ENVIRONMENT: High Speed Trains Slowed By Ecological Red Light

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

IPS Correspondents

PARIS, Oct 6 1995 (IPS) - World experts on high-speed train travel gathered in the French ‘railway capital’ of Lille, Friday, to develop plans for a hi-tech rail network to cross Europe — raising NGO fears that environmental problems are being side- stepped.

Undeniably less environmentally damaging than cars in terms of direct pollution, NGOs say high-speed railways bring new problems instead — from tracks that rip through the countryside, to newly recognised noise pollution and vibration problems.

Behind the expansion of transport in Europe is the European Round Table of Industrialists (ERT), the architect of the Trans-European Networks (TENs) infrastructure plans, a 320 billion dollar package of 220 new road, rail and airport development schemes.

A top lobby group of 45 top industrial leaders with powerful friends at the EU, the ERT runs the European Centre for Infrastructure Studies (ECIS) which defends the TENs as ‘necessary for economic growth and progress.’

They rolled out the case again in Lille at the massive three day Eurailspeed conference, which ended Friday. ECIS want special agencies set up for each priority project that will allow them to circumvent the environmental impact assessments and public hearings that has helped bring plans for a high-speed rail link between London and the Channel tunnel to a shuddering halt.

To stop ECIS, NGOs like Greenpeace, the European Federation for Transport and Environment, A SEED Europe, the World Wide Fund for Nature and Friends of the Earth, have allied to lobby for a Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment for TENs as a whole.

They want priority to be given to environmentally-sound means of transport like coastal shipping and instead of new transport links, they advise better integration of existing ones.

Most opposition to TENs focus on their road plans; of the 220 TEN schemes, 126 involve new roads. They would add 15,000 kilometres of new asphalt to Europe and hike EU CO2 emissions by five percent in 15 years, say Greenpeace, shattering EU commitments to stabilise CO2 emissions.

All this has lent weight to the case, on which all agree, that trains are a lesser evil than cars and trucks. Rail is more energy- efficient and less polluting than roads. It takes five litres of fuel to carry a tonne of freight 100 kilometres by road but 333 kilometres by train.

But environmental groups like the Council for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) recognise both the benefits and drawbacks of high-speed rail travel; it is a chief opponent of a proposed high- speed rail link between London and the Channel Tunnel.

“One of the main benefits is that high speed trains offer a real alternative to flying and trains generally are more energy efficient and less polluting than aircraft,” says CPRE’s Lily Matson. The Channel Tunnel has reduced pressure to expand airports in south England and road networks which serve them,” she adds.

She also notes that high-speed rail helps get freight off the roads. Britain’s biggest freight train carries as much cargo as 185 lorries. High-speed trains are electric powered and create no direct pollution — though electric power stations do, of course.

But there are drawbacks to high-speed rail travel from an environmental point of view , says Matson. “They may be more energy efficient than cars or aircraft but they still consume a lot of energy,” she notes. “And the there is the noise factor.”

“The main problems associated with trains, including high- speed trains are noise and vibration,” says Professor Marco Masoero of Turin Polytechnic.

“With ordinary trains the main noise comes from contact between the rails and the wheels and this dominates up to speeds of around 300 kph. At speeds above this, however, aerodynamic noise may dominate which arises from contact between the train and the air. This is more difficult to block. It is a particular problem with the ‘bullet train’ in Japan.”

“The important difference between a busy road and a busy railway is that the former creates continuous noise. Railway noise is intermittent,” says Keith Hill of British Rail. “Moreover new types of track are also designed to reduce noise levels.”

But perhaps the main problem of high-speed rail links is the need for special tracks. “Building new lines clearly has a direct impact on the local environment,” says Lily Matson. “It affects houses, woodland and the countryside in general.”

“Any infrastructure is bound to have an environmental down side,” says John Bennet of Union Railways, which is building Britain’s new high-speed rail link.

The new line will generally use existing transport corridors and will run alongside railways or freeways, he says. Every effort will be made to avoid areas of special scientific interest or outstanding beauty. “We are doing everything possible to design an environmentally friendly railway,” Bennet adds.

This is still not enough for some. In an April report from the European Parliament’s transport committee, German MEP Wilhelm Piecyk criticised the EU’s “lack of focus on environment-friendly modes of transport”. The Parliament has resisted the TENs, and EU member states have proven unwilling to fund schemes.

This has held up the EU’s TEN plans for high speed rail links between Paris and Berlin, Lyons and Turin and the long awaited high-speed link between Paris, Brussels, Cologne and Amsterdam.

To tackle this problem the European Investment Bank has offered new transport infrastructure loans. The private and public sectors have been roped into pacts like the one that turned Lille itself into a billion dollar transport hub with a new railway station to take huge cross-Channel trains, and built this week’s conference venue, the Grand Palais, with its giant exhibition halls.

But these kind of pacts are rare outside of France, Japan and Germany. The transport business accepts that trucks are more expensive long haul but are cheaper and more flexible for shorter shipments. Railways cannot deliver direct to the supermarkets.

Airline opposition shot down plans to build North America’s first ever high speed railway in Texas after years of discussion and funding wrangles. In Asia, the only real possibilities for new high speed train contracts are in Taiwan and China, and these may take years to be realised.

So far high-speed rail travel has taken off only in France, Germany and Japan. In Germany Siemens is a leading member of the consortium that builds the Inter City Express (ICE) train and in France GEC-Alsthom, jointly owned by Britain’s GEC and Alcatel- Alsthom of France, makes the Train a Grande Vitesse (TGV).

A Japanese consortium led by Mitsubishi builds the Shinkansen or bullet trains. GEC Alsthom has so far made or is making 771 high speed trains, most of them for France (626) but a few from Spain, South Korea (a 2.1 billion dollar deal for the Seoul-Pusan link) and the EU as well as 38 for Eurostar (the Channel Tunnel).

Siemens has made or is making 267, all for Germany. Recently negotiations have begun on a possible joint venture between the two companies for the possible development of a joint European train. Its success, however, will depend on the worldwide market for fast trains.