Cost comparison SGR Kenya vs SGR Tanzania

Cost comparison SGR Kenya vs SGR Tanzania

Weeken hii iliopita Freight Forwarders kutoka makampuni tofauti (Nairobi na Mombasa) wametuma wajumbe kwa farmiliarization tour kutembelea Naivasha ICD kuangalia kama dry port iko tayari kushughulikia mizigo.. ikiwemo barabara,vifaa ofisi za kukagua mizigo e.g kra,kpa,port health..etc

84562438_3012557178776978_3697990146348548096_n.jpg

84191831_3012556692110360_3901212850445615104_n.jpg


84138724_3012556868777009_5799910994566184960_n.jpg
 
Kafrican said:
Hapo uko na point, ingawaje unajua sio kila mtu atafika dakika 5 kabla treni inondoke, mimi nimeshuhudia watu wengi sana wakiachwa na treni na walifika dakika kumi kabla treni iondoke, Si unajua vile tuna dili na alshabaab huku? Utapitia security check points kama nne hivi kabla uingie ndani ya stesheni, ya kwanza unaangaliwa kitambulisho au pasport kama wewe uko kenya kihalisi, ya pili unapanga mizigo kwa sakafu alafu umbwa ana nusa nusa, alafu baada ya hapo unaenda kwa ofisi ya tiketi, unatumia 'code' ulio tumiwa kwa simu wakati uli book safari kwa mpesa ussd au mtandaoni, hio code ndo unatumia ku chapisha ticketi yako kutoka kwa automated ticketing machine, alafu ndo sasa unaeenda kwa security checkpoint nyengine ambapo mizigo itafanywa x-ray scan alafu we mwenyewe utafanyiwa search juu hadi chini... pia utaambiwa utoe kitambulisho pamoja na ticketi walinganishe kama jina kwa kitambulisho na kwa tiketi linafana kwasababu hauruhusiwi kutumia ticheti ya mtu mwengine....baada ya hapo ndo unaingia mahali pa kukaa........kabla kuingia kwa treni yenyewe bado tena utaitishwa uonyeshe tena ticketi yako.... Kumbuka kama mko wengi, hio line ya security pekee itakuchukua kama 20-30 minutes! Alafu unaelewa vile waafrica tunapenda kuchelewa kwahivyo nyote mtapatana hapo kwa gate dakika ya mwisho .... Kwahivyo ili usichelewe, panga kufika kwa stesheni angalau lisaa limoja kabla.



Anyway, stesheni yoyote ya abiria iwe in airport,train station, bus station, capacity yake hua inapigiwa hesabu kulingana na maximum throughput.... Yani hauangalii best case scenario, unaangalia worst case... Ni abiria wangapi wanaeza pitia hapo na wafanyiwe kila kitu kwa dakika au lisaa limoja au kwa siku nzima.... Kutoka hapo sasa ndo anaeza ukapiga hesabu za abiria wa ngapi kwa mwaka... Kwa mfano kwa stesheni ndogo za Kenya ile ndogo kabisa zinaweza kuhudumia abiria 300 kwa siku. na zile kubwa kubwa kidogo kama Voi na mariakani maximum kwa siku ni abiria 600.... Hio ndo nambari ya wateja wanaotarajiwa mwaka wa 2035...

hio maximum capacity hawakuiokota tu, walichukua data ya kutoka kwa reli ilojengwa na mkoloni na uhusiano wake na ukuaji wa miji kama Voi, Nakuru Eldoret iliopanuka kwasababu ya reli, alafu waliangalia intergrated economic plans za kila county ambapo SGR itapita, tena wakapiga hesabu za economic potential za hizo county.. Kwa mfano ukosoma hizo feasibility studies na ESIA reports utapatahesabu za mambo mengi sana...

Kwa mfano hii hapa inaangalia economic returs za route tofauti ambazo SGR ingepitia

View attachment 1353180
Click to expand...

Kwa utaratibu huo uko sahihi kua na stations kubwa samahani mkuu nilizani ni kama huku kwetu tu. Kumbe sikua sahihi hasa masuala ya security. Ila kwa hizo hatua ulizosema unapita hadi upande train basi nina uhakika kuna watu wengi tu hawapendi usumbufu huo hivyo kama kuna usafiri tofauti usiokua na shida zote za hivyo basi wataacha kutumia hizo station na train. Anyway kwa usalama zaidi ni bora security iwe strong.
 
Nope, it is not the same document!
What geza is showing you is a exctract from an updated version of non technical EISA dated August 2019. On the other hand all of your arguments are based on an old draft EISA document dated 2019.

We have been telling you that, the initial documents on Yapi's site were not final. I guess now you will start to listen...
Kafrican said:
I don't know what you wanted me to see there but , that document you have given is a summary of the ESIA full report which I have been using...

To cut this argument short, Uganda's electric SGR includes the cost of the TL plus locomotives. Now, when you are comparing the costs of building the UG vs Tz rail, do you think it would be fair to exclude adding the costs of associated facilities for the TZ line???
Click to expand...

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
 
Bantugbro said:
Nope, it is not the same document!
What geza is showing you is a exctract from an updated version of non technical EISA dated August 2019. On the other hand all of your arguments are based on an old draft EISA document dated 2019.

We have been telling you that, the initial documents on Yapi's site were not final. I guess now you will start to listen...

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
Click to expand...
Here is the so called new updated document

1581418474398.png





And here is the so called old ESIA report that I have been using

1581418607677.png





Now, can you tell me what the new document is saying that the old one didn't already say!?
 
Just FYI there is also an updated version of the ESIA report.

... Now comming back to your question, the difference btwn the 2 set of reports is a section detailing how TANESCO will be involved in building and running the SGR TL and the description of the TL as an associated facility to the project as per the IFC. You will find that particular description at the footnote of the updated report....
Kafrican said:
Here is the so called new updated document

View attachment 1354401




And here is the so called old ESIA report that I have been using

View attachment 1354404




Now, can you tell me what the new document is saying that the old one didn't already say!?
Click to expand...

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
 
Bantugbro said:
Just FYI there is also an updated version of the ESIA report.

... Now comming back to your question, the difference btwn the 2 set of reports is a section detailing how TANESCO will be involved in building and running the SGR TL and the description of the TL as an associated facility to the project as per the IFC. You will find that particular description at the footnote of the updated report....

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
Click to expand...
Hivi ni vitu hawezijua upeo wake mdogo sana!
 
Bantugbro said:
Just FYI there is also an updated version of the ESIA report.

... Now comming back to your question, the difference btwn the 2 set of reports is a section detailing how TANESCO will be involved in building and running the SGR TL and the description of the TL as an associated facility to the project as per the IFC. You will find that particular description at the footnote of the updated report....

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app
Click to expand...
Discuss Issues like you mean to discuss them, not try to drag the topic by not saying anything substatial... Both documents describe what an associated facility is...... But that is not the main issue, the main issue was who was paying for the TL, it is still TANESCO! now do you want to deny that???


Even the old document has all those descriptions
1581509853664.png


And just incase you aren't caught up with the description of associated facilities even the building and equipping of the train maintenance workshops are associated facilities from Yepi's point of view because they are not part of their contract and they are not responsible for that even though without the Associated Facilities the SGR project would not be viable. One could even say the trains and wagons can also fall under such a definition, the only reason why they are not mentioned as AF is because Yepi works for TRC and TRC has influence over buying and running the trains... Do you want us to count the trains out too when we want to know the total cost of your project?

------
If I understand you correctly, essentially what you are trying to differentiate is that associated facility (I will call it AF) is not supposed to be part of Yepi contract. right? Well that's a matter of what you choose to define as AF within your country... Uganda's TL for their electric SGR is part of the contract cost because they chose to define it as part of the project.....

A good example is like how in Tanzania TANESCO is responsible for generating, Transmitting and Distributing of electricity.... While in Kenya its different... Kengen is the one that builds and owns all power plants, Kentraco is the one that builds and owns transmission lines in Kenya, while Kenya Power KPLC is the one that is responsible for last mile distribution of electricity to homes.... If you want to build a power plant in TZ, you will need just one contract/budget , TANESCO will build the plant, build the transmission line and distribute the power to people, but in Kenya, Kengen will build the plant, sell the power to KPLC and then ask Kentraco to build a high voltage transmission line to bring the power closer to its sub-station so that KPLC can distribute the power to homes...{KPLC will pay Kengen and Kengen will pay Kentraco for using its TL network even though they are all government companies Kenya Power pays KenGen Sh18.5bn in four months} ..... So, if TANESCO was building a new plant.... Transmission lines and distribution lines are just part of the project, but if Kengen was building a new plant, then transmission lines and distribution network are Associated Facilities.
But do you think it would be fair to you if when calculating the costs of building a new power plant in Tz vs Kenya, we should take the cost quoted by TANESCO (which would include everything including TL) VS the cost quoted by Kengen (which excludes the costs of other associated facilities e.g TL, substations, Transformers etc) ???? The right comparizon would be to compare the cost quoted by TANESCO VS cost quoted by (Kengen+Kentraco+ KPLC ) for the same project...

I hope you got the point.
 
Kafrican said:
Discuss Issues like you mean to discuss them, not try to drag the topic by not saying anything substatial... Both documents describe what an associated facility is...... But that is not the main issue, the main issue was who was paying for the TL, it is still TANESCO! now do you want to deny that???


Even the old document has all those descriptions
View attachment 1355327

And just incase you aren't caught up with the description of associated facilities even the building and equipping of the train maintenance workshops are associated facilities from Yepi's point of view because they are not part of their contract and they are not responsible for that even though without the Associated Facilities the SGR project would not be viable. One could even say the trains and wagons can also fall under such a definition, the only reason why they are not mentioned as AF is because Yepi works for TRC and TRC has influence over buying and running the trains... Do you want us to count the trains out too when we want to know the total cost of your project?

------
If I understand you correctly, essentially what you are trying to differentiate is that associated facility (I will call it AF) is not supposed to be part of Yepi contract. right? Well that's a matter of what you choose to define as AF within your country... Uganda's TL for their electric SGR is part of the contract cost because they chose to define it as part of the project.....

A good example is like how in Tanzania TANESCO is responsible for generating, Transmitting and Distributing of electricity.... While in Kenya its different... Kengen is the one that builds and owns all power plants, Kentraco is the one that builds and owns transmission lines in Kenya, while Kenya Power KPLC is the one that is responsible for last mile distribution of electricity to homes.... If you want to build a power plant in TZ, you will need just one contract/budget , TANESCO will build the plant, build the transmission line and distribute the power to people, but in Kenya, Kengen will build the plant, sell the power to KPLC and then ask Kentraco to build a high voltage transmission line to bring the power closer to its sub-station so that KPLC can distribute the power to homes...{KPLC will pay Kengen and Kengen will pay Kentraco for using its TL network even though they are all government companies Kenya Power pays KenGen Sh18.5bn in four months} ..... So, if TANESCO was building a new plant.... Transmission lines and distribution lines are just part of the project, but if Kengen was building a new plant, then transmission lines and distribution network are Associated Facilities.
But do you think it would be fair to you if when calculating the costs of building a new power plant in Tz vs Kenya, we should take the cost quoted by TANESCO (which would include everything including TL) VS the cost quoted by Kengen (which excludes the costs of other associated facilities e.g TL, substations, Transformers etc) ???? The right comparizon would be to compare the cost quoted by TANESCO VS cost quoted by (Kengen+Kentraco+ KPLC ) for the same project...

I hope you got the point.
Click to expand...
a reason unit cost of electricity is way high! And nothing to show about in comparison to Tanesco that has major projects aside HP btn Tanzania n Uganda there is one btn Tanzania n Rwanda n Burundi, about 5 Transmission lines aside JNHPP while Kinyerezi phase II n III loading!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Community

Regional Communities

Back
Top Bottom
Menu
Forums
New posts
Log in
Register