The document summarizes Kenya Railways' plans to develop high-speed, high-capacity railways in Kenya and the region to connect Mombasa to Kampala/Kisumu, Lamu to Juba, and Nairobi to Addis Ababa. It outlines the technical specifications planned for the long-distance and commuter rail lines. Key challenges mentioned include the large costs required, long timelines, need for stakeholder buy-in, securing land, and identifying funding sources. Nuclear power is presented as a preferred option for powering electric rail over renewable, fossil fuel, or other options due to its safety, cleanliness, and proven record.

1. 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 MULI
MANAGING DIRECTOR
KENYA RAILWAYS
17/05/12

2. ITEMS OF INTEREST
Long 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

3. LONG DISTANCE RAILWAYS – REGIONAL
CONNECTIONS

4. LONG DISTANCE RAILWAYS – THE CENTRAL
CORRIDOR

5. LONG DISTANCE RAILWAYS:
THE GREAT EQUATORIAL LAND BRIDGE

6. LONG DISTANCE RAILWAYS: TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
Item Specification
1. Design Standard AREMA
2. Gauge 1,435 mm (standard gauge)
3. Maximum gradient 1.00%
4. Maximum curvature 1 degree (1,740 metres radius)
5. Axle loading 32.5 tonnes
6. Loading gauge Suitable for double stacking of containers, double deck
coaches and electrification at 25 KV 50 Hz
7. Freight trains maximum 120 kph; 10,000 tonnes trains
speed and capacity
8. Passenger trains maximum
180 kph but infrastructure designed to achieve 220 kph
speed without modification
9. Signalling No line-side structures
10. Communication Fibre optic and/or micro wave backbone
11. Environment Compliant
11. Motive power High capacity diesel locomotives initially, electrification
in the long run
DISCUSSED AND AGREED WITH UGANDA RAILWAYS AND
12. IT Comprehensive information and passenger security
ETHIOPIAN RAILWAYS systems inside the stations and in the coaches.

7. NAIROBI COMMUTER RAIL FOOTPRINT

8. THE AIRPORT LINE FOOTPRINT

9. COAST REGION COMMUTER RAIL FOOTPRINT

10. COAST REGION PHASE 1 COMMUTER RAIL FOOTPRINT

11. LAKE REGION COMMUTER RAIL FOOTPRINT

12. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE NAIROBI COMMUTER
RAIL PROJECT
Item Specification
1. Design Standard Kenya Railways
2. Gauge 1,000 mm (metre gauge)
3. Maximum gradient 1.5%
4. Maximum curvature 10 degree (175 metres radius)
5. Axle loading 18 tonnes
6. Loading gauge Suitable for double deck coaches and third rail
electrification at Max 1.5 KV DC
7. Commuter trains 90 kph
maximum speed
8. Coach capacity 160 passengers: 60 seated, 100 standing
9. Signalling No line-side structures
10. Communication Fibre optic and/or micro wave backbone
11. Environment Compliant
12. Motive power and train Diesel locomotives and coaching stock in push-pull
formation formation, electrification in the long run
13. IT Comprehensive information and passenger security
systems inside the stations and in the coaches.

13. 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

14. 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

15. FUNDING IDENTIFICATION
POSSIBLE SOURCE COMMENTS
Private sector for rolling stock and This is now the trend in railway and other
operational logistics 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 Insufficient but could be used to
up by GoK and funded from fuel securitise loans by GoK
levy, grants and donations
Recommendation: GoK to pursue a G-to-G arrangement with a
Government tohaving financial and technical capability; G-to-G to be supported
government Government (G- Promising, already applied for roads
to-G) arrangement a Railway Development Fund
by GoK budget and development

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

17. OPTIONS FOR ELECTRICITY GENERATION
 Renewable/s
– Solar
– Wind
– Sea waves
– Hydro
– Geothermal
 Fossils
– Coal
– Petroleum (diesel, heavy diesel and black oil)
– Natural gas (methane)
 Unclear
NUCLEAR PREFERRED – SAFE, CLEAN AND
PROVEN TECHNOLOGY

18. TOP UNCLEAR ENERGY COUNTRIES
COUNTRY NO. UNITS CAPACITY (MW) PERCENT SHARE
U.S. 104 101,465 19.3
France 58 63,130 77.7
Japan 50 44,215 18.1
Russia 33 23,643 17.6
Korea Rep. 23 20,671 34.6
India 20 4,391 3.7
Canada 18 12,604 15.3
U.K. 17 9,703 15.7
China 16 11,816 1.9
Ukraine 15 13,107 47.2
Sweden 10 9,326 39.6
Germany 9 12,068 17.8
Spain 8 7,567 19.5
Taiwan, China 6 5,018 19.0
South Africa 2 1,830 5.2

20. ENERGY SOURCES INDICATIVE COST COMPARISONS
TYPE BUILD ENERGY COST ENERGY COST
(US$/KW) (US$/MWH) (KSHS/KWH)
Gas Turbine 420 63.1 5.0
Coal fired 1,290 94.5 7.6
Wind 1,208 97.0 7.7
Hydro and petroleum power generation not included
Geothermal 1,880 101.7 8.1
due to numerous unrelated variables in the cost
matrix
Nuclear 2,081 113.9 9.1

21. CONCLUSION
None of the challenges is insuperable
Railway 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
considered
There is commercial opportunity in the investing into
large nuclear and coal power generation plants

22. THANKS