CHALLENGES TO PLANS FOR MODERN HIGH SPEED HIGH CAPACITY RAILWAY DEVELOPMENT IN KENYA AND THE REGION

PRESENTATION TO THE US AND LOCAL BUSINESS COMMUNITY

NDUVA MULIMANAGING DIRECTORKENYA RAILWAYS

17/05/12

ITEMS OF INTERESTLong distance railway development plans

– Mombasa – Kampala/Kisumu– LAPPSET– Central line– The Great Equatorial Land Bridge

Commuter rail development plans– Nairobi– Coast Region– Lake Region

Challenges

LONG DISTANCE RAILWAYS – REGIONAL CONNECTIONS

LONG DISTANCE RAILWAYS – THE CENTRAL CORRIDOR

LONG DISTANCE RAILWAYS:THE GREAT EQUATORIAL LAND BRIDGE

LONG DISTANCE RAILWAYS: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Item Specification1. Design Standard AREMA2. Gauge 1,435 mm (standard gauge)3. Maximum gradient 1.00%4. Maximum

curvature1 degree (1,740 metres radius)

5. Axle loading 32.5 tonnes6. Loading gauge Suitable for double stacking of

containers, double deck coaches and electrification at 25 KV 50 Hz

7. Freight trains maximum speed and capacity

120 kph; 10,000 tonnes trains

8. Passenger trains maximum speed

180 kph but infrastructure designed to achieve 220 kph without modification

9. Signalling No line-side structures10. Communication Fibre optic and/or micro wave backbone11. Environment Compliant11. Motive power High capacity diesel locomotives

initially, electrification in the long run12. IT Comprehensive information and

passenger security systems inside the stations and in the coaches.

DISCUSSED AND AGREED WITH UGANDA RAILWAYS AND ETHIOPIAN RAILWAYS

NAIROBI COMMUTER RAIL FOOTPRINT

THE AIRPORT LINE FOOTPRINT

COAST REGION COMMUTER RAIL FOOTPRINT

COAST REGION PHASE 1 COMMUTER RAIL FOOTPRINT

LAKE REGION COMMUTER RAIL FOOTPRINT

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE NAIROBI COMMUTER RAIL PROJECT

Item Specification

1. Design Standard Kenya Railways2. Gauge 1,000 mm (metre gauge)3. Maximum gradient 1.5%4. Maximum curvature 10 degree (175 metres radius)5. Axle loading 18 tonnes6. Loading gauge Suitable for double deck coaches and third rail

electrification at Max 1.5 KV DC7. Commuter trains

maximum speed90 kph

8. Coach capacity 160 passengers: 60 seated, 100 standing

9. Signalling No line-side structures10. Communication Fibre optic and/or micro wave backbone11. Environment Compliant12. Motive power and train

formationDiesel locomotives and coaching stock in push-pull formation, electrification in the long run

13. IT Comprehensive information and passenger security systems inside the stations and in the coaches.

ESTIMATED COSTS

FROM TO ≈ US$ MILLION

MOMBASA KAMPALA/KISUMU

7,500

LAMU JUBA 5,200

NAIROBI ADDIS ABABA 6,000

NAIROBI COMMUTER RAIL SERVICES

350

KISUMU COMMUTER RAIL SERVICES

750

MOMBASA COMMUTER RAIL SERVICES

1,200

CHALLENGES TO DEVELOPING RAILWAY PROJECTS

Considerations: 1. Very large and expensive projects – billions of US$;2. Have long incubation period requiring tenacity;3. Challenges include:

– Buy-in by stakeholders– Securing the railway corridors and locations for

workshops, depots and passenger stations;– Identifying funding for infrastructure

rolling stock provision and operations– Fast tracking procurement process of the various

items– Identifying suitable source of energy– Providing railway expertise– Uncoordinated development– Environmental and social issues

FUNDING IDENTIFICATION

POSSIBLE SOURCE COMMENTSPrivate sector for rolling stock and operational logistics

This is now the trend in railway and other infrastructure operations

Development partners Buy-in for the project being pursued

Private investors Will require GoK guarantees, which could be constrained by level of public debt to GDP ratio

Government budget Insufficient, constrained by other compelling needs

Railway development fund – set up by GoK and funded from fuel levy, grants and donations

Insufficient but could be used to securitise loans by GoK

Government to Government (G-to-G) arrangement

Promising, already applied for roads development

Recommendation: GoK to pursue a G-to-G arrangement with a government having financial and technical capability; G-to-G to be supported by GoK budget and a Railway Development Fund

TRACTION

• Steam – obsolete• Diesel – initially• Electrification – in the long term• ELECTRIFICATION PREFERRED

OPTIONS FOR ELECTRICITY GENERATION

Renewable/s– Solar– Wind– Sea waves– Hydro– Geothermal

Fossils– Coal– Petroleum (diesel, heavy diesel and black

oil)– Natural gas (methane)

UnclearNUCLEAR PREFERRED – SAFE, CLEAN

AND PROVEN TECHNOLOGY

TOP UNCLEAR ENERGY COUNTRIES

COUNTRY NO. UNITS CAPACITY

(MW)PERCENT SHARE

U.S. 104 101,465 19.3France 58 63,130 77.7Japan 50 44,215 18.1Russia 33 23,643 17.6Korea Rep. 23 20,671 34.6India 20 4,391 3.7Canada 18 12,604 15.3U.K. 17 9,703 15.7China 16 11,816 1.9Ukraine 15 13,107 47.2Sweden 10 9,326 39.6Germany 9 12,068 17.8Spain 8 7,567 19.5Taiwan, China 6 5,018 19.0South Africa 2 1,830 5.2Iran 1 915 0.0

ENERGY SOURCES INDICATIVE COST COMPARISONS

TYPE BUILD (US$/KW)

ENERGY COST (US$/MWH)

ENERGY COST (KSHS/KWH)

Gas Turbine

420 63.1 5.0

Coal fired

1,290 94.5 7.6

Wind 1,208 97.0 7.7

Geothermal

1,880 101.7 8.1

Nuclear 2,081 113.9 9.1

Hydro and petroleum power generation not included due to numerous unrelated variables in the cost matrix

CONCLUSIONNone of the challenges is insuperableRailway development in the region is an

idea whose time has come; nothing can stop it; friends will support it and assist to develop it; sceptic will be persuaded to join the believers.

Electric traction is the better option;For Kenya and the region, nuclear

energy could be consideredThere is commercial opportunity in the

investing into large nuclear and coal power generation plants

THANKS