AGL 40.00 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
AIRLINK 129.06 Decreased By ▼ -0.47 (-0.36%)
BOP 6.75 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (1.05%)
CNERGY 4.49 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-3.02%)
DCL 8.55 Decreased By ▼ -0.39 (-4.36%)
DFML 40.82 Decreased By ▼ -0.87 (-2.09%)
DGKC 80.96 Decreased By ▼ -2.81 (-3.35%)
FCCL 32.77 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
FFBL 74.43 Decreased By ▼ -1.04 (-1.38%)
FFL 11.74 Increased By ▲ 0.27 (2.35%)
HUBC 109.58 Decreased By ▼ -0.97 (-0.88%)
HUMNL 13.75 Decreased By ▼ -0.81 (-5.56%)
KEL 5.31 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-1.48%)
KOSM 7.72 Decreased By ▼ -0.68 (-8.1%)
MLCF 38.60 Decreased By ▼ -1.19 (-2.99%)
NBP 63.51 Increased By ▲ 3.22 (5.34%)
OGDC 194.69 Decreased By ▼ -4.97 (-2.49%)
PAEL 25.71 Decreased By ▼ -0.94 (-3.53%)
PIBTL 7.39 Decreased By ▼ -0.27 (-3.52%)
PPL 155.45 Decreased By ▼ -2.47 (-1.56%)
PRL 25.79 Decreased By ▼ -0.94 (-3.52%)
PTC 17.50 Decreased By ▼ -0.96 (-5.2%)
SEARL 78.65 Decreased By ▼ -3.79 (-4.6%)
TELE 7.86 Decreased By ▼ -0.45 (-5.42%)
TOMCL 33.73 Decreased By ▼ -0.78 (-2.26%)
TPLP 8.40 Decreased By ▼ -0.66 (-7.28%)
TREET 16.27 Decreased By ▼ -1.20 (-6.87%)
TRG 58.22 Decreased By ▼ -3.10 (-5.06%)
UNITY 27.49 Increased By ▲ 0.06 (0.22%)
WTL 1.39 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.72%)
BR100 10,445 Increased By 38.5 (0.37%)
BR30 31,189 Decreased By -523.9 (-1.65%)
KSE100 97,798 Increased By 469.8 (0.48%)
KSE30 30,481 Increased By 288.3 (0.95%)

Lowari tunnel started in 1975 but stopped in 1976 due to paucity of funds. Recommenced in 2005 and but again stopped due to shortage of money; recommenced in 2013 and finally completed in 2017. The cost of Rs 8 billion increased to Rs 26 billion by 2010 and ultimately exploded to Rs 46 billion by 2019. https://fp.brecorder.com/2019/10/20191003523361/.

Lowari tunnel could have also incorporated a facility to evacuate power from abundant Chitral hydropower but was not heeded despite expert advice. The tunnel should have taken 4 years to complete but took 42 years! The cost exploded due to huge time delays and changes in design from single track railway tunnel, to single track road vehicle tunnel and finally dual track road vehicle tunnel. The constructed tunnel diameter was altered at each design change and ultimately ended up more than double the initial design.

Lowari is a glaring example of our bad planning and inability to think through a project over its lifespan and holistic time dimension leading to horrendous cost overruns and delays. Pakistan is now moving to construct ML-1 which will lay down a new railway system after more than 150 years of using the British era, railway infrastructure.

We should be wary and not make the same planning mistakes. ML-1 is approx. a US$ 6.8 billion project which entails laying of a new track to allow 160 km/h speeds for railways, rehabilitation and construction of bridges, modern signalling and telecom systems, replacing level crossings with underpasses/flyovers and fencing of track. Over the past five decades the world has gradually moved from sub-high speed (160km/h) to high speed rail (HSR), a technology in commercial operation since 1964. Countries that have built and developed HSR infrastructure to connect its cities include Belgium, China, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Morocco, The Netherlands, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Turkey, the UK, the US and Uzbekistan.

Pakistan’s ML-1 project, that is being financed by Chinese Banks and built by Chinese contractors, will only allow average speeds of 160 km/h for passenger trains. Whereas domestically, China has built over 29,000 kilometres of 300+ km/h HSR as of December 2018, accounting for two-thirds of the world’s total. It must be asked why Pakistan is not exploiting the vast knowledge and expertise of a country with the most extensive HSR network in the world and is instead opting for a network with maximum speeds comparable to that of the German pre WW-II (1933) diesel-powered Hamburg Flyers.

The French have already achieved a mind blowing 575 km/h in experimental tests. Most top railways have a maximum operating speed of over 300 km/h. We seem to have copied India that is increasing speed from 130 km/h to 160 km/h in its Delhi-Mathura stretch. However, they are now constructing a 534 km stretch from Mumbai to Ahmedabad with train speeds of 320 km/h, shortening the travel time from the current 6 hours in conventional rail to 2 hours in HSR.

Pakistan should also dream big and leapfrog the many decades of slumber. All the infrastructure i.e. rail track, bridges etc. should be designed for 300 km/h or higher to enable electrified travel; even though initially we could have 250 km/h locomotives, they can, in future, be upgraded at minimum cost to higher speeds. If we design our infrastructure for 160 km/h we will find ourselves stuck in a technology trap and it will then cost another US$ 6-8 billion to upgrade over the years.

We must start understanding that early, careful planning and opting for a more advanced design is far cheaper in the long run. The dream of 160 km/h is several decades old and not appropriate for designing a completely new greenfield railway system. We must not only look at upfront cost but lifecycle cost. At 250 km/h, the approx. 1500 km distance from Islamabad to Karachi would take 6 hours; while Islamabad to Lahore under 1 hour. This will be revolutionary, both in terms of the vastly superior interconnectivity between our cities but also to boost the Nations psyche and ego; after all who in Islamabad would not like to make a day trip to the beach at Karachi and who in Karachi would not care for a brief respite from the bustling city into the mountains, but do we have the vision and foresight to do it?

Copyright Business Recorder, 2020

Comments

Comments are closed.