可以 上車怎樣上呢
這提問要留下讓懂人回答
-----
2010年06月14日08:00
高鐵助中國經濟走上快行道
Will Freeman / Arthur Kroeber
時
速350公里的武廣和諧號高速列車乘載著乘客﹐在短短三個小時內呼嘯著從武漢穿越中國中心地帶到達1,000公里外的廣州﹐這段距離大致相當於從華盛頓到 芝加哥的距離。朝車窗外看去﹐現代中國的典型景象一覽無余：大片燦爛金黃的油菜籽田地裡﹐時而會出現一幢破敗的磚瓦農舍﹐而諸多未來的城鎮區正從中崛起﹐ 只不過目前只有起重機、混凝土建築框架及火電廠冷卻塔的身影。這種仍處於發展初級階段的農業國的場景﹐令現代的武廣和諧號高速列車看起來是一種過度的奢侈﹐一種中國政府不顧成本及效用而痴迷於基建的象徵。批評人士說 ﹐中國龐大的高速客車鐵路網絡(16,000公里中僅有四分之一完工)沒有實際用處﹐並會使中國背上沉重的債務負擔。
現在修 建高鐵網絡是不錯的投資。
隨著收入提高﹐中國鐵路客運的繁忙程度將高居全球之首。將乘客從擁擠的普通鐵路線上轉移將會為爆炸性增長的貨運釋放空間﹐因而﹐貨運收入增加將為建設新軌 道支付資本成本。而通過減少飛機、小汽車及卡車的客貨運需求﹐高鐵系統通過降低能耗及減少碳排放方面將節約大筆資金。
中國的鐵路已是全球最繁忙的鐵路線了。中國的鐵路客貨運量佔全球的四分之一﹐而鐵路里程僅佔全球的6%。中國的鐵路客、貨運繁忙程度是印度的兩倍﹐是美國 的三倍﹐而是歐洲的十二倍。中國鐵道部預計﹐下一個10年中﹐貨運將增加55%﹐而客運里程將翻倍。增加鐵路里程並非奢侈之舉﹐而屬必要之為。除高鐵外﹐ 鐵道部計劃至2020年前﹐增建18,000公里的普通客、貨運鐵路線。
反對的理由之一是高鐵成本遠遠高於普通鐵路線的修建成本﹐或許﹐新建客運鐵路線並非奢侈﹐但修高鐵的確 是種浪費。
這種說法還是錯了。在法國、西班牙及日本﹐一英里高鐵的成本是普通鐵路的三倍。但在中國﹐據世界銀行(World Bank)估計﹐高鐵的成本僅比普通鐵路高出20%至30%。廉價的勞動力及國產設備在其中發揮了作用。修建更多高架橋的決定也是如此﹐修高架橋可將購地 成本降至最低。最後﹐同時修建整個鐵路網可產生巨大的規模經濟效應。
高鐵修建成本溢價不高也使得票價較為適宜：比普通火車票價高﹐但比機票低。目前中國36個規模最大城市的平均家庭收入超過1萬美元﹐因而數千萬中國人支付 高鐵票價較為輕鬆﹐特別是商務旅行更是如此。
近期在寧武線、武廣線以及廣深線做了幾次旅行後﹐我們發現火車滿座率幾乎達到90%。據世界銀行估計﹐幾年後京港線每年載客量將超過8000萬人﹐成為全 球最繁忙的高速客運鐵路線。
但真正的一項大收獲是﹐將大部分客運從現存普通鐵路線上分流﹐就能釋放更多的貨運空間。中國眾多的企業﹐從製造商到煤礦﹐多年來一直抱怨難以獲得充足的火 車貨運能力﹐以致不得不採用價格更高而效率更低的卡車運輸。火車運力增加會使得這些企業重新用火車來進行貨物運輸﹐從而節省大量成本支出。以噸位計﹐火車 貨運成本比卡車低近70%﹐且所耗能源減少77%﹐二氧化碳排放也少91%。
聽來當然不錯﹐但這些好處要經過許多年方可逐漸顯現。而建設這一鐵路網的成本卻是現在生成﹐而且主要是以大幅增加的巨額債務形式呈現的。這種財務風險是否 過高呢？
實際並非如此。首先﹐現在開建這種鐵路網絡﹐勞力成本仍較低﹐因而比再等一、二十年待薪資上漲推高其它成本之時再建要明智得多。再者﹐不管怎樣﹐為經濟效 益要等一段較長時期方能顯現的工程融資正應該採用借債的形式。
然而﹐中國政府的確需要將鐵路建設融資方式多樣化。2009年中國鐵道部的負債增加了近50%﹐達到1.3萬億元人民幣(1900億美元)﹐已瀕臨其慎重 發債的極限。中國已開始讓地方政府分擔新建鐵路所需成本的約三分之一﹐但下一個五年計劃中還需要中央政府直接提供預算支持。
但這並非不同尋常﹐大多數擁有高鐵網絡的國家主要甚至完全由國家預算來為基本建設提供資金。底線是﹐不管資金從哪裡來﹐中國雄心勃勃的鐵路建設是一項很有 價值的投資。
(編者按：本文作者弗里曼(Will Freeman)是位研究分析師﹐葛藝豪(Arthur Kroeber)是北京研究機構龍洲經訊（GaveKal Dragonomics）的董事總經理)
2010年06月14日08:00
China's Fast Track To Development
Will Freeman / Arthur Kroeber
The 350-kilometer-per-hour Wuguang Harmony Express rockets through China's heartland delivering passengers 1,000 kilometers from Wuhan to Guangzhou -- roughly the distance between Washington, D.C. and Chicago -- in just three hours. Outside, quintessential scenes of modern China unfold. Future urban districts populated only by cranes, the skeletons of concrete buildings and the cooling towers of coal-fired power plants rise out of fields of bright-yellow rapeseed dotted with the occasional dilapidated brick farmhouse.
Such glimpses of an agrarian country still in its initial stages of development make the state-of-the-art Wuguang Harmony Express seem an extravagant indulgence, an emblem of Beijing's obsession with infrastructure, regardless of cost or utility. Critics say China's mammoth high-speed passenger rail network (16,000 kilometers of which a quarter is complete) serves no useful purpose and will saddle the country with a crippling debt.
Such criticism is misguided. The high-speed rail program is not a desperate throw of gold-plated dice in response to the global financial crisis, but a carefully considered component of a long planned and desperately needed upgrade of China's rail system.
As incomes rise, China's passenger railroads will become by far the world's busiest. Moving passenger traffic off clogged conventional rail lines will free up room for an explosion of freight traffic, so increased freight revenue will pay the capital cost of building the new lines. And by reducing the need for airplanes, cars and trucks to carry passengers and freight, the system will yield big savings in energy intensity and carbon emissions.
China's rail system is already the most intensively used in the world. China carries a quarter of the world's rail freight and passenger traffic on only 6% of the world's track. China's intensity of rail use (passenger and freight combined) is double India's, triple that of the United States, and a dozen times Europe's. Over the next decade, China's Ministry of Railways expects freight carriage to rise 55%, while passenger-miles will double. More miles of track are not a luxury, but a necessity. In addition to the high-speed lines, the ministry plans to lay another 18,000 kilometers of new conventional freight and passenger track by 2020.
One objection is that high-speed lines cost far more to build than conventional lines. Maybe new passenger lines are not a luxury, but high-speed lines are.
Wrong again. In France, Spain or Japan a mile of high-speed track costs triple a conventional mile. But in China, according to World Bank estimates, the cost premium is as low as 20% to 30%. Cheap labor and locally produced equipment help; so does the decision to build much of the network on viaducts, minimizing land acquisition cost. Finally, building an entire network all at once produces massive economies of scale.
This modest cost premium translates into affordable ticket prices -- higher than for conventional rail, but lower than for air travel. The average household income in China's 36 biggest cities is now more than $10,000, so tens of millions of Chinese can easily afford high-speed tickets, especially for business trips.
On several recent trips on the Nanjing-Wuhan, Wuhan-Guangzhou and Guangzhou-Shenzhen lines, we found the trains to be about 90% full. The World Bank reckons that in a few years' time the Beijing-Hong Kong line will carry more than 80 million passengers a year, becoming the world's busiest high-speed passenger rail line.
But the really big gain is that by moving most passenger traffic off existing conventional lines, more space is freed up for cargo. China's businesses -- ranging from manufacturers to coal mines -- have complained for years about the difficulty of securing space on freight trains, which forces them to move a lot of their cargo on more expensive and less efficient trucks. An increase in rail capacity will enable them to put their freight back on trains, generating huge savings. Ton for ton, freight carried by rail costs nearly 70% less than carriage by truck, uses 77% less energy and produces 91% less carbon dioxide emissions.
All well and good, but these benefits will accrue over many years. The cost of building the network is happening now, and is financed mainly by a huge run-up in debt. Isn't the financial risk too great?
Actually, no. For one thing, building the network now, when labor costs are still low, is smarter than waiting a decade or two, when higher wages will push the real cost far higher. And anyway, financing projects whose economic benefit takes a long time to emerge is precisely what debt is for.
That said, Beijing does need to diversify the sources of rail finance. MOR's liabilities rose by nearly 50% in 2009 to 1.3 trillion yuan ($190 billion), and it is near the limit of its ability prudently to issue more bonds. It has begun to get local governments to shoulder about one-third of the cost of building new lines, but direct budgetary support from the central government may also be required in the next five-year plan.
Yet this is hardly unusual -- most countries with high-speed rail networks financed the capital construction mainly or entirely from budgetary funds. The bottom line is that, however it is financed, China's ambitious rail build-out is an investment well worth making.
---
Mr. Freeman is a research analyst and Mr. Kroeber is managing director at GaveKal Dragonomics, a Beijing-based research firm.
沒有留言:
張貼留言