Noise reduction for ballasted track: A comparative socio-economic assessment

Abstract

Transport infrastructure produces many externalities. Increased accessibility and the resultant economic development are among the most notable positive ones. Accidents, air and noise pollution and other environmental issues, such as impacts on biodiversity, landscape and townscape, are the most important negative ones. In the case of railway infrastructure, noise impacts have a key effect on net social benefit. Noise reduction is crucial to achieve greater social benefits. Against this background, the University of Southampton has been undertaking the Track to the Future (T2F) project, which is assessing, among other issues, how to produce a quiet ballasted track system that at the same time is cheaper to maintain and renew. This paper considers combinations of engineering interventions that could reduce rail-related noise, including under sleeper pads, rail dampers and noise barriers which all reduce noise emissions. It extends previous analysis of under sleeper pads to compare their costs and benefits with those of rail dampers and noise barriers in the context of a UK-based installation case study.

A transferable method for estimating the economic impacts of track interventions: Application to ground-borne noise reduction measures for whole sections of route

“…The purpose of the GIS analysis was to develop a transferable and automated method using open source tools (to ensure wide reproducibility), to identify the resident population affected by ground-borne noise and their expected level of exposure. Unlike earlier work [10,18], the method adopts a disaggregate approach at a high spatial resolution to better represent the actual ground-borne noise levels experienced by individuals, and consists of the following key steps:…”

“…If the investment for the entire route is budgeted in 2009, then the payback period will be four to five years longer, but the accrued benefits are projected to be about 4% greater overall. Valuation of socio-economic benefits/disbenefits Due to the absence of any available data on the monetary value of ground-borne noise, previous work has assumed the valuation to be the same as that for airborne noise [10,18]. However, in practice there are substantial differences between ground-borne noise which is experienced inside a property (assessed as maximum level during a train pass-by) and airborne noise that is measured outside a property (assessed as long-term equivalent level).…”

“…There is, therefore, a need for a rigorous economic assessment of alternative interventions that takes account of the costs and benefits to all stakeholders. Recent work to assess the economic impact of interventions, including under-sleeper pads (USPs), rail dampers, and noise barriers, has been carried out as part of the Track21 [8] and Track to the Future (T2F) [9] research programmes [10]. The validity of any analysis of costs and benefits will largely depend on the accuracy of the financial inputs.…”

Developing a Generalised Assessment Framework for Railway Interventions

“…Track21 [6] and Track to the Future (T2F) [7] research programmes, whose aims are to improve the "engineering, economic and environmental performance of railway track" in Britain, developed bespoke cost-benefit analysis (CBA) tools for specific infrastructure interventions, as described in Ortega et al [8] and Armstrong et al [9].…”

“…While the outputs of these exercises provided useful information, and Armstrong et al [9] included comparative analysis of alternative interventions, rather than assessing a single "do something" option against a "do minimum" base, the approaches used were still somewhat location-and situation-specific. It thus became apparent that, rather than conducting repeated, one-off assessments of possible interventions, there are significant potential benefits to be gained from the development of a standardised, flexible assessment framework and methodology, capable of assessing different types of intervention on different parts and extents of the national (or another) railway system.…”