BR100 Increased By (0.11%)
BR30 Decreased By (-0.26%)
KSE100 Increased By (0.12%)
KSE30 Increased By (0.09%)
AGHA 7.79 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.52%)
BECO 5.23 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.77%)
BML 57.26 Decreased By ▼ -1.40 (-2.39%)
BOP 34.10 Increased By ▲ 0.41 (1.22%)
CNERGY 9.92 Decreased By ▼ -0.69 (-6.5%)
CSIL 5.35 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.94%)
FCCL 54.61 Increased By ▲ 0.87 (1.62%)
FFL 16.70 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (1.46%)
FNEL 1.24 Increased By ▲ 0.02 (1.64%)
KEL 7.42 Increased By ▲ 0.14 (1.92%)
KOSM 5.75 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (1.95%)
LOTCHEM 29.35 Decreased By ▼ -0.30 (-1.01%)
MLCF 94.35 Decreased By ▼ -2.01 (-2.09%)
NBP 202.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.83 (-0.41%)
NCPL 57.00 Increased By ▲ 0.15 (0.26%)
NPL 67.78 Increased By ▲ 0.47 (0.7%)
OGDC 316.40 Decreased By ▼ -1.82 (-0.57%)
PACE 10.64 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.09%)
PAEL 43.15 Increased By ▲ 1.38 (3.3%)
PIBTL 16.72 Decreased By ▼ -0.09 (-0.54%)
PPL 220.50 Increased By ▲ 0.33 (0.15%)
PRL 49.05 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
PTC 70.98 Increased By ▲ 0.97 (1.39%)
SSGC 28.17 Decreased By ▼ -0.97 (-3.33%)
TBL 9.90 Increased By ▲ 0.13 (1.33%)
TELE 8.80 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.23%)
TPL 18.14 Increased By ▲ 0.97 (5.65%)
TPLP 13.40 Increased By ▲ 0.89 (7.11%)
TREET 22.75 Increased By ▲ 0.16 (0.71%)
TRG 60.30 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.13%)

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 for this article.