Phase 1 Chapter3 1620901a

Feasibility Study Concerning
High-Speed Railway Lines

in Norway
3
3.1
Market Study
Objectives and Background
The aim of the market study in Phase 1 was to identify the most important demand potentials for High-Speed Rail Services in Norway, to compare these potentials among each
other and with the European potentials of already realised or planned High-SpeedNetworks. First priorities for the selection of corridors from the market point of view had to
be set.
The methods and models used in this market study are well proofed in several high-speed
rail and air traffic studies which were conducted by Intraplan in the last two decades, as
for example the forecasts on passenger transport for the German transport master plans,
which include the extension of the German high-speed rail network as well as studies for
the maglev rail system and a European-wide study for UIC, building a common and comparable transport database for evaluating High-Speed Rail Traffic on a European level.
The approved passenger transport models used for the above mentioned studies were
adapted to the Norwegian transport market by feeding the model with actual transport
demand data on a high disaggregated spatial level. For each origin-destination relation
between municipalities in Norway, demand data for road, rail, air and boat traffic were
collected by using information from the Norwegian Transport Model (NTM5), from NSB,
from air traffic statistics and own estimations. The model had been calibrated with these
data and was then applied to the various scenarios on socio-economic development and
network extensions.
Before identifying and calculating the demand potentials for High-Speed Rail Services in
Norway, a comparison of key figures of traffic demand on a European level had been carried out (see Chapter 3.2).
For this comparison, data were taken from a study which was conducted in 2002/03 on
behalf of UIC by a German-French consortium, as this study is the only comprehensive
and consistent database of traffic demand which comprises all means of transport
throughout Western Europe on a high disaggregated level [UIC-PTS]. The UIC-Passenger
Traffic Study will be described in chapter 3.2.1 in some more detail, as the methods and
assumptions made in this study are quite comparable to that of the study at hand and the
comparison of demand key figures refer to the results of the UIC-Study.
In chapter 3.3, the potential for High-Speed Rail Services in Norway are identified and
calculated. In chapter 3.4, then, a Basic Network with the most promising High-Speed Rail
Projects is created from the market point of view. This Basic Network is subject of further
examinations with respect to technical and costs aspects in the following main chapters.
- 3-1 -

in Norway
3.2
Passenger Traffic in Europe
The definition of long-distance traffic in this study belongs to the definition by UIC and
differs from that what is used usual in Norway. The long-distance traffic in the UIC study
comprises trips with a travel distance of more than 80 km, whereas in the Norwegian
Transport Model, long-distance traffic comprises only trips of more than 100 km travel
distance.
3.2.1
Outline UIC Passenger Traffic Study
The Passenger Traffic Study 2010/2020, conducted by the consortium INTRAPLANIMTRANS-INRETS on behalf of the International Union of Railways (UIC), delivered essential information on traffic market to the European Railways and political decisionmakers:
o
Passenger traffic flows for 1999 throughout Europe
The development of long-distance passenger traffic in the Western European Countries up till the year 2020 for alternative scenarios
The impact of the ongoing extension of the High-speed Network in railways transport
demand
The study aimed to show the prospects of High-Speed Rail Traffic within Europe. The
advantage of this comprehensive study over national studies was the summary presentation and the compatibility of the results, stemming from common methods of analyses and
forecasts for all Western European Countries.
The study concerned the domestic and international long-distance passenger traffic of the
15 member states of the European Union plus Switzerland and Norway, denoted as "Western European Countries (W.E. Countries) and the international traffic to and from the
other European Countries (denoted as C.E.E.C.) and countries outside Europe.
Task Force and Group of Experts
The study was accompanied by a Task Force composed of representatives of the UIC
(High-Speed Division), the European Commission (Directorate-General for Energy and
Transport), German Railways (Deutsche Bahn AG), Austrian Railways (sterreichische
Bundesbahnen) and French Railways (Socit Nationale des Chemins de fer Franais)
and the consultants. The procedure, the main assumptions of the study and intermediate
results were presented to the Group of Experts, made up of representatives of all European UIC members.
Methodology of Forecast
As a basis for the traffic forecasts, the existing traffic flows in Western Europe were analysed and differentiated by means of transport, trip purpose and by origin and destination
of trips. This was conducted for both, domestic and international traffic within the Western
- 3-2 -

in Norway
European countries as well as for international traffic affecting the C.E.E.C. and countries
outside of Europe (intercontinental traffic).
The forecasts were designed to reflect the interaction between the different means of
transport, i.e. train, private car, bus and plane, generated by external influencing factors
such as growth in GDP, the development of population and employment, car ownership,
market regularities, user costs, transport policies and the extension of road, rail and air
infrastructure as well as new air and rail services. Special focus was placed on modelling
the attractiveness of rail services. In addition to the traditional supply factors, i.e. travel
time, transport cost, frequency of services and changes in public transport, factors specific
to high-speed train service were considered, e.g. train-user costs based on speed and
travel distance.
A complex forecasting approach was applied, based on data that were broadly differentiated. To reach a higher degree of validation, different forecast methods were used. The
effects of new rail infrastructure and new rail services were calculated with two different
models: the transport model of INTRAPLAN and the M.A.T.I.S.S.E. model, which was
developed at INRETS and applied by IMTrans. Various crosschecks between the different
approaches were undertaken and, as necessary, results were adjusted or combined.
Spatial Differentiation
The core area of the study, i.e. the 17 W.E. Countries, was divided into 354 traffic zones.
The Central and Eastern European Countries were divided into 42 traffic zones. Together
with the six zones outside of Europe, the total number of traffic zones adds up to 402.
The zoning division was based on the administrative regions as most input data were
available at this level only. The zoning division respects the borders of the NUTS (Nomenclature des units territoriales statistiques) level 1 and 2. The traffic zones were fairly
homogeneous in terms of physical geography and socio-economic conditions and the
zoning system had been formed in accordance with the traffic flows as well as with the
present and future railway network.
A visual overview of all zones within the territory of the study is given in Annex 3.1.
Means of Transport and Trip Purposes
The objectives of the study required a multimodal approach to the forecast of longdistance passenger traffic. Explicit consideration was given to the following means of
transport:
o
Rail transport
Private car (p.c.) transport
Air transport
Bus transport
- 3-3 -

in Norway
Long-distance passenger traffic was differentiated by travel purpose:
o
Business
Trips from home to work or home to place of education (school, university etc.)
Leisure day trips
Leisure trips of more than one day of absence
Holiday trips involving five or more days of absence
Socio-economic Development
The forecasts for population had shown only relatively slight changes between 1999 and
2020 for most of the Western European countries. Only in Ireland, Luxembourg and Norway, the population was expected to grow by more than 10%. France and Switzerland
were also expected to have a considerable increase in population (6% and 8% respectively), too. In all other countries, the growth rates range between -4% and +4%, with the
average amounting to 2%.
Gross domestic product (GDP) which is the key variable describing the economic growth
was expected to increase by 2020 by 70% totally or 2.6% p.a.
The car stock for the 17 Western European countries totalled 178 million vehicles in 1999.
Average car density in the Western European countries amounts to 462 cars per 1000
inhabitants. In all of Western Europe, car stock was expected to grow by 24%.
Scenarios
To show the effects of different basic assumptions on development of user costs and
transport policies, five alternative scenarios, characterised as follows, had been examined:
o
Basic Scenario: continuation of the observable development with respect to transport

policies and user costs
Favourable Scenario: favourable development of transport policies and user costs

with regard to rail traffic
Unfavourable Scenario: unfavourable development of transport policies and user

costs with regard to rail traffic
Tariff Scenario: assuming an increase of rail tariffs by 0.5% p.a. in comparison to the
Basic Scenario
Environmental Scenario: a favourable development of transport policies (with regard

to rail traffic) with strong interventions in road traffic in light of an increasingly ecological orientation of transport policies
- 3-4 -

in Norway
Rail Network and Services
The rail network model for the analysis comprised about 76 685 km (47%) of the rail network in the W.E. Countries that totalled to 162 714 km in 1999 and 1.1 billion train-km
(37%) of 3.0 billion train-km in total. Of that, 9 340 km of the infrastructure had been defined to be new or upgraded lines and more than 200 million train-km had been assigned
to the category of High-Speed Rail Services.
The High-Speed Rail Network for the time horizon 2020 was defined by the UIC in coordination with the railways. Until 2020, a yearly average of more than 1200 km of new or
upgraded lines in the W.E. Countries and about 500 km of upgraded lines in the C.E.E.C.
were supposed to be constructed. Between 1999 and 2010 the European High-Speed
Network length will more than double and unitl 2020 it will nearly quadruple. Figure 3-1
shows the anticipated High-Speed Network for the year 2020.
2020
Sundsvall
European
High-Speed Network
Oslo
Helsinki
Stockholm
St.Petersburg
Tallinn
Gteborg
Rseau Europen
Grande Vitesse
Riga
Edinburgh
Glasgow
Moskva
Kbenhavn
Vilnius
Gdansk
Europisches
Hochgeschwindigkeitsnetz
Hamburg
Dublin
Hann.
London
Brux.
new lines
lignes nouvelles
Neubaustrecken
Warszawa
Kln
Lux.
Fr.
Wien
Mnchen
Rennes
Katowice
Praha
Nrnberg
Paris
upgraded lines
lignes amnages
Ausbaustrecken
Minsk
Berlin
Amsterdam
Kiev
Budapest
Zrich
Genve
Chisinau
Ljubljana
Milano
Lyon
Bordeaux
Lviv
Bratislava
Zagreb
Beograd
Bologna
Genova
Sarajevo
Bucuresti
Sofia
Marseille
Skopje
Porto
Madrid
Barcelona
Roma
Napoli
Istanbul
Tirana
Bari
Ankara
Valencia
Lisboa
High-Speed Division
Figure 3-1:
Athinai
Sevilla
Mlaga
500 km
Version 01.03.2002
All rights reserved. UIC 2002
European High-Speed Network 2020
Travel Times 2010 and 2020

Travel times in rail passenger traffic are falling drastically as a result of the ongoing extension of the High-Speed Network and new High-Speed Services. Travel times are not only
shorten due to higher speeds on the new and upgraded lines but also due to new direct
services causing a reduction of transfer times and shorter travel times with High-Speed
Trains on conventional and not upgraded lines (e.g. utilisation of tilting trains).
- 3-5 -

in Norway
kph
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Finland
Sweden
Norway
Denmark
Ireland
United Kingdom
Netherlands
Belgium
Luxembourg
Germany
Austria
Switzerland
France
Spain
Portugal
Italy
Greece
W.E.Countries
C.E.E.C.
1999
2010
2020
Figure 3-2: Average Commercial Speed for Longdistance Rail Traffic in 1999, 2010 and 2020
Figure 3-2 shows the average commercial speed in the rail networks
(weighted by demand). In 2020, the
average commercial speed in the
W.E. Countries increases to 127 kph
(on average for every traveller) compared to about 100 kph in 1999. The
highest figures appear for France with
an average commercial speed of 160
kph and for Spain and Portugal with
148 kph and 146 kph respectively.
These values correspond to a high
percentage of high-speed lines with a
maximum speed of 300 kph and more.
Sweden will also join this group once
the newly constructed high-speed system between the most important regions of the country will be implemented (Stockholm - Gteborg/Malm).
Determining the extension of HighSpeed Rail Services was not feasible,

because of the many differing definitions of high-speed traffic and services in the W.E.
Countries. For this reason, the share of traffic on new and upgraded lines was used to
characterise the expansion of high-speed traffic within the different European countries.
The share of long-distance rail traffic on High-Speed Lines (new and upgraded) reaches a
value of about 77% on average for the W.E. Countries in 2020, compared with 33% in
1999 (Figure 3-3). In several countries, almost all long-distance traffic will occur on HighSpeed Lines as defined by the railways.
Not all services on new or upgraded lines will be High-Speed in nature. A significant share
of night trains will remain in particular for passengers travelling very long distances and
conventional services will run for short-distance travellers on journeys of 80 to 150 km. In
contrast, High-Speed Rail Services will continue to expand on the remaining conventional
network.
Mobility and Modal-Split in 1999
Data mining led to the overall result of transport performance (passenger-kilometres) in all
W.E. Countries, including short-distance traffic, amounting to approx. 5100 billion pkm in
1999. This means an average per capita figure of 13200 pkm. The key value of mobility in
- 3-6 -

in Norway
long-distance traffic (only trips with a travel distance of more than 80 km) for the national
and international traffic of the W.E. Countries amounts to approx. 2000 billion pkm if intercontinental traffic is not considered and about 2350 billion pkm if it is considered. Car
transport performance in long-distance traffic comprises 62% of all modes, rail traffic adds
up to about 10%, bus transport about 8% and air traffic (without intercontinental traffic)
about 20%.
Long-distance rail transport performance is about 189 billion pkm in 1999. The share of
high-speed traffic out of that is slightly above 30% or 60 billion passenger-kilometres..
Development of Transport Demand until 2020
3500
3500
3111
3000
3000
Billion Passenger-km
In the Basic Scenario, the total

long-distance transport performance for all means of transport will increase by 58% from
1967 billion pkm in 1999 to 3111
billion pkm in 2020 (see Figure
3-4). While the growth rates for
private cars (+45%) and bus
traffic (+5%) are below average,
rail transport volume increases
by 67% and for air traffic the
figure (without intercontinental
traffic) will more than double.
2553
857
2500
1967
2000
Total
2000
401
1500
1778
1527
1000
1223
500
154
157
161
189
258
315
2500
611
1999
2010
Air
1500
P.C.
Bus
1000
Rail
500
0
2020
Figure 3-3: Development of Transport Performance in Longdistance Passenger Traffic for all Means of
Transport (Basic Scenario; without Intercontinental Traffic and Airport Feeder Traffic)
Air traffic will significantly increase its market share from

20.4% in 1999 to 23.9% in 2010
and 27.5% in 2020. Although transport performance for all other modes grows as well, as
seen above, private car and bus traffic will loose market share. The railways market share
will increase only slightly by 0.5 points due to air traffics massive growth in transport volume. Intercontinental air traffic grows from 457 billion pkm in 1999 to 785 billion pkm in
2010 and 1130 billion pkm in 2020.
- 3-7 -

in Norway
3500
3142
3100
3111
3033
2972
905
859
857
805
807
3000
2500
1500
3000
Total
2500
Air
2000
2000
P.C.
1821
1786
1778
1666
1575
170
392
174
416
1000
Bus
1500
Rail
1000
161
315
500
En
vi
ro
nm
bl
e
en
ta
l
Fa
vo
ur
a
163
292
ic
158
258
Ba
s
500
Ta
ri f
f
3500
Un
fa
vo
ur
ab
l
In the other scenarios (see Figure 3-5), total transport performance differs from the Basic
Scenario to a fairly small extent.
The lowest growth rate can be
found in the Environmental
Scenario, where cost increases
reduce total mobility. Transport
performance ranges 4.5% below the Basic Scenario, but still
grows by 51% over 1999.
Growth in total mobility is the
highest (60%) in the Unfavourable Scenario, amounting to 1%
above the Basic Scenario.
Figure 3-4: Transport Performance in Long-distance Passenger Traffic in 2020 for all Means of Transport for
Different Scenarios (without Intercontinental Traffic
and Airport Feeder Traffic)
Figure 3-6 shows the developEnvironmental Scenario

ment of the railways transport
Favourable Scenario
450
performance
(passengerPast / Basic Scenario
416
Tariff Scenario
kilometres) assuming the reali400
Unfavourable Scenario
392
GDP-Scenario
sation of the planned High350
Speed Network. In the Basic
315
300
Scenario, rail transport perform292
281
258
ance grows by two-thirds from
250
189 billion pkm in 1999 to 315
200
billion pkm in 2020. If transport
189
150
160
policies and user costs follow a
145
135
favourable development path for
100
rail traffic, the transport per1970
1980
1990
1999
2010
2020
formance of railways will more
Figure 3-5: Development of Long-distance Rail Traffic in
than double, reaching a value of
Different Scenarios (Passenger-km; without Air392 billion pkm. In the Environport Feeder Traffic)
mental Scenario, the increase to
416 billion pkm (+120%) is even higher. If railways raise prices by 0.5% p.a. (real terms),
they will loose about 7% of transport performance compared with the Basic Scenario.
However, compared to 1999, this is still an increase in transport performance by more
than 100 billion pkm or 55%. Even if the assumptions in the Unfavourable Scenario prove
true, the railways attain an increase in transport performance by 36% or 69 billion pkm
stemming from the ongoing extension of the High-Speed Network.
- 3-8 -

in Norway
As shown in Figure 3-7, the
railways market share in the
Basic Scenario will slightly increase by 0.5 points to 10.1%.
Clear share gains over the
1999 level (9.6%) occur in the
Environmental (14%) and Favourable (almost 13%) Scenario. In the Tariff Scenario
(9.4%), only slight changes
take place. In contrast, the Unfavourable Scenario shows a
considerable loss to a level of
8.2%.
Effect of the Extension of the
High-Speed Network 2020
Environmental Scenario
Favourable
Past / Basic Scenario
Tariff Scenario
Unfavourable Scenario
GDP-Scenario
20%
18%
18.5%
16%
14%
14.0%
12.8%
12.9%
12%
10.2%
10.7%
10.1%
9.4%
10%
9.6%
8.2%
8%
6%
1970
1980
1990
1999
2010
2020
Figure 3-6: Development of Railways Market Share in Longdistance Traffic in Different Scenarios (Related to
Passenger-kilometres; without Intercontinental
Traffic and Airport Feeder Traffic)
The extension of the HighSpeed Network leads to a significant increase in rail demand. Without High-Speed Network extensions (network remains in the state of 1999), long-distance passenger traffic in
the W.E. railway networks would amount to 228 billion pkm in the Basic Scenario 2020
(see Figure 3-7). The extensions would produce an increase in demand to about 319 billion
pkm p.a., a gain of about 40% or 91 billion pkm1.
Effect of the Extension of the High-Speed Network
Without Furhter Extension of the High-Speed Network
97.0
400.0
300.0
200.0
100.0
318.9
(+40%)
265.1
(+47%)
393.3
(+33%)
97.0
induced
Traffic
32.8%
91.0
from
Private
Car
32.2%
84.4
from Air
27.6%
296.3
227.9
new
Airport
Feeder
Traffic
6.1%
180.7
0.0
Unfavourable
Scenario
Basic Scenario
from
Bus
1.3%
Favourable
Scenario
Figure 3-7: Growth of Long-distance Rail Traffic in the W.E. Countries and Origin of Additional
Rail Traffic (without Intercontinental Traffic but with Airport Feeder Traffic)
The definition used here differs from that of the previous section with the Figures, primarily by consideration of airport feeder traffic in this section (an exact definition is given in the detailed report). The corresponding figures in the definition of the previous section are 227 billion pkm without and 315 billion pkm
with extensions of the High-Speed Rail Network
- 3-9 -

in Norway
As already shown above, the levels of railway transport volume in 2020 range from 258
billion pkm in the Unfavourable Scenario to 392 billion in the Favourable and 416 billion
pkm in the Environmental Scenario. This span in relation to the Basic Scenario (315 billion
pkm) with a deviation of about 18% in the Unfavourable Scenario and 24% in the Favourable Scenario is also apparent in Figure 3-7. But growth in railway demand as an effect of
High-Speed Network extensions only ranges between -7% (88.4 billion pkm) in the Unfavourable Scenario and +7% (97.0 billion pkm) in the Favourable Scenario as compared to
the Basic Scenario (91.0 billion pkm). That means that the political context for transport
will play a major role in absolute volume of rail transport demand, but the considerable
advantages of the High-Speed Network extension remain rather uninfluenced.
About 60% of the railways gains in transport demand stem from substitutions from private
car and air traffic.
Table 3-1 shows the rail market share in the cases with and without further extension of
the High-Speed Network for several OD-Relations.
Rail Market Share in the Cases with and without Further Extension of the High Speed Network
on Selected Relations (Basic Scenario, 2020)
OD-Relation
Without Extension
International
2
Paris - Region of Bruxelles
37%
Paris - Bruxelles
43%
Madrid - Lisboa
6%
3
Region of London - Region of Bruxelles
39%
Paris - Milano
18%
London - Bruxelles
48%
National
4
Region of Berlin - Mnchen
11%
Berlin - Mnchen
12%
Paris - Marseille
32%*
Kln - Stuttgart
27%
Madrid - Barcelona
12%
Stockholm - Malm
25%
* state of 1999; before opening of the TGV Provence / Cte dAzur
Table 3-1:
With Extension
Per Cent
3
38%
44%
48%
52%
54%
65%
34%
41%
44%
44%
49%
51%
Rail Market Share in the Cases with and without Further Extension of the
High-Speed Network on Selected Relations
It is noteworthy, that on individual origin-destination links, railways can reach market shares of up to 50% in the case of high quality rail supply, i.e. very short travel times, direct
2
3
Region of Bruxelles: Bruxelles, Halle-Vilvoorde, Leuven, Brabant and Wallon

Region of London: London, Kent, Surrey, East and West Sussex, Berkshire, Bucks and Oxfordshire, Bedfordshire, Herfordshire and Essex,
Region of Berlin: Berlin, Barnim, Oberhavel, Uckermark, Frankfurt (Oder), Mrkisch-Oderland, Oder-Spree,
Brandenburg, Potsdam, Havelland, Ostprignitz-Ruppin, Potsdam-Mittelmark, Prignitz, Teltow-Flming,
Cottbus, Dahme-Spreewald, Elbe-Elster, Oberspreewald-Lausitz, Spree-Neie
- 3-10 -

in Norway
services and quick access. If conditions for other means of transport a comparatively bad,
market share grows up to 65%.
As there are no further extensions on the Paris - Bruxelles line, the increase in railways
market shares on the relation Paris - Bruxelles only attributes to a higher frequency of
services due to extensions on connected lines (Bruxelles - Amsterdam and Bruxelles Kln).
The extent to which access and egress aspects influences market share becomes apparent by comparing the results for the city and the region of Bruxelles (see Footnote 2): a
loss of 6 points by comparing the relations Paris - Bruxelles and Paris - region of Bruxelles
or a loss of 13 points by comparing the relations London - Bruxelles and region of London
(see Footnote 3) - region of Bruxelles respectively.
The growth rates of rail demand for individual sections of the railway network, brought
about by the extension of the High-Speed Network exceed 100% in several parts of the
network, where major projects of the planned High-Speed Network will be realised.
The section loads in the core areas of the High-Speed Rail Network reach a value of 50
million passengers per year, i.e. more than 100 000 passengers per day. As minimum
value, a section load of 2 million passengers per year, i.e. about 6 000 passengers per
day, can be observed.
- 3-11 -

in Norway
3.2.2
Long-distance mobility
Norwegians overall long-distance mobility is one of the highest throughout Europe. Statistically In 1999, more than 7 000 km had been covered by each Norwegian on longdistance traffic (more than 80 km travel distance). This figure is 40% higher than the
Western European average. In Germany and in France, for example, overall long-distance
mobility averages between 5 000 and 5 500 km per year (see Figure 3-8, left side).
Kilometers
per Annum and Inhabitant
1999
Kilometers
1999
not specified
not specified
< 3000
< 500
3000 - 4000
500 - 1000
4000 - 5000
1000 - 1500
5000 - 6000
1500 - 2000
6000 - 7000
2000 - 2500
> 7000
> 2500
Finland
5763
Norway
7064
Finland
1141
RU
Sweden
6211
Norway
2623
Sweden
1479
EE
EE
EE
EE
LV
Denmark
4367
Ireland
4092
BY
France
5186
Austria
6349
Switzerland
5699
Germany
Belgium
648
685
Luxembourg
1149
MD
SK
HU
France
528
RO
UA
Czech. Republic
167
Austria
631
Switzerland
1040
HU
HR
BA
YU
BG
YU
BG
Italy
479
MK
Portugal
1357
AL
Greece
3377
Spain
2211
MK
AL
Greece
1556
Feasibility Study
High-Speed Traffic Norway
Overall Mobility
(Long-distance Traffic)
1999
source: UIC Study
MD
SK
RO
SI
Feasibility Study
Kilometres
200
Poland
50
HR
BA
50 100
BY
Netherlands
821
Italy
4387
LT
United Kingdom
1069
UA
Czech. Republic
2324
SI
Spain
5635
Ireland
1311
Poland
2254
Netherlands
4390
Portugal
4280
LV
Denmark
1084
LT
United Kingdom
3996
Germany
Belgium
5446
3949
Luxembourg
5912
RU
Air Traffic Mobility

1999
0
50 100
Kilometres
200
source: UIC Study
Figure 3-8: Overall Long-distance Mobility and Air Traffic Mobility

Long-distance mobility in Norway is air traffic orientated. Norwegians air traffic mobility is
the highest throughout Europe. In 1999, it was more than twice as high as the Western
European average. Compared to France and Germany it was even four times higher (see
Figure 3-8, right side).
In opposite to that, long-distance rail traffic mobility is one of the lowest. In 1999, only 339
km had been covered by a Norwegian on average. The European average amounted to
about 500 km per year and in countries with quite good rail services, like in France and in
Switzerland, rail traffic mobility per inhabitant summed up to more than 800 km per year
(see Figure 3-9, left side). In consequence to that, railways market share in Norway
- 3-12 -

in Norway
ranged with 4.8% far below the European average, that amounted in 1999 to 9.6% (see
Figure 3-9, right side).
Kilometers
1999
Market Share
1999
not specified
not specified
< 4%
< 300
4% - 8%
300 - 400
8% - 12%
400 - 500
12% - 16%
500 - 600
16% - 20%
600 - 700
> 20%
> 700
Finland
493
Norway
339
Finland
8.6%
RU
Sweden
629
Norway
4.8%
Sweden
10.1%
EE
EE
EE
EE
LV
Denmark
437
Ireland
151
BY
France
886
Austria
535
Switzerland
875
Kilometres
200
Germany
Belgium
8.4%
8.0%
Luxembourg
11.8%
MD
SK
HU
Poland
22.5%
France
17.1%
RO
UA
Czech. Republic
13.9%
Austria
8.4%
Switzerland
15.4%
SI
HR
BA
50 100
BY
Netherlands
9.9%
BG
MD
SK
HU
RO
HR
BA
YU
Italy
512
LT
United Kingdom
8.1%
UA
Czech. Republic
324
SI
Spain
325
Ireland
3.7%
Poland
508
Netherlands
436
Portugal
224
LV
Denmark
10.0%
LT
United Kingdom
322
Germany
Belgium
456
314
Luxembourg
698
RU
YU
BG
Italy
11.7%
MK
Portugal
5.2%
AL
Greece
113
Spain
5.8%
MK
AL
Greece
3.3%
Feasibility Study
Feasibility Study
Rail Traffic Mobility

1999
Market Share of Rail

1999
source: UIC Study
50 100
Kilometres
200
source: UIC Study
Figure 3-9: Rail Traffic Mobility and Rail Market Share
Due to relative low population, passenger demand potentials in Norway are relative low,
too. Overall long-distance passenger mobility of Oslo is one of the lowest among the capitals of the Western European Countries (see Figure 3-10). Passenger mobility of other
capital cities, like Amsterdam, Berlin and Roma is about three times higher and passenger
demand figures from Kbenhavn and Stockholm are about 30% higher than that of the
Oslo region. Traffic demand potentials from the other major Norwegians cities, i.e. Bergen, Trondheim and Stavanger, are about a half to a fourth of that of Oslo (see Figure
3-11). On the other side, traffic demand in Norway is concentrated on a few larger cities
with very low potentials in between.
- 3-13 -

in Norway
Long-distance Passenger Mobility
80
60
80
67
Lisboa
Madrid
Berlin
Amsterdam
Kbenhavn
45
20
43
33
18
Luxembourg
93
Oslo
94
Stockholm
100
40
Roma
Index (Berlin = 100) .
Selcted Capitals
100
Figure 3-10: Rail mobility by regions

Long-distance Passenger Mobility
80
60
100
33
26
Stavanger
Bergen
46
20
Trondheim
40
Oslo
Index (Oslo = 100) .
100
Figure 3-11: Rail mobility by regions
That will say that only Oslo can act as an origin for new High-Speed Lines and that new
High-Speed Services have to be adjusted to relative small traffic potentials. It has to be
reached high cost efficiency by combining the relative small potentials, by integration of
existing services and by minimising of investment and operation costs. On the other side,
rail services have to be competitive to air traffic, the most important competitor for railways
on long-distance passenger traffic in Norway. That means, travel times between the centres of the major cities should not exceed three hours, the travel time of a domestic journey using air services including access, egress and terminal times.
- 3-14 -

in Norway
3.3
Potentials for High-Speed Rail Services
3.3.1
Identification of Main Markets Segments
Hitra
4025
Smoela
2195
Airports
Aure
2620
Fylke
Municipalities
KRISTIANSUND/KVERNBERGET
Population 2005
Railway
Aukra
3050
Sandoey
1274
Giske
6591
Haram
8715
Skodje
3597
Aalesund
40295
Sula
7453
Ulstein
6795
Heroey_Moere
Hareid
8386
Sande_Moere 4658
2576
Selje
2999
Molde
24124
Vestnes
6390
Oerskog
2121
Sykkylven
7446
Nesset
3181
Vaagsoey
6218
Lesja
2184
Folldal
1717
Dovre
2875
Rendalen
2105
Sel
6059
Lom
2467
Luster
4927
Joelster
2918
Balestrand
1431
Leikanger
2209 Sogndal
6794
Modalen
361
Masfjorden
Fedje
1693
661
Austrheim
2527 Radoey
4656 Lindaas
13043
Oeygarden
3975
Meland
5861
Osteroey
7207
Askoey
22020
Oeystre Slidre
3114
Fjell
20043
Hemsedal
1909
Voss
13850
Kvam
8334
Tysnes
2825
Ullensvang
3517
Nore og Uvdal
2635
Hjartdal
1633
Seljord
2919
Vindafjord
4700
Suldal
3901
3032 Telemark
Bykle
857
Tokke
2463
Tysvaer
9370
Kviteseid
2598
Finnoey
2772
Bokn
Karmoey 769
37567
Rennesoey
3350
Kvitsoey
511
Randaberg
9099
Stavanger
113991
Sola
19832
Time
14461
Haa
14784
FYRESDAL
Hjelmeland
2736
Strand
10441
Sandnes
57618
Valle
1384
3041 Rogaland
Fyresdal
1353
Nissedal
1408
Forsand
1102
Gjesdal
9273
Bygland
1327
Sirdal
1760
Kvinesdal Aaseral
907
5582
3043 Aust-Agder
Evje og Hornnes
3305
Lund
3129
Eigersund
13408
3042 Vest-Agder
Flekkefjord
8878
Sokndal
3309
Farsund
9479
LISTA
12.5
Kilometers
25
Lyngdal
7244
Froland
4672
Grue
5275
Eidsvoll
18637
Hole
5229
Nannestad
10141
Soer-Odal
7623
Kongsvinger
17279
Ullensaker
24556
Gjerdrum
5064
Nes_Akershus
18025
Soerum 3012 Akershus

Skedsmo
Oslo
12925
Eidskog
42094
Baerum 529846
Fet
6499
104690
Aurskog-Hoeland
Loerenskog 9567
Raelingen
13275
30675
14797
Asker
50858 Nesodden
Oppegaard
Enebakk
1623123586
Roemskog
9297
Roeyken
667
Notodden
Frogn
12359
Oevre Eiker Drammen 17280
Aas
Troegstad
13358
57148
15633
14472 Ski
Askim
4962
Hurum
26800
Svelvik
14089
Spydeberg
NOTODDEN
Hof
8799
6441
Eidsberg
4798
Kongsberg 3048
10203
Hoboel
Sande_Vestfold
23244
2062 Karlstad
7690
Vestby 4557
Holmestrand
Boe_Telemark
12990
Skiptvet
9604
Vaaler_Oestfold
5249
3355
Moss
4020
Lardal
3021 stfold
Rygge
28040
2419 Horten
Marker
Sauherad Skien
13712
Toensberg
Sarpsborg
50676
24768
3439
4323
Siljan
36452
49753
Rakkestad
2372
Nome
Raade
Stokke
7284
6565
Aremark
6465
10014
1425
Andebu
5083
Fredrikstad Halden
3033 Vestfold
70418
27582
SKIEN/GEITERYGGEN
Noetteroey
Porsgrunn
20022
33407
Sandefjord Tjoeme
Hvaler
Drangedal
Larvik
41289
4582
3773
4143
41142
Gjerstad
2500
Aamli
1801
Bjerkreim
2463
Aasnes
7779
Nord-Odal
5073
Modum
12541
Flesberg
2517
Sauda
4819
Stange
18427
Oestre Toten
14604
Hurdal
2602
Lunner
Jevnaker
8505
6335 Nittedal
19578
Kroedsherad
2151
Rollag
1441
Tinn
6380
Etne
3904
Oelen
3420
Gran
13010
Ringerike
28079
3031 Buskerud
Vinje
3758
Sveio
4672
Elverum
18844
Loeten
7271
Soendre Land Vestre Toten

6008
12546
Flaa
1014
Odda
7378
Kvinnherad
13122
Stord
16516
Klepp
14536
Nes_Buskerud
3485
Sigdal
3537
Fitjar
2895
Utsira
213
Soer-Aurdal
3265
Hol
4557
3051 Hordaland
Jondal
1078
Hamar
27439
Gjoevik
27648
Vaaler_Hedmark
3924
Eidfjord
914
Fusa
Os_Hordaland 3709
14908
Nordre Land
6847
Gol
4375
Aal
4670
Ulvik
1163
Granvin
1008
Bergen
239209
BERGEN/FLESLAND
Etnedal
1397
Nord-Aurdal
6442
Vegaarshei
1854
Lier
Nedre Eiker21725
21522
Bamble
Krageroe
14154
10529
Risoer
6909
Tvedestrand
5889
Arendal
39676
2031 Gteborg
Birkenes
4340
Haegebostad
1594
Audnedal
1575
Songdalen Vennesla
5556
12427
Marnardal
2167
Lindesnes
4484
Iveland
1154
Grimstad
18885
Lillesand
9043
Kristiansand
76066
Soegne
9547
Mandal
14010
The main focus of HighSpeed Rail Services has to

be set on heavy markets
segments with a high
concentration of demand
potentials on long distances.
To reach high market shares
on these market segments,
the number of stops has to
be limited to reach a high
commercial speed.
Aamot
4398
Lillehammer
25075
Ringsaker
31824
Vestre Slidre
2245
Laerdal
2158
Vik
2881
Trysil
6882
Oeyer
4840
Gausdal
6175
Vang
1613
Aurland
1783
Vaksdal
4154
Samnanger
2322
Soer-Fron
3271
3063 Oppland
Aardal
5631
Hoeyanger
4502
Gulen
2459
Haugesund
31530
Ringebu
4586
3064 Hedmark
Gaular
2749
Boemlo
10830
Stor-Elvdal
2832
Nord-Fron
5896
Vaagaa
3773
3052 Sogn og Fjordane
Foerde
11151
Fjaler
2916
Hyllestad
1526
Austevoll
4451
Engerdal
1499
2063 Borlnge
Askvoll
3229
Sund
5537
Alvdal
2416
Skjaak
2394
Stryn
6843
Naustdal
2682
Solund
875
ROROS
Tolga
1778
Tynset
5405
Stranda
4605
Gloppen
5793
Flora
11364
Roeros
5636
Os_Hedmark
2087
Oppdal
6473
Norddal
1817
Oersta
10233
Bremanger
4031
FLORO
Sunndal
7370
3053 Mre og Romsdal
Stordal
1007
Holtaalen
2132
Rennebu
2660
Rauma
7336
Vanylven
3693
Volda
Hornindal
8351
1197
Eid
5766
Tydal
902
3081 Sr-Trndelag
Midtre Gauldal
5797
Surnadal
6160
MOLDE/ARO
Midsund
1939
Meraaker
2560
Malvik
12095
Klaebu
5279 Selbu
3988
Melhus
13977
Meldal
3934
Rindal
2101
3082 Nord-Trndelag
Stjoerdal
19562
Orkdal
10512
Tingvoll
3105
Gjemnes
2700
Frosta
2493
Trondheim
156161
Skaun
6063
Hemne
4277
Halsa
1697
Frei
5301
Averoey
5448
Fraena
9023
Eide
3304
Tustna
1006
Kristiansund
17026
Leksvik
Rissa 3508
6433
Snillfjord Agdenes
1799
1026
Feasibility Study
High-Speed Rail Traffic Norway
Population in Norway
Figure 3-12: Repartition of Population
Additional stops have to be

considered, if the demand
potentials of the additional
markets are higher than the
loss of demand potentials as
an effect of longer travel
times on the main markets.
The balance is depending on
the potentials of the different
markets segments, the loss
of time due to additional
stops and the attendant
circumstances
on
the
markets
such
as
concurrence by air traffic and
the level of rail services in
the situation without the
additional stop.
Figure 3-12 shows the repartition of population in the southern parts of Norway.
- 3-15 -

in Norway
As already seen in chapter 3.2.2, the main potentials in Norway can be found on the relations from and to the major cities in the southern parts of Norway, i.e.:
o
Oslo (530 000 inhabitants**)
Bergen (239 000 inhabitants*)
Trondheim (156 000 inhabitants*)
Stavanger (114 000 inhabitants*)
Kristiansand (76 000 inhabitants*)
Thus, the following main markets of Norway up to 500 km travel distance can be defined,
including the international markets to the major cities of Sweden:
o
Oslo Trondheim
Oslo Bergen
Oslo Stavanger
Oslo Kristiansand
Oslo Stockholm
Oslo Gteborg
Bergen - Trondheim
Bergen Stavanger
Bergen Kristiansand
Stavanger - Kristiansand
Outside the agglomeration area of Oslo (stlandet), additional potentials are relatively
rare. Depending on the alignment, the following potentials should be attended by highspeed services.
o
Arendal (40 000 inhabitants*)
Sandnes (58 000 inhabitants*)
Haugesund (32 000 inhabitants*)
Karmy (38 000 inhabitants*)
In the agglomeration area of Oslo (stlandet), the following potentials could be attended
by High-Speed Services on the way between the above mentioned centres:
Oslo Vestfold South (Tnsberg/Sandefjord/Larvik)
Oslo Telemark East (Skien/Porsgrunn)
Oslo Hamar/Ringsaker
Oslo stfold South (Fredrikstad/Sarpsborg/Halden)
in 2005
- 3-16 -

in Norway
As the line between Oslo and Trondheim might take course via Lillehammer, the market
between Oslo and Oppland (Northern parts) was considered as well.
Other stops have to be evaluated separately as the balance between the additional demand potentials through the additional stop and the losses of demand on the main markets due to longer travel times may not be positive in all cases. Even if the balance is
positive, the benefits might be less than the costs which are caused by an additional stop.
Figure 3-13 shows the main markets which were examined in the market study.
Froeya
4114
Smoela
2195
Hitra
4025
Oerland
5136
Agdenes
1799
Snillfjord
1026
Hemne
4277
ORLAND
Rissa
6433
Orkdal Skaun
10512 6063
Leksvik
3508
Mosvik
888
Verdal
13815
Frosta
2493 Levanger
18001 3082
Malvik
Trondheim 12095
156161
Stjoerdal
19562
Nord-Trndelag
Lillehammer
25075
Meraaker
2560
Aure
Klaebu
Selbu
2620
Tustna
5279
3988
1006
Melhus
Kristiansund
Rindal
13977
17026
2101
Halsa
Tydal
Meldal
902
1697
Frei
2072 stersund
3934
Fraena
Averoey5301
Tingvoll
3081 Sr-Trndelag
Holtaalen
9023
5448
Gjemnes 3105
2132
Eide
Rennebu
2700
Aukra
Surnadal
3304
2660
Midtre Gauldal
3050
6160
Sandoey
5797
Midsund
1274
Molde
1939
24124
Giske
ROROS Roeros
Haram
Sunndal
6591
5636
8715
7370
Rauma
Vestnes
Os_Hedmark
7336 3053 Mre og Romsdal
Skodje
6390
2087
Ulstein
Oppdal
3597
Nesset
Heroey_Moere 6795
Sula
Stordal
6473
3181
8386
Sykkylven 1007
Tynset
7453
7446
Sande_Moere
Hareid
5405
Tolga
2576
4658
Norddal
1778
Oersta
1817
Selje
10233
Lesja
Folldal
Vanylven
2999
2184
1717
3693
Hornindal Stranda
Dovre
4605
Engerdal
1197
2875
Volda
Vaagsoey
Alvdal
1499
8351
6218
2416
Eid
Skjaak
2063 Borlnge
5766
2394
Bremanger
Sel
Rendalen
4031
6059
2105
Stryn
Flora
6843
Lom
11364
Gloppen
Luster
FLORO
2467
Naustdal
5793
4927
2682
Nord-Fron
Joelster
Vaagaa
5896
2918
3773
Stor-Elvdal
2832
Askvoll
Soer-Fron Ringebu
3229
3271
3064 Hedmark
4586
Foerde
3063 Oppland
Aardal
11151
Leikanger
Fjaler
Trysil
Gaular
5631
Oeyer
Gausdal
2209
2916
6882
2749
4840
6175
Sogndal
Balestrand
Hyllestad
Solund
Vang
6794
Oeystre Slidre
1431
1526
875
1613
3114
Lillehammer
Aamot
Hoeyanger
25075
4398
4502
Vik
Vestre Slidre
Ringsaker
Laerdal
Elverum
2881
2245
31824
Gulen
Etnedal
2158
18844
2459
Nordre Land
1397
Modalen
6847
Austrheim
Loeten
Hemsedal
Nord-Aurdal
361
Gjoevik
2527
Masfjorden
1909
6442
Hamar 7271
27648
Vaksdal
1693
Lindaas
27439 Vaaler_Hedmark
Aurland
4154
Aal
13043
Aasnes
1783
3924
4670
Gol
7779
Oestre Toten
Soendre Land
Ulvik
4375
Osteroey
Voss
Stange
14604
6008
1163
Soer-Aurdal
7207
13850
18427
Granvin
3265
Vestre Toten
Hol
Nes_Buskerud
Askoey
1008
12546
4557
3485
Nord-Odal
Kvam
22020
5073
Gran
8334
Grue
Eidfjord
Flaa
Bergen
Hurdal
13010
5275
914
1014
239209 Samnanger
2602
Eidsvoll
Jevnaker
18637
Ullensvang
2322
Fjell
3031 Buskerud
6335 Lunner
3517
OSLO/GARDERMOEN
20043Sund
8505
Fusa
Jondal
Nore og Uvdal
Kroedsherad
Sigdal
3709
1078
2635
2151
5537
3051 Hordaland
3537
Ringerike
Os_Hordaland
Soer-Odal Kongsvinger
28079
14908
7623
17279
Kvinnherad
Hole
Rollag
Nes_Akershus
Austevoll
3012 Akershus
13122
5229
1441
4451 Tysnes
18025
Tinn
Oslo
Odda
Modum
6380
2825
7378
Eidskog
529846
12541
Fitjar
Flesberg
6499
Fet
2895
2517
Lier
Aurskog-Hoeland
9567
Vinje
Stord
21725
13275
3758
Enebakk
Hjartdal
Boemlo 16516
Etne
Drammen
Roemskog
9297
1633
10830
3904
Sauda
Oelen
667
Hoboel
NotoddenOevre Eiker 57148
4819
3420
4557
15633
12359
Eidsberg
Haugesund Sveio
NOTODDEN
Vindafjord
2062 Karlstad
31530
10203
4672
Vestby
4700
Suldal
3032 Telemark Seljord Boe_Telemark
Kongsberg
Horten Moss 12990
3901
2919
5249
Marker
23244 Lardal
Tokke
24768 28040
Bykle
3439 3021 stfold
2463
Raade
2419
857
Kviteseid
Sauherad
Rakkestad
Tysvaer
Siljan
6465
2598
4323
Finnoey
7284
2372
9370
Toensberg
Sarpsborg Aremark
2772
Nome
Skien
Hjelmeland3043 Aust-Agder
36452
Karmoey
FYRESDAL
49753
1425
6565
Andebu
50676
2736
37567 Bokn
Fredrikstad
Valle
769
5083
Strand
Nissedal
70418
1384
104413041 Rogaland
Porsgrunn
Halden
1408
Sandefjord
Fyresdal
33407 Larvik 41289
Hvaler
Drangedal
27582
Stavanger
1353
3773
4143
Forsand
41142
113991
3033 Vestfold
1102
Bygland
Krageroe
Sola
Sandnes
10529 Bamble
1327
Sirdal
19832
Gjerstad
57618
14154
1760
2500
Klepp
Aamli
Gjesdal
Risoer
14536
Aaseral
1801
9273 Bjerkreim
6909
Vegaarshei
Haa
907
2463
Time
1854
14784
14461
Froland
Tvedestrand
3042 Vest-Agder
4672
Kvinesdal
5889
Lund
Evje og Hornnes
5582
2031 Gteborg
3129
3305
Haegebostad
Arendal
Eigersund
Birkenes
1594
39676
13408
Flekkefjord
Iveland 4340
TROLLHATTAN
8878
Grimstad
Vennesla
Sokndal
1154
18885
12427
3309
Marnardal
Songdalen
Lillesand
Lyngdal
2167
5556
9043
7244
Farsund
Lindesnes
9479
Kristiansand
4484
LISTA
0
12.5
25
Ki lometers
50
Nord-Aurdal
6442
Elverum
18844
Gjoevik
27648
Hamar
27439
3063 Oppland
Gol
4375
Loeten
7271
3064 Hedmark
Vaaler_Hedmark
3924
Vestre Toten
12546
Soer-Aurdal
3265
Stange
18427
Soendre Land
6008
Nes_Buskerud
3485
Oestre Toten
14604
Nord-Odal
5073
Gran
13010
Flaa
1014
Hurdal
2602
Eidsvoll
18637
Ringerike
28079
Lunner
8505
Jevnaker
6335
Nittedal
19578
Hole
5229
Baerum
104690
Flesberg
2517
Kongsberg
23244
Boe_Telemark
5249
Asker
50858
Drammen
57148
Hof Sande_Vestfold
3048
7690
Holmestrand
9604
Sauherad
4323
Lardal
2419
Siljan
2372
TORP
Porsgrunn
33407
Drangedal
4143
0
Gjerstad
2500
Larvik
41142
Bamble
14154
Krageroe
10529
Raelingen
14797
Ski
26800
Enebakk
9297
Spydeberg
4798
Hoboel
4557
Roemskog
667
Troegstad
4962
Askim
14089
Vaaler_Oestfold
4020
Eidsberg
10203
Skiptvet
3355
2062 Karlstad
Marker
3439
Rakkestad
7284
3021 stfold
Sarpsborg
49753
Aremark
1425
Fredrikstad
70418
Tjoeme
4582
Sandefjord
41289
Hvaler
3773
Halden
27582
Kilometers
12.5
Figure 3-13: Main Markets for High-Speed Rail Services in Norway
- 3-17 -
Aurskog-Hoeland
13275
Raade
6465
Toensberg
36452
Stokke
10014
Noetteroey
20022
SKIEN/GEITERYGGEN
Fet
9567
Rygge RYGGE
13712
Andebu
5083
Skien
50676
Nome
6565
Eidskog
6499
Skedsmo
Vestby
12990
Moss
28040
24768
Nes_Akershus
18025
3012 Akershus
KJELLER 42094
Loerenskog
30675
Oppegaard
23586
Nesodden
16231
Frogn
Roeyken
13358
17280
Aas
Svelvik Hurum
14472
6441 8799
3033 Vestfold Horten
3032 Telemark
Oslo
529846
OSLO/FORNEBU
Lier
21725
Nedre Eiker
21522
Oevre Eiker
15633
Ullensaker
24556
Gjerdrum
5064
Soerum
12925
3011 Oslo
Modum
12541
NOTODDEN
Soer-Odal
7623
OSLO/GARDERMOEN
3031 Buskerud
Rollag
1441
Notodden
12359
Nannestad
10141
Kroedsherad
2151
Sigdal
3537
76066
Mandal Soegne
14010 9547
Ringsaker
31824
Nordre Land
6847
Etnedal
1397
2031 Gteborg

in Norway
3.3.2
Database of Passenger Traffic Demand
Passenger demand figures for 2005 were deduced from several data sources and studies
for the Norwegian passenger traffic market. The analyses and forecasts were made to
reflect passenger demand potentials for High-Speed Services in Norway. Therefore, the
segmentation of the markets had been done with respect to these demand potentials.
The model used for the calculation of the traffic demand potentials for High-Speed Rail
Services does not differ between long-distance traffic and regional traffic, as all traffic
segments could be of interest for High-Speed Services.
The model calculates traffic flows between the municipalities on the basis of number of
inhabitants, the centrality of the municipalities and as far as available on empirical data of
traffic demand differentiated by means of transport. Empirical data were available for rail
and air traffic on all relevant relations. Rail data were delivered by NSB, air traffic data
were derived from statistics made by Avinor.
As no empirical data on traffic flows for car traffic were available, the information on existing car traffic flows was taken from the actual Norwegian Transport Model (NTM5) which
was erected for the workgroup for transport analysis in the National Transport Plan in
Norway [NTM5].
3.3.3
European Passenger Transport Model
The basic structure of the model can be seen in Figure 3-14.

Demand
Basic Conditions
Infrastructure
OD-Matrices
Inhabitants
Air/Rail/Road
Air/Rail/Road/Bus
Supply
2005
Income / GDP
Services
Air/Rail/Bus
Car Availability
User Costs
Transport policies
Air/Rail/Road
European Passenger
Transport Model
2020
Infrastructure
Inhabitants
Air/Rail/Road
Income / GDP
Services
Air/Rail/Bus
Car Availability
User Costs
Transport policies
Air/Rail/Road
OD-Matrices
Air/Rail/Road/Bus
Figure 3-14: The European Passenger Transport Model
- 3-18 -

in Norway
The model is sensitive to changes in population, growth of income, car-availability, the
development of infrastructure of all means of transport, services by air, rail and bus user
costs and transport policy-related variables.
In combination with traffic demand data of the analysis year, the model is calibrated and
then applied to the various scenarios on socio-economic development and network extensions for the year 2020. As result, the model produces new OD-tables of traffic demand
for the different variants of network extensions on the forecast time horizon.
The model calculated the effects of all these variables on mobility ('induced traffic'), the
spatial distribution of traffic and the modal-split. Rail traffic flows are assigned to the railway network.
Figure 4-3 shows the structure of the European Passenger Transport Model. Input consists of a zonal databank with geographical (used also for graphics) and socio-economic
information, a network handling system as input for a route choice/route split model for all
modes and relevant transport chains, tariff/user cost model and input concerning policy
variables transferred either to network-related or user cost-related factors.
'empirical' OD-matrix for the
base year (p.c., rail, bus, air)
demand model
zonal databank
- geographic
- socio economic
ZONDAT
O/D factors/elasticities
value of time,
changes
trip generation
INES
INES
network handling
system
DEMO
route choice/split
model (incl. route chains)
induced
andtraffic
supply
characteristics
per mode
road
access
rail
distribution
distribution
transfered
into
generalised
costs
access
modal-split
integrated
air airport choice/
assignment
access split
model
tariff model PEP

(user costs)
network
related
GIS based graphics
user cost
related
policy variables
POLDAT
Figure 3-15: Structure of the European Passenger Transport Model
- 3-19 -
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
F
U
N
C
T
I
O
N
S

in Norway
The demand model itself consists of:
o
An integrated trip generation and distribution model based on socio-demographic and

socio-economic factors per zone and level of services (travel time and costs) between
origin and destination
A sophisticated multi-nominal modal-split model
A multi-route assignment procedure which also assign airport ground access per rail to
the railways. Therefore, transport chains including air traffic and airport choice were
considered.
The 'exogenous' variables used in the model are:

o
Population per zone
Employment per zone
GDP development per zone
Cars per 1000 inhabitants per zone, transferred into car availability
Factors representing the border 'resistance', calibrated according to the ratio between
international and national traffic
The level-of-service variables used in the model are:

o
Travel time per main mode and trip purpose as specified by
In vehicle time
Access and egress time
Transfer time (dependent on time tables)
Adaption time (difference between desired departure/desired arrival and real departure/real arrival due to the possible connections)
Travel costs per mode and trip purpose
Transfer penalties per trip purpose
Comfort factors per mode, system (type of train) dependent on trip purpose and share
of the modes/systems used on the entire trip
Access/egress comfort per mode dependent on trip purpose and type of zone
Transport policy related variables are considered by transferring into cost or time variables
(fuel costs -> user costs, access restrictions -> time surcharges etc.).
The model is the international extension of the passenger model for the German Federal
Master Plan of Transport [BVWP 2015].
- 3-20 -

in Norway
3.3.4
Development of Population
Traffic demand will change significantly until 2020, the time horizon of traffic forecasts,
due to changes in population and growth of income. The assumptions on the development
of socio-economic figures and user costs are made in coherence with the assumptions of
other studies made for the New Norwegian Transport Master Plan.
Table 3-2 shows the development of number of inhabitants between 2005 and 2020.
Overall growth is expected to be 9.5% over this period. Growth rates in the today already
densely populated area such as the Oslo area, in Hordaland (Bergen), in Rogaland (Stavanger), Vest-Agder (Kristiansand) and Sr-Trndelag (Trondheim) are above average.
Development of Population by Regions 2005-2020
Fylke
Total
01 stfold
02 Akershus
03 Oslo
04 Hedmark
05 Oppland
06 Buskerud
07 Vestfold
08 Telemark
09 Aust-Agder
10 Vest-Agder
11 Rogaland
12 Hordaland
14 Sogn og Fjordane
15 Mre og Romsdal
16 Sr-Trndelag
17 Nord-Trndelag
18 Nordland
19 Troms
20 Finnmark Finnmrku
2005
4606363
258542
494218
529846
188376
183174
243491
220736
166289
103596
161276
393104
448343
107032
244689
272567
128444
236825
152741
73074
2020
5045056
289631
569982
609197
194967
187657
266435
243782
173816
110855
179871
445131
502605
108819
252287
303287
135010
237161
160292
74271
Growth
9.5%
12.0%
15.3%
15.0%
3.5%
2.4%
9.4%
10.4%
4.5%
7.0%
11.5%
13.2%
12.1%
1.7%
3.1%
11.3%
5.1%
0.1%
4.9%
1.6%
Source: SSB, Alternative MMMM, medium national growth
Table 3-2: Development of population by regions

Table 3-3 shows the development of population by age classes. While the number of
young people (less than twenty years old) will decline slightly, the number of elder people
(67 years or older) will rise by about 30%. For transport demand that means a higher
growth rate on average as long-distance mobility of young people is less than that of elderly people.
- 3-21 -

in Norway
Development of Population by Age Classes 2005-2020
Age classes
0-19 years
20-66 years
67 years or more
Total
2005
1198361
2804068
603934
4606363
2020
1191183
3063557
790316
5045056
Index
-0.6%
9.3%
30.9%
9.5%
Source: SSB, Alternative MMMM, medium national growth
Table 3-3: Development of population by age classes

From Annex 3.2 the development of population differentiated by region and age classes
can be taken.
3.3.5
Economic Growth and Development of Car Availability and User Costs
Figure 3-16 and Table 3-4 show the development of GDP and car availability. Economy
shall grow by about 40% between 2005 and 2020 with respect to a study made for the
finance department [FIN-DEP]. In the same period, it is expected that car availability will
grow by about 23%. Again, the assumptions are made in coherence with the assumptions
of other studies made for the New Norwegian Transport Master Plan.
Development of GDP and Car Availability
Car availability
23.2
GDP
39.3
50
100
2005
150
2005 -2020
Figure 3-16: Economic growth (GDP) and development of car availability

Input for HSR Norway Study
2005-2010
p.a.
2010-2015
p.a.
2015-2020
p.a.
2005-2020 Index 2020

(2005=100)
p.a.
Development of Gross Domestic Product

GDP
2.1%
2.3%
2.3%
2.2%
139.3
1.4%
123.2
Development of Car Availability

Car availability
1.8%
1.2%
1.2%
Source:
1) [FIN-DEP] Tabell 5.1, Bruttoprodukt, Fastland (Kilde: Finansdepartementet v/ Svein Sterdahl)
2) [FIN-DEP] Tabell 5.5, total and constricted car availabilty (FK=1, B>=hfk and FK=1, B<hfk)
Table 3-4: Economic growth (GDP) and development of car availability
- 3-22 -

in Norway
The development of user costs is depicted in Figure 3-17.
Development of user costs 2005 - 2020
Private Car
Train
Express Bus
Plane
-8.0
-6.0
-4.0
-2.0
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
Figure 3-17: Development of user costs

Development of user costs (real prices, anual rates )
Input for HSR Norway Study
Private Car
Train
Express Bus
Plane
Source: [TI-1891]
2005-2010
2010-2015
2015-2020
2005-2020
-0.7%
-0.1%
-1.1%
-0.9%
0.9%
0.6%
0.1%
0.0%
-0.2%
0.9%
-0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.5%
-0.3%
-0.2%
Index 2020
(2005=100)
100.3
107.2
94.5
95.8
Table 3-5: Development of user costs

Compared with the assumptions made for the UIC-Passenger Traffic Study, the development in Norway will follow a more unfavourable path for railways. Economic growth shall
be less and growth of car availability higher than in the main scenarios of the UIC study.
The prediction of user costs in Norway is most similar to the assumption of the Unfavourable Scenario of the UIC study with constant prices for car and bus, an average annual
decrease in air fares of 0.5% and an average annual increase in rail fares of 1.0%. The
Basic Scenario assumed an increase in using the private car and constant user costs for
all other means of transport.
3.3.6
Development of Traffic Demand without High-Speed Rail Services
Overall traffic demand will grow strongly due to growth of population and economic prosperity. The growth rates are different with respect to travel distances as not only the total
number of trips will grow but also travel distances (see Table 3-6). On short and medium
distances up to 300 km overall traffic demand will grow by up to 23% whereas on longer
distances within Norway traffic demand growth rate will range between 33% and 42%.
- 3-23 -

in Norway
Development of Overall Traffic Demand
(passengers per day, both directions)
in the Main Markets
- without High-Speed Services Market segment (OD)
Oslo - Vestfold South
Oslo - Telemark East
Oslo - Kristiansand/Arendal
Kristiansand - Stavanger
Oslo - Stavanger
Stavanger - Bergen
Oslo - Bergen
Bergen - Trondheim
Oslo - Lillehammer (Oppland N)
Oslo - Hamar/Ringsaker
Oslo - Trondheim
Oslo - Stockholm
Oslo - stfold South
Oslo - Gteborg
2005
abs.
7 950
3 550
5 100
3 250
4 400
3 900
6 200
1 700
2 750
4 450
6 600
6 950
8 100
5 700
2020 w/o HSS

abs.
9 325
3 950
6 300
3 825
6 150
5 050
8 675
2 400
2 950
4 850
8 825
8 575
9 625
6 725
Growth rate
17.3%
11.5%
23.4%
17.9%
39.8%
29.4%
40.0%
41.7%
7.0%
9.2%
33.7%
23.5%
18.8%
17.9%
Table 3-6: Development of overall passenger traffic in main relations without High-Speed
Services
Higher incomes will favour air traffic, as people will switch to the faster traffic mode despite higher costs. In addition, it is expected that air fares will decline further on by about
4% until 2020 on average whereas rail fares will grow by about 7%, the market share of
the railway will fall considerably. In total, it can be assumed, that rail traffic will grow only
slightly if the railways level of service will be the same in 2020 as today.
3.3.7
Development of Traffic Demand with High-Speed Rail Services
If high-speed services are established, traffic demand in all mentioned market segments
will grow significantly. There are two main effects on the transport market:
a) Railways market share will grow strongly up to about 55% of total traffic demand
in the corridors
b) Overall traffic demand will grow due to shorter land bound travel time today and
lower user costs in comparison to air traffic
Especially the last mentioned effect is quite considerable and in the expected dimension a
specific observation on the Norwegian transport market as todays travel times on both
land-bound modes, road and rail, range on an extreme bad level compared to land-bound
travel times in other European countries. Overall traffic demand on several market segments will grow by up to 30% when high-speed rail services will be established.
The following travel times had been assumed for the first estimation of traffic demand with
an established High-Speed Network.
- 3-24 -

in Norway
Minimum Running Time on Main Markets
(assuming direct lines and direct services)
Line
Length of line
Minimum running
time
Oslo Trondheim
ca. 500 km
ca. 2h45
Oslo Bergen
ca. 400 km
ca. 2h15
Oslo Stavanger
ca. 400 km
ca. 2h15
Oslo Kristiansand
ca. 300 km
ca. 2h00
Oslo Gteborg
ca. 300 km
ca. 2h00
Oslo Stockholm
ca. 500 km
ca. 4h00*
Bergen Trondheim
ca. 500 km
ca. 3h00
Bergen Stavanger
ca. 200 km
ca. 1h30
Stavanger Kristiansand
ca. 200 km
ca. 1h00
* on Swedish side, only an upgraded line had been assumed
Table 3-7: Basic Network Minimum Running Time on Main Markets (direct services)
Traffic demand would develop as shown in Table 3-8.
Development of Overall Traffic Demand
(passengers per day, both directions)
in the Main Markets
- with and without High-Speed Services Market segment (OD)

Oslo - Stavanger
Stavanger - Bergen
Oslo - Bergen
Bergen - Trondheim
Oslo - Trondheim
Oslo - Stockholm
Oslo - stfold South
Oslo - Gteborg
Overall Traffic Demand

2020
2020 with HSS
w/o HSS
abs.
abs.
9 325
3 950
6 300
3 825
6 150
5 050
8 675
2 400
2 950
4 850
8 825
8 575
9 625
6 725
9 775
4 175
7 075
4 525
7 900
6 425
10 925
2 950
3 075
5 025
10 225
10 775
10 250
7 825
Rail Traffic
2020 with HSS
Growth rate Market Share

4.7%
5.4%
12.3%
18.3%
28.6%
27.2%
25.8%
22.8%
4.3%
3.3%
16.0%
25.5%
6.6%
16.5%
28.4%
22.1%
52.2%
49.1%
53.3%
55.0%
52.1%
54.7%
42.7%
42.9%
48.2%
33.9%
32.6%
46.1%
abs.
2 775
925
3 700
2 225
4 225
3 525
5 700
1 625
1 300
2 150
4 925
3 650
3 350
3 600
Table 3-8: Development of overall passenger traffic in main relations with High-Speed
Services
- 3-25 -

in Norway
Froeya
4114
Smoela
2195
Rindal
2101
Halsa
1697
Frei
Averoey 5301
Fraena
Tingvoll
9023
5448
Gjemnes 3105
Eide
2700
3304
Sandoey
1274
,5
00
Hemsedal
1909
Aurland
1783
Ulvik
1163
Granvin
1008
Voss
13850
Kvam
8334
Finnoey
2772
Strand
10441 3041
Stavanger
113991
Sandnes
57618
Lund
3129
25
.2
Sokndal
3309
Kilometers
50
Valle
1384
ca. 4
Fyresdal
1353
Flekkefjord
8878
Lyngdal
7244
Farsund
9479
LISTA
Aamli
1801
Vegaarshei
1854
Froland
4672
Evje og Hornnes
3305
Iveland
Vennesla
1154
12427
Marnardal
Songdalen
2167
5556
Lindesnes
4484
Kristiansand
76066
Grimstad
18885
Lillesand
9043
Drammen
57148
Porsgrunn
Sandefjord
33407 Larvik
41289
41142
Krageroe
10529 Bamble
14154
Risoer
6909
Tvedestrand
5889
Arendal
39676
Birkenes
4340
Eidsvoll
18637
OSLO/GARDERMOEN
7623
17279
Nes_Akershus
3012 Akershus
18025
Oslo
529846
Fet
9567
Lier
21725
Grue
5275
Eidskog
6499
Aurskog-Hoeland
13275
0
ca. 3,50
Enebakk
9297
Hoboel
4557
Eidsberg
10203
Vestby
Roemskog
667
2062 Karlstad
Kongsberg
Horten Moss 12990
Marker
23244 Lardal
24768 28040
3439 3021
Raade
2419
Sauherad
Rakkestad
Siljan
6465
4323
7284
2372
Toensberg
Sarpsborg Aremark
Nome
Skien
36452
49753
1425
6565
Andebu
50676
Fredrikstad
5083
Gjerstad
2500
Vest-Agder
Haegebostad
1594
Hole
5229
Modum
12541
NotoddenOevre Eiker
15633
12359
Nissedal
1408
Drangedal
4143
Bygland
1327
Aaseral
907
,0 0
,0 0 0
FYRESDAL
Aust-Agder
Kvinesdal3042
5582
Hurdal
2602
Jevnaker
6335 Lunner
8505
Ringerike
28079
Boe_Telemark
5249
Kviteseid
2598
Nord-Odal
5073
70418
3033 Vestfold
Hvaler
3773
stfold
Halden
27582
2031 Gteborg
0
,50
Eigersund
13408
12.5
Rogaland
Forsand
1102
Sirdal
1760
Gjesdal
9273 Bjerkreim
Time
2463
14461
ca
0
Hjelmeland 3043
2736
NOTODDEN
Stange
18427
Vestre Toten
12546
Gran
13010
Kroedsherad
2151
Hjartdal
1633
Seljord
2919
Aasnes
7779
3924
Flesberg
2517
3032 Telemark
Elverum
18844
Loeten
Hamar 7271
Oestre Toten
14604
Soendre Land
6008
Rollag
1441
Tinn
6380
Tokke
2463
Bykle
857
Nordre Land
6847
Gjoevik
27648
Aamot
4398
.3
ca
Sola
19832
Klepp
14536
Haa
14784
3901
Sigdal
3537
Trysil
6882
Lillehammer
25075
Ringsaker
31824
3031 Buskerud
Nore og Uvdal
2635
3064 Hedmark
Oeyer
4840
Flaa
1014
,5
Karmoey
37567 Bokn
769
ca. 3,500
239209 Samnanger
Ullensvang
2322
Fjell
3517
20043
Fusa
Jondal
Sund
1078
3709
5537
3051 Hordaland
Os_Hordaland
14908
Kvinnherad
Austevoll
13122
4451 Tysnes
Odda
2825
7378
Fitjar
2895
Vinje
Stord
3758
Boemlo16516
Etne
10830
3904
Sauda
Oelen
4819
3420
Haugesund Sveio
Vindafjord
31530
4672
4700
Suldal
Tysvaer
9370
Nes_Buskerud
3485
.3
Bergen
Hol
4557
Stor-Elvdal
2832
Soer-Fron Ringebu
3271
4586
Gol
4375
Soer-Aurdal
3265
ca. 5,50
0
Eidfjord
914
2063 Borlnge
Rendalen
2105
Nord-Fron
5896
Etnedal
1397
ca
Osteroey
7207
Askoey
22020
5,000
Engerdal
1499
Sel
6059
Nord-Aurdal
6442
Aal
4670
1,000
Tolga
1778
Alvdal
2416
00
Vaksdal
4154
Long-distance Traffic
Number of passengers/day (both directions)
Os_Hedmark
2087
Folldal
1717
Vestre Slidre
2245
Laerdal
2158
Modalen
361
Masfjorden
1693
Demand on Individual Markets
ROROSRoeros
5636
Tynset
5405
Gausdal
6175
Oeystre Slidre
3114
Vang
1613
2072 stersund
Holtaalen
2132
Midtre Gauldal
5797
Oppdal
6473
.1
Lindaas
13043
Tydal
902
Meldal
3934
ca
Gulen
2459
Austrheim
2527
Stjoerdal
19562
Selbu
3988
0
ca. 5,00
Solund
875
Klaebu
5279
Melhus
13977
Nord-Trndelag
Meraaker
2560
Malvik
Trondheim 12095
156161
Rennebu
2660
Surnadal
6160
3063 Oppland
Aardal
5631
11151
Leikanger
2209
Sogndal
Balestrand
6794
1431
Hoeyanger
4502
Vik
2881
Gaular
2749
Verdal
13815
Frosta
2493 Levanger
18001 3082
3081 Sr-Trndelag
Aukra
3050
Midsund
1939
Molde
24124
Giske
Haram
Sunndal
6591
8715
7370
Rauma
Vestnes
Skodje
6390
Ulstein
3597
Nesset
Heroey_Moere 6795
Stordal
Sula
3181
8386
Sykkylven 1007
7453
7446
Sande_Moere
Hareid
2576
4658
Norddal
Oersta
1817
Selje
10233
Lesja
Vanylven
2999
2184
3693
Hornindal Stranda
Dovre
4605
1197
2875
Volda
Vaagsoey
8351
6218
Eid
Skjaak
5766
2394
Bremanger
4031
Stryn
Flora
6843
Lom
11364
Gloppen
Luster
FLORO
2467
Naustdal 5793
4927
2682
Joelster
Vaagaa
2918
3773
Askvoll
3229
Foerde
Fjaler
2916
Hyllestad
1526
Rissa
6433
Orkdal Skaun
10512 6063
Hemne
4277
Aure
2620
Tustna
1006
Kristiansund
17026
Mosvik
888
Leksvik
3508
ORLAND
Oerland
5136
Agdenes
1799
Snillfjord
1026
Hitra
4025
TROLLHATTAN
MandalSoegne
14010 9547
Figure 3-18: Traffic demand on Main Markets for High-Speed Rail Services
3.4
Creating a Basic Network from the Market Point of View
The section load is one indicator for the profitability of an infrastructure project. A higher
section load normally leads to a better benefit-cost ratio.
Traffic demand figures for High-Speed Services in Norway are very low in comparison to
existing or planned HS Project in other European countries.
As mentioned in chapter 3-2, demand figures in the core areas of the HS Networks of
France, Germany or Italy are higher than 50,000 passengers per day. There will be only a
few new HS sections with traffic loads less than 10,000 passengers per day. At least, they
will have a section load of 6,000 passengers per day.
For definition of a basic network, a minimum daily section load of 4,000 passengers per
day was set.
This minimum traffic load would be reached by the three main city-pairs in Norway: Oslo
Bergen (circa 5,500 passengers per day), Oslo Trondheim (circa 5,000 passengers per
day) and Oslo Stavanger (circa 4,000 passengers per day). All other relations couldnt
be served by direct lines, due to less demand.
To heighten traffic demand, variants of high-speed lines serving several markets segments were examined by
- 3-26 -

in Norway
extension of another High-Speed-Line,
branching from another High-Speed-Line or
serving regional markets by additional stops.
3.4.1
Including the Main Regional Markets
By adding regional market segments to long-distance corridors it is possible to raise the

average load factor on several corridors.
For the Oslo - Gteborg line and the Oslo Kristiansand line, serving the regional markets will raise the average load factor significantly to a higher range and would jack the
lines into the category of the basic network. In both cases, the minimum travel time on the
main markets to Kristiansand and Goteborg would be prolonged by about 30 minutes, but
total travel time would not exceed 2h30m. Railways would still be competitive to air traffic
and the loss of demand potentials on the main markets due to longer travel times are less
than the additional potential of the regional markets.
Serving the region of Hamar would raise the average load factor of the Oslo Trondheim
line by about 500 passengers per day.
3.4.2
Combining the Markets of the North- and West-Corridor
An alternative of serving the West-Corridor by a branch from the North-Corridor will have
no advantages in terms of average section loads compared to the separate line from Oslo
to Bergen and Oslo and Trondheim. Although, the demand potentials between Bergen
and Trondheim could be served better in this variant, overall rail traffic demand will be
less, as the loss of traffic demand on the Oslo Bergen market due to longer travel times
is higher than the additional potential on the regional markets.
3.4.3
Combining the Markets of the South- and West-Corridor
The market potential between Oslo and Stavanger alone will not justify the construction of
a relative expensive new high-speed infrastructure next to a line between Oslo and Bergen or Oslo and Kristiansand.
Linking this market segment to the Oslo Kristiansand or the Oslo Bergen corridor
would raise the average load factors of both lines significantly although the railways share
on the Oslo Stavanger market would decrease due to longer travel times. By serving
Stavanger with a branch from the Bergen line, it would be possible to establish additional
services between Bergen and Stavanger. In the alternative via Kristiansand it would be
possible to serve the regional market between Stavanger and Kristiansand directly by the
Oslo Kristiansand Stavanger services. The average load factors so would rise by
about 1,500 and 3,000 passengers per day respectively.
- 3-27 -

in Norway
Combining the markets in the Western parts of Norway will be a better solution than serving the potentials separately, as load factor is rising and the length of necessary new lines
will be shorter. Which variant of combined market will be the better one can only be answered with a closer look to investment and operational costs.
Table 3-9 shows the traffic demand figures for the examined variants. The demand potentials for High-Speed Rail Services on the individual markets, i.e. the demand between a
city pair, ranges between 1,000 and 5,500 passengers per day (both directions). For the
line variants which serve combined markets, the average demand (average section load)
amounts between 4,500 and 8,500 passenger per day.5
Average Section Load (passengers per day, both directions)
for Different Variants of High-speed Lines
(Forecast 2020)
Market segment (OD)
Oslo - Stavanger
Stavanger - Bergen
Oslo - Bergen
Bergen - Trondheim
Oslo - Trondheim
Oslo - Stockholm
Oslo - stfold South
Oslo - Gteborg
Individual
Markets
3000
1000
3500
2000
4000
3500
5500
1500
1500
2000
5000
3500
3500
3500
Combined
Markets
4500
6000
8500
5000
5500
4500
Legend: "high potential"

"high potential"; better variant available
"high potential"; alternative variants
"low traffic demand"
Table 3-9: Average Section Load for Different Variants of High-speed Lines
Combining the markets will not result in an addition of the section loads of the individual markets as demand is weighted by trip length and demand on the individual markets might change
due to longer travel times
- 3-28 -

in Norway
3.4.4
The Basic Network
Figure 3-19 shows the basic network with the two alternatives for serving the Oslo Stavanger market.
Froeya
4114
Kristiansund
17026
Sandoey
1274
Aukra
3050
Midsund
1939
Hemne
4277
Aure
2620
Tustna
1006
Halsa
Frei
1697
Fraena
Averoey 5301
Tingvoll
9023
5448
Gjemnes 3105
Eide
2700
3304
ORLAND
Oerland
5136
Agdenes
1799
Snillfjord
1026
Hitra
4025
Smoela
2195
Rindal
2101
Rissa
6433
Leksvik
3508
Mosvik
888
Orkdal Skaun
10512 6063
156161
Klaebu
5279
Melhus
13977
Rennebu
2660
Nord-Trndelag
Meraaker
2560
Stjoerdal
19562
Selbu
3988
Tydal
902
Meldal
3934
3081 Sr-Trndelag
Surnadal
6160
Verdal
13815
Frosta
Levanger
2493
18001 3082
Malvik
Trondheim 12095
Basic Network
with two alternatives of serving Stavanger
2072 stersund
Holtaalen
2132
Midtre Gauldal
5797
Molde
24124
Main lines
h
2h30 - 3
Giske
ROROS Roeros
Haram
Sunndal
6591
8715
5636
7370
Rauma
Vestnes
Os_Hedmark
Skodje
6390
Ulstein
2087
Oppdal
3597
Nesset
Heroey_Moere 6795
Stordal
Sula
6473
3181
Sykkylven 1007
8386
Tynset
7453
7446
Sande_Moere
Hareid
5405
Tolga
2576
4658
Norddal
1778
Oersta
1817
Selje
10233
Lesja
Folldal
Vanylven
2999
2184
1717
3693
Hornindal Stranda
Dovre
4605
Engerdal
1197
2875
Volda
Vaagsoey
Alvdal
1499
8351
6218
2416
Eid
Skjaak
5766
2063 Borlnge
2394
Bremanger
Sel
Rendalen
4031
6059
2105
Stryn
Flora
6843
Lom
11364
Gloppen
Luster
FLORO
2467
Naustdal
5793
4927
2682
Nord-Fron
Joelster
Vaagaa
5896
2918
3773
Stor-Elvdal
Askvoll
2832
Soer-Fron Ringebu
3229
3271
4586
3064 Hedmark
Foerde
3063 Oppland
Aardal
11151
Leikanger
Fjaler
Trysil
Gaular
5631
Oeyer
2209
Gausdal
2916
6882
2749
4840
Sogndal
6175
Hyllestad
Balestrand
Solund
Vang
Oeystre Slidre
6794
1526
1431
875
1613
Lillehammer
3114
Aamot
Hoeyanger
25075
4398
4502
Vik
Vestre Slidre
Ringsaker
Elverum
Laerdal
2245
2881
31824
Gulen
Etnedal
18844
2158
2459
Nordre Land
1397
Modalen
6847
Austrheim
Loeten
Hemsedal
Nord-Aurdal
361
Gjoevik
2527
Masfjorden
1909
6442
Hamar 7271
27648
Vaksdal
1693
Lindaas
Aurland
4154
Aal
13043
Aasnes
1783
3924
4670
Gol
7779
Oestre Toten
Soendre Land
4375
Ulvik
Osteroey
Voss
Stange
14604
6008
1163
Soer-Aurdal
7207
13850
18427
Granvin
Vestre Toten
3265
Nes_Buskerud
Hol
Askoey
1008
12546
3485
Nord-Odal
4557
22020
Kvam
5073
8334
Gran
Grue
Eidfjord
Flaa
Bergen
Hurdal
13010
5275
914
1014
2602
239209 Samnanger
Eidsvoll
Jevnaker
18637
Ullensvang
Fjell
2322
3031 Buskerud
6335 Lunner
3517
OSLO/GARDERMOEN
20043
8505
Jondal
Fusa
Kroedsherad
Nore og Uvdal
Sund
Sigdal
1078
2151
3709
2635
5537
3051 Hordaland
3537
Ringerike
Os_Hordaland
28079
14908
7623
17279
Kvinnherad
Hole
Rollag
Nes_Akershus
Austevoll
13122
3012 Akershus
5229
1441
18025
4451 Tysnes
Tinn
Oslo
Odda
Modum
2825
6380
Eidskog
7378
529846
12541
Fitjar
Flesberg
6499
Fet
2895
2517
Lier
Aurskog-Hoeland
9567
Vinje
Stord
21725
13275
3758
Enebakk
Hjartdal
Boemlo16516
Etne
Drammen
Roemskog
9297
1633
10830
3904
Sauda
667
Oelen
Hoboel
NotoddenOevre Eiker 57148
4819
3420
4557
15633
12359
Eidsberg
Haugesund Sveio
NOTODDEN
Vindafjord
2062 Karlstad
10203
31530
4672
Vestby
4700
Suldal
Seljord Boe_Telemark
3032
Telemark
12990
Kongsberg
Horten
Moss
3901
2919
5249
Marker
23244 Lardal
Tokke
24768 28040
Bykle
3439 3021 stfold
Raade
2419
2463
857
Kviteseid
Sauherad
Rakkestad
Tysvaer
Siljan
6465
2598
4323
Finnoey
9370
7284
2372
Toensberg
Sarpsborg Aremark
2772
Nome
Skien
Hjelmeland3043 Aust-Agder
36452
Karmoey
FYRESDAL
49753
1425
Andebu
6565
2736
50676
37567 Bokn
Fredrikstad
Valle
5083
769
Strand
Nissedal
70418
1384
10441 3041 Rogaland
Porsgrunn
1408
Halden
Sandefjord
Fyresdal
33407
Drangedal
Hvaler
Larvik 41289
27582
Stavanger
1353
4143
3773
Forsand
41142
113991
3033 Vestfold
1102
Krageroe
Bygland
Sola
Sandnes
Bamble
10529
1327
Sirdal
19832
Gjerstad
57618
14154
1760
2500
Klepp
Gjesdal
Aamli
Risoer
14536
Aaseral
9273 Bjerkreim
1801
6909
Vegaarshei
Haa
907
Time
2463
1854
14784
14461
Froland
Tvedestrand
3042 Vest-Agder
4672
Kvinesdal
5889
Lund
Evje og Hornnes
5582
2031 Gteborg
3129
3305
Haegebostad
Arendal
Eigersund
Birkenes
1594
13408
39676
Flekkefjord
Iveland 4340
TROLLHATTAN
Grimstad
8878
Vennesla
Sokndal
1154
18885
12427
3309
Marnardal
Songdalen
Lillesand
Lyngdal
2167
5556
9043
7244
Farsund
Lindesnes
9479
Kristiansand
4484
LISTA
Alternative lines for serving Oslo - Stavanger
00
ca. 2h3
0
12.5
25
h0
0
.2
h3
0
.1
Kilometers
50
76066
Mandal Soegne
14010 9547
ca
5
h1
ca
.2
ca
ca
.
3h
30
ca.
1h3
0
ca. 3h
00
Figure 3-19: Basic network

Up to this point, only market aspects were considered in classifying the different transport
corridors. Passenger demand figures alone are only one indicator of profitability of a specific project. For evaluation of the efficiency of a project, demand figures have to be discussed on a more detailed level and other aspects like investment and operational costs
have to be considered.
- 3-29 -

in Norway
3.5
Conclusion
Long-distance passenger traffic is object of ongoing growth. Due to this, railways traffic
demand in long-distance traffic can grow likewise if basic conditions develop on a favourable path for railways and service quality is improved by extension of high-speed rail services. If no upgrading of the existing rail services is planned, Norwegians rail market
share will diminish, while the European average will be constant or will increase in countries where new high-speed services are established.
As traffic demand potentials are relatively low, planning, construction and operation has to
be adapted to this constraint.
Traffic demand from Oslo to Trondheim and Bergen are the highest one; from the
market point of view these corridors should be given a high priority
Traffic demand potentials from Oslo to Gteborg and Kristiansand should be combined with demand potentials of regional markets. In doing so, these corridors can
also be given a high priority from the market point of view
Traffic demand potentials between Oslo and Stavanger have to be combined with
demand potentials of the Oslo Bergen or Oslo Kristiansand corridor
Due to relative small traffic demand, investments and operation costs have to be minimised, for example by integration of existing infrastructure in agglomeration areas, by designing single tracked high-speed lines outside the agglomeration areas and by integration of existing services, esp. in the Oslo area.
- 3-30 -

Phase 1 Chapter3 1620901a

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Phase 1 Chapter3 1620901a

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Feasibility Study Concerning

High-Speed Railway Lines

Feasibility Study Concerning

Passenger Traffic in Europe

Outline UIC Passenger Traffic Study

Passenger traffic flows for 1999 throughout Europe

Feasibility Study Concerning

Private car (p.c.) transport

Feasibility Study Concerning

Leisure day trips

Leisure trips of more than one day of absence

Holiday trips involving five or more days of absence

Basic Scenario: continuation of the observable development with respect to transport

Favourable Scenario: favourable development of transport policies and user costs

Unfavourable Scenario: unfavourable development of transport policies and user

Environmental Scenario: a favourable development of transport policies (with regard

Feasibility Study Concerning

European High-Speed Network 2020

Travel Times 2010 and 2020

Feasibility Study Concerning

Determining the extension of HighSpeed Rail Services was not feasible,

Feasibility Study Concerning

In the Basic Scenario, the total

Air traffic will significantly increase its market share from

Feasibility Study Concerning

Figure 3-6 shows the developEnvironmental Scenario

Feasibility Study Concerning

Feasibility Study Concerning

Region of Bruxelles: Bruxelles, Halle-Vilvoorde, Leuven, Brabant and Wallon

Feasibility Study Concerning

Feasibility Study Concerning

Air Traffic Mobility

source: UIC Study

Figure 3-8: Overall Long-distance Mobility and Air Traffic Mobility

Feasibility Study Concerning

Rail Traffic Mobility

Market Share of Rail

source: UIC Study

source: UIC Study

Figure 3-9: Rail Traffic Mobility and Rail Market Share

Feasibility Study Concerning

Long-distance Passenger Mobility

Index (Berlin = 100) .

Figure 3-10: Rail mobility by regions

Index (Oslo = 100) .

Figure 3-11: Rail mobility by regions

Feasibility Study Concerning

Potentials for High-Speed Rail Services

Identification of Main Markets Segments

Soerum 3012 Akershus

Soendre Land Vestre Toten

The main focus of HighSpeed Rail Services has to

3052 Sogn og Fjordane

3053 Mre og Romsdal

Figure 3-12: Repartition of Population

Additional stops have to be

Feasibility Study Concerning

Oslo (530 000 inhabitants**)

Bergen (239 000 inhabitants*)

Trondheim (156 000 inhabitants*)

Stavanger (114 000 inhabitants*)

Kristiansand (76 000 inhabitants*)

Arendal (40 000 inhabitants*)

Sandnes (58 000 inhabitants*)