Stimulus and High Speed Rail

[HuskyCaucasian]

This popped up on Huff-Po and I thought I would pass it along for discussion:

After much clamoring by energy hawks, who knows what it was that finally brought high-speed rail to the stimulus -- perhaps a little nudge from ol' Amtrak Joe? -- but it got in, to the tune of $8 billion.

 

And now the question is, where will the expansion be? Matthew Yglesias reports on possible new high speed rail expansion:

In a la

s

t-minute change, the total quantity of fund

s

available wa

s

increa

s

ed. But there'

s

no

s

pecial plan for La

s

Vega

s

. The money will be

s

pread all acro

s

s

the country. A

s

it happen

s

, I thin

k

an LA-Vega

s

H

S

R line i

s

a perfectly rea

s

onable project. But in practice the area

s

that will get a leg up

s

hould be the Federal Railroad Admini

s

tration'

s

officially de

s

ignated high-

s

peed rail corridor

s

. A

s

it happen

s

, LA-Vega

s

doe

s

n't ma

k

e the cut. But gue

s

s

who doe

s

have

s

uch a corridor? Ohio!

 

Here is the flaw in part of their argument which is actually stolen from another site...

If you click through all the links and actually got the Department of Transportation website, you see that the map dates to 2002... under the Bush administration... and parts of it date back even farther. So, the map is probably not very accurate.. they just failed to fact check it.

 

But I thought it might make for some good debate.

[ChiSox_Sonix]

I dont really have time to read through all the articles, but I'm just gonna say that I would love if we had a large system of high-speed rail travel in this country similar to that of Europe.

[bmags]

I dont really have time to read through all the articles, but I'm just gonna say that I would love if we had a large system of high-speed rail travel in this country similar to that of Europe.

 

Me too. Especially being in Columbia, MO and needing to travel back to Chicago, I would much rather take a train where you can move around, write, read then a plane, where you need to be there 4 hours in advance for a 30 minute flight and wait an hour for luggage. I would use the rail all the time.

[HuskyCaucasian]

I dont really have time to read through all the articles, but I'm just gonna say that I would love if we had a large system of high-speed rail travel in this country similar to that of Europe.

I have an interesting point of comparison here. My wife sells European Rail for a living and she cant begin to tell you how embarrassed she is of America's rail system. It's a total disgrace. Europeans are totally shocked when they come to America. "Plane? Who flys by plane? I have to drive from Chicago to St. Louis?"

 

I have been a big proponent of completely replacing our current system, but it's just WAY too expensive. I cant find it, but I used the LA-Las Vegas rail line proposal and extrapolated those numbers out for a nation wide system. As a rider, it was cheaper than flying.. about half as fast... but expensive as hell to build.

[bmags]

I have an interesting point of comparison here. My wife sells European Rail for a living and she cant begin to tell you how embarrassed she is of America's rail system. It's a total disgrace. Europeans are totally shocked when they come to America. "Plane? Who flys by plane? I have to drive from Chicago to St. Louis?"

 

I have been a big proponent of completely replacing our current system, but it's just WAY too expensive. I cant find it, but I used the LA-Las Vegas rail line proposal and extrapolated those numbers out for a nation wide system. As a rider, it was cheaper than flying.. about half as fast... but expensive as hell to build.

 

but, in what time could a return be made on that investment? I mean nuclear energy is through the roof to install, but many in the country find that worth it, in what time in America could this be made up, especially with a proposed rise in gas the next decade (forever)

[southsider2k5]

but, in what time could a return be made on that investment? I mean nuclear energy is through the roof to install, but many in the country find that worth it, in what time in America could this be made up, especially with a proposed rise in gas the next decade (forever)

 

You would have to convince an entire culture to shift how they move. This country is 100% about the car. Unless you can change that, you are going to have a really tough time pitching anything that isn't automotive related. People want to be able to jump into their cars and go.

[HuskyCaucasian]

but, in what time could a return be made on that investment?

oh no doubt. I think... if I remember properly... at the time I was trying to figure out who would want to take the risk. It would almost have to be 100% government funded because of the extreme costs and the need to keep the system standardized across the country.

[ChiSox_Sonix]

I have an interesting point of comparison here. My wife sells European Rail for a living and she cant begin to tell you how embarrassed she is of America's rail system. It's a total disgrace. Europeans are totally shocked when they come to America. "Plane? Who flys by plane? I have to drive from Chicago to St. Louis?"

 

I have been a big proponent of completely replacing our current system, but it's just WAY too expensive. I cant find it, but I used the LA-Las Vegas rail line proposal and extrapolated those numbers out for a nation wide system. As a rider, it was cheaper than flying.. about half as fast... but expensive as hell to build.

 

 

I lived in Germany for 3 years growing up. Taking the train was every day life. Take it to the neighboring town, into the city, out of the country for a weekend etc...Here, it's non-existant. I havent been on a train here except to go into NYC from White Plains, the NYC subway system and the DC system. It takes me about 2 hours to drive down to NYC now that I've moved away for a bit and it would be so convenient if there was train service for when I go down there. Especially in the northeast/mid-atlantic there are so many cities where if there was a good train system it would be so convenient to travel. When i was coming how from Vegas in November I had to wait 3 hours in Chicago just to take a 45 minute plan to Wilkesbarre, PA. Also, I can fly b/c I realize I have to to go anywhere, but I still hate it and would gladly sacrifice a bit of time to utilize train travel instead

[HuskyCaucasian]

You would have to convince an entire culture to shift how they move. This country is 100% about the car. Unless you can change that, you are going to have a really tough time pitching anything that isn't automotive related. People want to be able to jump into their cars and go.

Locally, yes. but many people prefer to fly to take business trips and vacations. My wife and I have friends in St. Louis who we'd love to go and visit more often. but there is no way we can afford to fly... and the idea of driving 5 hours for a weekend visit isnt enticing. However, a 4 hour train ride where we can play card,s read, or nap... now that is enticing.

 

And if there was a way to link the Chicago hub to the Florida hub and have some sort of a high speed line from Chicago to Orland (DIsney)... man, I'd be in heaven.

[bmags]

You would have to convince an entire culture to shift how they move. This country is 100% about the car. Unless you can change that, you are going to have a really tough time pitching anything that isn't automotive related. People want to be able to jump into their cars and go.

 

gas moves up to $5 again and I'll take my chances convincing them.

[bmags]

Locally, yes. but many people prefer to fly to take business trips and vacations. My wife and I have friends in St. Louis who we'd love to go and visit more often. but there is no way we can afford to fly... and the idea of driving 5 hours for a weekend visit isnt enticing. However, a 4 hour train ride where we can play card,s read, or nap... now that is enticing.

 

And if there was a way to link the Chicago hub to the Florida hub and have some sort of a high speed line from Chicago to Orland (DIsney)... man, I'd be in heaven.

 

Well, in my experience with my father/father's friends/brothers since they entered the work force, is that since 9/11 they prefer to drive for business trips because they can get work done calling while driving, as opposed to on a plane, and the hassle of security with the lap tops and shoes and wait time, which is pretty much just time lost. I think a train would be enticing for that group, because you could add email to that list if we eventually create a large wireless network. What an investment that would be.

[southsider2k5]

Locally, yes. but many people prefer to fly to take business trips and vacations. My wife and I have friends in St. Louis who we'd love to go and visit more often. but there is no way we can afford to fly... and the idea of driving 5 hours for a weekend visit isnt enticing. However, a 4 hour train ride where we can play card,s read, or nap... now that is enticing.

 

And if there was a way to link the Chicago hub to the Florida hub and have some sort of a high speed line from Chicago to Orland (DIsney)... man, I'd be in heaven.

 

That would be something like a full day on a train, correct? I don't know that Americans are ready for that. They want to be there now, which is why the car wins out over the train most of the time.

[BigSqwert]

Well, in my experience with my father/father's friends/brothers since they entered the work force, is that since 9/11 they prefer to drive for business trips because they can get work done calling while driving, as opposed to on a plane, and the hassle of security with the lap tops and shoes and wait time, which is pretty much just time lost. I think a train would be enticing for that group, because you could add email to that list if we eventually create a large wireless network. What an investment that would be.

 

I could see them implementing similar security measures for a high speed rail system.

[bmags]

That would be something like a full day on a train, correct? I don't know that Americans are ready for that. They want to be there now, which is why the car wins out over the train most of the time.

 

My trip from Jefferson city (about...130 miles from STL) to Union station was 11.5 hours with a stop in STL. It is a 7 hour car ride there. I'd imagine a high speed rail would be quite comparable.

[HuskyCaucasian]

That would be something like a full day on a train, correct? I don't know that Americans are ready for that. They want to be there now, which is why the car wins out over the train most of the time.

i totally see that point. We... as Americas... have become way too "give it to me now".

[southsider2k5]

I could see them implementing similar security measures for a high speed rail system.

 

Especially since if there was any upsurge of traffic, it would make them a much more attractive terror target.

[bmags]

yeah i can't, maybe some drug dogs and metal detectors but nothing as inefficient and terrible as airplanes.

[lostfan]

You would have to convince an entire culture to shift how they move. This country is 100% about the car. Unless you can change that, you are going to have a really tough time pitching anything that isn't automotive related. People want to be able to jump into their cars and go.

I think market conditions will gradually start pushing Americans in that direction though, like bmags said. Once the economy recovers and gas goes back up above 3, it's there for good.

[BigSqwert]

yeah i can't, maybe some drug dogs and metal detectors but nothing as inefficient and terrible as airplanes.

Probably not as bad but a high speeding train with 1000 people on it seems like a desirable terrorist target...especially since planes are near impossible to target now.

[StrangeSox]

I could see them implementing similar security measures for a high speed rail system.

 

That would be a waste because it'd be much easier to sabotage the tracks.

[BigSqwert]

That would be a waste because it'd be much easier to sabotage the tracks.

Doesn't stop the government from implementing unnecessary procedures at the airport security gate.

[bmags]

Probably not as bad but a high speeding train with 1000 people on it seems like a desirable terrorist target...especially since planes are near impossible to target now.

 

well, this'll be off topic, but there's been cases of government watchdog groups who have taken things they shouldn't be able to take just to prove a point that it's still ineffective and takes forever.

 

 

 

[southsideirish71]

i totally see that point. We... as Americas... have become way too "give it to me now".

 

Good luck with trying to get the business traveller to move to this. People are away from their families enough with travel and would rather fly and get there quickly instead of taking forever to use a train.

 

[bmags]

Good luck with trying to get the business traveller to move to this. People are away from their families enough with travel and would rather fly and get there quickly instead of taking forever to use a train.

 

 

Here's the point, though. You wouldn't be taking a train cross-country. But, if you do work in chicago. Instead of that 30 minute plane ride, you'd take the train. At face value that seems inefficient. BUt then, taken into effect how brutal airports are, your 30 min. plane ride scoots further and further towards 4 hours. Meanwhile, a highspeed train to indy would be about that, if not faster. To st. louis, about the same. And while you are on the train you can call and get work done. This ins't a replacement for Chicago to Boston, it's a replacement for Chicago to Milwaukee/STL/Indy. And when gas is high, would your company rather pay for your miles done by national avg. x miles driven, or a flat rate on the train.

 

We ought not thing where the puck is now, but where the puck is going to be.

[Balta1701]

You would have to convince an entire culture to shift how they move. This country is 100% about the car. Unless you can change that, you are going to have a really tough time pitching anything that isn't automotive related. People want to be able to jump into their cars and go.

This is an important thing to keep in mind and it's something that's been pervasive in the posts here so far...rail isn't just something that you stick in and suddenly it's going to make everything better, it's a piece of infrastructure around which growth has to occur. It has to be available and good quality and reliable, and then it needs time to grow in to people's lives where they can trust it. You need to have a certain level of density around the rail for it to work. If I want to take the train to Vegas, for example, I need to be able to get to the train station, get on to the train, get to my destination, and then be able to get from the end terminal to whichever hotel I'm staying at. If I'm in the NY area, there has to be a stop near me, it has to go where I want to go, it has to do so with a limited # of connections, etc.

 

This nation has a number of corridors that would work perfectly for high speed rail. But it will take time and a lot of money for this nation to grow around any rail system that is built. If you build an unreliable system, a system that doesn't get the funding it needs and never gets integrated in to people's lives, you wind up with the Amtrak spiral, where the quality of service is so low that no one takes it so it never gets the funding roads do and therefore the quality stays low and no one takes it.