From LaVoce.Info
The feasibility study for doubling the railway line Naples-Bari was made by RFI. Regards the socio-economic feasibility because it is assumed that there are no financial returns of any kind and that the State to pay for everything. The work is feasible, with a net benefit to the community of 683 million euro. But if the calculations are based according to international practice and directions to get to a net loss of social welfare. Even more disturbing traffic forecasts made by RFI, which probably confuses the possible supply and demand.
growing number of cost-benefit analysis public investment, which is an excellent thing. Too bad that there are still three small problems to overcome: a) studies are always done by neutral parties, that is interested to always say "yes", b) the studies are not used to compare alternative projects, and finally, c) have trivial errors in calculations, in some cases "against" the feasibility of the project (but obviously never large enough to say "no").
ACCOUNTS redone
latter case, the doubling of high-capacity line Napoli-Bari, 162.3 km long and the expected cost of 4.052 billion euro. The study was done by Rfi and concerns the socio-economic feasibility of the work. Was not properly examined the financial one, since it assumes that there are no financial returns of any kind and that the state pay for everything. The study work is feasible, with a net benefit to the community of 683 million euro.
For a thesis discussed environmental engineering at the Politecnico di Milano have redone the calculations presented, with the following, which are essential, adjustments:
1. For the value residual work has been referred to the international practice (50 per cent of the initial investment after thirty-six years), not to the astronomical number proposed by RFI (1.8 times the value of the investment) .
2. For the essay social discount has used a value of 3.5 per cent, recommended by the European Commission in Italy, instead of the rather higher, used by RFI (5.5 percent), which drastically reduces the estimated future benefits of the work.
3. For the benefits derived by the displacement of the current traffic from road to rail is used the method of variation of net surplus of the users (the one used by RFI, based on net change in costs for users, it is theoretically defensible and generates paradoxical values).
4. Next environmental benefits to estimated by RFI, reduced emissions generated by following the movement of traffic over links (benefits equal to 88,957 tons of CO 2 / year), emissions are measured CO 2
from the site, taking into account the international literature on the subject, which is very controversial. Dutifully keeping us "on the safe side", they have taken the lower unit values, from which we obtained an estimate amounting to 2,975,245 tons of CO 2 total. This value, translated into economic terms, according to European standards (50 € / ton di CO 2 ), è risultato tuttavia scarsamente rilevante per la fattibilità economica dell'opera (incide solo per il 4 per cento dei costi di costruzione).
5. Ma la sorpresa è venuta dai confronti quantitativi delle emissioni: assumendo che nello studio di Rfi sia corretta la stima del traffico spostato dalla strada (vedi oltre), occorrerebbero trentaquattro anni per recuperare il CO 2 emesso dal cantiere!
6. Con these need to adjust the net result for the community increased from 683 million to + - 837 million euro. That is, the infrastructure would lead to a net loss of social welfare.
For a thesis discussed environmental engineering at the Politecnico di Milano have redone the calculations presented, with the following, which are essential, adjustments:
1. For the value residual work has been referred to the international practice (50 per cent of the initial investment after thirty-six years), not to the astronomical number proposed by RFI (1.8 times the value of the investment) .
2. For the essay social discount has used a value of 3.5 per cent, recommended by the European Commission in Italy, instead of the rather higher, used by RFI (5.5 percent), which drastically reduces the estimated future benefits of the work.
3. For the benefits derived by the displacement of the current traffic from road to rail is used the method of variation of net surplus of the users (the one used by RFI, based on net change in costs for users, it is theoretically defensible and generates paradoxical values).
4. Next environmental benefits to estimated by RFI, reduced emissions generated by following the movement of traffic over links (benefits equal to 88,957 tons of CO 2 / year), emissions are measured CO 2
from the site, taking into account the international literature on the subject, which is very controversial. Dutifully keeping us "on the safe side", they have taken the lower unit values, from which we obtained an estimate amounting to 2,975,245 tons of CO 2 total. This value, translated into economic terms, according to European standards (50 € / ton di CO 2 ), è risultato tuttavia scarsamente rilevante per la fattibilità economica dell'opera (incide solo per il 4 per cento dei costi di costruzione).
5. Ma la sorpresa è venuta dai confronti quantitativi delle emissioni: assumendo che nello studio di Rfi sia corretta la stima del traffico spostato dalla strada (vedi oltre), occorrerebbero trentaquattro anni per recuperare il CO 2 emesso dal cantiere!
6. Con these need to adjust the net result for the community increased from 683 million to + - 837 million euro. That is, the infrastructure would lead to a net loss of social welfare.
AS TRAFFIC ON LINE
We come now to the more disturbing: the traffic forecasts made by RFI. The new line is save, based on official figures, 1 hour and 17 minutes for passenger trains and probably a little 'less freight trains (The data for these is not specified). The rates should rise, or at most remain unchanged.
The experience and the literature show that the maximum value elasticities to journey time is around 2. Now, the traffic expected from the study arrives at quadrupled Rfi with the new line. By a trivial calculation shows that the value implicitly assumed elasticity is equal to more than 8. No explanations are given of any kind on the model used to achieve quell'inverosimile value. The feeling is that this is a slight confusion between supply and demand possible or desirable. Obviously, If in our review of the calculations presented above had taken a question "probable" on a new line, the social benefits would be further collapsed about a quarter of those estimates (and assumed by us to stay "on the safe side ", as required by international good practice in case of negative results of the analysis of economic feasibility).
The numbers seem so very eloquent. After a "slight miscalculation" of the feasibility study of the line AV Milan - Venice, already commented on lavoce.info e mai smentito dagli autori, sembra che la vicenda si ripeta. Si ricorda, per inciso, che quel "lieve errore" faceva passare il risultato da clamorosamente negativo a molto positivo…
Vale anche la pena di ripetere che nessuno attribuisce alle analisi costi-benefici significati "evangelici", soprattutto in contesti recessivi come quello attuale. Ma come strumento di confronto tra investimenti alternativi nello stesso settore, questo approccio sembra ancora senza rivali. Meglio però non continuare a chiedere all'oste se il vino è buono, perché l'uso agiografico e distorto dello strumento (che inevitabilmente ne risulta) non sembra davvero edificante né utile ad alcuno. Quel vino diventa spesso aceto.
The experience and the literature show that the maximum value elasticities to journey time is around 2. Now, the traffic expected from the study arrives at quadrupled Rfi with the new line. By a trivial calculation shows that the value implicitly assumed elasticity is equal to more than 8. No explanations are given of any kind on the model used to achieve quell'inverosimile value. The feeling is that this is a slight confusion between supply and demand possible or desirable. Obviously, If in our review of the calculations presented above had taken a question "probable" on a new line, the social benefits would be further collapsed about a quarter of those estimates (and assumed by us to stay "on the safe side ", as required by international good practice in case of negative results of the analysis of economic feasibility).
The numbers seem so very eloquent. After a "slight miscalculation" of the feasibility study of the line AV Milan - Venice, already commented on lavoce.info e mai smentito dagli autori, sembra che la vicenda si ripeta. Si ricorda, per inciso, che quel "lieve errore" faceva passare il risultato da clamorosamente negativo a molto positivo…
Vale anche la pena di ripetere che nessuno attribuisce alle analisi costi-benefici significati "evangelici", soprattutto in contesti recessivi come quello attuale. Ma come strumento di confronto tra investimenti alternativi nello stesso settore, questo approccio sembra ancora senza rivali. Meglio però non continuare a chiedere all'oste se il vino è buono, perché l'uso agiografico e distorto dello strumento (che inevitabilmente ne risulta) non sembra davvero edificante né utile ad alcuno. Quel vino diventa spesso aceto.
0 comments:
Post a Comment