Environmental analysis HSR Phase 2 Asplan Viak AS with subconsultants MISA VWI BREKKE & STRAND akustikk as °Miljøanalyser

Task Develop methods for assessment of: Landscape (AVAS) Intervention effects (natural environment, water resources) (AVAS) Noise (AVAS, Brekke & Strand akustikk) Energy (VWI) Climate (MISA) Main challenge: High level analysis at a large geographical scale with relevant documentation and advices for the project and later IA °Miljøanalyser

Landscape study and Intervention effects Legislative and Regulatory Framework; a selection: –European Conventions regarding landscape and biological diversity –The EU Water Framework Directive »implemented in Norway through Norwegian legislation »the main goal of the Water Framework Directive is to achieve a so-called “Good ecological standard” for the quality of surface water and groundwater.” –Water resources are regulated through e.g. ”Lov om vassdrag og grunnvann (Vannressursloven)” –Norwegian Nature Diversity Act –Norwegian Planning and Buliding Act, and requirements for Impact Assessment at different planning stages –Regulations –Handbooks °Miljøanalyser

Landscape study and Intervention effects Approach to Method Development: Review existing methods for analysis and assessment of landscape and environmental intervention effects, and Identify aspects of existing methods which could be adapted for high level analysis at a large geographical scale °Miljøanalyser

Landscape study and Intervention effects Scope of work: –Litterature study –Identification and review of digital datasets –Identification of existing value classification of datasets –Identification of need for supplementing information and the need for additional/ supporting data and qualitative assessments –Description of methodology and description of GIS-model °Miljøanalyser

Landscape study and Intervention effects Recommendations so far: ”Wide” defenition of landscape also including visible cultural heritage Inclusion of natural resources and outdoor activities despite this not being covered by JBVs initial scope of work The proposed approach consists broadly of the following stages: To describe the character of the area under each topic To describe a value/ importance/ sensitivity to the characteristics of the area To describe how proposals will impact on these characteristics To derive an overall assessment score/ measure of conflict potential Derived from : [TØI, 2000] Miljøhåndboken, Trafikk- og miljøtiltak i byer og tettsteder, [STATENS VEGVESEN 2010] Konseptvalgutredning Grenland. Vurdering av ikke-prissatte virkninger, [STATENS VEGVESEN 2008] Konseptvalgutredning E18 Langangen – Grimstad. Vurdering av ikke-prissatte virkninger °Miljøanalyser

Landscape study and Intervention effects GIS-model Data unevenly registered °Miljøanalyser

Natural environment °Miljøanalyser Naturbase (DN) – important nature Regionally collected Classified according to national, regional or local interest/ level of protection 8

Noise DIRECTIVE 96/48/EC — INTEROPERABILITY OF THE TRANS-EUROPEAN HIGH SPEED RAIL SYSTEM : Likely to be a guideline also for Norwegian HSR Limiting values L pAeq,T for the stationary noise of rolling stock: 68 dB for train sets Starting noise for electric trainsets: Class 1/Class 2 = 85/82 dB Pass-by noise has different limits at different speeds, se table below. Measured 25 m from centre of track, 3.5 m above ground in a non reflecting environment. Practical situation: Limits are hard to achieve for rolling stock available today °Miljøanalyser

Findings from the NOEMIE project (NOise Emission Measurements for high speed Interoperability in Europe –EU) The TSI noise emission limits are difficult to keep, current HS-TSI levels can be considered to be very demanding limits, however, trainsets have come on the market since then. The combined roughness of rail and wheels is the dominant contribution to the track side noise emission up to train speeds of 300 kph. First at speeds beyond 300 kph, the aerodynamic noise tends to dominate A takeout from NOEMIE project is that Nordic noise calculation method is expected to be applicable for higher speeds than earlier envisioned °Miljøanalyser

A summary of pass-by noise levels Results from NOEMIE project compared with TSI values Results from new models of trainsets should be obtained and compared °Miljøanalyser

Important takeouts at this stage: Noise limits set in the TSI for rolling stocks will be difficult to achieve Nordic noise calculation metod can likely be used for most practical cases up to 300 kph based upon current findings Around and beyond 300 kph, the nose of the train, the first boggie and the pantograph creates the main noise sources and the pantograph present a noise challence at these speeds, especially because it may create noise with significant content of ”sinusiodal” character, implying a + 5 dB more stringent noise requirement according to T-1442 Vibrations seems mainly to follow the solutions seen by ordinary tracks Structural noise will present a greater challenge than today, especially where buildings are located above tunnel openings or close to the tunnel Tunnels with irregular shape (”blasted tunnels”) have significantly less vibrational problems than ordinary, round tunnels. Tunnels, tracks and power lines must be included in noise assesment °Miljøanalyser

Infrastructure ScenariosTechnical DataResultsSummary Institute of Transportation Research Stuttgart (VWI)13  Infrastructure scenarios  General and train specific technical data and assumptions General assumptions Train specific technical data Efficiency degree of the tractive system  (Intermediate) Results Passenger load factor effects Gradient and permitted track velocity impact Tunnel impact on specific energy consumption „Straight but steep“ vs. „Flat but with a detour“ Energy Consumption

Infrastructure ScenariosTechnical DataResultsSummary Institute of Transportation Research Stuttgart (VWI)14 Infrastructure Scenarios Based on the attributes above, 1,650 different infrastructural combinations – and thus far too many – can be found. Passenger load factors included, the number rises to 9,900. Consequently, the calculations are limited to reasonable scenarios, only. Infrastructure scenarios AttributesValues Track Length [km]500 Track Gradient [‰]0±12.5± 20.0± 25.0± 30.0± 35.0 Permitted Track Speed [km/h] Passenger Load Factors [%] CurvesNone Tunnel lengths [km] Number of Intermediate Stops012510

Infrastructure ScenariosTechnical DataResultsSummary Institute of Transportation Research Stuttgart (VWI)15 Technical Data Efficiency Degree as a function of Train Speed and Tractive/Braking Effort Efficiency degree (  ) of the tractive system

Infrastructure ScenariosTechnical DataResultsSummary Institute of Transportation Research Stuttgart (VWI)16 Results Permitted track speed impact and train comparison

Infrastructure ScenariosTechnical DataResultsSummary Institute of Transportation Research Stuttgart (VWI)17 Results Tunnel impact on specific energy consumption

Motivation for assessment of climate related effects Is High Speed Rail an environmentally good solution, and for what time horizon? Importance of infrastructure is often omitted in discussions of transport modes Importance of infrastructure phase versus operation phase HSR in Norwegian topography – More tunnels and bridges? What are the consequences? – Consequences of topography on operation? Decision making support – Building module based system to assess various corridor characteristics – open sections, tunnels, bridges Only climate related effects are considered in this part

Air Road: car & bus Market analysis Alternatives A-D Demand for individual transport modes Component-based emission inventories High speed rail: A, B, C, D HSR Rolling stock OperationInfrastructure Time (year) CO2e Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Emission profiles (to be made) Physical planning Alternatives A-D Energy use data Alternatives A-D Open stretch TunnelsBridges Materials, processing, energy, transport … National emissions Emissions abroad Time (year) CO2e