Magnetic levitation (maglev) is a highly advanced technology which provides, through magnetic forces, contactless movement with no wear and friction and, hence, improved efficiency, followed by reduced operational costs. It can be used in many fields, from wind turbines to nuclear energy and elevators, among others. Maglev trains, which use magnetic levitation, guidance and propulsion systems, with no wheels, axles and transmission, are one of the most important application of the maglev concept, and represents the first fundamental innovation of rail technology since the launch of the railroad era. Due to its functional features, which replaces mechanical components by a wear free concept, maglev is able to overcome some of the technical restrictions of steel-wheel on rail (SWR) technology, running smoother and somewhat quieter than wheeled systems, with the potential for higher speeds, acceleration & braking rates and unaffected by weather, which ultimately makes it attractive for both high speed intercity and low speed urban transport applications. From a technical perspective, maglev transport might rely on basically 3 technological concepts: i) electromanetic suspension (EMS), based on the attraction effect of electromagnets on the vehicle body, that are attracted to the iron reactive rails (with small gaps and an unstable process that requires a refined control system); ii) Electrodynamic Levitation (EDL), which levitates the train with repulsive forces generated from the induced currents, resulted from the temporal variation of a magnetic field in the conductive guide ways and iii) Superconducting Levitation (SML), based on the so called Meissner Effect of superconductor materials. Each of these technologies present distinct maturity and specific technical features, in terms of complexity, performance and costs, and the one that best fits will depend on the required operational features of a maglev system (mainly speed). A short distance maglev shuttle first operated commercially for 11 years (1984 to 1995) connecting Birmingham (UK) airport to the the city train station. Then, high-speed full size prototype maglev systems have been demonstrated in Japan (EDL) (552 kph - 343 mph), and Germany (EMS) (450 kph - 280 mph). In 2004, China has launched a commercial high speed service (based on the German EMS technology), connecting the Pudong International Airport to the outskirts of the city of Shanghai. Japan has launched a low speed (up to 100 kph - 62.5 mph) commercial urban EMS maglev service (LIMINO, in 2005), followed by Korea (Incheon, in 2016) and China (Changsha, in 2016). Moreover, Japan is working on the high speed Maglev concept, with the so called Chuo Shinkansen Project, to connect Tokio to Nagoya, in 2027, with top speeds of 500 kph (310 mph). China is also working on a high speed maglev concept (600 kph - 375 mph), supported on EMS Maglev technology. Urban Maglev concept seeks to link large cities, with their satellite towns and suburbs, to downtown areas, as a substitute for subways, due to its low cost potential, compared to metros and light rail (basically due to their lower turning radius, grade ability and energy efficiency). High Speed Maglev is also seen as a promising technology, with the potential do provide high quality passenger transport service between cities in the 240–1,000 km (150–625 mi) distance range into a sustainable and reliable way. This work is supposed to present, based on a compilation of a multitude of accredited and acknowledged technical sources, a review of the maglev transport technology, emphasizing its potential and risks of the low and high speed (urban and intercity) market, followed by a brief summary of some case studies.

Rail (passenger and freight) industry has been under pressure to tackle climate change, local and noise emissions. The current available powertrain technologies to reach the reduced greenhouse (GHG) and zero local emissions demands are electric (fed from the power grid), battery and fuel cell. However, the associated infrastructure costs (electrical equipments and the required overhead catenary infrastructure) have limited the electric option to heavy loaded corridors. Battery electric powered rail vehicles could be another potential option, but their system recharging requirements might significantly limit the system’s availability, thus, impacting the rail vehicle’s on-the-job performance. The recent breakthrough of fuel cell technology in the heavy duty road industry (mainly transit buses), allied with its operational flexibility and environmental performance has opened the way for this groundbreaking technology in the rail industry. Fuel cells generate electricity onboard, using hydrogen or hydrogen rich hydrocarbon fuels. Electricity is, then, stored in batteries or fed directly into a rail vehicle’s high voltage propulsion system. From an operational perspective, fuel cell powered rail vehicles might replace diesel ones in a one-to-one relationship, with the same range and running times, and a more efficient and less noisy powertrain. Moreover, the on-site refilling station is the only additional infrastructure element required, compared to diesel rail vehicle baselines. In short, fuel cell technology might offer a long term local zero emission alternative, fast refuelling (like diesel), flexibility, with self-electrification, integration with a renewable energy source and a quiet operation. Given their outstanding operational and environmental features, several rail market niches might be addressed by the fuel cell technology: i) light rail and trams in urban environments; ii) commuter and regional trains operating on non electrified tracks; iii) shunt or switch locomotives in rail yards (generally located on central portions of large cities or at the crossroads of major rail distribution hubs); iv) underground mining locomotives, and v) line haul locomotives. Since 2002, there has been an intense activity in the global development of fuel cell technology for the rail industry for both passenger and freight markets. This work is supposed to present, based on the compilation of information from a multitude of acknowledged sources, a review of fuel cell rail technology, followed by an overview of fuel cell rail experiences and feasibility studies, highlighting their main outcomes, as well as fuel cell technology potential to offer lower operational costs (fuel and maintenance) and improved performance for the rail industry.

The formerly public owned Brazilian Freight Rail System was under pressure in the middle nineties, mainly due to the revenue insufficiency, resulting from the government rate control policy and the inherent lack of investments, as well as the increasing funding requirements from the public budget. In this context, the system has been denationalized in the mid nineties, following a corridor format, with 11 regionalized concessions, with 30 year term contracts, running under a price-cap rate regime. The denationalization model has set contractual production and safety targets, which ultimately have indirectly set the required investments to comply with the contractual targets. The post denationalization scenario has allowed the rehabilitation of the former freight rail installed capacity, as a result of private investments on both rail network and rolling stock. The acknowledged freight rail system installed capacity recovery, followed by a profit guided management, have fostered the improvement of freight rail system’s performance, which ultimately have been translated into system’s production and safety enhancements. Albeit the huge advances observed during the first half of contract terms, there were some hurdles to be addressed, mainly the low interoperability/interchange rates, as well as the lack of greenfield investments, required for the necessary expansion of the Brazilian rail network. In this context, the regulatory authority has issued, in 2011, a rail regulatory package reform, focused on: i) interoperability improvement; ii) a widespread service coverage along the rail network (stretches production targets) and iii) a compilation of rail stakeholders (shippers and carriers) rights and obligations. The so called 2011 rail regulatory package has brought more transparency and equilibrium among shippers and carriers relationship, but has not addressed the lack of greenfield required rail investments, necessary to expand the freight rail share on Brazilian transport matrix. In this context, the Brazilian Government has proposed in 2012 the Freight Rail System Unbundling (Open Access Model), in which infrastructure managers would be in charge of providing rail capacity (with the guarantee of the demand risk covered by the Brazilian government) and granted rail operators allowed to operate on the network under a fee payment. However, the unbundled freight rail proposal has not evolved, mainly due to the lack of funding required to guarantee rail infrastructure managers return on investments, resulted from a strong fiscal crisis. Currently, the Brazilian Rail Regulatoy Authority is working on a proposal to extend the current (bundled) freight rail contracts, conditioned to contractual adjustments, focused on the imposition of mandatory investments for capacity improvement and interoperability enhancement. This work is supposed to present an overview of Brazilian Freight Rail System’s performance evolution since the denationalization process, followed by an assessment of the 2011 Rail Regulatory Reform, the 2012 Rail Unbunbled initiative attempt and the perspectives associated with the current freight rail bundled contract term extension proposal.

The increasing movement of people and products caused by modern economic dynamics has burdened transportation systems. Both industrialized and developing countries have faced transportation problems in urbanized regions and in their major intercity corridors. Regional and highway congestion have become a chronic problem, causing longer travel times, economic inefficiencies, deterioration of the environment and quality of life. Congestion problems are also occurring at airports and air corridors, with similar negative effects. In the medium distance travel market (from 160 up to 800 km), too far to drive and too short to fly, High Speed Rail (HSR) technology has emerged as a modern transportation system, as it is the most efficient means for transporting large passenger volumes with high speed, reliability, safety, passenger comfort and environmental performance. HSR system’s feasibility will depend on its capacity to generate social benefits (i.e. increased mobility rates, reduced congestion, capacity increase and reduced environmental costs), to be balanced with the high construction, maintenance and operational costs. So, it is essential to select HSR corridors with strong passenger demands to maximize these benefits. The first HSR line was Japan’s Shinkansen service, a dedicated HSR system, between Tokyo and Osaka, launched in 1964, which is currently the most heavily loaded HSR corridor in the world. France took the next step, launching the Train à Grande Vitesse (TGV), in 1981, with a dedicated line with shared-use segments in urban areas, running between Paris and Lyon. Germany joined the venture in the early 1990 with the Inter City Express – ICE, with a coordinated program of improvements in existent rail infrastructure and Spain, in 1992, with the Alta Velocidad Espanola – AVE, with dedicated greenfield lines. Since then, these systems have continuously expanded their network. Currently, many countries are evaluating the construction of new HSR lines, with European Commission deeming the expansion of the Trans European Network as a priority. United Kingdom, for example, has just awarded construction contracts for building the so called HS2, an HSRexpanded line linking London to the northern territory. China, with its dynamic economic development, has launched its HSR network in 2007 and has sped up working on its expansion, and currently holds the highest HSR network. United States, which currently operates high speed trainsets into an operationally restricted corridor (the so called Northeast Corridor (NEC), linking Washington, New York and Boston), has also embarked into the high speed rail world with the launch of Californian HSR Project, currently under construction, aimed to link Los Angeles to San Francisco mega regions, the ongoing studies for Texas HSR project, to connect Dallas to Houston, into a wholly privately funding model, as well as studies for a medium to long term NEC upgrade for HSR. Australia and Brazil are also seeking to design and launch their first HSR service, into a time consuming process, in which a deep discussion about social feasibility and affordability is under way. This work is supposed to present an overview of HSR technology worldwide, with an assessment of the main technical, operational and economical features of Asian and European HSR systems, followed by a snapshot of the general guidelines applied to some planned HSR projects, highlighting their demand attraction potential, estimated costs, as well as their projected economic and environmental benefits.

Competition is the driving force of any economic system, as it creates a challenging environment for service suppliers to provide affordable and reliable services to customers. Rail systems are an important element of the logistic chain, as they provide a unique service category (generally transporting large volumes at low unit costs) to shippers that otherwise would not be serviced by other modes — the so called captive shippers. In this scenario, competition is essential to guarantee the required service levels (availability and reliability), followed by competitive rates, which ultimately may influence shippers’ business competitiveness, both regionally and globally. Brazil and some North American countries (Canada, Mexico and United States), have a common feature, i.e. continental territories allied with the economic exploitation of bulky activities (industrial, mineral and agricultural), and, hence, depend strongly on heavy haul rail systems. These countries have been performing a continuous effort on improving competition practices into their rail systems, which are translated into important, and sometimes controversial, regulatory measures. These initiatives require a tenuous equilibrium, as they are supposed to provide the required competitive service at affordable rates for shippers, as well as a sustainable (financial and operational) environment to rail carriers, to guarantee the required return on long term investments and avoid compromising medium and long term rail network efficiency. This challenging task for rail market stakeholders (rail carriers, shippers and regulators) is far from a consensus. Rail companies claim that, as a capital intensive sector, governmental regulatory intervention into the rail system may inhibit their ability to invest the required funds to provide and expand rail capacity, as well as the maintenance of the required safety levels. Shippers, on the other hand, state that rail systems operate within a strong market concentration (originally formatted or due to subsequent merges and acquisitions) that give some rail carriers a disproportionate market power, that resembles a monopoly, which ultimately leaves a significant contingent of the so called captive shippers with just one freight rail carrier option, sometimes subjected to excessive rates, and, in some special instances (into offer restricted rail markets, for example), are responsible for the unavailability of rail services into the required volumes. In this context, there is currently a controversial debate regarding the effectiveness of competitive regulatory remedies into freight rail systems. This debate includes both market oriented rail systems (Canadian and U.S.), as well as rail contractual granted ones (Brazilian and Mexican). In the formers, the systems are mostly owned and operated by the private sector, and inter and intra modal options may theoretically provide the required competition level, while in the latter, rail systems have been broken into separate pieces and granted to the private sector under a concession arrangement, followed by an exclusive right to serve their territories, with trackage rights provisions, to be exerted by third parties, under previously defined circumstances and subjected to contractual agreements among rail operators. In both systems, competitive regulatory actions may be desirable and effective, as far as they may address the technical-operational-economic boundary conditions of each particular rail system. This work is supposed to present, into a review format, sourced from an extensive research into available international technical literature, and gathered as a unique document, an overview of the Brazilian and North American freight rail competition scenario, followed by a technical and unbiased effectiveness’ assessment of current (existing) and proposed competitive regulatory freight rail initiatives into Brazil, Canada, Mexico and United States, highlighting their strengths and eventually their weaknesses.

The Brazilian Rail Regulatory Framework was reviewed in 2011 by the National In Land Transport Agency (ANTT), with the edition of a package of Regulatory Resolutions (Resolution nº. 3,694 - Regulation of General Rules for Shippers and Rail Companies, Resolution nº. 3,695 - Regulation of Trackage and Haulage Rights, and Resolution nº. 3,696 - Regulation for Stretch Production Targets and Safety Targets Procedure Agreements) with the basic objectives of: i) create incentives for rail interoperability, ii) promote intra sector competition and, hence, enhance rail role in the national transport sector, and iii) establish new funding sources for the rail sector, in order to support investments needed for increasing rail system capacity. These, together with other structural measures already adopted by ANTT, such as the regulation of investments made by rail concessionaires and the revision of rail price cap rates, complemented the package of rail regulatory measures. For the effective implementation of the principles set out in the mentioned rail regulatory framework review, however, it was necessary to develop a sort of tools to allow regulatory control and reduce asymmetric information within the actors of this important industry. Among these tools, it is highlighted the Rail Network Statement, established by Resolution ANTT nº. 3,695/2011, basically composed of a compilation of the existing rail network main operational and technical data, such as rail gauges, load capacities, operational speeds, clearances, location of locomotives and wagons repair facilities as well as fuel stations, including an inventory of traffic capacity, with a survey of available capacity in all sections of the national rail network. This dataset was intended to reduce asymmetric information between rail industry players - Regulatory Authority, Rail Carriers and Shippers, and, so, enhance the negotiation processes for interoperability operations and investments agreements. Rail Network Statement must be filed annually by Concessionaires, and after a critical analysis and data review by the regulatory agency, it is released on its website for public access to support rail interoperability planning and negotiation process. This work is supposed to present an overview of Brazilian Rail Network Statement structure, with a Case Study Analysis of 2013 Edition, the first issued, with a strong focus on rail capacity analysis, an essential requirement for rail interoperability.

Freight rail carriers have been continuously challenged to reduce costs and comply with increasingly stringent environmental standards, into a continuously competing and environmentally driven industry. In this context, current availability and relative abundance of clean and low cost non conventional gas reserves have aroused a comprehensive reevaluation of rail industry into fuel option, especially where freight rail are strongly diesel based. Countries in which rail sector is required to play an important role in transport matrix, where fuel expenditures currently accounts for a significant share of operational costs, like Australia, Brazil, United States and other continental countries, can be seen as strong candidates to adopt fuel alternatives to diesel fueled freight railways. Moreover, from an environmental perspective, the use of alternative fuels (like natural gas) for locomotive traction may allow rail freight carriers to comply with emission standards into a less technologically complex and costly way. In this context, liquefied natural gas (LNG) fueled freight locomotives are seen as a strong potential near-term driver for natural gas use in rail sector, with its intrinsic cost and environmental benefits and with the potential to revolutionize rail industry much like the transition from steam to diesel experienced into the fifties, as well as the more recent advent of use of alternating current diesel-electric locomotives. LNG rail fueled approach has been focused on both retrofitting existing locomotive diesel engines, as well as on original manufactured engines. Given the lower polluting potential of natural gas heavy engines, when compared to diesel counterparts, LNG locomotives can be used to comply with increasingly restrictive Particulate Matter (PM) and Nitrogen Oxides (NO x ) emission standards with less technological complexity (engine design and aftertreatment hardware) and their intrinsic lower associated costs. Prior to commercial operation of LNG locomotives, there are some technical, operational and economic hurdles that need to be addressed, i.e. : i) locomotive engine and fuel tender car technological maturity and reliability improvement; ii) regulation improvement, basically focused on operational safety and interchange operations; iii) current and long term diesel - gas price differential, a decisive driver, and, finally, iv) LNG infrastructure requirements (fueling facilities, locomotives and tender car specifications). This work involved an extensive research into already published works to present an overview of LNG use in freight rail industry into a technical, operational and economical perspective, followed by a critical evaluation of its potential into some relevant freight rail markets, such as United States, Brazil and Australia, as well as some European non electrified rail freight lines.