Rail Baltica Forum 21 April 2017 Benefits of High Speed Rail in France April, 24th 2017 Dominique DEAU 1 Table of contents 1. The different HSL since 1981 2. Impact on the traffic 3. Other impacts 4. Conclusion April 2017 2 1 The different HSL since 1981 in France HSL6 2007/2016 Total HSL length (Dec. 2016) : HSL3 1993 HSL7 2011 • 2130 km HSL2 1989/1990 Number of HS trainsets : • above 400 trainsets Network operated by HS trainsets HSL1 (HSL and conventional) : 1981/1983 • about 10 000 km HSL4 1992/94 Number of stations served by HS trainsets : • 250 stations, • among which 19 built for HSL services. HSL5 2001 April 2017 3 120 M pass./ year year pass./M 120 2.1 Total of all high speed of services all 2.1 Total 2 Impact on the traffic (highest HS traffic in Europe, but in 350 M JapanEurope, in and 800 M in traffic (highest HS China) April 2017 April Build-up of TGV traffic 120,0 110,0 100,0 90,0 80,0 70,0 sharing, coaches, etc.) Impactof competition (car 60,0 50,0 Traffic in millions of passengers of millions Trafficin 40,0 TGV all routes 30,0 20,0 10,0 0,0 4 1982 1983 1986 1987 1990 1991 1995 1999 2003 2007 2011 2015 1981 1984 1985 1988 1989 1992 1993 1994 1996 1997 1998 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2012 2013 2014 2.2 Detail by high speed high by service 2.2 Detail 2 Impact on the traffic commercial policy commercial of Impact the Opening of Opening HSL5 Build-up of TGV traffic April 2017 April 35,00 30,00 25,00 20,00 journey journey times of Increase 15,00 Traffic in millions of passengers ofmillions Traffic in 10,00 TGV South-East TGV Atlantic TGV jonction 5,00 0,00 5 1985 1986 1987 1995 1996 1997 2005 2006 1981 1982 1983 1984 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2.3 Example of Eurostar traffic (1/2) traffic of Eurostar 2.3 Example 2 Impact on the traffic Eurostar traffic through the Channel Tunnel 1000 April 2017 April 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 Monthly traffic in thousands of passengers of Monthlythousands in traffic 200 100 trend (12 month moving average) 0 nov.-94 nov.-95 nov.-96 nov.-97 nov.-98 nov.-99 nov.-00 nov.-01 nov.-02 nov.-03 nov.-04 nov.-05 nov.-06 nov.-07 nov.-08 nov.-09 nov.-10 nov.-11 nov.-12 nov.-13 nov.-14 nov.-15 nov.-16 6 2 Impact on the traffic 2.3 Example of Eurostar traffic (2/2) Eurostar traffic through the Channel Tunnel 1000 Sept. 2008 : 2nd fire in the Channel tunnel 900 Sept. 2001 : check-in times increased from 800 Change of 20 to 30 min commercial policy 700 Nov 2015 / July 2016 : terrorist attacks in Paris, 600 Brussels and Nice 500 Nov 2007 : journey time reduced by 20 min (CTRL2) 400 28 Sept. 2003 : journey Summer 20015 : terrorist 300 time reduced by 20 min attacks in London Monthly traffic in thousands of passengers of Monthlythousands in traffic (CTRL1) 200 100 Nov. 1996 : 1st fire in the trend (12 month moving average) Channel tunnel 0 nov.-94 nov.-95 nov.-96 nov.-97 nov.-98 nov.-99 nov.-00 nov.-01 nov.-02 nov.-03 nov.-04 nov.-05 nov.-06 nov.-07 nov.-08 nov.-09 nov.-10 nov.-11 nov.-12 nov.-13 nov.-14 nov.-15 nov.-16 April 2017 7 2 Impact on the traffic 2.4 Lessons to be learnt • The elasticity of the traffic to journey time is strong • The elasticity of the traffic to price is also strong • The market reacts up or down very quickly (you never “control” a market) • The traffic between 2 cities located in 2 different countries is lower than what would be the traffic between these 2 cities if they were in the same country (border effect) • If you try to internalise all the time saving through the fare policy, you jeopardise the future growth of the traffic April 2017 8 2 Impact on the traffic 2.5 Economic approach of a high speed project competition infrastructure economical environment quality rolling stock of service demand operating programme fare policy revenues operating costs investment costs interest for the operator interest for the community April 2017 9 3 Other impacts 3.1 Example of Paris – Lyon OD On the Paris – Lyon OD between 1980 and 1985 : • the railway journey time has been divided by 2 (4 hours to 2 hours), • the railway traffic has been multiplied by 2.4 (5 M pass. with TGV). The study carried out to assess ex post the TGV impact has shown that : • among TGV passengers between Paris and Lyon, there was the same number of people living in Paris than people living in Lyon. As Lyon in 10 times smaller than Paris (1 M inhabitants vs 10 M), it means that in proportion the effect on Lyon has been 10 times bigger, • as it became so easy to travel from Paris to Lyon by TGV, some big companies have decided to remove their local or regional offices in Lyon, • on the other hand some skilled professionals living in Lyon (barristers, architects, etc.) have taken advantage of TGV to sell their services in Paris. April 2017 10 3 Other impacts 3.2 Continuous development around Lyon Part-Dieu railway station Railway B B B station Bricks Orange Sky 56 C A two Lyon Terralta B : Silex1 B C : Silex2 Garibaldi C Commercial A centre Le Dolet B 2016 vision Wintech B 107 A : delivered A Servient B : works on going Incity C : works decided April 2017 11 3 Other impacts 3.3 Example of HSL Rhin-Rhône (HSL7) HSL Rhin-Rhône has been in service since December 2011. The study carried out to assess ex post the TGV impact has shown in particular that the number of nights spent in the hotels around the HSL area : • has decreased from Monday to Thursday (business travellers can now achieved a return trip in the same day), • has increased on week-ends (positive impact thanks to leisure traffic). April 2017 12 3 Other impacts 3.4 Preparing the opening of HSL Bretagne (July 2017) Public and private stakeholders have been preparing this opening for several years. Among the actions undertaken : • city of Rennes is involved in the development of Rennes station to facilitate intermodality with local transport (buses and automatic underground line), • Region of Bretagne is pushing hard to make sure that the benefits of the HSL will go beyond Rennes towards Brest and Quimper ; achieving such a result necessitates a remodelling of regional railway services, • private undertakings have reserved offices around Rennes railway station to facilitate co-working. April 2017 13 4 Conclusion • The market reacts up or down very quickly depending on : ➢ the journey time, ➢ the fare policy ➢ the economic environment (including competition) • The key point for the economic assessment of a high speed project is the consistency between : ➢ the traffic forecasts (the demand) ➢ the operating programme (train timetable, rolling stock roster, etc.) • The effects of a high speed project beyond the traffic are not automatic ; they have to be prepared well in advance with all stakeholders : ➢ public sector ➢ private sector April 2017 14 Thank you for your attention April 2017 15 Appendix April 2017 16 A1 Impact of Eurostar on air traffic Impact of Eurostar Air travel between London and Paris April 2017 April 400 350 300 250 200 150 trend (12 month moving average) traffic inof passengers thousands traffic 100 monthly traffic 50 0 juil-92 juil-93 juil-94 juil-95 juil-96 juil-97 juil-98 juil-99 17 oct-92 oct-93 oct-94 oct-95 oct-96 oct-97 oct-98 oct-99 avr-92 avr-93 avr-94 avr-95 avr-96 avr-97 avr-98 avr-99 janv-92 janv-93 janv-94 janv-95 janv-96 janv-97 janv-98 janv-99 janv-00.