ScienceDirect. Investigation of Priority Directions of Rail Baltica Extension from Warsaw

Transcription

1 Available online at ScienceDirect Procedia Engineering 187 (2017 ) th International Scientific Conference Transbaltica 2017: Transportation Science and Technology Investigation of Priority Directions of Rail Baltica Extension from Warsaw Gediminas Vaičiūnas*, Stasys Steišūnas Department of Railway Transport, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Lithuania Abstract Issues of the significance of Rail Baltica and its distribution for respective countries have been sufficiently investigated in literature sources. Some of literature references on this topic have been overviewed in this article. The article provides the methodology developed by the author used to assess the significance of extension of the passenger railway route in one or another direction. To this effect, the author suggests using a geometric mean method as a basis. The methodology was realized on the example of Rail Baltica line by investigating the significance of extension of the passenger railway route from Warsaw in the West and South directions The The Authors. Authors. Published Published by Elsevier by Elsevier Ltd. This Ltd. is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of the 10th International Scientific Conference Transbaltica 2017: Peer-review Transportation under Science responsibility and Technology. of the organizing committee of the 10th International Scientific Conference Transbaltica 2017 Keywords: Rail Baltica, priority directions, route, railway transport, indicators 1. Introduction Although according to the policy of the European Union the road transport is sought to be replaced by the railway transport, the level of automobilisation during the last 10 years has grown in all EU countries, except for Luxemburg [4]. As a measure to reduce this phenomenon, European railway projects are developed. Core network corridors were introduced to facilitate the coordinated implementation of the core network. They bring together * Corresponding author. address: gediminas.vaiciunas@vgtu.lt The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of the 10th International Scientific Conference Transbaltica 2017 doi: /j.proeng

2 Gediminas Vaičiūnas and Stasys Steišūnas / Procedia Engineering 187 (2017 ) public and private resources and concentrate EU support, particularly to remove bottlenecks, build missing crossborder connections and promote modal integration and interoperability. Main corridors are Scandinavian Mediterranean Corridor, North Sea Baltic Corridor, North Sea Mediterranean Corridor, Baltic Adriatic Corridor, Orient/East Med Corridor, Rhine Alpine Corridor, Atlantic Corridor, Rhine Danube Corridor, and Mediterranean Corridor [5]. One of the priority tasks of the system is to comply with safety and environmental standards [7, 14]. One of more relevant projects in the Baltic Sea region (in North Sea Baltic Corridor) is Rail Baltica. This railway is intended to connect Poland, Baltic countries and Finland, also improve a link of the Central and Eastern Europe with Germany. The project intends to connect Tallinn (Estonia) and Warsaw (Poland) through Riga (Latvia) and Kaunas (Lithuania) [11] by the railway line. The stretch from Helsinki to Tallinn could possibly be connected by ferry lines. In the future, a Helsinki Tallinn tunnel possibly offered to be dug out could connect Tallinn and Helsinki by the railway line ([8], see Fig. 1). Some authors proposes to include St. Petersburg into the Rail Baltica route this would increase flows of both passengers and cargoes [3]. Fig. 1. Rail Baltica route. This project is created by following the approach that in the uniform EU railway network system there should also operate a uniform railway transport standard system satisfying the needs of EU countries and its citizens to the maximum extent by enhancing the efficiency of development of business links which maybe more effective in a better developed railway network system [9]. Railway line must be equipped with modern rolling stock and infrastructure facilities. This requires appropriate research design and methodology [17, 18]. The key idea of the newest White Book intended for general issues of the transport policy European Transport Policy 2010: Time to Decide significance of the transport system for the Community s economy and its balance: A modern transport system must be balanced in the economic and social, also environmental respect [1]. Thus, it should follow that the project should be equally important for the countries crossed by this line. In reality, however, this significance varies. By analysing for which countries the aforementioned project will have greater significance and for which smaller, indicators of the countries are analysed (related in one or another respect with significance of Rail Baltica for the country), such as length of Rail Baltica in the country, length of Rail Baltica per million residents in the country, length of Rail Baltica per thousand km of the existing railway, length of Rail Baltica per area of the

3 42 Gediminas Vaičiūnas and Stasys Steišūnas / Procedia Engineering 187 (2017 ) country, length of Rail Baltica per country s gross domestic product GDP. To generalize them, multi-criteria optimization methods were used, such as rating according to the sum-of-ratings method and the geometric mean method [2, 6]. After assessing the significance of Rail Baltica project for countries by rating the indicators by the sum-of-ratings method it was determined that the project is most significant for Estonia and Lithuania, Latvia is the third, and Poland is the fourth in terms of significance. After assessing the project significance by rating according to the geometric mean method it was determined that the project is the most significant for Estonia, followed in the second place in terms of significance by Lithuania, the third one Latvia, the fourth one Poland. When presenting such findings of the study in Poland, researchers of this country found them doubtful. Polish researchers provided an observation that Rail Baltica railway should be assessed not only in the section from Tallinn to Warsaw, but also a possibility of communication of the Baltic Sea region countries with Berlin and Hamburg should be assessed. In this case, a bigger part of Rail Baltica would go across the territory of Poland and this way would have a relatively greater significance for Poland. The authors of this study found this remark reasonable, therefore in the next study, the railway section from Tallinn to Hamburg was examined. The ratio of Rail Baltica indicators with economic indicators of the countries was rated by the geometric mean method. After assessing the indicators of significance of Rail Baltic project for the countries it was determined that upon extension of the railway line from Warsaw to Hamburg, the priority ranking of the countries for which the project will have the greatest significance does not essentially change; the project is the most significant for Estonia, followed by Lithuania in the second place, Latvia in the third place, and Poland in the fourth place, whereas Germany appears only as the fifth one. Therefore, there is hardly any sense of further investigating the importance of this railway line for the countries it crosses. Another issue to which direction it would be expedient to extend the route from Warsaw: to Berlin, to Prague, to Vienna or to Budapest? In all routes, there exists passenger communication by the railways. Therefore, the question is absolutely real how the mentioned routes will distribute by significance as extensions of the passenger route of Rail Baltica line. 2. Methods and course of the study For a passenger travelling by railways, one of essential issues is the journey time. The journey time from Warsaw to the capitals of neighbouring countries is indicated in Fig. 2 (data on January 1, 2017 [6]) ,08 6,67 7,5 7,33 Time of journey, h Warsaw-Berlin Warsaw-Prague Warsaw-Vienna Warsaw-Budapest Fig. 2. Time of journey from Warsaw to capitals of the neighbouring countries. According to data provided in Fig. 2, the shortest journey time is from Warsaw to Berlin, and the longest to Vienna. However, differences in the journey time are not especially big the shortest journey lasts for 6 hours and 5 minutes (6.08 hour), and the longest 7 hours and 30 minutes (7.5 hours). It follows that also other indicators are important that may determine the significance of one or another route. Eg. average speed accordingly to Berlin

4 Gediminas Vaičiūnas and Stasys Steišūnas / Procedia Engineering 187 (2017 ) km/h, to Prague 102 km/h, to Vienna 91, km/h to Budapest 118 km/h, for it is appropriately used intercity rolling stock [15]. Development of the country and its importance with respect to other countries in the region is defined by its area, number of residents, and gross domestic product. These data are analysed by countries in Table 1. Table 1. Indicators defining development of the countries and their importance in the region. Country Area of the country, thousand km 2 Number of residents in the country, million Germany Czech Republic Austria Hungary General gross domestic product of the country, billion USD Table 1 shows that Germany is ahead of others in the majority of indicators. These are, however, only preliminary results of comparison. Relative criteria could be considered the correlation of these values (from Table 1) with the journey time (according to date of Fig. 1). These criteria are provided in Table 2. Table 2. Relative criteria defining significance of the route. Route Ratio of the country s area with the journey time, thousand km 2 /h Ration of the country s residents with the journey time, million residents/h Warsaw Berlin Warsaw Prague Warsaw Vienna Warsaw Budapest Ratio of the country s gross domestic product with the journey time, billion USD/h Based on data provided in Table 2, it is possible to apply one of multi-criteria optimisation methods for comparing the significance of routes. As the sum-of-ratings method is the simplest one, we could start from it. Each route occupies a specific place according to the value of each relative criterion. For example, according to the ratio of the country s area with the journey time, the first place is taken by the route Warsaw Berlin, and the last one by Warsaw Vienna (the aforementioned criterion in the first case is the biggest, and in the second case the smallest). By applying this principle, Table 3 is drawn up. The numbers of places are summed by each route. Table 3. Priority of the routes according to relative criteria. Route Place according to the ratio of the country s area with the journey time, thousand km 2 /h Place according to the ratio of country s residents with the journey time, million residents/h Place according to the ratio of domestic product with the journey time, billion USD/h Sum of places Warsaw Berlin Warsaw Prague Warsaw Vienna Warsaw Budapest Priorities of the route Priorities of the routes are provided in the right column of Table 3 (e.g. the smallest sum of places determines the first priority, and the biggest the last priority). Such distribution of priorities is logical, and maybe even anticipated. Another question is that this priority does not evaluate the significance of route importance quantitatively. In other words, it is not clear whether the route. Warsaw-Berlin is more significant than the route Warsaw Prague by, for example, 5 percent or 5 times. To solve this question, more precise multi-criterion

5 44 Gediminas Vaičiūnas and Stasys Steišūnas / Procedia Engineering 187 (2017 ) optimization methods are to be applied. In this case, the geometric mean method is appropriate. The generalized rating R i is calculated for each route according to the formula: n n R i Π j = 1Rij =, (1) where: R i value of the generalized rating of i-route; R ij value of j-relative criterion of i-route; n number of criteria (in this case n = 3). R ij = X ij k j = 1 X ij, (2) where: X ij value of j-indicator of i-route; k number of routes (here, in this case k = 4). The results of calculations according to formula (2) are provided in Fig. 3. Values of relative criteria 1,000 0,800 0,600 0,400 0,200 0,624 0,767 0,836 Ratio of the country s area with the journey time, thousand m²/h Ratio of the country s residents with the journey time, million residents/h Ratio of the country s gross domestic product with the journey time, billion USD/h 0,124 0,091 0,058 0,118 0,064 0,065 0,135 0,078 0,041 0,000 Warsaw-Berlin Warsaw-Prague Warsaw-Vienna Warsaw-Budapest Fig. 3. Values of relative criteria for routes. Data provided in Fig. 3 show that the main criterion determining special significance of the route Warsaw Berlin is the ratio of the German gross domestic product with the journey time from Warsaw to Berlin. Upon generalizing the values of relative criteria according to formula (1), calculation results are provided in Fig. 4. Values of generalized ratings 1,000 0,800 0,600 0,400 0,200 0,000 0,737 0,087 0,079 0,076 Warsaw-Berlin Warsaw-Prague Warsaw-Vienna Warsaw-Budapest Fig. 4. Values of generalized ratings for routes.

6 Gediminas Vaičiūnas and Stasys Steišūnas / Procedia Engineering 187 (2017 ) Numbers in Fig. 4 clearly show that the route Warsaw Berlin is 10 times more important than the remaining 3 routes. 3. Conclusions 1. The priority of extending the Rail Baltica railway line from Warsaw is an issue requiring a separate study. 2. After analysing possible directions of extension of the Rail Baltica line from Warsaw by the sum-of-ratings method, the following priorities were obtained: the first route Warsaw Berlin, the second Warsaw Prague, the third one Warsaw Budapest, and the fourth one Warsaw Vienna. 3. After analysing possible directions of extension of the Rail Baltica line from Warsaw by the by the geometric mean method it was determined that the route Warsaw Berlin is 10 times more important than the remaining 3 routes. 4. The key factor determining special significance of the route Warsaw Berlin is the value of the German gross domestic product. References [1] The White Book. European Transport Policy 2010: Time to Decide. Brussels, COM (2001). [2] G. Bureika, S. Steišūnas, Complex evaluation of electric rail transport implementation in Vilnius city, Transport problems, Katowice: The Silesian University of Technology, ISSN , 11(1) (2016) [3] J. Butkevičius, Development of passenger transportation by railroad from Lithuania to European States, Transport 22(2) (2007) [4] J. Drew, J. Ludewig, Reforming railways, learning from experience, DVV Media group GMBH/Euraill press, D-20010, Hamburg Second edition, p [5] Available from Internet: [6] Available from Internet: [7] Hamilton, B. A.; Edwards & Kelcey, J. Shared use of railroad infrastructure with non compliant public trasit rail vehicles: A practitioner's uide. Transit cooperative research program (TCRP). Report 130. National Research council, Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press p. [8] Helsinki-Tallinn Rail Tunnel Link?, YLE News, October 31, Available from Internet: rail_tunnel_link/ [9] M. Ledbury, E. Schanzler, J. Ludewig, Rail transport and environment: meeting the challenge, Local transport today Ltd, Quadrant House 250 Kennington Lane, London SE 11 5RD First edition, pp [10] O. Lunys, S. Dailydka, S. Steišūnas, G. Bureika, Analysis of freight wagon wheel failure detection in Lithuanian railways, Procedia Engineering, TRANSBALTICA 2015: proceedings of the 9th international scientific conference, May 7 8, 2015, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Ltd. ISSN (2016) [11] Rail Baltica Final Report, Vilnius Extension FINAL v9 ISSUED Available from Internet: [12] Railway Rail Baltica feasibility study, Directorate General for Regional Policy of the European Commission [13] G. Sinkevičius, S. Dailydka, Railway transport in the conditions of globalisation, The 8th international scientific conference Business and Management 2014, Vilnius: Technika. 2014, pp ISSN [14] A. Rao, T. Tsai, Safety standards for high speed rail transportation, Transportation Research Record 1995 (2007) 1 8. doi: / [15] Available from Internet: [16] G. Sinkevičius, A. Jarašūnienė, Development of Railway Transport in the Context of International Intermodal Transportation, Logistics and Transport Corridors, Proceedings of 19th International Conference Transport Means [17] Steišūnas, S Keleivinių traukos riedmenų geležinkelio magistralei Rail Baltica parinkimo lgoritmas [Traction rolling stock of railway passenger bus Rail Baltica selection algorithm]. Transport Means 2012: proceedings of the 16th international conference, October 25 26, 2012, Kaunas University of technology, Lithuania. Kaunas: Technologija, 2012, pp [18] Steišūnas, S.; Bureika, G. Prekinių šilumvežių magistralei Rail Baltica parinkimo algoritmas, Mokslas Lietuvos ateitis 4(4) (2012) [Freight locomotives bus Rail Baltica selection algorithm. Science Future of Lithuania]. Vilnius: Technika.