transalpine transportation policies in switzerland and austria · transalpine transportation...

28 Japan Railway & Transport Review 26 • February 2001

Trends in Rail Freight

Feature

Copyright © 2001 EJRCF. All rights reserved.

Transalpine Transportation Policiesin Switzerland and Austria

Lionel Clement and Florence Darmon

The Alpine countries of Switzerland andAustria must, like France, deal with anumber of problems caused by transittraffic. In the Alps between the Fréjus Pass(France–Italy) and the Brenner Pass(Austria–Italy), transit traffic weighs in atabout 36.5 million tonnes and isequivalent to 41% of road traffic crossingthe French Alps. This transit trafficaccounts for 90% of all road trafficcrossing the Austrian Alps and 52% of thatcrossing the Swiss Alps, with a growth rateof 14% for both countries between 1997and 1998. Switzerland is developing apolicy aimed at discouraging road trafficthrough a new tax on road use andincentives to encourage rail use. Inaddition, railway tunnels are underconstruction at the St. Gotthard Pass andat Lötschberg.Although Switzerland is not an EUmember s tate, i t recently s ignedagreements with the EU anticipating thederegulation of truck traffic in the 28- to40-tonne range under a quota systemstarting in 2001.Austria’s transportation policy is beingdeveloped within the framework of EUregulations. Here, the aim is also todiscourage transit traffic on Austrian roads.Measures will include an ecopoint system(to reduce exhaust emissions) and bilateralquotas with East European countries. Newfees will be levied from 2002 for usingthe transportation infrastructure and thiscould lead to reductions in tolls at theBrenner Pass.This article examines current trends in thetransportation policy of Switzerland andAustria and recent developments ininfrastructure projects.Switzerland and Austria are faced withhigh levels of heavy-vehicle transit trafficin mountain areas. This road trafficfollows corridors that wind throughdensely populated valleys, damaging thefragile Alpine environment along the way.Only in Switzerland can railways competewith these transalpine roads.

Switzerland and Austria have adopteddifferent approaches to road trafficproblems. However, both are adoptingmeasures that comply with their statuswithin the European legal framework.In August and December 1999, adelegat ion represent ing France’smotorway interests visited Switzerlandand Austria within the framework of theAssociat ion of French MotorwayCompanies (ASFA) Economic ResearchProgramme. The purpose was to learnabout current transportation policydi rec t ions and developments ininfrastructure projects.This article summarizes the informationo b t a i n e d f r o m m e e t i n g s w i t hrepresentatives of national and local

governments, freight carriers and the railindustry. It places this information withinthe perspective of problems seen intransport of freight through the Alps andhighlights some poorly known factors.

Transalpine Freight Tonnage

According to Swiss sources1, totalfreight traffic on the Fréjus–Brenner–Alpine segment amounted to 95 milliontonnes in 1998 of which 61% wascarried by road and 39% by rail .French roads in this Alpine area carriedalmost 26 million tonnes of freightcompared to 24 million for Austria and8 million for Switzerland. Railways

Road and Rail Traffic

France

14%

41%

45%

52%

25%

23%

Austria Switzerland

All road traffic in Alpine countries All rail traffic in Alpine countries

France0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Austria Switzerland France0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Austria Switzerland

Share of transit road traffic in Alpine countries

Share of transit railway traffic in Alpine countries

29Japan Railway & Transport Review 26 • February 2001Copyright © 2001 EJRCF. All rights reserved.

Traffic Crossing Swiss, French and Austrian Borders between 1986 and 1997

carried 9.25, 8.5 and 19 million tonnes,respectively, for these three countries.Only Swiss railways enjoy the lion’s share(72%) of all freight traffic due to the banon trucks over 28-tonnes and to a well-established hands-on policy of promotingrailways. In Austria and France, railwayscarry only about 26% of all freight.In France, transit road traffic represents41% of all transalpine road traffic(domestic + import/export + transit). Thecomparable figures in Austria andSwi tzer land a re 90% and 52%,respectively. For rail traffic, the figuresare 36.5%, 93%, and 86.5%.Between 1986 and 1997, road transportexperienced an average annual growthrate of 4.5% with marked differencesbetween corridors (5.4% in Frenchcorridor, 2.9% in Austrian, and 7.6% inSwiss). Average growth rates for transit

Major Transalpine Road and Rail Corridors

Milano

Italy

Fréjus

Lombarda

Torino

Tenda

Ventimiglia

Switzerland

Germany

Austria

Genève

Mont Blanc

Grand St. BernardSimplon

Lötschberg

Bern

St. Gotthard San Bernardino

ReschenBrenner

Innsbrück

RoadsRailways

France

Lyon

ProjectsRoad tunnelsRailway tunnels

Existing corridors

Ventimiglia 5.4 11.6 114.8% 1.6 0.9 -43.8% 0 0 0.0%

Mont Cenis 5.5 12.6 129.1% 4.9 5.0 2.0% 2.1 5.1 142.9%

Mont Blanc 8.5 12.7 49.4%

French corridor 19.4 36.9 90.2% 6.5 5.9 -9.2% 2.1 5.1 142.9%

Grand St. Bernard 0.3 0.3 0.0%

Simplon 0.1 0.1 0.0% 2.5 4 60.0% 0.1 0.3 200.0%

St. Gotthard 2.3 6 160.9% 7.7 5.3 -31.2% 2.7 7.4 174.1%

San Bernardino 0.4 0.6 50.0%

Swiss corridor 3.1 7 125.8% 10.2 9.3 -8.8% 2.8 7.7 175.0%

Reschen 0.5 1.2 140.0%

Brenner 16.5 20.1 21.8% 2.9 3.1 6.9% 1 3.1 210.0%

Felbertauern 0.3 0.5 66.7%

Tauern 3.9 5.8 48.7% 4 3.9 -2.5% 0.5 0.5 0.0%

Schober 7.8 8.5 9.0% 3.6 3.9 8.3% 0.5 0.4 -20.0%

Semmering 2.8 4.4 57.1% 5.3 8.7 64.2% 0.2 0.4 100%

Wechsel 2.9 7 141.4% 0.4 0 -100% 0 0 0.0%

Austrian corridor 34.7 47.5 36.9% 16.2 19.6 21% 2.2 4.4 100.0%

Total 57.2 91.4 59.8% 32.9 34.8 5.8% 7.1 17.2 142.3%

Routes Conventional railway Mixed transportGrowth rate19971986 Growth rate19971986 Growth rate19971986

The data for piggyback transport are not shown in the table. However, for 1997, the Brenner Pass was 1.6 million tonnes and St. Gotthard was 1 million tonnes.

(million tonnes)

Source: Service for General Traffic Studies (1988), Alpine Freight Traffic, GVF-News, No. 48.1




traffic were 3.6% for the entire Alpinesegment, compared to 4.6% for the Frenchcorridor, 2.3% for the Austrian, and11.35% for the Swiss.Road transit traffic through the Alpsgenerates the most concern and isestimated at almost 36.5 million tonnesin the above-mentioned transalpinesegment. This tonnage continues to grow.Railways compete effectively with roadsonly when they of fer mixed andpiggyback transport.In 1997 and 1998, road t ra f f icexperienced high growth rates—4% inFrance, and a high of 14% in Switzerlandand Austria. The results of combinedsurveys by the French, Austrian and Swissauthorities were published in 2000 andprovides figures based on uniformstandards2. Although the most recenttraff ic estimates made within theframework of the Pan-European TransportSystem (PETS) project3 anticipate a 1.46-fold increase4 in heavy truck trafficthrough the Alps by 2010, the increasingconcentration of road traffic is alreadycreating serious problems that are beingtackled by Switzerland and Austria indifferent ways.

Swiss Solutions

After voting against EU membership in1992, the Swiss voted in 1994 in favouro f an Alps In i t ia t ive to p ro tec tmountainous areas from the negativeeffects of transporting freight by road. AsSwitzerland promotes this Initiative, it willhave to open its market to road transport,introduce measures to transfer road freightto railways, and adopt coordinatedpolicies within the Alpine region.Switzerland is located at the geographicalheart of Europe, and is rat i fyingagreements with the EU and individualmember states5 encompassing roadtransportation issues. The ratificationprocess was completed on 11 July 2000.

The seven EU Bilateral Agreements(transportation and free circulation ofpeople are the most contentious) are likelyto es tabl ish new rates for us inginfrastructure, deregulation of trucks of upto 34 tonnes and introduction of quotasfor trucks of up to 40 tonnes, but notbefore the first half of 2001.The railway tunnels at Lötschberg and St.Gotthard will probably not start operationbefore early 2008 and 2012, respectively,since improvement of upstream anddownstream networks for the entire north–south corridors is still in planning.The next sections discuss the Swisstransportation strategy and examinetransport policy and financing. Then, weexamine some of the technical andeconomic aspects of the railway tunnelprojects (the backbone of Swiss transportpolicy). Finally, we place the constructionof tunnels within the framework of theagreements recently signed with the EU.

Swiss Strategy

Switzerland’s strategy is based on twoprinciples that respect its framework ofcompromise wi th the EuropeanCommission:• Discouraging road freight traffic by tax

on road use• Attracting traffic to railways by

improving rail services (mixed andpiggyback)

The choice was made to transfer theequivalent of the entire road transittonnage and the post-1999 growth inSwitzerland’s transalpine domestic freighttonnage to railways once the new railwaytunnels are completed. It was decided totransfer 650,000 journeys from road to raileach year by 2010, using new tunnelsaccommodating piggyback transport.This initiative is called New Railway Linesthrough the Alps (NLFA).The Swiss Federal Council stipulated the

following conditions when implementingthis strategy:• Swiss and foreign trucks must be

treated equally—measures will applyto all transalpine transportation ofgoods, not just to transit from oneborder to the next.

• N o p r o h i b i t i o n s s h o u l d b eimplemented but market controlsshould be used (introduction of newtax on use of infrastructure).

• Enforcement should not result inbypass traffic via France or Austria.

This Swiss strategy follows a uniform andhierarchical transport policy outlined below.

Swiss Transport Policy

Swiss transport policy is organized aroundseveral parts:• Rail 2000: Improvement of north–

south and east–west railway links(both passenger and freight)

• NLFA: Construction of railway tunnelsa t Lö t s chbe rg , S t . Go t tha rd ,Zimmerberg, and Ceneri (extensionsand improvements)

• Connection to trans-European high-speed rail networks

• Development of noise-reductionmeasures

This policy wil l be implementedaccording to the following schedule:• 1995–2005: Improvement of north–

south links• 2010–20 : Improvement of east–west

links• 2000–12 : Construction of NLFA• 2001–11 : Construction of trans-

European high-speed links• 2002–13 : Implementation of noise-

reduction measures

Implementation will obviously requireextensive financing.


Financing by ProportionalHeavy Vehicle Tax

Table 1 shows how Switzerland intendsto finance its transport policy. Therequired total is FFr122 billion (FFr1=US$0.14) with tunnel construction (includingimprovement of Zimmerberg Tunnel)account ing fo r FF r54 .4 b i l l ion .Switzerland intends to self-finance itstransport policy with borrowing for 16%of the investment. A special fund has beenset up to collect money from the varioussources for the various uses. The financialkeystone is the Proportional HeavyVehicle Tax (RPLP) to be implemented in2001 and providing almost 55% of allrevenue for implementing the policy. Onethird of the revenue will go to the cantonsto cover the cost of roadside infrastructure,and two-thirds will go to the federalgovernment to finance the NLFA. TheRPLP will be levied according to distanceand weight and will apply to all vehicleswith a gross weight over 3.5 tonneswhether loaded or empty travelling inSwitzerland6. The tax is to be reduced(by up to 20%) for vehicles under 28tonnes causing little pollution and is to

be increased for vehicles causing morepollution.The planned rate in 2001 for 34-tonnevehicles will be FFr0.064 per tonne-km.When the first railway tunnel is openedin early 2008, the rates will reach theirmaximum level of FFr0.12 per tonne-km. Consequently, the 300-km journeyfrom Basel to Chiasso will cost FFr1300(SFr325—SFr1=US$0.62) with an upperlimit of SFr330 according to a Swiss–EU agreement.

Lötschberg and St. GotthardRailway Tunnels

Existing transalpine routesThe current railway tunnel at Lötschbergnow carries motor vehicles on flat wagonsand the St. Gotthard tunnels permitpassage of both road and rail traffic.According to the Department ofCommunications, Transportation andEnergy (DETEC), approximately 14 milliontonnes of freight are carried in trucksthrough these tunnels (by road and railpiggyback) with an additional 8 milliontonnes carried by conventional or mixedrailways. This totals 22 million tonnes offreight carried through these two corridors.In 1998, 1.235 million heavy truckscrossed the Swiss Alps by road (52% intransit). St. Gotthard alone accounted for84% of this traffic (80% of all transittraffic). The total number of heavy truckson this route increased by 7.4% between1997 and 1998 (14% for transit traffic).Simplon handled only 2.5% of all trafficwhereas the more westerly Grand St.Bernard accounted for 11% of all traffic(131,000 heavy trucks per year)7.The Lötschberg Tunnel corridor linksNovara (Italy) with Freiburg (Germany) viaBase l (Swi tzer land) . Thanks toimprovements in 1999, the Lötschberg

Table 1 Funding of Swiss Transport Policy

Source of funds Use of funds

RPLP 66.8

Value Added Tax (VAT) (+ 0.1%) 23.2

Gasoline tax (fossil fuels) 12.0

Loans 20.0

Total 122

NLFA 54.4 (tunnels, including Zimmerberg)

Rail 2000 53.6

Trans-European TGV links 4.8

Noise countermeasures 9.2

Total 122

(FFr billions)

Vertical shaft at new St. Gotthard Tunnel (L. Clement)




Tunnels under Construction

Lötschberg St. Gotthard

Start of operations 2008 2012

Altitude (m) 750 550

Length (km) 34.6 57

Entrance/exit Raron/Frutingen Biasca/Erstfeld

System One one-way tunnel (21.6 km) Two one-way tunnelsTwo one-way tunnels (13 km)

Possible extension to two one-way tunnels over entire length

Construction to date Start of horizontal boring Start of horizontal boring

Boring locations Steg, Ferden, Mitholtz Amsteg, Sedrun, Faido, Piora

Boring method Blasting + tunnel borers Blasting + tunnel borers

Diameter (m) 9.50 9.20

Height at angles, wagons (m) 4.20 4.20

Wagon width (m) 2.60 2.60

Cost including improvements (FFr) 14 billion 34.4 billion

Cost per km (FFr) 404 million 604 million

Average speed of freight trains (km/h) 80 80

Access tunnel for vertical shaft at new Lötschberg Tunnel (L. Clement)

Tunnel can now accommodate 4-m widetrucks. However, delays at the Italian endof Simplon prevented movement of trafficthrough Domodossola until late 2000.The St. Gotthard Tunnel corridor stretchesfrom Lugano (Italy) to Freiburg (Germany)through Basel (Switzerland). Unfortunately,it has a maximum width of 3.8 m,preventing passage of modern trucks.

Construction of new tunnelsThe proposed transfer of freight from roadto rail in Switzerland requires new railwaytunnels at Lötschberg and St. Gotthard,costing FFr14 billion and FFr34.4 billion,respectively. The new St. Gotthard tunnelwill be complemented at the southern endby the Ceneri Tunnel (15.6 km) and at thenorthern end by the Zimmerberg Tunnel(11.3-km extension of present tunnel). Nodate has been set for the opening of thecomplete north–south link.The purpose of these two railway tunnelprojects is not to improve capacity, whichis already quite sufficient, but is toimprove safety, es tabl ish a low-environmental-impact transport corridor,and improve freight shipping withcompetitive times across Switzerland.

When the two railway tunnel projects arecompleted, it will be possible to sendtrucks through the Alps piggybacked ondedicated flat wagons.In keeping with the government ’stransport policy, Swiss Federal Railways(CFF/SBB/FFS) will encourage transport

o f u n a c c o m p a n i e d r a t h e r t h a naccompanied trucks.

Traffic projections and socio-economic advantagesIn Switzerland, railway construction is notnecessarily expected to result in eventualrailway profits.Acting as the so-called ‘final authority,’ thepeople of Switzerland have decided thattransit trucks must be carried by rail. Thisis a political rather than an economicdecision. Switzerland has enormousfreedom in the area of transport planningand regulation because the people havea large say in political decisions.Moreover, the country has considerableability to raise funds, does not have toabide by EU regulations (Switzerland isnot an EU member state and does not haveto abide by EU Directive 99/62 EEC), andcan establish irregular special funds oreven change funding sources.According to documents submitted to theSwiss parliament, when both new railwaytunnels are open, planned capacity isexpected to be between 51 and 74 million


tonnes (66% for St. Gotthard Tunnel, 33%for Lötschberg Tunnel), depending on thetype of equipment used8.The reference study9 used here dates from1996 and anticipates approximately 58million tonnes in 2010, assuming that allAlpine tunnels are in operation (includinga capacity upgrade for Mont Cenis) andassuming also that heavy vehicles arelimited to 40 tonnes. According to themedium-term scenario, the annualtonnage will be 52 million tonnes. Thisscenario is most likely if work proceedsas planned (Lötschberg and St. Gotthardopen, Brenner not open, capacityimprovement of Mont Cenis not ready,and vehicle tonnage limited to 34 tonnes).However, if present trends continue, theannual tonnage will be only 39 milliontonnes.Incentives expected to amount to SFr300million annually for covering operatingcosts are planned to encourage railwayoperators to ship freight piggybackthrough the tunnels. However, there willbe no direct grants and financing costs willnot be subject to incentives.

Switzerland–EU Agreement

The construction of railway tunnels inSwitzerland cannot be considered inisolation because Switzerland has RPLPagreements with the EU that graduallyderegulate passage of trucks over 28tonnes through the country.Seven agreements were signed in 1999and ratified in July 2000. The agreementon land transport was highly contentiousand in addition to acknowledged hotissues, it regulates licensing of drivers,hours on the road, dangerous products,and exhaust emissions. The opening ofthe Swiss road network to heavy trucksfrom throughout Europe is closely linkedto introduction of a fee system for usinginfrastructure, which hinges on pollutionemissions of trucks with proportional

penalties. It should be noted that part ofthe agreement calls for integration ofSwitzerland’s railway system into theexisting international system, as well aslinks to the trans-European networks.The agreement is related to the RPLPbecause this fee system will replace the 28-tonne limit currently set for trucks. Inaddition to the RPLP, the agreement alsointroduces quotas for vehicle transitingSwitzerland, which will open its bordersfirst to 34-tonne trucks (no quotas) and thento 40-tonne trucks (quotas). Quotas forheavy trucks up to 40 tonnes will be300,000 in 2001 and 2002, increasing to400,000 in 2003 and 2004. Fullderegulation will be achieved in 2005.Quotas will be apportioned in relation toeach EU member state’s transportrequirements with a basic quota of 1500.(This provision is strongly opposed by somestates who see it as an incentive for somecountries to attract freight from areas wherethey would not usually seek it.) France willreceive 16.3% of the quota, Germany38.2% and Italy 21.5%.Without going into details, the agreement:• Establishes RPLP levels (before and

a f te r open ing o f f i r s t tunne laccommodating piggyback transport)

• Specifies rules for empty or lightlyloaded trucks

• Maintains ban on night travel (whileimproving Customs procedures atborders)

• Introduces a protective clause(increase of road use charges undercertain conditions).

Switzerland’s place in Europe

As a palliative to the ‘No’ vote in the Swissreferendum on joining the EU, the Swissparliament approved seven agreementswith the EU by an overwhelming majorityon 31 August 1999, setting the stage forcompromises that benefit Switzerland andthe EU as a whole. The agreements were

ratified by the EU member states in July2000. Switzerland’s place in Europe aswell as the EU’s relationship withSwitzerland are now being clarified.

Unknown Factors

The above issues rest on a number of still-unknown factors. The first is the impactof the RPLP on the business of Swisscarriers. The second is what conditionswill be required to ensure transfer of roadfreight to railways.

Impact of RPLPThree-quarters of all revenue from the RPLPwill come from Swiss carriers, which iscausing some debate in Switzerland withrepresentatives of Swiss carriers believingthat the tax will lead to more smaller trucks,withdrawal by major trucking companies,and a 10% to 25% rise in commodity pricesdepending on the industrial sector. Swisscarriers say they will suffocate under thisnew tax and see their major contributionto the RPLP as unfair10 and an enormousburden when coupled with costs ofinstalling in-cab terminals11.Studies by DETEC show that the coststructure of Swiss railways clearlyfavours use of heavy road vehicles. TheRPLP will not reverse this trend—lighttrucks (under 3.5 tonnes) will still bepenalized in the sense that they cannoto f f e r a d v a n t a g e o u s t o n n e - k mconditions. However, to protect theSwiss road transport industry, 40-tonnequotas are planned.To encourage transfer of road freight torail, road transport quotas will be madeconditional upon use of railways, undera system known as reward quotas. Ina d d i t i o n , f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n trepresentatives state that the RPLP willhave little negative impact, since it willrepresent only a minimal sum per personper year.




Road–rail transfersOne important question for which thereis no definite answer is the extent to whichroad freight can and will be transferred torail. Perhaps the only people who cananswer this question are shipping agentsand service providers who devisestrategies for selecting routes afterconsidering price and time. However, theSwiss authorities have adopted all thesemeasures in order to ensure that transferis feasible from both the technical andoperational viewpoints. In practicalterms, bearing in mind that Switzerlandplans no road improvements12, the highvolumes of road traffic and congestion thatwill prevail when the tunnels open shouldencourage transfer to rail.The transfer of road freight to rail dependsupon five factors:• Future actions of France and Austria

Heavy trucks of up to 34 tonnes andthen up to 40 tonnes coming fromnorth and south of Switzerland willpay almost equal infrastructure usagecharges.

• Policies encouraging rail freighttransport

• Congestion levels on alternative roadroutes in Switzerland, France andAustria

• Continuance of CFF/SBB/FFS marketingpolicies to increase demand andincrease the railway’s market shareCFF/SBB/FFS’s goal is 28% growthin freight transport between 1999and 2005.

• Competition between two railwaytunnels

The Swiss government has one moredevice for collecting fees from road freightcarriers—the Tax on Alpine Transit (TTA).This tax cannot be implemented at presentbecause i t i s p rec luded by theSwitzerland–EU agreements that set amaximum limit on transit costs. Ifimplemented, this tax would be levied ontop of the RPLP on all heavy trucks on theSt. Gotthard, San Bernardino, Simplon andGrand St. Bernard axes. The tax rate isunknown but it may be adjusted inrelation to the RPLP based on the actualtransfer of traffic from road to rail.

Austria

Austria faces the same problems ofenvironmental degradation by road transittraffic as Switzerland. In 1988, thegovernment determined that increases inroad freight had greatly increasedpollution and noise levels. The Tyrol,which carries 80% of all transit traffic,lobbied the government to negotiate asettlement of this problem with the EU.In 1987, Austria severely restricted transittraffic while the EU was pushing for fullderegulation. The Austrian authoritiesthen started considering introduction ofecopoints13 for transit traffic in order toreduce NOx emissions by 60% between1991 and 2003. The ecopoint system wasimplemented in 1993. Protocol No.9,which deals with ecopoints, wasappended to the Act of Accession ofAustria, Finland, and Sweden with therequirement that Austria should beginworking in 1997 to replace its manual

management system with an electronicsystem. The electronic system has beenin operation since 1 January 1998.Since joining the EU, Austria has beenfaced with the possibility of deregulationof road traffic from the east followed by ahigh natural growth in road transit traffic.Austria tried to curb road traffic growthby two successive increases in road tollsfollowing the 28% decrease required bythe Act of Accession (which had led to a20% increase in traffic over the BrennerPass). The European Court of Justicerendered a decision on Brenner Pass tollsin late 2000 and the prosecution’s demandthat Austria be admonished for excessivecharges was upheld.Austria’s transport strategy, policy, andfinancing for implementing thesestrategies are discussed in followingsections along with an examination of theBrenner rail tunnel project and someunknown factors.

Austria’s Transport Strategy

Austria intends to discourage transit trafficfrom crossing the country along its north–south and east–west axes. The nation’stransport policy is centred around twogoals: reducing exhaust emissions, andobtaining the approval of its citizens formeasures to this effect.Austria now uses quotas to curb east–westtruck traffic but it is adversely affected bythe passage of additional trucks throughits territory due to Switzerland’s ban ontrucks over 28 tonnes. The Tyrol is avictim of Swiss policy with some 30% ofthe 1.489 million trucks crossing theBrenner Pass in 1999 being traffic that isbypassing Switzerland.Although passage across the Alps at theBrenner Pass is not the shortest route, itoffers the lowest altitude (1380 m), makingit an advantage in terms of travel time.The Brenner Pass is on the 450-kmMunich–Verona main road and although

Anticipated Situation of Heavy Vehicles

< 28 tonne Existing freedom of circulation

28–34 tonne Freedom of circulation starting in 2001

34–40 tonne Circulation by quota from 2001 to 2004 Quotas and preferential rates for light loads (7.5 to 28 tonnes)


these two cities are connected by a sub-regional rail network, road traffic at thePass is constantly increasing with freighttonnages showing a year-on-year averagegrowth rate of 4.5% since 1980. This isin comparison to 3.4% for rail. TheAustrian Science and Transport Ministryestimates that traffic at the Brenner Passwill double by 2015.

Austria’s Transport Policy

Austria’s transport policy has severalpriorities:• Avoiding irrational (= unnecessary)

transport• Internalizing external costs to avoid

distortion of transport modes• Linking and promoting some transport

modes (conventional rail, mixedt r anspo r t and p iggyback ) i nconjunction with other countriesthrough incentives (one additionalroad authorization for four piggybackjourneys)

• Using latest technical standards andapplying differential charges (inaccordance with European vehiclepollution standards)

Austria uses three effective tools to applythese policies. First, it negotiates bilateralquotas with each East European countrywith the goal of encouraging entry ofmodern, low-pollution trucks. Forexample, if a carrier uses one EURO IIpolluting vehicle, two journeys can bemade instead of one. Quotas might endup being adjusted or waived because apriority is EU membership by EastEuropean countries. Second, ecopointsare applied to vehicles over 7.5 tonnestravelling through Austria. Points aredistributed14 as follows: Italy, 34%;Germany, 32%; Austria, 14%, theNetherlands, 8% (12% distributed toremaining 11 countries) based on theassumption of almost 1.5 million transit

journeys. In 1999, 11 million ecopointswere issued (compared to 23 million in1993). It is anticipated that only 8 millionecopoints will be issued in 2003.According to the 1998 report of theCouncil Commission, the ecopoint systemdecreased NOx emissions by almost 27%between 1993 and 1996. This isdemonstrated by the increase in traffic anddecreased use of ecopoints— thepercentage of trucks paying the maximumof 16 ecopoints per transit journeydecreased from more than 51% in 1993to less than 18% in 1996, whereas thepercentage paying 8 ecopoints increasedfrom 20% in 1993 to 41% in 1996. Thesystem should be redundant by 2003.Third, it is trying to promote the BrennerPass railway tunnel project within thelimits of EU financial restrictions.

Financing Transport Policy

Under EU Directive 99/62 EEC, Austriacannot increase charges on its transalpinecrossings and use this extra revenue toinvest in railways. (However, otherresources can be used to finance railways.)

Also, funds from road tolls can be usedonly for infrastructure investment andmaintenance. Therefore, Austria cannotuse special funding systems like those inSwitzerland where revenue (RPLP androad tolls) from one sector of the transportindustry is used to finance improvementsin another sector (NLFA or other rail lines).Instead, Austria must finance its transportpolicy from the general budget andthrough non-budgetary measures for roadinfrastructure projects. As a result,Austria’s present financial resources areinsufficient to implement the Brenner Passrailway tunnel project.

Brenner Pass RailwayTunnel Project

A new 55-km railway tunnel at theBrenner Pass costing FFr26 billion haslong been on the Austrian government’sdrawing board to provide a more efficientway to cross Austria to Manching inGermany (20 km north of Munich).Completion of the tunnel would connectInnsbrück (Austria) and Portenza (Italy)and double the capacity of the presentrailway (which consists of a succession

Present Brenner Pass crossing—trucks piggyback on flat rail wagons (L. Clement)




of small 4-m wide tunnels) to 36 milliontonnes per year. The present throughrailway dates to 1867 and carries 7.9million tonnes of freight annually bypiggyback (trucks on flat wagons), mixedtransport, and conventional railway.However, the project is currently stalleddue to financing difficulties, althoughGermany and Italy both have an interest.Unfortunately, most of the financing willhave to be borne by Austria because ofterritorial considerations. A quickdecision would mean that the new tunnelcould open between 2020 and 2025, butit would compete with the Swiss tunnelsnow under construction and would haveto accommodate trucks on flat wagons.In the meantime, Austria is promoting adynamic and constantly evolving railwaypolicy. It is now in the process ofeliminating the rail bottleneck north ofInnsbrück and is substantially increasingcapacity. To double freight tonnage, it isalso promoting vigorous marketing(commissioning consultants throughoutEurope and examining transport activitiesin order to attract more clients).

Unknown Factors

There are several unknown factorsaffecting transport in Austria. The first isthe impact of implementing new tolls forinfrastructure use (the only source of fundsfor the Brenner Pass railway tunnelproject). The second is possiblederegulation of transport links with EastEuropean countries. The third is the extentto which railways can curb increases inroad traffic (even after completion of theBrenner tunnel). The fourth is the extentof the effect on Austria when Switzerlandopens its doors to trucks over 28 tonnes.

Impact of new infrastructure tollsIn compliance with EU Directive 99/62EEC, Austria will switch to tolls linked tothe distance travelled for vehicles over 3.5tonnes with different rates for vehicleswith 2, 3 or more axles (base rate per kmof FFr0.95). Revenues will go to theorganization responsible for setting up thetolls to finance and maintain the transportinfrastructure.Unlike in Switzerland, in Austria, tolls will

no t be used to f inance ra i lwayinfrastructure for accompanied transport.Vehicles under 3.5 tonnes will continueto be charged a network access tax formotorways and expressways. The newtoll system will be implemented in January2002 and should produce between Sch2and 2.5 billion per year (FFr0.95 and 1.19billion). Austria should be able to upgradeits road network and reduce its debts usingthese new sources of revenue,As in Switzerland, Austrian freight carriersbelieve that they will be paying more thantheir European competitors. Indeed, beforeAustria joined the EU, it imposed a usagetax based on vehicle-km. This tax wasgreatly reduced when a tax on vehicles over12 tonnes was started and this latter tax willnow be replaced by the new toll system.However, costs will probably increase,penalizing Austrian carriers15.

Deregulation of transport linkswith East European countriesThe entry of East European countries intothe EU is a priority for Europe as a whole.Even if this is not achieved for severalyears, transport deregulation may beimplemented over the short and mediumterm. If this occurs, the quotas Austriahas agreed with these countries might bemodified or waived. Such a step wouldincrease east–west traffic and reduce thecompetitiveness of Austrian carriers andservice providers.

Curbing road traffic growthThe present use of the Brenner Pass is veryrevealing. Each year, 108,000 trucks crossby piggyback on flat rail wagons while1.5 million trucks cross by road. Between1998 and 1999, traffic growth was 8%(300 trucks per day). Hence, the annualgrowth rate in road traffic each day onthis main road is equivalent to thepiggyback demand.All other things being equal, the expectednatural growth in road traffic will accountfor half the capacity of the new tunnel over

Present Brenner Pass crossing—loading trucks on flat rail wagons (L. Clement)


Lionel Clement

Dr Clement has worked since 1998 for ISIS Corporation of the EGIS

Group where he is in charge of transport studies and surveys. After

taking a doctorate in Transport Economics at Universite Lumiére Lyon

II, he worked for 3 years in the field of analysis of urban public

transportation before joining the Study Centre of the French Ministry

of Public Works and Transportation.

Florence Darmon

Ms Darmon is Vice President in charge of Development at Cofiroute.

She graduated from the Ecole Polytechnique de Paris and the Ecole

Nationale Ponts et Chausées before joining the Public Works Division

of the Hauts-de-Seine region. She has also held posts in the Roads

Department of the French Ministry of Public Works and Transportation

and at Autoroutes et Tunnel du Mont Blanc.

about 10 years. This raises the questionof whether the new rail infrastructure cancurb the natural growth in road traffic. Astudy of the same through-route indicatesthe reasons for transporting trucks on flatrail wagons rather than send them by road.The main reasons are: the ban on trucksover 40 tonnes (preventing them crossingAustria), non-possession of ecopoints,non-possession of authorizations (quotaswith East European countries), and fleetmanagement (including driver rest timebecause the distance between the Brennerand Manching terminals is 283 km with asouth–north journey time of 6 hours 20minutes to 6 hours 50 minutes, and anorth–south journey time of 7 hours 30minutes to 7 hours 55 minutes).The challenge of how to curb natural roadtraffic growth is complemented by theadditional challenge of implementing apolicy favouring transfer of road freightto rail, based on competition (orcombination) between the varioustransport modes over the main routes.

Impact on Austria afterSwitzerland permits trucks over28 tonnes16

Austrians do not consider the opening ofSwitzerland to vehicles over 28 tonnes tobe much of a problem because there aretoo many unknown factors. For example,can the Swiss policy be implemented asplanned? And what would be the reactionof carriers and service providers if it isimplemented? The charges for crossingAustria should remain lower than thosein Switzerland (the toll at the Brenner Pass

is likely to drop, since its current purposeis to do more than just cover infrastructurecosts) and the quota system should reducetraffic in Austria, at least temporarily.

Conclusions

First, it is difficult to predict future trendsexcept with regard to the number of heavytrucks passing through France, whichshould drop when Switzerland opens itsdoors to trucks up to 34 and 40 tonnes.However, the drop would not necessarilybe significant because of unknown factorsin Switzerland and Austria, France’stransport policy in mountainous regions(now being defined), and above all,economic growth in Europe (with strongnatural growth in traffic).Second, the impact of opening the EU tocarriers from East European countriescould lead to transport dumpingthroughout the EU.Third, will the transport policies actuallytransfer road traffic to piggyback rail? Theabove-mentioned factors governing thechoice of transportation mode—whethergoal-oriented (as in Switzerland) ormacro-economic (as in Austria)—providean important lesson. The incentives topromote rail use will have to be verystrong if we are to transfer huge volumesof road freight to rail. �

AcknowledgementThis article was previously published inFrench in Transports, No. 401, May–June2000.

Notes1. Dienst für Gesamtverkehrsfragen, 7 July 1999.2. Sources vary with different average tonnages and

units.3. Transalpine Freight Case Study, DIO, July 1999.4. These estimates are more conservative than

previous estimates that anticipate up to 1.65 timesmore vehicles.

5. Germany is Switzerland’s main supplier (31.4%)and customer (22.7%). EU countries are suppliers(79% of imports) and customers (60.7% ofexports).

6. For example, PTAC for trucks and PTRA forarticulated vehicles and trailers.

7. Press release from GVF and DETEC.8. Report to Swiss parliament, 26 June 1996.9. Study of the Development of Transalpine Traffic

Horizon 2010, European Commission, 1996.10. For example, a 40-tonne truck travelling 75,000

km per year will pay SFr0.0275 per tonne-km(reference rate).

11. The RPLP is to be levied using GPS on-board units.12. The Alpine Clause forbids any additional

development of Alpine roads.13. EU Countries plus Switzerland and Slovenia

receive ecopoints. Each truck has a documentissued by the manufacturer proving its compliancewith pollution standard requirements. Theplanned 50% NOx reduction was achieved by2000.

14. The initial number of ecopoints (23 million in1993) is equal to the average amount of NOxexhaust emissions (between 9 and 14 g/kWh)multiplied by the number of transit journeys in1991 (1.5 million).

15. The system will be semi-open with one main tollstation on each road. Tolls will be paid at themotorway exit when the exit is before the maintoll station for that section, at the motorwayentrance when the entrance is situated after themain toll station for that section, and at the maintoll station itself when passing that station. Onsome sections there will be no toll (where trafficis low).

16. However, these costs cannot be compared to thosein Switzerland. For example, a 40-tonne trucktravelling 100 km will pay FFr440 in Switzerlandbut only FFr95 in Austria.

transalpine transportation policies in switzerland and austria · transalpine transportation...

Documents