Most expensive rail project per mile?

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Most expensive rail project per mile?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

1628 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#3310633 19-Nov-2024 14:38

As a general thought, the UKs cost is due to political and consumer interference primarily (otherwise know in project management as scope changes).

Often the cost may typically come down to not being set up for heavy industry projects. If I set up a project, equip it and apply labor resources, then those costs apply to the single project. If I then take that equipment and labor through to another project, it creates a cost reduction - the more projects I do, the more streamlined the cost.

Software Engineer
(the practice of real science, engineering and management)
A.I. (Automation rebranded)
Gender Neutral
(a person who believes in equality and who does not believe in/use stereotypes. Examples such as gender, binary, nonbinary, male/female etc.)

...they/their/them...

Benoire

2798 posts

Uber Geek

#3310640 19-Nov-2024 14:43

New Zealands issues with CRL is simply due to the specialist nature of tunneling not being held onshore and requiring international experience to deliver. Without a pipeline of work, we can only simply purchase the skills at the time... and no, general roading skills are not transferrable to rail or tunneling especially.

For the cost, well we must remember that since ~2021 we have been hit with +40% escalation on our projects due to product and material supply... this has a staggering impact on costs.

mattwnz

20177 posts

Uber Geek

#3310641 19-Nov-2024 14:45

tripper1000:

One of the reasons it costs so much is because Kiwi's are/elect idiots who are allergic to city planning, which results in building things in the wrong order.

Drunken evolution instead of sensible planning and layout is happening right now out at Westgate.

Also it seems that councils and governments get charged a lot, possibly one reason being the hassle of dealing with them. It is one reason why PPPs can be a good option because it is then private business building them, who should be able to get a better deal. Although for some of these big projects, a lack of competition means that they seem to be able to charge what they want. I wonder how many times they get at least 3 quotes.

Benoire

2798 posts

Uber Geek

#3310642 19-Nov-2024 14:49

mattwnz:

Also it seems that councils and governments get charged a lot, possibly one reason being the hassle of dealing with them. It is one reason why PPPs can be a good option because it is then private business building them, who should be able to get a better deal. Although for some of these big projects, a lack of competition means that they seem to be able to charge what they want. I wonder how many times they get at least 3 quotes.

PPPs (or PFIs) are never good for public infrastructure. They're only useful if you want to take the capex off your books and stick it all on opex long term funding. No one can borrow as cheaply as the sovereign country. See UK failures of PPP across the 20years especially hospital / schools for good examples or even closer to home is the syndey (or melbourne - can never remember the city) connection to the airport that is supposed to save time but no one uses as the free to use one is close enough by and as a result has needed bailing out by the local authority.

cddt

1565 posts

Uber Geek

#3310651 19-Nov-2024 14:58

mattwnz:

Also it seems that councils and governments get charged a lot, possibly one reason being the hassle of dealing with them. It is one reason why PPPs can be a good option because it is then private business building them, who should be able to get a better deal. Although for some of these big projects, a lack of competition means that they seem to be able to charge what they want. I wonder how many times they get at least 3 quotes.

In the long run, Transmission Gulley will cost the taxpayer far more as a PPP than it would have if performed under normal government procurement. It was Key's way of keeping the debt of the books so he could achieve a budget surplus on paper.

My referral links: BigPipe | Mercury

mattwnz

20177 posts

Uber Geek

#3310652 19-Nov-2024 14:59

Benoire:

PPPs (or PFIs) are never good for public infrastructure. They're only useful if you want to take the capex off your books and stick it all on opex long term funding. No one can borrow as cheaply as the sovereign country. See UK failures of PPP across the 20years especially hospital / schools for good examples or even closer to home is the syndey (or melbourne - can never remember the city) connection to the airport that is supposed to save time but no one uses as the free to use one is close enough by and as a result has needed bailing out by the local authority.

Well they seem to be planning to use them a lot more in NZ and getting support from both the big parties. Transmission Gully was built as a PPP and probably wouldn't have occurred or for the 1 billion price at the time, if they hadn't done it as a ppp. I remember the government were going to have to spend about double that at the time to build it, although it probably ended up costing that. But I don't like PPPs

mattwnz

20177 posts

Uber Geek

#3310655 19-Nov-2024 15:02

cddt:

mattwnz:

Also it seems that councils and governments get charged a lot, possibly one reason being the hassle of dealing with them. It is one reason why PPPs can be a good option because it is then private business building them, who should be able to get a better deal. Although for some of these big projects, a lack of competition means that they seem to be able to charge what they want. I wonder how many times they get at least 3 quotes.

In the long run, Transmission Gulley will cost the taxpayer far more as a PPP than it would have if performed under normal government procurement.

I can't see them having ever built it if it hadn't been done as a PPP though. Kiwis end up paying more as a result over the long term due to the government essentially contracting out what they should be providing.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Handle9

11409 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3310673 19-Nov-2024 15:48

The article was referring to complete railway projects not modifications or extensions of existing lines.

cddt

1565 posts

Uber Geek

#3310726 19-Nov-2024 17:20

mattwnz:

I can't see them having ever built it if it hadn't been done as a PPP though. Kiwis end up paying more as a result over the long term due to the government essentially contracting out what they should be providing.

First up we are allergic to debt levels (good Protestants we are) much lower than are common in other countries.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing, if you're avoiding spending money on things which don't contribute to economic growth. You don't want to be paying interest on debt which hasn't improved productivity or the lives of your citizens.

However in the case of NZ, in order to avoid debt we will avoid investing in infrastructure which would support productivity growth (e.g. public transport, preventative healthcare), while instead we are quite happy to borrow debt to "invest" in tax cuts for rentiers (i.e. landlords) which will not contribute to productivity growth whatsoever.

Common sense is turned on its head and those the country has seen fit to elect are too intellectually shallow to challenge the neo-liberal group-think which ultimately works only for the benefit of the very rich. I condemn blue and red parties equally - they are two sides to the same coin.

My referral links: BigPipe | Mercury

Handle9

11409 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3310755 19-Nov-2024 20:09

mattwnz:

Also it seems that councils and governments get charged a lot, possibly one reason being the hassle of dealing with them.

Citation required here.

It's really hard for most people to grasp the complexity and inter dependencies of major construction projects.The major difference between public and private construction is the big government stuff is orders of magnitude more complex and difficult to deliver. It's why it's left to the public to deliver.

Handle9

11409 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3310756 19-Nov-2024 20:11

mattwnz:

Well they seem to be planning to use them a lot more in NZ and getting support from both the big parties. Transmission Gully was built as a PPP and probably wouldn't have occurred or for the 1 billion price at the time, if they hadn't done it as a ppp. I remember the government were going to have to spend about double that at the time to build it, although it probably ended up costing that. But I don't like PPPs

PPP was chosen because of where the costs sat on the balance sheet not the actual cost to deliver the project.

PPPs don't sit on the government balance sheet so the government can show low public debt while operationalizing the costs onto the users of the asset.

SomeoneSomewhere

1805 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3310793 19-Nov-2024 23:33

CRL is like 100% tunnel (in a volcanic area, no less), plus IIRC three big (possibly overkill, debatable) stations and major upgrades to two more, plus track works outside of the tunnels. The only way to get more expensive per km would be to need even more winding around existing underground lines/infrastructure, like Crossrail (the underground sections only), or I think the new NYC line.

HS2 got cost-downed by mostly avoiding actually going into city centres. It has lots of 'unnecessary' tunnels to reduce visual impact because virtually every local body needed to approve it. You pay for the initial design and consents, then a new design and new consents, then another design and more consents...

One of the best ways to reduce infrastructure cost (see e.g. Spain HSR) is to have a constant steady stream of work waiting, rather than lumpy batches. Planning things well in advance with proper stages means you can minimise equipment, upskilling, and manpower requirements. 'Bursty' is not good. If you have a glut of projects, you need people to staff all those projects, then they immediately leave the industry because there's no next project.

There isn't really a way around that for the CRL; TBMs are too location-specific and we simply don't have the need for a new metro line every 4-8 years.

It is relevant for most other infrastructure including hospitals, schools, roads etc.

GV27

5898 posts

Uber Geek

#3310801 20-Nov-2024 06:23

Just wish we had the original Britomart plan of the ramps for Light Rail and we could have had a proper terminus.

aw

286 posts

Ultimate Geek

#3310958 20-Nov-2024 14:09

Handsomedan: Then they started boring holes in the bedrock. What ever happened to the "cut and cover" that they were originally supposed to be doing throughout the CBD?

johno1234: The first part from Britomart up Albert Rd was cut and cover.

Handsomedan: Yes, I remember that from my childhood.

(edit: Depending on when your childhood was...) Is it possible you're remembering the tunnel they dug in as futureproofing for Britomart? Started when they realigned Quay Street in the late 1990s, and completed in 2000 if I recall.

You can see the tunnel ramp (without any rail line) in the Auckland Council GIS 2001 historical aerial imagery.

BONUS POINTS if you can spot a bridge they sunk into the ground for a second tunnel approach, also from the east, that ultimately never got used.

fastbike

212 posts

Master Geek

#3310998 20-Nov-2024 15:45

johno1234:

Indeed. I think the costs of hiring a digger or an engineer here are comparable to the ROW. However the planning, consenting and compliance overheads appear to be a crushing burden on infrastructure projects.

Before all of this neo liberal rubbish, we had a Ministry of Works that built dams, hospitals, schools, roads, bridges etc. That were built to a good standard, and at an affordable price. But then the silliness of the "private sector can do it better" started and look where we are. The biggest problem is the lack of a pipeline and institution knowledge that gets built up over the course of a project, at tax payer expense, and is then shown the door at the end of the project rather than moving onto the next project. Case in point - the shambolic hospital build / procurement in this country.

Otautahi Christchurch

1 | 2 | 3 | 4