On the Fast Track

by Craig Canine

Click for full-size image Illustration by Paul Holland

(Page 3 of 5)

This is no way to run a high-speed railroad. Like interstate highways in the United States, the rail systems in Europe and Japan were built from scratch on new rights-of-way, securely fenced. There are no on-grade road crossings, and slower-moving traffic is not allowed. Motion sensors on bridges send warning signals if they detect objects falling onto the tracks. Curves are bigger than on conventional rail lines and elevation changes more gradual, to allow for higher speeds. The trains themselves are made of lightweight composite materials, so acceleration is more rapid. Also, all trains are articulated, meaning that adjacent cars share a single set of wheels. This allows for wider, more spacious cars and reduces the chance that they will tip over or jackknife in the event of a derailment.

With their own dedicated tracks (except in cities, where they merge with existing rails and operate at conventional speeds), high-speed trains can run safely, reliably, and frequently. In Japan, for example, Shinkansen trains run as often as three minutes apart. The average delay is six seconds. "In traveling by high-speed rail in Japan or France, I don't have to have a schedule or even know the language," says Chris Calwell, vice president for policy and research at the energy efficiency consulting firm Ecos, in Durango, Colorado. "I just show up at a station, put my credit card in a machine, and buy a reserved seat on a train that leaves in a few minutes. The trains can be closely spaced because they operate precisely on time. The train zips me to my destination, where I can get off and then link to a local rapid-transit system. The systems are coordinated, so when a high-speed train pulls into a station, there's a connecting subway or local commuter train waiting, sometimes right across the same platform."

Today Americans can only dream of such efficient, passenger-friendly rail travel. But the dream is becoming less far-fetched as a number of planets come into alignment. One positive sign: passenger trains are making a comeback in the United States. A potent combination of factors, including $4-a-gallon gasoline last summer and frustration with congested roads and airports, drove millions of Americans to the rails in 2008. Amtrak attracted a record 28.7 million passengers, up 11 percent from 2007. Local transit systems across the country also set new ridership records last summer. Americans drove an estimated 27 percent less -- about 826 billion fewer vehicle miles traveled -- in 2008 than in 2007. That means a direct reduction in emissions of 375 million metric tons of CO2 (around 5 percent of the U.S. annual total).

Politicians have noticed this growing interest in trains. Congress, historically hostile to Amtrak, passed an uncharacteristically generous reauthorization bill for the embattled rail carrier last fall. The legislation authorizes $13 billion over five years for passenger rail programs, nearly doubling previous spending levels. In addition to providing for Amtrak's ongoing operations and capital expenses, the legislation includes $2 billion in federal matching grants to encourage states to invest in intercity passenger rail projects, plus another $1.5 billion for development of high-speed rail corridors.

"This is the beginning of the transformation of passenger rail service in America," said James Oberstar, the Minnesota Democrat and chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. "It's not going to lead us tomorrow to the TGV of France, the Shinkansen of Japan...or the 220-mph train service between Beijing and Shanghai in China. But it will put us on a course to get there."

A few billion dollars (not yet appropriated) is not much in the grand scheme of things. A single new freeway interchange or bridge, by comparison, can cost anywhere from $500 million to more than $2 billion. Even so, the law represents a sea change in federal policy. For the first time, it gives intercity passenger rail projects the same entitlement to federal funding -- however tenuous and temporary -- as highway and airport improvements, which have been matched for the past half century by a four- or fivefold amount in federal grants. Publicly owned intracity light rail, metro and subway systems, and bus rapid transit have also routinely received federal matching grants. But intercity passenger rail services like Amtrak, which use privately owned rail infrastructure, have had to settle for dribs and drabs of federal funding from one-time grants and short-lived programs for modest projects, such as adding more drop-down gates to road crossings.

Many conservative lawmakers object as a matter of principle to using public money to subsidize improvements to property owned by private companies. They also believe that Amtrak, which was created in 1971 as a quasi-public corporation, should (miraculously) generate a profit -- or at least not require operating subsidies. So they starve Amtrak of the funds it would need to entice its host railroads to do things like add more rail sidings and double track. Such upgrades would help Amtrak improve its service and performance, thereby attracting more riders and bringing it closer to financial independence. As things stand, however, the private railroad companies -- which are legally obliged to let Amtrak use their tracks for a fee -- regard passenger trains as unwelcome interlopers on their freight rail systems.

This policy stalemate has kept U.S. intercity passenger rail at a near standstill for decades. "We're working with a rail system built in the 1890s," says Eugene Skoropowski, who manages the Capitol Corridor, an independent passenger-train agency run by an eight-county authority in northern California. "It's about up to the 1930s now in terms of operating safety and technology."

Under Skoropowski's leadership, the Capitol Corridor has become one of the country's most successful passenger-rail services. The 170-mile route links San Jose with the state capital, Sacramento. "Ten years ago, we started with four round-trip trains a day and fewer than half a million riders a year," Skoropowski says. He is standing on one of his trains as it pulls out of a station near Oakland, bound for Sacramento. "Over the last 10 years we've gradually stepped up the frequency. Every time we add a new train, our ridership jumps disproportionately. Now we're up to 16 round-trips a day, and in 2008 we carried 1.7 million passengers. We're Amtrak's third busiest route. The message is that people will ride trains in this country, even at conventional speeds, if you provide them with a true travel choice."

Continued...

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

Comments

  • Elizabeth Schafer wrote on February 28, 2009, 07:45AM : Flag this comment as inappropriate Flag this comment as inappropriate

    I think Europe and Japan have had the right idea for years. We (Americans) are only now catching on. Train travel is better than bus, auto or air, if the technology is modern and eco-friendly. No 1890's coal-fired steam engines! Transportation for people isn't the only good use for this. It would also be beneficial for transporting goods, like produce to supermarkets. Although I support the consumption of local produce, there are many things we can't raise effectively in northern climates and people like their oranges in winter. Shipping these from Florida to New York via electric train, rather than gasoline-powered trucks would be fabulous for the environment and our health. It would also clear the roads of unnecessary traffic. High-speed trains, though, would probably be wasted on this.

  • Simpleton wrote on March 08, 2009, 09:24PM : Flag this comment as inappropriate Flag this comment as inappropriate

    Auto-manufacturers and Oil giants made sure that we don't have high speed trains. We are paying now. Every major city should be connected via high speed train. People should call their congressmen and senators to act quickly. Huge job creation, manufacturing, servicer etc., will generate huge jobs and taxes to the government.

  • Wellslogan wrote on March 08, 2009, 10:34PM : Flag this comment as inappropriate Flag this comment as inappropriate

    February 24th, 2059
    WASHINGTON D.C.- Yesterday, the American Rail Association CEO spoke with the President about existing plans to begin construction on a new rail line between New York and Boston. The company, which was also in charge of the Sacremento High Speed project, now 30 years and $10.8 trillion over budgit, is expected to outsource much of the needed resources to Japan and China. After the recent scandal involving the ARA's former CEO, who knows what will become of America's high speed rail vision, imagined nearly 50 years ago.

View All 13 Comments

Comment on this article


Subscribe to Magazine | Site Map | About OnEarth | All Authors | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Media Kit | Contact the Editors | NRDC Home

NRDC