Military版 - 【Economist】China’s railways: Less express |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
u***r
发帖数: 4825 | 1 http://www.economist.com/node/21542420
CHINA’S love affair with fast trains is gathering steam again. Undaunted by
horrendous accidents and massive cost overruns, officials are planning
further expansion of the country’s high-speed rail network. A new service
has begun between the southern cities of Guangzhou and Shenzhen, nearly
halving the travel time to 35 minutes. With trains capable of travelling up
to 380kph (236mph), the service will eventually be extended to nearby Hong
Kong. For those craving even faster speeds, CSR Corp, China’s biggest
trainmaker, has unveiled a supertrain (pictured above) said to be inspired
by the shape of an ancient Chinese sword. It should slice through the air at
500kph.
Supertrains are sexy. Politicians love to show them off. But to allow more
Chinese people to get where they want to go at a reasonable price, then
three less glamorous types of investment would yield better returns. China
Rail, the state near-monopoly, is deficient in all three.
The first is safety. Standards are patchy. In July a high-speed train
crashed near Wenzhou, leaving 40 dead. Officials attempted a cover-up,
prompting a wave of popular outrage on the Chinese internet; even the state-
controlled media wailed that development had become “stained with blood”.
The mood has lifted a little following the recent publication of a
surprisingly harsh official report that finds fault with both the design of
the railway and its management. It calls for more than 50 officials to be
punished. Deeper reforms are required, however.
The second neglected area is information technology. Chaos broke out this
week when a new system for online ticket sales at China Rail became
overwhelmed. The demand for tickets was completely predictable, as 2.8
billion rail journeys are expected during the Chinese New Year holidays
later this month. But instead of enjoying a convenient alternative to
queuing all night for paper tickets, as they have done in the past,
customers were frustrated by hours wasted online trying to find out if they
could actually get the tickets they thought they had paid for.
The third area is pricing. Fares have historically been tightly regulated
and heavily subsidised. This began at a time when China Rail had a de facto
monopoly not merely of rail but of inland transport in China. In those days,
tight regulation was justified. But no longer, says a new paper by the
World Bank. China’s roads are much better, and railways must compete with
booming airlines, too.
Average incomes in China have risen tenfold since the current pricing and
subsidy regime was put in place in 1982. Liberalising fares would allow
services to be tailored to meet customers’ needs. In Europe, for example,
rail operators offer a wide range of fares and discounts for those who book
in advance, travel at odd times or bundle the fare with a packaged holiday—
much as airlines have long done.
Poverty too could be better addressed by targeted subsidies, off-peak
discounts and other measures. The evidence from rail liberalisation in North
America and Europe suggests that such reforms could actually reduce fares.
With a free hand, railways tend to squeeze more trips out of their trains,
provide better service and make more money.
In short, China needs to rethink how it spends money on rail. That may
happen. Although it did not receive the same attention as the supertrain,
Sheng Guangzu, the railway minister, was recently quoted by China Daily, an
official organ, as saying that there are now plans to slash the investment
budget for railways to 400 billion yuan ($64 billion) in 2012—some 44%
below the level in 2010. If that makes for a better rail network, then many
Chinese will agree that speed is not everything. | u***r
发帖数: 4825 | | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 4 连评论一起转过来。
Hong Kong Jan 5th 2012 16:45 GMT
I was very excited when China first announced the Shanghai to Beijing high-
speed line; It seemed like a great and reliable way to travel between the
two cities without having to go through all the hassles at the airport.
But after the line was launched and its speed lowered for safety reasons, I
realized that flying was still cheaper, quicker, and safer. I see why the
government needs to massively subsidize their high-speed system now.
Recommend
2
Report
Permalink
reply
Konker Jan 5th 2012 18:12 GMT
Wow. That 'supertrain' looks pretty fast. What a long nose it has! 500kph
hey? The Chinese are certainly the world leaders in innovation and
development when it comes to transport!!
2.8bn journeys this month? That's a lot. No wonder the new IT systems are
under strain as many people get used to them. Sounds pretty good result for
such a large system implementation.
I hope Chinese railways don't ape the European pricing system which is so
unintelligible and opaque, even the operators at the train stations often
can't work out what the best fare is.
If Chinese rail need more cash why don't they make a fortune through
commercial arrangements with their land and property like in Hong Kong or
the UK. There never seems to be anything to do at the new Chinese train
stations. Just bare concrete buildings sometimes with only a couple of small
kiosks. There's certainly a lot of potential. Just have a look at Kings
Cross/St Pancreas. It's more of a shopping centre/hotel office and
residential zone that happens to have trains pulling into the mezzanine.
Recommend
12
Report
Permalink
reply
E K Kadiddlehopper Jan 6th 2012 7:31 GMT
China is to be highly commended for emphasizing high-speed rail! Other world
nations, especially the USA, should take note and follow their example.
Far too much has been written about the single accident in which 40 lives
were lost. At approximately the same time as the rail accident, a bus
accident on freeways took the lives of more than the rail accident. Yet,
there was very little in the news about the bus accident. No one proposed
that buses and freeways be abolished, or that funding cease for them. The
fact is that there is a high rate of accidents involving buses and freeways!
The fact is that rail is the safest, most efficient, least polluting and
most comfortable form of transport known to man. When air passenger mile and
rail passenger mile are compared, rail is the safest, worldwide!
Recommend
9
Report
Permalink
reply
E K Kadiddlehopper Jan 6th 2012 7:49 GMT
We need articles that are more objective when reporting on railway progress
in China. Does General Motors, Chrysler or Ford write the articles??
High-speed rail, using precision, fenced, heavy duty, continuous weld rail,
is the safest, least polluting, most efficient and most comfortable form of
transportation known to man. It is the wave of the future, and we need to
get on board! These trains can easily travel at 300 MPH, as both France and
China have shown!
Recommend
9
Report
Permalink
reply
TS2912 Jan 6th 2012 10:03 GMT
I love the way the sole rail accident (resulting in 40 dead) has been raised
time and time again as 'proof' that Chinese high speed rail system has
serious safety issues.
Recommend
10
Report
Permalink
reply
criticalobserver Jan 6th 2012 12:04 GMT
This article paints too gloomy a picture of China's railway. The Wenzhou
accident in July was certainly a wake up call, and in a investigation report
which just published, the causes (bad management, faulty signaling system,
corruption etc) were identified. There is nothing basically wrong which
cannot be rectified and I am confident that the industry would emerge safer,
stronger and more efficient.
I have travelled recently on the high speed train from Nanjing to Shanghai
and back. I found the trains clean, efficient, punctual and safe.
Accordingly, I strongly recommend that all visitors to China should use this
form of transport rather than flying or by road.
Recommend
6
Report
Permalink
reply
criticalobserver Jan 6th 2012 12:28 GMT
The recent unveiling of the new experimental high speed train capable of
travelling at 500 km/h suggests that China is not content with its existing
trains which are already capable of running at 380 km/h. It means that China
aims to improve her competitiveness on the world market through continual R
&D work on safety, energy efficiecy and speed.
Recommend
5
Report
Permalink
reply
vMx5YmCycs Jan 7th 2012 0:32 GMT
"The evidence from rail liberalisation in North America and Europe suggests
that such reforms could actually reduce fares". I am quite young so didn't
actually live through rail 'liberalisation' (I assume this roughly means
privatisation) in the UK but rail fares here are extoirtionate. Other
countries in Europe do much better but I definitely don't think the UK model
is one to follow.
Recommend
3
Report
Permalink
reply
maxw3st Jan 7th 2012 1:14 GMT
To compare the trains in Europe and China to what we have in the US is a bad
joke at best. I wouldn't feel safe on an Amtrac train going over 50mph on
our rail system, much less 200. Sounds like they have some growing pains,
but are on the right track. We could learn from them.
Recommend
3
Report
Permalink
reply
Mcamelyne Jan 7th 2012 2:48 GMT
Sure, China is having some learning curve issues and growing pains but at
least they have the ball rolling. In the US, we act like HSR is a ridiculous
idea because it doesn't generate a maximized profit. The best we have are
some sketches on maps. As President, I will make HSR a priority and stop
expansions at airports because aircraft contribute 9% of our carbon
emissions and we cannot allow that to grow as our population grows. Only a
smart HSR policy can help us bring carbon emissions under control. Besides,
it will create at least 1.5 million jobs and add trillions to our GDP.
Mike Ballantine is a Green Party candidate for US President on Americans
Elect.
Recommend
2
Report
Permalink
reply
criticalobserver in reply to TS2912 Jan 7th 2012 4:14 GMT
Actually, the Chinese rail system whether high speed or conventional (even
these travel at 150 to 200 km/h similar to the first generation Japanese
bullet trains) are very safe. Except for the Wenzhou accident (resulting in
40 dead), there has been no other accidents over the past five years. In
contrast, there have been major accidents resulting in many fatalities
almost every week on Chinese highways. Accordingly, I would rather go by
high speed train than by car.
Recommend
4
Report
Permalink
reply
Mz6VR9rmsb Jan 7th 2012 6:16 GMT
Hmm maybe its needs to be as efficient as the rail system in the US or
Europe.
Reading this I can't help but think of story of Sour Grapes
Recommend
0
Report
Permalink
reply
nelsonsim Jan 7th 2012 6:40 GMT
Horrendous accidents? I just heard three trains collided in the US. Germany
had a bad train accident only a few years ago and what about India? Given
China having one of the world's largest rail network, accidents are almost
relatively few.
Recommend
4
Report
Permalink
reply
Archie_BiC Jan 7th 2012 7:39 GMT
Can you say that high-speed rail in China has been a marriage of European
and Japanese rail technology with Chinese cost advantage - not the that
sword.
In Europe, a great deal of freight is carried in the waterways around the
continent, in the US, a much freight is carried via rail. So European rail
networks are predominantly for moving people, while US networks are for
commerce, goods. Europes rail network is about 5% larger than the US, but
both are far larger than China's.
Recommend
0
Report
Permalink
reply
k9h3rKpzro Jan 7th 2012 10:32 GMT
High Speed train should be encouraged. It saves more lives compared with
traveling by cars on highway. This mode of transport is more efficient and
more environmentally friendly compared with air-plane. It is better for
government to subsidize train transport, rather than fuel, road system and
car park. The world would be a better place with more efficient train
transport system. More people will choose train if high speed train is
available instead of slow train.
Chinese government is strategic and get it right in supporting sustainable
transport. Other government should follow.
Recommend
1
Report
Permalink
reply
criticalobserver Jan 7th 2012 13:15 GMT
I understand that there are several railway lines connecting Tokyio and
Osaka. It is quite possible that in due course there might be several
railway lines between Beijing and Shanghai bearing in mind that there are
more than 300 million people living near the current railway line. I
envisage that the next line between these two cities might be built in 15 to
20 years' time and this time maglev or other advanced technologies capable
to running at say 600 -700 km/h might be used. I read elsewhere that some
Chinese research institutes are already working on the next generation of
maglev.
Recommend
0
Report
Permalink
reply
silent night Jan 7th 2012 13:41 GMT
The fact is the best explanation.Why so many people would rather choose high
-speed trains to travel and not aviation or cars? Go to see the high-speed
trains' stations,you will find the right answer.
In Wright brothers era,a plane at 600 km/h were beyond most peope's
imagination or had been thought as a danger.A train at 350 km/h will be
looked on as a standard speed,not "high speed" in the future.
If you are running in the right direction,you don't need to stop and wait
for somebody or something.Trying your best to achieve your goal is the only
thing worth doing.China should go to develop its High Speed Railway.The oil
and gas will be used up one day.Electric drived-HSR is more feasible than
electric cars. | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 5 说中国太空项目那篇，说高铁这篇，水平都有限。我看读者评论都比作者强。 | y***l
发帖数: 6963 | 6 读者里竟然没有喷made in china的，让我很不适应
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 说中国太空项目那篇，说高铁这篇，水平都有限。我看读者评论都比作者强。
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | | h*c
发帖数: 1859 | 8 啥读者,都是5毛
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 读者水平越来越高，想洗脑也不那么容易。
| u***r
发帖数: 4825 | 9 这Economist的读者怎么都看上去象5毛啊。而且是100%的纯5毛 | p******u
发帖数: 14642 | 10 自带干粮不
【在 u***r 的大作中提到】
: 这Economist的读者怎么都看上去象5毛啊。而且是100%的纯5毛
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
