for the market participants.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
92
are aiming to rebuild the whole economy step by step - have to be prepared in detail and in
the long run to safeguard chances of success.
For Denmark are the main points of transport policy covered by ‘green solutions’ including
substantial and sustainable investments: as much as possible of transport growth should
solely be directed to the railway, which is asked to doubling the passenger km and triple
the ton km. Public spending in new railway investments is 60% of the total investments,
and new funds have just been decided in order to lower the fares in public transport thereby enhancing the incentives for getting more passengers.
The railway network in Denmark will be rebuilt. A complete ERTMS modernization with
new signalling and traffic management system will be implemented on national scale,
which in itself raises capacity.
New tracks in the east-west corridor are partly under construction and partly in the study
phase. The 250 km/h line Copenhagen-Ringsted is progressing, new tracks around Copenhagen Airport with connection to the Øresound Bridge is to be decided, and new fixed
links across either Kattegat or Little Belt are investigated in order to increase long term
capacity (and shorten travel times).
In the north-south corridor are capacity improvements under way, both on the hinterland
line on the islands of Lolland and Falster by an upgrade and track doubling. Further, a decision to build a new double tracked Storstrømmen Bridge is now under preparation due to
the large bottleneck which the old bridge constitutes after 2020 when the fixed link opens.
In southern Jutland will the rail line be track doubled in 2015. And around the big cities of
Aarhus and Copenhagen are completely new light rails lines under construction, the
cityline in Aarhus and the Ring 3-line in Copenhagen, where 2 metro projects also are under construction, the Metro City line and the Northern line.
For the road sector are a number of new high ways under construction. Three motorway
projects are in realization phase in Mid Jutland. A new north-south trunk road along the
western part of Jutland is studied, but improvement of capacity of the existing north-south
corridor cannot be avoided. New capacity for rail and road across Little Belt is also investigated, and according to the time schedule a decision by 2013 is expected on the national
level. The new projects can at the earliest start in 8 years eventually as a part of the new
investment budget for the period 2020-2030
In east Denmark are a number of highway projects under construction. Rebuilding of the
M3 around Copenhagen to minimum 6 lanes has now final been inaugurated. Other major
projects are concerning the expansion of highways to 6-8 lanes of Helsingør motorway,
Køge Bugt motorway, Holbæk motorway through Roskilde, and coupling M4 and M3. The
last one is the beginning of a new motorway to Frederikssound together with a new bridge
or tunnel under Roskilde Fjord, but these projects would probably have to be postponed to
the period 2020-2030.
The large new projects of a western corridor (Ring 5) or an eastern corridor (connecting to
a northern harbour tunnel in Copenhagen) are under preparation for a decision in 2013.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
93
These projects are vital to increase capacity and reduce congestion in the metropolitan
region, and thus also improve the transit traffic through the region.
But can massive investments in the road network in the Capital region solve all congestion
problems? This is doubted today by many transport experts. The investment initiatives are
broadly consistent but only up to take the top of the expected demand, as calculated in a
number of analyzes and reports. There must actually be implemented major changes to
handle a larger growth perspective.
This can be considered basically two ways, namely the ability to regulate traffic through
various forms of green road km-charges, or different ways of increasing investment levels
in transport infrastructure, where new organizational and funding principles can become
part of the solution.
In terms of regulation will it be local systems in the form of toll rings or in the form of more
national road user charging systems. The specific proposal is currently cancelled in Copenhagen, just before the government had planned to adopt it, but congestion problems
are unresolved, so it would be quite natural that the proposal comes up again - perhaps a
wiser technical solution.
National road pricing is the most effective and comprehensive ITS-system that can exploit
and optimize the capacity of transport infrastructure. At the railway is already an extensive
rail charging system. In the road network we will probably see an expansion from vignette
and lorry km-charges system to apply the systems more generally for passenger cars.
Finally a look at Sweden and the current trends, new initiatives are underway in terms of
regulation of car traffic. Following the introduction of congestion charging in Stockholm turn
has now come to Gothenburg which also next year introduces a charging zone in the city.
The Swedish Transport authorities have prepared a detailed draft report to the Swedish
government concerning the transport sector's development and need of capacity seen in a
perspective up to 2050.
It seems that one of the main conclusions is that infrastructure capacity will become increasingly constrained over the coming years, even in a view of various traffic demand
assessments. There is proposed an expansion of highways in the existing network, but it is
recognized that some new measures also must be done. And as seen in other countries
are therefore prepared various proposals to build a parallel railway network to receive the
next doubling of passenger traffic.
A comprehensive approach is necessary because there is no money to remove the bottle
necks in itself, or to establish around 700 km of new high-speed lines only for fast passenger traffic. The initiatives must necessarily promote a combination of goods and passengers, and combining intermodal solutions in a coherent transport system.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
94
In a nutshell: The infrastructure development should be reoriented in order to adopt the
economies to the coming challenges:
► Understand infrastructure development as a comprehensive issue considering national
and comprehensive transport needs to be coordinated!
► Safeguard more capacity for ecological friendly transports for passenger and freight as
a matter of prevention and general preparation for the future!
► Support the sustainable implementation of the new White Paper - Roadmap to a Single
European Transport Area!
► Pay more attention to the needs of the transport markets instead of organizing infrastructure development primarily from a political perspective!
► Ensure more efficient use of (rail) infrastructure) as more infrastructure is not a value in
itself and an efficient use has to ensured by adequate (regulatory) measures!
► Increase budget efficiency by investing in reasonable (rail) infrastructure projects considering the requirements of passenger and freight business at the same time
► Enable energy-efficient modes like rail to leave their traditional market segments (between aviation and car) and to enter more long-distance passenger corridors!
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
4.2
95
Corridor-related Assessment
As highlighted in chapter 1 the Baltic Region focuses on the availability of rail capabilities
in order to solve future mobility and logistical challenges. As future meaning of rail and
inland waterways will decrease, Denmark, Germany and Sweden rely on rail more than the
EU-27 member states on average (see Figure 34 and Figure 35). Therefore the rail transport mode is of specific strategic relevance.
The analysis would be facilitated through comprehensive and cross-border project organisation. As there are only very first ideas to create such entity a lot of different documents
are to be considered which sometimes argue on different levels using various information
from different sources.
Beside the publicly discussed topics like capacity restraints, cost increases and so on the
official actual infrastructure concept (2010) still comprises very briefly the following elements:79
► Transport target:
− Reduction of travel and transport times between German, Denmark and Sweden
− Elimination of bottlenecks.
► Planned measurements
− Electrification Bad Schwartau - Puttgarden
− Extension from single to double track of Bad Schwartau - Puttgarden line (Exception:
Fehmarn Sound Bridge).
► Project figures:
− Length of the line Lübeck - Puttgarden 89 km
− Draft speed 160 km/h
− Total cost: 817 Million Euro.
The official measures to be taken in order to safeguard "in time" capacity comprise:80
► Upgrading of the Ahrensburg - Bad Oldesloe line to 3 tracks, Vmax = 160 km/h,
► Some gradient improvements in Bad Schwartau and Neustadt (speed reductions in
Bad Oldesloe (Vmax = 150 km/h) and in Oldenburg (Vmax = 80 km/h) will persist),
► Upgrading of the Bad Schwartau - Puttgarden line to 2 tracks (Fehmarn Sound Bridge
persist single tracked).
According to most current documents81 the FBL hinterland rail connection is part of the
chapter D. "Other important projects". The above mentioned official investment figure for
the FBL was criticised by the Federal board of auditors to be too "optimistic". The entity in
2009 estimated cost of 1.7 Billion Euros including the enhancement Hamburg - Bad Olde-
79
80
81
See Deutscher Bundestag, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Verkehrsinvestitionsbericht 2010,
Drucksache 17/4980, 01.03.2011, p.165. Link: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/049/1704980.pdf
(09.03.2012).
See BMVBS, Analyse der verkehrlichen Auswirkungen einer Stufenkonzeption beim Ausbau der Schienenachse Hamburg - Puttgarden, 2006, p.1. Link: http://www.riechey.de/uploads/media/BVU-Studie-2006Wirtschaftlichkeitsberechnung_FBQ_Hinterland-.pdf (09.03.2012).
BMVBS, Investitionsrahmenplan 2011 - 2015 für die Verkehrsinfrastruktur des Bundes (IRP), 15. März
2012 supplement 1, p.7. (p.37.) Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/80922/publicationFile/53893/investitionsrahmenplan-2011-2015-irp.pdf (29.03.2012.).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
96
sloe (S4) with about 406 Million Euro82. This judgement was affirmed by the budget committee of the German Bundestag.83
Depending on the observers view these estimates can be evaluated as "optimistic" as well
as "pessimistic". The defined steps for further network development recommended by the
forecast experts - also in context with the commercial evaluation of each investment project - directly imply an advantageous situation regarding the closure of infrastructure development works. Typical assumption is that certain other necessary investments, which
are relevant regarding capacity of the whole network and influence expected profitability of
individual measures, are already executed. So their influence on capacity and quality became part of the commercial evaluation of all measures to improve the railway's network
on the level of BVWP.
The brief FBL hinterland infrastructure description given above reflects that challenge as
well. To receive the mentioned capacity effects only a few steps of investments are necessary. According to FBL all of the 24 measures of the German ad-hoc-programme for seaports ("Sofortprogramm Seehafenhinterlandverkehr")84 are assumed to be completely finalized. Additionally for the neighbour states of Germany - Poland, Czech Republic/Slovakia,
Austria, Italy, Switzerland, France and BeNeLux 36 different steps of new or extension
projects are judged to be in operation.85 7 of the 24 ad-hoc measurements for Germany
are located directly to the seaports Bremerhaven and Hamburg86 and so far close to
Lübeck and Rostock. It is very likely that many of them will not be in operation in 2025 due
to other demanding "politically" pushed projects like Nuremberg - Erfurt or Stuttgart - Ulm /
Stuttgart 21. Regarding the FBL the extension works between Hamburg and Lübeck (i.a.
steps for "S4") are insinuated to be finalized "in time" including possible delays of completion of FBL itself.
Subsequently the capacity issue looks pretty better compared to different concepts of
analysis and evaluation of projects. Result is the individual commercial project evaluation
is in principle in danger to become too optimistic and network capacity effects are overestimated. So it is not very surprising that "rail" has severe problems for many to match with
the ambitious planning documented in the official forecast files. Repeatedly the German
forecast rail freight transport figures did not match with realized figures. Contrary to that
the road sector is in general in the position to fulfil political expectations documented in the
82
83
84
85
86
Prices of 2008, according to " Überprüfung des Bedarfsplans" 2011.
See Bericht an den Rechnungsprüfungsausschuss des Haushaltsausschusses des Deutschen Bundestages nach §88 Abs. 2 BHO über die Feste Verbindungen über den Fehmarnbelt mit Hinterlandanbindung,
30.04.2009. Link: http://spdnet.sozi.info/sh/ostholstein/bhagedorn/dl/10-10-01_16WP385.pdf (29.03.2012).
See details of that programme at DB Netze Sofortprogramm Seehafen-Hinterland-Verkehr: Eine gute Investition in die Zukunft, 2008. Link: http://www.deutschebahn.com/site/shared/de/dateianhaenge/publikationen__broschueren/ub__transport__logistik/seehafen__hinterlandverkehr__flyer__sofortprogramm.pdf
(09.03.2012).
See BMVBS, Überprüfung des Bedarfsplans für die Bundesschienenwege, final report Nov. 2011, p.5-5ff
(104ff). Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/59400/publicationFile/30928/schlussberichtschienen-de.pdf (06.02.2012).
See DB Netze Sofortprogramm Seehafen-Hinterland-Verkehr: Eine gute Investition in die Zukunft, 2008.
Link: http://www.deutschebahn.com/site/shared/de/dateianhaenge/publikationen__broschueren/ub__transport__logistik/seehafen__hinterlandverkehr__flyer__sofortprogramm.pdf (09.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
97
forecast target figures.87 Figure 83 shows for German road freight (left) and rail freight
(right) transports the deviation between forecasted and realized figures.
Figure 83
Deviation Analysis for Road and Rail Freight of Passed Forecasts
for Germany
Source: BMVBS, Verkehrsprognose 2015, 2001, p.318+309. Link: http://www.bmvbs.de /cae/servlet/contentblob/33560/publicationFile/51577/verkehrsprognose-2015.pdf (09.03.2012).
Regarding these not very advantageous conditions it is not unlikely that with growing daily
train figures capacity and quality will become an issue. The arising commercial consequences (customer's penalties, higher cost due to disturbed vehicle cycle times and so on)
primarily the railway companies will have to bear but not the infrastructure manager.
Today many of the chances and challenges of the transport markets especially regarding
rail are not very transparent and accessible. Already in 2009 public urban transport companies addressed their cautiousness regarding FBL because the inherent chances and
risks are mainly unclear due to important missing commercial facts and outlooks for the
Baltic region.88
87
88
BMVBS stressed that traffic forecasts do not deliver figures to be judges as target figures. See Deutscher
Bundestag, Drucksache 17/7690, Bundesverkehrswegeplanung - Grundannahmen der Verkehrsprognose
2030, Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Kleine Anfrage der Abgeordneten Stephan Kühn, Dr. Anton
Hofreiter, Dr. Valerie Wilms, weiterer Abgeordneter und der Fraktion BÜNDNIS 90/ DIE GRÜNEN Drucksache 17/7431 -, 09.11.2011, p.2. Link: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/076/1707690.pdf
(09.03.2012).
See IHK Lübeck, Entwicklung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur auf der Achse Hamburg - Puttgarden im Zuge einer
festen Fehmarn-Beltquerung, 2009, p.3f. Link: http://www.ihk-schleswig-holstein.de/linkableblob/1054234
/.3./data/gutachten_langfassung-data.pdf (06.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
98
According to DB AG the current valid figures (day/2 directions) for 2025 are as follows
►
►
►
22 long distance passenger trains
38 short distance public urban transport trains
78 for freight trains.
It has to be considered that the total freight train figure will include 60-70 freight trains running today between Germany and Sweden/Denmark via Padborg and tomorrow shall be
routed vie FBL according to conceptions of DB AG. So the net plus of freight trains is
about 20.
This targeted train figure for 2025 means that at the opening of the FBL the calculated capacity will be already utilized by about 50%.89 In fact the utilisation level might be about
75% according to the limiting situations like in the Lübeck node.
Due to the re-routing of freight trains and a in general limited market growth potential the
Padborg corridor will become cost-ineffective and many of the train path lots will remain
unused. The infrastructure managers will have to take measures to initiate more demand
for train paths what is not very like or to reduce cost by closing down parts of the current
available infrastructure. Besides the consultants expect that not all (third party) train operators will follow automatically the re-routing plans of DB AG. So the final distribution of train
paths demand between the corridors of FBL and Jutland will be a steered result of in fact
available capacity of FBL and i.a. within the Hamburg node (i.e. single track "Güterumgehungsbahn") and the demanded level of infrastructure charges for the use of FBL.
In case that in future trains running between Denmark and Germany preferably use the
FBL corridor the region of South Schleswig will probably loose some of its especially logistical connections. The inherent chance for the regional logistic activities is to have "new"
capacities available for freight trains. Precondition is of course that there is an adequate
infrastructure of combined terminals or loading tracks. In principal currently only the Padborg terminal is of noteworthy meaning as nearly all sidings in Schleswig-Holstein had
been closed in the younger past (so called "Mora C" initiative of DB AG started ca. 2001).
Such capacity considerations of course have to be done section-wise as the capacity of
the relevant upstream and downstream interfaces of the analyzed line is decisive. The
weakest section of a complete line decides the comprehensive capacity maximum. Regarding train figures as calculated the route Puttgarden - Lübeck would remain mainly uncritical due to today very little traffic. But railway nodes like Lübeck (Bad Schwartau) and
Hamburg and the connecting line will become real bottlenecks - i.e. in matters of the 2025
train figures - as these sections are already heavily used first of all by public transport. For
that reason the extension works regarding "S4" are vital for this corridor.
The final layout of the route is still open but anyway capacity simulations are necessary to
see whether a three- or four-track line layout is required for the Hamburg - Lübeck route as
suggested by the IHK Lübeck also for possible high-speed purpose.90
89
Basis of estimation: 10' train sequence: 6+24+2=288 trains/day/2 directions and "perfect" interfaces of the
calculated route regarding capacity meaning no limitations. In fact capacity might be lower than 200
trains/day.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
5.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SOLVING INFRASTRUCTURE PROBLEMS
5.1
General remarks
99
Chapter 1 addressed in detail the future requirements - at least as they are described in
the analyzed official forecasts - for the European transport market (EU 27) in total and as
well for the Baltic region and the EU member states Germany, Denmark and Sweden. The
known forecast studies argue in a manner which prolongs the traditional development path
(driving through the "rear mirror": to do things in future as they were done in the past) with
a dominating road sector in the passenger and freight segment which is not eco-friendly
enough to match neither the fixed environmental targets nor the factual challenges.
According to chapter 2 and 3 it is likely that the existing way of use and development of
transport infrastructure has potential for future improvement to meet in an adequate way
the needs of the transport markets like more capacity in a comparable short period of time,
good quality of infrastructure considering at the same time targets like clearance of the
public households, debt reductions and so on. So far it is necessary to invest in infrastructure which indeed is demanded by the markets and risks should be avoided to push projects too much from a political perspective in order to eliminate possible "wishful thinking"topics.
At the same time infrastructure projects express or shall express political ideas for tomorrow. If Europe shall become more than a framework of unified member states and shall
become an institution with an own kind of personality the different regions have to be
brought closer together from the transport and logistics perspective. Perhaps the analogy
of the creation of Germany before the founding of the "Deutsche Reich" in 1871 is applicable. In the late beginning of the 19th century there were a huge number of states, cities and
dominions forming the confederation of "Deutsche Bund" 1815. In 1834 the "Deutsche
Zollverein" (German tariff union) was put into force. At that time the first German railways
had already started operations. Friedrich List, one of the leading former economists at that
time (1833) created the first draft of a railway network for Germany although only the very
first structures had been created.
In relation to Europe the necessity of a comprehensive infrastructure network for the
relevant transport modes should be designed - the TEN-T concepts may be a valid approach to be deepened in future. Beside the current rules that allow national infrastructure
managers to realize dedicated Trans-European routes if they are seen to be appropriate, a
network strategy is essential which is of a peace and coherent with "own" projects. Furthermore funding rules should be implemented which allow to realize sound infrastructure
projects in manageable time frames. Nonetheless besides all commercial aspects to be
considered also a clear strategic and political view on Europe's infrastructure agenda
seems to be necessary in order to support European unification and the according creation
of new economic areas with new environmentally focussed rules of the game.
90
See IHK Lübeck, Entwicklung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur auf der Achse Hamburg - Puttgarden im Zuge einer
festen Fehmarn-Beltquerung, 2009, p.89. Link: http://www.ihk-schleswig-holstein.de/linkableblob/1054234
/.3./data/gutachten_langfassung-data.pdf (16.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
5.2
100
North-South-Corridor in Germany
For the road sector in general the future transport development can be envisaged as in
principle without significant problems. The Fehmarn Sound Bridge is likely to become the
"weak point" of the corridor. Today and in future especially during vacations traffic jams are
possible if the transport forecasts for the FBL become true. Beside this fact-based evaluation it is as well a political question whether it is acceptable to have possible traffic jams
during one month per year and the rest of the year there is likely no problem given due to
high traffic volumes. A third lane with steered bidirectional operation dependent on the
direct transport situation is likely to enlarge capacity sufficiently for many years.
Regarding rail infrastructure on the North-South-Corridor the capacity situation will become a problem if the number of trains per day develop as forecasted in early 2009:
► In case that in 2025 the double-track line is complete in operation and in time with the
FBL opening the remaining potential bottleneck is the single-track section of the Fehmarn Sound Bridge. Commonly about 90 trains per day can run on a single-track line if
train speed is harmonized between passenger and freight trains. This figure can vary
dependent on the concrete situation (infrastructure installations, operation programme,
punctuality of trains and so on) and so far it has to be left open how many trains can be
daily operated in detail.
► The higher train figures are (>>100/day) the more likely the Fehmarn Sound Bridge
becomes a bottleneck and "good punctuality" an issue. This is important for the whole
corridor capability because it is likely as well that the 3,1 km long and 74 years old
Storstrømmen Bridge will be refurbished or substituted through a new building within
the next years (<2020) due to in December 2011 discovered substantial damages. Accordingly the Fehmarn Sound Bridge likely will become not the sole but the first real
bottleneck on the corridor due to the one-track line section. The challenge is dependent
on the operating programme. From the consultants perspective it is likely that DB AG
will design the alignment of the double-track line for 250 km/h to be in line with TEN requirements. Draft speed for the hinterland project currently is 160 km/h. Decisive is not
the possible speed but a continuous (high) speed level to achieve attractive travel
times.91 Cost for the double-track and electrification works officially are >800 Million
Euro. Due to cost increases and the still unspecified alignment a doubling of cost is not
unlikely.
► Only in case of train figures being significantly higher than forecasted at the end of
2009 by DB AG situations of severe bottlenecks are more likely. Shortcomings are as
well to be expected in the node of Lübeck/Bad Schwartau. Currently trains running on
the railway lines Puttgarden - Lübeck and Kiel - Lübeck have to share capacity. Today
the enhancement of regional passenger trains in the node leads to a higher level of
demand. This situation will become more challenging in case of more trains running on
the Puttgarden - Lübeck due to the opening of the FBL. An enhancement of the node
of Lübeck through a third and fourth tack in the section Bad Schwartau crossing Lübeck central station is mandatory.92 To integrate passenger and freight train opera-
91
92
See train operations between Hamburg and Berlin: Maximum speed is 230 km/h, travel time is about 90
minutes.
The need of a fourth track depends finally on the in fact realized future figure of freight trains (per day).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
101
tions on the route between Hamburg and Lübeck without any disturbances a buffer at
Lübeck central station for freight trains is necessary as well.
► In case of daily train figures as forecasted by DB AG before the signing of the treaty
(210 trains/day) in principle for the whole route Lübeck - Hamburg a four-track-line
design becomes mandatory as well.93
► It is very unlikely to operate such train figures in the node of Hamburg without any
problems: The single track section at Hamburg-Wandsbek has to become a double track segment in order to allow trains passing the node at its easterly brink. Additionally a sustainable solution has to be found to solve the capacity problems at
Hamburg central station.94 Infrastructural and operational options are available but
not relevant to be discussed here in detail.
► A core problem of a sufficient capacity supply within the node of Hamburg being widely
independent from the FBL is the "Hamburg Unterelbe" crossing near the HamburgHarburg station. The bottleneck there is mainly a result of permanent growing figures of
freight trains from/to the westerly part of the port by at the same time unchanged infrastructure capacity within this crossing. The situation aggravates as the new doubletrack connection in Hamburg-Hausbruch is opened for operations.95 In 2005 for the first
time a principle bypass solution for "Hamburg Unterelbe" was presented.96 Basic
idea of the double-track electrified line (partly a tunnel) was to facilitate rail network operation substantially in the most critical part of the Hamburg node. The "Harburger Bypass" shall directly begin in Hamburg-Hausbruch. The line is intended to be designed
as a tunnel as far as possible to minimize environmental damages and noise emissions. The line will follow closely the highway A7 and is to be connected with the freight
line Maschen - Jesteburg - Buchholz and the Maschen - Lüneburg route. According to
the interface design trains can reach/leave the port towards the West, South and NorthEast directly. The existing line through Hamburg-Harburg would be kept in operation for
train figures exceeding the bypass capacity but noise emissions in that quarter will be
reduced significantly. Expected train capacity is about 100%97 and cost estimations
were about 1 Billion Euro.98 The "Harburger Bypass" still is only of unofficial character
but is of strategic meaning for the port, the whole city and the region around from the
93
94
95
96
97
98
Assumption: Most of the trains pass Hamburg node. See according infrastructure recommendations of the
IHK Lübeck investigation of 2009. The train figures of 210 per day are i.a. documented in DB Netze AG,
Raumordnungsverfahren Schienenhinterlandanbindung Feste querung (FBQ), Erweitertes Handout, Gesamtunterlage zur Antragskonferenz zum Raumordnungsverfahren gemäß §14a Abs.1 Landesplanungsgesetz (LaPlaG), 22.06.2010, p.10f. Link: http://www .deutschebahn.com/contentblob/2199032/__erweitertes__handout/data.pdf (22.03.2012).
A new platform between track 9 and track 10 is intended. Track 10 will be dismantled and track 9 will get a
new platform. See, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung - Verkehrsinvestitionsbericht für das Berichtsjahr 2010, Deutscher Bundestag, Drucksache 17/8700, 20.02.2012, p.163. Link: http://dip.bundestag.de/btd/17/087/1708700.pdf (20.03.2012).
The second track and consolidation of signalling blocks were parts of a collective contract of an ad-hoc
programme worth about 49 Million Euro. See Deutscher Bundestag, Unterrichtung durch die Bundesregierung, Verkehrsinvestitionsbericht 2010, Drucksache 17/4980, 01.03.2011, p.14+156. Link: http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/049/1704980.pdf (09.03.2012).
The analysis of 2009 was not published yet.
Depending on the capability of the network interfaces.
See Dr. Thomas Rössler, Leistungsfähige Infrastrukturen für den Seehafenhinterlandverkehr, BDI-Congress Verkehrspolitischer Workshop, 05.03.2009. Link: http://www.htc-consultancy.de/fileadmin/Daten/Dokumente/Vortrag%20BDI.pdf (12.03.2012).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
102
market demand perspective requiring at least twice as much train path capacity than
today until 2025.99
► One further main question today still unanswered is how many trains using the FBL
have to call at Hamburg. The larger this share will be the more reasonable is a deviation of freight trains. One alternative to avoid the Hamburg bottleneck is to run trains
from Lübeck via Bad Kleinen and Wittenberge in the direction to/from Southern and
Eastern Europe. The route Lübeck - Grevesmühlen - Bad Kleinen - Hagenow /
Ludwigslust for that purpose would have to be electrified and enlarged to doubletrack and for the city of Bad Kleinen a bypass is necessary to avoid noise and unadequate train operations (reverse operations) due to missing a rail connection to run
trains directly southwards. Official cost expectation for this pending project is 99,6 Million Euro for moderisation of the 95 km single-track route Lübeck - Schwerin including
electrification and a by-pass in Bad Kleinen.100 The complementing German reunion
project VDE-Projekt Nr. 1 (extension of line Lübeck/Hagenow Land - Rostock - Stralsund) is finished up to an extent of about 80%. The sections Riekdahl (near Rostock) Ribnitz-Damgarten West und Velgast - Stralsund yet intend to become double-track
alignment and maximum speed enhancement ≤160 km/h. Calculated total Investment
was 211 Million Euro.101
► The share of trains using FBL with direct port reference will largely depend on the type
of cargo being transported by trains and the competition between maritime and rail logistics in the short-sea respectively Baltic Sea feeder market segment.102 The number
of freight trains passing Hamburg node anyway will increase because there are an a
few ways to cross the river Elbe. The possible bypass via Lübeck - Büchen - Lüneburg
is not a suitable solution because trains would have to use one of the most congested
hinterland corridors (Lüneburg - Uelzen) of Hamburg. The second option mentioned
above Lübeck - Grevesmühlen - Bad Kleinen (…) requires noteworthy preparations
and in case of growing train figures the crossings of Hagenow Land103 and Ludwigslust
have cope with freight trains from/to Scandinavia and passenger and freight trains directly running between Hamburg and Berlin (Eastern Europe). Advantageous is the fact
that the Hamburg - Berlin route shall receive more train passing tracks than today in
99
100
101
102
103
According to official seaport forecast documents (Hamburg port development program (draft version), sea
transport forcecast) until 2025 the container handling volume shall increase up to 25 Mio. TEU (+200%)
and the hinterland volume of Hamburg shall grow by nearly 200% up to about 14. Mio. TEU (2010: 5.3 Mio.
TEU). The share of rail will triple its volume from 1.9 to 5.7 Mio. TEU. This growth in volumes will automatically lead to more trains running from/to the port. The train figures will at least double until 2025 requiring
twice as much train path capacity. See Dreimal so viele Container bis 2025, Hamburger Abendblatt,
16.03.2012., p.21. Planung für das Jahr 2025, DVZ Deutsche Verkehrs-Zeitung Deutsche Logistik-Zeitung,
20.03.3012., p.8.
In order to save money the double-track option was given up. See BMVBS, Überprüfung des Bedarfsplans
für die Bundesschienenwege, final report Nov. 2011, p.9-176ff (563ff). Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/servlet/contentblob/59400/publicationFile/30928/schlussbericht-schienen-de.pdf (06.02.2012). Current cost-benefit-ratio is 2.5.
See BMVBS, Überprüfung des Bedarfsplans für die Bundesschienenwege, final report Nov. 2011, p.10-1ff
(669ff). Link: http://www.bmvbs.de/cae/serv¬let/con¬tentblob/59400/publicationFile/30928/schlussberichtschienen-de.pdf (06.02.2012).
An analysis of Rambøll estimated 2011 the share of freight with relevance for Hamburg of about 9% (road
and rail) on the basis of 2003 figures. See Rambøll Sverige AB, International freight transport in Skåne
2030, Malmö 2011, p.35. Link: Not available on the internet.
The Hagenow Land crossing is part of the crash programme "Sofortprogramm Seehafenhinterlandverkehr".
The enhancement was executed in 2012 in a very cost-based manner so that no parallel train operation is
possible to enter/leave the Hamburg – Berlin route.
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
103
order to increase the line capacity even if there is a large spread of train speeds consuming precious train path capacities.
► So finally it is very likely that freight trains using FBL in most cases will have to run via
Hamburg node because of operational reasons of the infrastructure manager. This underlines the requirement to enlarge the capacity of the railway node of Hamburg in
a sustainable way. The enhancement of the Hamburg node is planned since many
years und would cost about 440 Million Euro.104 The cost-benefit ratio of this investment project is 17.0 and on record level.105 Nonetheless for political reasons still other
less profitable projects are preferred.
104
105
Price basis is 2008.
See BMVBS, Entwicklung und Bewertung eines Konzeptes für den Schienenknoten Hamburg, 2009 p.96.
Link:
http://www.nahverkehrhamburg.de/dokumente/studien/Gutachten_Schienenknoten_Hamburg_
Schlussbericht.pdf (26.03.2012.).
Report – Bottlenecks in the Infrastructure between Scandinavia and Central Europe
5.3
104
North-South Corridor through South Sweden - Denmark
The best use of the relatively large investment in the fixed FBL requires that the infrastructure on land throughout the corridor South Sweden - Fehmarn undergoes an upgrading of
the capacity in order to be sufficient for the expected transport demand in the future:
► The Øresund region includes 3.7 million inhabitants and is experiencing significant
economic growth. According to the statistics the population is expected to grow to 4.0
million people in 2030 and 4.4 million in 2050.
► In the transport sector growth will be distributed uneven. Especially on the main roads
a picture of increased congestion could be seen. In the metropolitan area traffic will increase by 30-50% by 2030 on certain routes. Queuing time in the metropolitan area
could reach 200.000 hours per day unless expansion of capacity undertaken.
► Among the largest projects will be the realization of a new tunnel connection between
Elsinore and Helsingborg, both for cars and trains. This connection of approximately 4
Billion Euro will relieve the existing Øresound bridge.
► The motorway network is going to continue with both major and minor expansions. The
minimum expansion requirements can be seen the main roads E4/E6 on the Swedish
side. Through the Danish metropolitan region, however, the challenges could be to establish an eastern harbour tunnel connection through Copenhagen or a Western bypass ring line Elsinore-Køge. The projects, each costing around 3 Billion Euro, reduces
the overall congestion situation significantly and contribute to enhancing accessibility
North Germany-South Sweden
► Requirements for upgrading the rail network will in the short horizon include removing
minor bottlenecks, including a bypass extension on the Øresund line through Copenhagen airport and a new passenger station here. At the same time it should be provided a fly-over to remove train passing conflicts that occurs at the junction New Ellebjerg where the Øresound line meets the future high-speed line to Ringsted
► It is imperative to expand to 3 and 4 tracks all the way from Malmö C and Lund C. Furthermore, the last single track section Helsingborg-Maria also has to be removed with a
new north double track tunnel in order to enhance the capacity and functionality of the
entire Swedish West Coast main line towards Gothenburg
► In the short horizon it will be mandatory to remove the bottleneck on the Storstrømmen
Bridge, as the single track section greatly reduces the functionality and capacity
throughout the corridor. Moreover, a repair of the nearly 75 year old bridge cannot remove uncertainty about the bridge's actual remaining life, in particular, it is expected to
be shortened by the upcoming large amounts of cargo transit Germany-Sweden
► In the horizon there is a need for a 3rd and 4th track on the Øresound line passing
Ørestad station. The railway is declared above the capacity limit. With expected growth
in the Copenhagen Airport business by 50% in 2030 this is unavoidable
► With the prospect of still more attractive train services ie short travelling time between
Hamburg and Copenhagen, and the prospect of significant growth in cargo is also a
need to build a new railway line between Køge and Vordingborg, as well as a new bypass line through a tunnel between Lolland and Falster, ie during Guldborgsund.