Rail grant opportunity garners enormous support

The news is out; states and regions are laying the groundwork for American high-speed passenger rail service, and they would like Federal support.

President Obama's vision for new and improved American passenger rail service is speeding toward reality.

The Administration's Recovery Act, which establishes a national high-speed and intercity passenger rail program, may have stimulated this activity. And local plans are already in motion. Right now, there are 10 corridors of at least 100 miles where states are building infrastructure to allow trains to achieve speeds of over 110 mph.

The outcome is clear: this country is building high-speed passenger rail.

And the response to those grants has been enormous. As Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph Szabo noted last week,

"We have received 45 applications from 24 states totaling approximately $50 billion to advance high-speed rail corridor programs. We also received 214 applications from 34 states totaling $7 billion for corridor planning and smaller projects."

People are excited about American passenger rail again. And for good reason.

This week, additional support for American high-speed passenger rail came from an unlikely source. A Brookings Institution report on American air traffic and airports weighed in unexpectedly, noting that:

• The ten metropolitan areas generating the largest shares of flights traveling less than 500 miles were also the source of 42.2 percent of all domestic departure delays.
• The environmental pollutants produced per mile are far greater on short-haul routes versus all others.

As I've mentioned in this blog before, the report points out that America's "investment in inter-metropolitan rail has been behind for decades, both relative to our own history and our industrialized competitors."

Further, it echoes what I've also said here, that at distances of less than 400 miles high-speed rail can meet or beat air's door-to-door travel times.

This points to passenger rail as one way to ease the air traffic burden. As the report reminds us,

"Many countries and studies have found benefits of rail-service versus aviation over shorter distances: environmentally cleaner, more comfortable, ability to add stops, and typically more centralized locations."

This just confirms what the hundreds of rail applications we've received have made clear: passenger rail is an obvious transportation solution.

We'll be reviewing the rail grant applications we've received very carefully and announcing our awards later this winter. In the meantime, the states and regions are already at work.

President Obama, this DOT, and the states and regions around the country are transforming the American transportation landscape.

Comments

[Dean Procter]

Hmmm... but I'm sure you can do much better than 110 mph and without expensive maglev.
Remember it won't be long before domestic air travel is prohibitive. Rail is a far better option anyway so make sure you give it your best shot, not a half-speed attempt.
The future is made right here, do you want to go 110 into the future while everyone else is going 300+? Doesn't sound like the America I know.

[Karl Rohde]

Let freight have the 19th century rails. It's time for elevated maglev for high speed passenger service. http://tinyurl.com/dnhoqg

[C Wood]

Hooray for trains! I'd like to see trains link Corpus Christi, Houston and San Antonio.

[Harry Johnson]

Maybe the Secretary and Mr. Szabo could dress up like Santa and award the grants in person?

In all seriousness, it bears repeating that ARRA funds for high speed rail have acted as a shot in the arm for interest in passenger rail by ordinary Americans. I'm a transportation planning student, and I have friends and family asking me about passenger rail in North Carolina all the time. This did not happen before the President and Congress supported HSR in the Recovery Act.

- Harry in NC

[Michael E. Bailey]

High speed rail would be a better and less polluting transportation option for trips such as from Anaheim in Orange County up to Sacramento and San Francisco. The High Speed Rail Authority is working on infrastructure for such a train that could cover the distance between Anaheim and San Fransisco in about three hours. We have the infrastructure in place now to safely run the Amtrack Surfliners at over 100mph on stretches of the line between San Diego and Irvine. That has cut a lot of travel time off what used to be a three hour trip each way with the old infrastructure and the old Santa Fe diesels.Best wishes, Michael E. Bailey.

[Sarah Morlock]

High speed rail is a viable option for any society today that is dealing with the economic and environmental issues with which United States is dealing. This country is decades behind when it comes to our rail systems. Europe and Eastern Asia both have high speed rail systems and are constantly improving their infrastructure for such trains. Even Russia will be joining these regions in 2011 with its own high speed rail line running to Finland.
As this article states, high speed rail is an environmentally friendly alternative to short distance flights. According to the Clean Air Conservancy, for flights less than 452 kilometers or 280.9 miles, 0.18 kg of CO2 per passenger per kilometer is released. Furthermore, short flights release far more CO2 than longer flights because it is necessary to burn large amounts of fuel to get the aircraft into the upper atmosphere. On the other hand, trains can be up to three times more energy efficient than short haul flights, according to the independent transportation researcher, David Lawyer. The high speed rail trains receive energy from stationary electrical engineering facilities which can also be engineered to emit less CO2 into the atmosphere. These facts make high speed rail far more environmentally sustainable than air travel in similar routes.
Additionally, high speed rail has the potential to be much safer than automobile traffic and even air traffic. Rail traffic is predictable. Even with high passenger loads, it is much simpler to control due to its predictability than automobile traffic and air traffic over busy airspaces like London or New York. By creating a high speed rail infrastructure in the United States, fewer people will be on the road or in the air creating fewer accidents in these modes of transportation.
Moreover, creating a high speed rail infrastructure would create jobs in these economically devastating times. In California alone, 160,000 construction jobs would be created according to the grant request. Not only will this create temporary construction jobs, though. It would also create upwards of 400,000 permanent jobs in California. These permanent jobs would be those required to run the rail system as well as jobs created in destinations the rail system would be servicing. This is a phenomenon that would be seen across the country with a push towards creating this high speed rail system.
High speed rail is a safe, environmentally friendly, and economically stimulating transportation option. It only makes sense that the United States should work on creating such an infrastructure. Our counterparts in Europe and Asia have already realized its capabilities. The USA simply needs to join them in the use of this amazing technology.

[Brandon Farley]

Many Americans are resistant to change and view trains, including fast effecient high-speed trains, like invaders from space. The degree of acceptance of HSR, and government spending, will in-part be directly related to the strength of reasoning for its implementation; is it HSR a choice, or is it a necessity?

I feel HSR is a necessity in many parts of the country, particularly California and the East coast where airports are at or near capacity with limited opportunity for expansion, or long-distance highways are too physically constrained for widening.

[Sarah Morlock]

High speed rail is a viable option for any society today that is dealing with the economic and environmental issues with which United States is dealing. This country is decades behind when it comes to our rail systems. Europe and Eastern Asia both have high speed rail systems and are constantly improving their infrastructure for such trains. Even Russia will be joining these regions in 2011 with its own high speed rail line running to Finland.
As this article states, high speed rail is an environmentally friendly alternative to short distance flights. According to the Clean Air Conservancy, for flights less than 452 kilometers or 280.9 miles, 0.18 kg of CO2 per passenger per kilometer is released. Furthermore, short flights release far more CO2 than longer flights because it is necessary to burn large amounts of fuel to get the aircraft into the upper atmosphere. On the other hand, trains can be up to three times more energy efficient than short haul flights, according to the independent transportation researcher, David Lawyer. The high speed rail trains receive energy from stationary electrical engineering facilities which can also be engineered to emit less CO2 into the atmosphere. These facts make high speed rail far more environmentally sustainable than air travel in similar routes.
Additionally, high speed rail has the potential to be much safer than automobile traffic and even air traffic. Rail traffic is predictable. Even with high passenger loads, it is much simpler to control due to its predictability than automobile traffic and air traffic over busy airspaces like London or New York. By creating a high speed rail infrastructure in the United States, fewer people will be on the road or in the air creating fewer accidents in these modes of transportation.
Moreover, creating a high speed rail infrastructure would create jobs in these economically devastating times. In California alone, 160,000 construction jobs would be created according to the grant request. Not only will this create temporary construction jobs, though. It would also create upwards of 400,000 permanent jobs in California. These permanent jobs would be those required to run the rail system as well as jobs created in destinations the rail system would be servicing. This is a phenomenon that would be seen across the country with a push towards creating this high speed rail system.
High speed rail is a safe, environmentally friendly, and economically stimulating transportation option. It only makes sense that the United States should work on creating such an infrastructure. Our counterparts in Europe and Asia have already realized its capabilities. The USA simply needs to join them in the use of this amazing technology.

[The Columbus Lock]

It's about time! How exciting, we are getting a little but closer to what they have in Europe.

[Daniel L. Manske]

Having travelled extensively in Europe and Asia, I find it baffling why the United States lags so far behind in rail service. Yes, it is easier to tie smaller countries together with rail lines, but we could start with regional service and then eventually expand nationwide. Why wasn't this started decades ago? Well, short-sightedness on the part of our leadership is mainly to blame, I believe. California is ready to lead the way in HSR development, and if we're lucky (and persistent with politicians) we may even get to ride HSR before riding to the retirement home.