Interview
‘Rail Baltica is at least three times more expensive for Estonia than HS2 for the UK’
source: Rail Baltica
Rail Baltica is without a doubt one of the largest railway projects in Europe, but there exist doubts about whether the benefits outweigh the high costs in the Baltic states. RailTech talked to Priit Humal of the critical organisation ‘Avalikult Rail Balticust – Publicly About Rail Baltica’.
Want to read more?
You have read all of your free premium articles for this month. Please become a subscriber to keep reading.
Subscribe now!
Take advantage of our exclusive offer to get full access to all premium content.
The criticism is correct, another alternative might be better: Building an essentially new line, designed for lower speed (e.g. 160 km/h), with less bridges and other expensive elements. Three rails allowing for standard gauge and Russian/Baltic broad gauge seems an appropriate measure between Kaunas and Riga, possibly to Tallinn. A detour to Tartu instead of passing Pärtu should be considered, but the route with flatter ground would probably win. Maybe single track is an option north of Riga.
While Rail Baltica is 3*times expensive, relatively, it is also much more important, by linking Estonia to central Europe. It should rather be compared with the aggregate of Eurotunnel, HS1 and HS2, probably serves a larger part of the population and improves on a much poorer original state.
Whether the uses uptake and resulting benefit will warrant the expenses is, such as for HS2, another question. Eg. many flights from Riga might be substituted by night trains to Berlin plus further transit.