Abstract

Purpose - This bachelor thesis compares high-speed rail (HSR) transport with air transport. The investigation considers physical fundamentals, energy consumption, environmental impact, infrastructure and investment, market situations, passenger's selection criteria to choose transportation options, and overall economics. --- Methodology - The thesis combines an investigation of physical principles with a literature review. --- Findings - Steel wheels on steel rails show by far less rolling resistance to support the train's weight than drag due to lift (induced drag) to support the aircraft's weight. This leads to less energy consumption. HSR trains use electricity from an overhead line. Hence, the environmental impact of HSR also depends much on how the electricity is produced. Airplanes only need an air traffic control environment to connect airports. In contrast, HSR needs infrastructure to connect stations. The amount of necessary infrastructure depends on the geological conditions. For example, crossing mountains means high investment. Longer passages over water are infeasible for HSR. High-speed rail is superior to air transport when connecting megacities because the trains have higher transport capacity, offer higher service frequencies and mission reliability, shorter total travel time, shorter access time to stations, shorter unproductive waiting time in stations and potentially lower travel costs. HSR is a strong competitor to airline services and has replaced some short range flights. A comparison of HSR in different world regions shows differences in the market situation and in passenger's selection criteria for transportation options. --- Research limitations - The potential of high-speed rail was investigated mainly on busy routes with high service frequencies. A comprehensive network comparison between high-speed trains and airplanes was not done and could lead to somewhat different results. --- Practical implications - The report tries to contribute arguments to the discussion about alternatives to air travel. --- Social implications - With more knowledge people can make an educated choice between transport options, can vote with their feet, and can take a firm position in the public discussion. --- Originality/value - A general comparison of HSR and air transport from physical fundamentals to economics seemed to be missing.

Abstract

The allocation of traffic between different transport modes follows transport user decisions which depend on the generalized cost of travel in the available alternatives. High Speed Rail (HSR) investment is a government decision with significant effects on the generalized cost of rail transport; and therefore on the modal split in corridors where private operators compete for traffic and charge prices close to total producer costs (infrastructure included). The rationale for HSR investment is not different to any other public investment decision. Public funds should be allocated to this mode of transport if its net expected social benefit is higher than in the next best alternative. The exam of data on costs and demand shows that the case for investing in HSR is strongly dependent on the existing volume of traffic where the new lines are built, the expected time savings and generated traffic and the average willingness to pay of potential users, the release of capacity in congested roads, airports or conventional rail lines and the net reduction of external effects. This paper discusses, within a cost-benefit analysis framework, under which conditions the expected benefits from deviated traffic (plus generated traffic), and other alleged external effects and indirect benefits justify the investment in HSR projects. It pays special attention to intermodal effects and pricing.