Is High Speed Rail the Answer? – Critic lashes out at UK’s High-speed rail expansion plans

May 1, 2009 at 12:05 pm

Source: Tree Hugger)

 Is Enthusiasm for High Speed Rail Just Another Speed Addiction?

The world is a confusing place – no sooner do the governments of the world finally start taking high speed rail seriously as an alternative to aviation, and the environmentalists start complaining. First we had Obama’s massive investment in high speed rail, which Jim Kunstler (who else?) described as “perfectly f***ing stupid.”And now UK politicians are limbering up to support a significant upgrade of the country’s rail system – but John Whitelegg over at The Guardian says High Speed Rail is an expensive and counterproductive red herring:

The HSR plan is a large and expensive sledgehammer to crack a modestly sized nut. We could stimulate the economy by building 1,000 miles of HSR, but the sums would not stack up in terms of how many jobs this would create per £100,000 spent.If we really want to create jobs in all local economies, rather than drain them away along a very fast railway line, we could insulate 20m homes; make every house a mini-power station to generate and export its own electricity; sort out extremely poor quality commuter railway lines around all our cities; improve inter-regional rail links; and build 10,000 kms of segregated bike paths to connect every school, hospital, employment site and public building to every residential area.

If you have a word to spare, please visit Tree Hugger and offer your comment.  Alternatively, you can post your comments here and they will be promptly relayed to folks at TreeHugger.  For a better understanding of the HSR initiatives in the US & UK, here are some related TransportGooru articles from the past on this topic. 

 

The TransportPolitic scoops more details on the Federal High-Speed Rail Strategic Plan

April 19, 2009 at 1:25 pm

(Source: The Transport Politic)

Proposal reveals a little – and a lot – about how the administration wants to proceed with its rail programs

As many of you commented in the previous, and unfortunately inadequate, post on the administration’s high-speed rail strategic plan, the report – though significant – doesn’t tell us all that much more about how the U.S. government will spend the $8 billion approved for fast rail by Congress in the stimulus bill. On the other hand, I want to point out that the administration never promised such information: for god’s sake – the states haven’t even submitted their proposals for the use of the funds yet! I think that our collective enthusiasm for rail projects may be getting a bit ahead of reality.

But I think the report’s basic outlines of the kinds of projects the federal government wants to fund with rail money are demonstrative of the administration’s seriousness in undertaking this project. By arguing that high-speed rail is most applicable for corridors between 100 and 600 miles in areas of moderate to high density, we can be assured that the government won’t be funding just any project with the limited funds available for rail. It’s good to know, in other words, that a line between El Paso and Phoenix isn’t going to get money over the connection between San Francisco and Los Angeles.

The report’s attempt to define different qualities of rail is also an admirable response to the fact that no one thus far has been able to come up with a concrete series of words that can be used to provide meaningful definitions of different types of rail services. I think there’s been a major problem in discussions about high-speed rail because of the lack of uniform agreement about what the term means, so it’s nice to have officially-sanctioned definitions. For the time being, I’ll attempt to incorporate them into the transport politic:

  • HSR-Express – 200-600 miles apart, more than 150 mph, dedicated rights-of-way.
  • HSR-Regional – 100-500 miles apart, 110-150 mph, some shared track with positive train control
  • Emerging HSR – 100-500 miles, with 90-110 mph speed service – developing the passenger rail market
  • Conventional Rail – 79-90 mph
  • IPR – Intercity passenger rail

Click here to read the entire article.

President Obama unveils his vision for high-speed rail in America and makes a compelling argument

April 16, 2009 at 1:03 pm

 (Source: USDOT, Infrastructurist; YouTube)

President Barack Obama, along with Vice President Biden and Secretary LaHood, announced a new U.S. push today to transform travel in America, creating high-speed rail lines from city to city, reducing dependence on cars and planes and spurring economic development.

The President released a strategic plan outlining his vision for high speed rail in America. The plan identifies $8 billion provided in the ARRA and $1 billion a year for five years requested in the federal budget as a down payment to jump-start a potential world-class passenger rail system and sets the direction of transportation policy for the future. The strategic plan will be followed by detailed guidance for state and local applicants. By late summer, the Federal Railroad Administration will begin awarding the first round of grants.

President Obama didn’t dance around the issues that American policticans usually bypass to avoid embarassment.  In an impressively candid and blunt assessment,  the President made a compelling argument for the need to invest in High-speed Rail.   Pointing to how other economies around the world, with a specific reference to France,  Pres. Obama reiterated the advantages of investing in HSR and how it can reviatlize the economy while offering a great alternative to our current transportation woes.

The Infrastructurist summaries this nicely: ” In fact, he (President Obama) doesn’t pull any punches in saying that rail is a *better* way to travel than car or plane. It’s “faster, easier, and cheaper than building more freeways.” And he conjures the appeal of travel from city center to city center without having to dash out to far-flung airports — “no sitting on the tarmac, no lost luggage, no taking off your shoes.” And: “High-speed rail is long-overdue, and this plan lets American travelers know that they are not doomed to a future of long lines at the airports or jammed cars on the highways.”

Additional funding for long-term planning and development is expected from legislation authorizing federal surface transportation programs.

The report formalizes the identification of ten high-speed rail corridors as potential recipients of federal funding. Those lines are: California, Pacific Northwest, South Central, Gulf Coast, Chicago Hub Network, Florida, Southeast, Keystone, Empire and Northern New England. Also, opportunities exist for the Northeast Corridor from Washington to Boston to compete for funds to improve the nation’s only existing high-speed rail service.

President Obama’s vision for high-speed rail mirrors that of President Eisenhower, the father of the Interstate highway system, which revolutionized the way Americans traveled. Now, high-speed rail has the potential to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil, lower harmful carbon emissions, foster new economic development and give travelers more choices when it comes to moving around the country.

“My high-speed rail proposal will lead to innovations that change the way we travel in America. We must start developing clean, energy-efficient transportation that will define our regions for centuries to come,” said President Obama. “A major new high-speed rail line will generate many thousands of construction jobs over several years, as well as permanent jobs for rail employees and increased economic activity in the destinations these trains serve. High-speed rail is long-overdue, and this plan lets American travelers know that they are not doomed to a future of long lines at the airports or jammed cars on the highways.”

“Today, we see clearly how Recovery Act funds and the Department of Transportation are building the platform for a brighter economic future – they’re creating jobs and making life better for communities everywhere,” said Vice President Biden. “Everyone knows railways are the best way to connect communities to each other, and as a daily rail commuter for over 35 years, this announcement is near and dear to my heart. Investing in a high-speed rail system will lower our dependence on foreign oil and the bill for a tank of gas; loosen the congestion suffocating our highways and skyways; and significantly reduce the damage we do to our planet.”

Ten major corridors are being identified for potential high-speed rail projects:

California Corridor (Bay Area, Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Diego)
Pacific Northwest Corridor (Eugene, Portland, Tacoma, Seattle, Vancouver BC)
South Central Corridor (Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Dallas/Fort Worth, Austin, San Antonio, Little Rock)
Gulf Coast Corridor (Houston, New Orleans, , Mobile, Birmingham, Atlanta)
Chicago Hub Network (Chicago, Milwaukee, Twin Cities, St. Louis, Kansas City, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Louisville,)
Florida Corridor( (Orlando, Tampa, Miami)
Southeast Corridor ((Washington, Richmond, Raleigh, Charlotte, Atlanta, Macon, Columbia, , Savannah, Jacksonville)
Keystone Corridor ((Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh)
Empire Corridor ((New York City, Albany, Buffalo)
Northern New England Corridor ((Boston, Montreal, Portland, Springfield, New Haven, Albany)