SHARE THIS SHOW:
RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
RECENTLY ON TOL:
The TOL Blog
TAGS:
High Speed Momentum
President Barack Obama has been an aggressive supporter of connecting the country via high-speed rail. As recently as Feb. 8, he proposed a $53 billion commitment to connect 80 percent of the country via high-speed rail in the next six years. Obama requested an initial $8 billion investment in high-speed rail as part of the 2012 budget plan released Feb. 14.
As we discussed on a previous show, the Pacific Northwest Corridor is one of 10 regions competing for federal funds. Since then, Washington started work on some high speed rail projects, using the $782 million in federal funds it was awarded in January 2010.
Last Wednesday, Florida Governor Rick Scott joined Ohio and Wisconsin governers in rejecting billions in federal funds for high speed rail. The money would have gone towards high speed rail projects to connect Tampa and Orlando, the two biggest cities in Central Florida.
Critics point out that the US version of high speed rail wouldn't exactly be a bullet train like Japan's Shinkansen and Shanghai's Maglev that can reach speeds over 200 mph. In urban areas, they say, so-called high speed trains might cruise along at 90 mph.
Proposals for a high speed train connecting Portland to Eugene have ruffled some feathers along the proposed route. Some Lake Oswego residents argue that it doesn't make sense to have high speed rail running through their community. The neighborhood association is asking elected officials to slow things down.
How would faster public transit affect you? Do you live or work along the proposed route? Are you a commuter? Are you passionately for or against the development of high speed rail linking Eugene to Vancouver, BC? Why?
GUESTS:
- Ed Schops: Daily rail commuter from Salem to Portland and senior account supervisor for Edelman
- Shelley Lorenzen: Vice chair of the North Country Club/North Shore Neighborhood Association
- Bruce Agnew: Policy director of the Discovery Institute's Cascadian Center
- Betsy Imholt: Operations manager for the Oregon Department of Transportation rail division
- Aaron Sharockman: Staff writer for the St. Petersburg Times
- Dave Rosenfelt: Executive director of Oregon State Public Interest Research Group
- John Charles: President and CEO of Cascade Policy Institute
Tagged as: economy · environment · high speed rail · transportation
Photo credit: John Kannenberg
-
AMTRAK's Cascades Service is operated using Talgo trainsets, while some of the service corridors in the Northeast are operated using Acela trainsets.
As for China's "True HSR," they have a lot more wide open space than we do, and longer stretches between their major cities. Here in the Oregon-Washington I-5 corridor, it is only about 60 miles from one city of significant size to another (Medford to Grants Pass, GP to Roseburg, Roseburg to Eugene, Eugene to Salem, Salem to PDX/Vancouver, PDX/Vancouver to Olympia, Olympia to Seattle, etc.).
All this being said, I am a staunch, passionate supporter of rail travel. I would much rather take a little bit longer to get where I am going (and actually be able to see America), than to subject myself to State-sanctioned Sexual Assault in order to get in a big aluminum tube to fly over America and not be able to see the country.
-
>Are you passionately for or against the development of high speed rail linking Eugene to Vancouver, BC?
Passionately for! Infrastructure like major transportation projects (CRC, Pacific Northwest Corridor), renewable energy projects, and building out high speed fiber optic networks for internet access are where we should be spending money, not on needless tax cuts for the people who need it the least and pointless wars with a huge military empire that has bases all over the world.
These types of investments will pay dividends in the future just like the Interstate Highway System has. We should build out this line incrementally with the end goal of a high speed rail line going all the way up and down the West Coast from Vancouver, British Columbia to San Diego, California.
- 2015 – Vancouver, BC to Seattle, WA + Seattle, WA to Portland, OR
- 2020 – Portland, OR to Eugene, OR + San Diego, CA to Los Angeles, CA
- 2025 – Los Angeles, CA to Sacramento, CA
- 2030 – Eugene, OR to Sacramento, CA
-
Bluewater42: "These types of investments will pay dividends in the future..."
No doubt they will pay dividends -- pour $500 billion dollars in, get $50 billion in benefits.
A test of whether it makes sense is to have the private sector tackle the project. If it works, fantastic! If not, the project dies. It is telling that the private sector won't touch something like this with a 10 foot pole. It sees how enormously wasteful of both space and money Amtrak and rail projects in places like Seattle and Portland have been.
-
@ Eupseiphos: "A test of whether it makes sense is to have the private sector tackle the project."
It's a test, but not the only test. Last time I checked the private sector didn't build the Interstate Highway System with 100% private money and they refuse to build any "cheap nuclear" plants without huge (billions of $) government loan guarantees. The government can be a partner when the private sector fails to act and in some cases the government is the solution compared to the private sector (see private health insurance).
-
And do you really think any Administration in DC is going to stop the Israel First wars just because we are going bankrupt?? Those costly wars will still be running when the only people in the US with jobs will be the defense contractors and our soldiers and sailors. You can make book on that.
But about public transport: With the chickens of our Mideast policies coming home to roost, and gas prices set to soar, public transportation will again be a necessary public service in the US, But paying for high tech, high speed trains may make less sense than simply exanding the current system, upgrading equipment and getting it to run on time.
-
Absurd proposition! The enormously greedy and obese gov't machine already eats way to much to be healthy. Instead of going on a diet, it says, "Bring me more doughnuts!"
"But the people are hungry."
"Let them eat cake!"
High-speed rail is an incredibly expensive and irresponsible boondoggle that will always require huge subsidies to stay alive. When private enterprises fail, they die. When government enterprises fail, politicians pour ever more money into them.
-
So true. It doesnt make sense to borrow money from China to build this train. Build a fence on the southern border.
-
Private enterprise is the reason that the original passenger trains went out of use. The privateers did not properly maintain the tracks and the trains, because of their shareholder demands for more profits, they saved money by not doing the needed maintenance.
The privateers drove the systems into the ground wearing them out and not modernizing the tracks, trains, and cars, and the passengers consequently took to other means of transportation.
Privateers need to be regulated and overseen so that they don't run themselves out of business due to abusive and excessive greed and so hurting the public.
-
It is expensive, I'm not sure either if we have money to put in such a project. There are argument on both side of the balance and they are all pretty good I guess, but it's hard to know right now if this would be a good choice. Maybe we'll end up eating ramen noodles for a while if this goes wrong heh. Anyway, we'll see soon enough. Great food for though to read article and this discussion!
-
Eupseiphos,
Learn your history. No major transportation infrastructure in the last two hundred years of this country was done simply by private capital. Local, state, and federal government subsidies were critical for initiating, sustaining, and completing interstate roads, canals, transcontinental railroads, and interstate highways. In the last fifty years the state has been the primary initiator of light rail, passenger rail, and high speed rail around the world, and in every case those decisions turned in part on a recognition that rail transit is significant for reducing pressure on airline and automobile congestion. Having ridden rail systems in Europe and Asia, the system between Boston and Washington, DC in the East, and commuting weekly on the Cascades line between Portland and Vancouver, BC, my wife and I can tell you that systems outside the US work much better and serve the public much better than the present Amtrak system in the US. It's easy be on the side of cynicism. All you have to do is say "no" and ignore vast amounts of experiential and scholarly evidence on how rail is a crucial tool for the future. It's easy to leave the mess to your children and children's children. If you're mind is open, however, start with a blog piece I posted last month at High Country News, follow the links, and learn: http://www.hcn.org/blogs/range/public-transportation-systems-come-at-a-high-price.
-
LOL >. u libs are so damn perfect and all knowing >. thank goodness we have you to take care of us bumpkins, no matter how much it costs us.
-
that was constructive, deafened
any other thoughts rattling around in there?
-
So you want to build a (high speed passenger) railroad?
It sounds easy - after all, many other countries have managed to complete the task - but in reality, high speed passenger rail (HSR) is a complex melding of a number of factors. I’ve been a passionate advocate of HSR in various countries for 40yrs and I’ve found the following to be universally true:
Factor 1. People.
You need lots of people and their desire to travel from A to B. World wide experience has shown that HSR is commercially cheaper than air travel over distances up to 900mi and can be operated without subsidy. In practice for the North West, that means connecting the city populations of Vancouver BC, Seattle/Tacoma and Portland. These people (i.e. the public) have to be prepared to support the cause to completion. The Federal Railroad Administration, the current state transportation boards and Amtrak are not included in these ranks.
Factor 2. Route
Straight, flat track with the minimum of curves and bridges. For the North West this translates to the current track along I-5 corridor where the major obstacles are the Columbia River and the curves in Tacoma. Improving this route for HSR operation would involve removing many grade crossings, requiring political will and segregation of freight traffic, requiring the cooperation of the Class A railroads.
Factor 3. Track
HSR can only be run at speed an continuously welded rail (CWR) on a track bed of high quality. Experience with this type of construction is limited in the U.S. and would probably need to be imported along with the technology for regular inspection.
Factor 4. High Speed Train sets
Fortunately the world is awash with first generation high speed train sets. These can be purchased for carry away prices and continue to give many years of reliable service while the U.S. ramps up to produce domestic equipment. Problems with these sets include the construction of platforms to the correct height and Amtrak’s reluctance to accept fixed train sets. The insistence that this country must have new, exciting and unproven technology is a major obstacle to HSR development. The reality is that cast offs from more advanced countries are perfectly adequate.
In summary HSR is economically viable in the North West. It needs political will and completely new and enlightened thinking in our federal and state authorities. It is not a “boondoggle” or an endless drain on government resources, but it does need a fresh approach and oversight of capital projects. The Oregon and Washington state governments should seize the opportunities presented by the current administration (and the reluctance of other states) to reinvent their processes and invest in an infrastructure development that will benefit the region for a hundred years. -
Much of what Mr. Smith says is true, but with a few comments. Genuine HSR, meaning speeds of 200 mph, is meant for distances of at least 200 miles between stops. The PNW Corridor is viable only if trains stop at cites like Albany, Salem, Centralia and Olympia. We can have a excellent rail system, partnering with the freight railroads, by investing in capacity improvements, and technology in the existing system, that would allow for increased frequency, solid reliability and faster trains, and for far less public money than building an entirely new system.
There are places where genuine HSR makes sense, but perhaps not here. We need to invest in a common sense system and sooner rather than later. The public needs to understand what the choices are, but right now there is a great deal of misinformation and misunderstanding about rail generally.
All of the track, by the way, on the BNSF and UPRR, is already continously welded rail, although the roadbeds do need work. A more important issue for HSR is that the right of way must be completely separated from road crossings and sealed from public access. That is both costly and controversial.
We can develop a very good rail system within the next five years, if the departments of transportation, and the public are committed to a balanced tranpostation system. Focusing on a hugely expensive system that serves only a few communities will not be successful and will only insure that we remain captive to the highway system.
-
While I like trains as much or maybe more than the average person, I find it hard to get excited about long-distance, city-to-city HSR. Given the large distances between major cities here in the West, I can't imagine a trip where it doesn't work out to be more cost- and time-effective to fly.
I _do_ on the other hand think that rail has a lot of appeal for replacing long commutes and providing connections between major cities and the small cities that surround them.
I've had fun riding things like the EuroStar and the Shinkansen, but what I really envy is that, in those countries, I was able to get around and see sights in smaller towns riding on one- and two-car DMU commuter trains. I envied the locals heading into town for work or shopping without the whole car+driving+traffic+parking mishigas. It was positively genteel.
-
"Cascade Policy Institute"
That's that extreme far right Conservative Republican group that wrote that President Lincoln was a "Communist" on a TOL show a year or so ago.
-
When the price of oil reaches $150 a barrel and rising, people will be glad they have dependable rail service. That is, IF they have it.
Rail moves more people and freight per unit of oil than cars or trucks. And rails last longer than asphalt highways.
High Speed Rail is fine, but I think a lot of people would be happy with better "normal" speed, and more passenger lines. Like the train that went up the Gorge on the Oregon side to Salt Lake City, Denver and Chicago. And how about train service to Bend?
Instead of wasting oil in order to save money, we should do the reverse. Make oil our "currency."
-
The price of Oil was damn close a couple of years ago -- it was as high as $147/bbl in 2008. And I have recently seen the Cash price for a gallon of Regular unleaded at $3.469 at a so-called "low-price" gas station here in Eugene. (It is higher at Chevron, just down the street from my house.)
-
rail is a good frieght mover >. not so great for passengers
-
i guess someone's never been on a train except in the cattle-car?
-
Well, we have the FAA and NASA studying, engineering, testing aircraft and designing air traffic control in the aircraft industry and they have helped to create a huge number of jobs in a safe industry and I think that ought to be recreated in the fast rail travel industries.
The government is currently cutting back in NASA and so a huge number of engineers are probably going to be available and could be re-employed, taking their terrific skills from aerospace and using them in the new "railspace" industries.
Steel wheels rolling on steel tracks is a very low friction way to move things and people at lower speeds than aircraft and the railroads have not kept up their end of the bargains that were made with them to subsidize building and maintaining the railroad systems. I suggest that the government jump in and design new routes and controls to move people on railroads and compete effectively with the air travel industry that has become so time consuming and irritating with all of their additional baggage and other fees and intrusive anti-terrorist inspections.
-
I think we need to define some terminology here.
High Speed Rail (HSR) according to the Department of Transportation is any rail service, freight or passenger that runs in excess of the current maximum ruling speed of 79 mph. The section of the North east corridor between D.C. and New York is such an example.
In Europe, HSR refers to passenger rail travel above 135 mph.
I agree with “oldhack“ that U.S. style HSR is well achievable here with a limited investment in the current infrastructure. There is no need for massive injections of new technology, magnetic levitation, or rocket engines. This was the flawed approach of British Rail in the 1960’s and it was a stuffing disaster. However, while millions were wasted on ultra light weight, tiling cars and marginal electrification schemes, a small band of locomotive engineers came up with the simple idea of running the diesel multiple units with power cars at each end that have sustained rail service recovery and constant growth in Britain for over 40yrs. Today, Britain is importing its tilting car technology from Italy!
“Sleepy’s” comment on local DMU service is a good one. Once a core corridor service at reasonable speeds (say 2.5 hrs for Portland to Seattle) is in place, the demand for local connecting services grows and can be financed. In Britain for example, the association of rail operating companies (not the government) is proposing to open 103 new stations this year. Town and City authorities plead to be on the list and offer to give land for the construction of facilities. The companies are taking this action because it increases revenues, not because they are public spirited.
(However, lets not get into a side controversy over the WES DMUs. A subject best left buried.) -
The paid contrarians aside, most people believe we should be making better use of the railroads in the main demand corridors, such as the I-5 corridor between Eugene and Vancouver BC.
Compared to Washington, Oregon hasn't done much yet, and this is reflected in Washington getting some $750 million to upgrade the line between Portland and Seattle, while Oregon got a few million to fix the roof at Union Station !
It will cost billions to build a true high speed rail line in the corridor, a cost that present use cannot hope to justify. A logical first step is to work with UP to upgrade the existing line to Eugene, and build up service, and demonstrate ridership. A later stage would then begin to build a new line suitable for high speed operations (ie. with high speed curves, and no grade crossings.) Note that neither the near term upgrade of existing service on UP, nor a true high speed line on a new alignment is likely to use the rail line through Lake Oswego that is so controversial
There is no doubt we'll eventually need high speed rail, and it certainly isn't going to get cheaper if we wait. We need to start a program of incremental improvements now.
-
i am consistently disappointed by the public's knowledge of important details. i doubt they know there are different kinds of high speed rail.
wiki:
Specific definitions by the European Union include 200 km/h (120 mph) for upgraded track
A vactrain (or vacuum tube train) This would entail building maglev lines through evacuated (air-less) tubes or tunnels. The lack of air resistance could permit vactrains to use little power and to move up to 4000–5000 mph (6400–8000 km/h), or 5–6 times the speed of sound at sea level http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vactrain
when are we going to up-grade the high speed system we install now? i hope that we install the fastest most modern system available/practical for ourselves and stop living in the fear and scarcity consciousness handed to us by the masters on wall street http://www.fcic.gov/ their mistakes always take something from the us
thanks
shody
-
we can spend ourselves to prosperity
-
A few months ago callers to TOL advocated for a waterslide in downtown PDX Rosegarden to " encourage exercise'. Using your vacuum train idea, why not use waterslide, vacum mass-transit to connect downtown destinations.
Hold your breath, watch for your stop and Wear a Swimsuit! Fat people should be extra lubricated.
-
I passionately support the project. I have ridden the train to Vancouver over the past years although it takes many more hours to get there and the timing is something akin to the night trains of europe.
I have participated in many surveys..and I must comment that the administration of AMTRAK from the Eastern Seaboard, design surveys meant for them, not us here in the PNW..for instance one question was whether we would use this train for our commute..PDX-Vancouver?! 10 hours..maybe if not longer each way? I find that the matrix used to understand rail use in our part of the country are always justified and denied on an eastern seaboard decision platform. This goes too for the train line to Boise..our west to east connection. While in Joseph this summer, many there said that although they had to board the train in the dead of night is was the only way they got to visit relatives in western oregon. Clearly there is a desire, and a true need, but our region should not be beholden to the Eastern Seaboards mentality concerning numbers.
We must go our own way here, as was the case with the early moves on light rail, streetcars and bike lanes..if we wait always for the east to catch up to our wilingness to work towards the public good..our life here as Oregonians, the spirit with which we work together, will be held hostage by those living on the otherside of the country, whose politics are more divisive.
Connect our region with intelligent transportation options and widen our own economies...
-
My wife and I take Amtrak between Portland to Eugene often once a week, and it's embarrassing how horrible our rail system is. I've ridden high speed rail in Taiwan, and it's fast, clean, reliable and cheap. I don't think that you can be an opponent of HSR in the US if you've ridden a great HSR system abroad.
-
The Busiest Freeway in Oregon and Washington for both People and Cargo is INTERSTATE 5, the Aorta of the Northwest. It is overloaded, overused and congested. We can't even replace an ancient drawbridge, despite decades of planning.
Many drivers are one passenger occupied vehicles. A convenient mass transit involving inter-city service from Seattle, Portland, but also Eugene, Springfield, Salem, Vancouver, Olympia and Tacoma can unite up to 80% of the Northwest Population in a strong vibrant interdepent economy.
-
I am one hundred percent for high speed electrical rail service between Eugene, to Vancouver B.C.. For 23 years I have ridden the electrical rail systems of Austria, Italy and Switzerland which are the state of the art in travel. At all the major rail stations and some of the smaller stations of Europe, one is able to shop, have breakfast, launch and dinner at all price levels - the food and shopping possibilities are excellent. In Europe, you can take a train to all the major ski and hiking ares of Europe or other areas of interest. Plus, train travel is an environmental must. If this type of travel is built properly, it will be used. I hate making long and now dangerous road trips on the freeways especially when everyone refuses to obey the law is texting and talking on their cell phone. Rail systems have and still do go through neighborhoods and without problems. High speed rail travel works. The train trip from Zurich, Switzerland to Innsbruck, Austria, travels along beautiful scenic route right along Zurich Zee (lake) and neighborhoods; Lake Oswego would not present a problem, however, in order for this proposed system to work you would need dedicated new track not shared with Burlington Northern Santa Fee line. When in Europe, I have never had recourse to rent an automobile.
-
Do not underestimate the power of NIMBY --Not in My Back Yard!-- to sabotage any public work project.
Whether High Speed Rails, Subways, Light Rail, Wind Turbine Projects, Wave Energy, Solar Projects, This is one major enemy of progress in democracy.
-
The power of Eminent Domain (when wielded judiciously) is pretty powerful, too!
-
Okay, so maybe this is a dumb question, but I'm going to ask it anyway:
Why do freight trains get priority over Passenger Rail, when passengers often need to be someplace at a specific time, whereas freight often does not? It isn't as if a meeting will be held up if a boxcar of iceberg lettuce is late, although a business deal can be made or lost, depending on someone (a Passenger) being on time (or not).
-
Except for a short segment on the eastern seaboard-- Philly to DC?--ALL RAIL TRACK is owned by private freight lines, Burlington Northern, -Santa Fe, CSX, etc.
-
I am a resident of Milwaukie, and live right next to the tracks. We will soon be adding MAX transit to the amount of train traffic past our house. While I am quite fond of the sound of train activity and like the privacy that it affords us, I have to object to the argument that this is all about choking off traffic at important roadways. Our tracks cross Harrison and 37th and frequently back up commuter traffic; not to mention stalling traffic at SE 12th St, Stark, Madison, and other junctions in inner SE Portland.
I find it interesting that the dialog is not focusing on the audial and visual blight that many people think trains make in a town, and how neighborhood associations with much funding and participation, such as you would find in affluent Lake Oswego, have a louder say in this conversation than associations that are cash-strapped and struggle with low attendance. It is the trend, not the exception, for mass transit to run through poorer neighborhoods because of this point, NOT because Lake Oswego's traffic concerns are more important than Milwaukie's.
-
i am sorry that trains are the most expensive way to travel, even though they are more energy efficient
perhaps big oil companies set ticket price to guide the public into car and planes?
oil costs as little as $1 a barrel in iraq, yet sells on the commodities markets at 90 to $100. what is done with the difference in oil price?
-
De-Regulated Commodity speculators are a major problem in the oil markets.
And that was done by Conservative Republicans.
-
Do you think it's possible that your moderator actually could address the flawed logic in Ms Lorenzen's arguments, or introduce the clear fact that she's irritated primarily because the train will pass through her high-end enclave? Disappointingly, you've given her a forum, rather than bring some analysis to bear on the matter.
-
As coastal residents who take a bus from Tillamook to Union Station, and the train to Seattle several times a year, we find the use of public transportation to be more efficient, more relaxing, and more "green" and cost effective then driving and paying for parking. Obama is right, lets reduce our oil-demanding footprint and improve public transportation.
-
People need to start thinking about rail projects as engines for sustainable economic development. The Lake Oswego resident mentioned the New England rail corridor, home to some of our country's greatest cities. Transportation infrastructure that doesn't rely on cars is critical to the density of these cites, and, I would argue, their character.
-
Listening to the show. The current corridor, the Union Pacific corridor, was designated 20 years ago by the federal government as the Pacific Northwest Corridor. Oregon DOT, on its own, initiated the idea of moving the corridor to the Oregon Electric line. As a correction, the line through Lake Oswego is not the Red Electric, or Oregon Electric line. It is the Tillamook Line, originally own by Southern Pacific, now by Union Pacific, and leased by a short line, the Willamette Pacific Railroad, also called the Portland and Western. The Tillamook line crosses the OE in Tualatin, but there is no physical connection. The OE has any number of fatal flaws.
ODOT's decision to move the alighnment is a major reason that the state got so little money because it now must do a costly, wasteful study, which will put the state even further behind the rest of the country in improving passenger rail. The UP alignment has the capacity, with investment, to handle both passenger and freight growth for many years to come.
-
we are supposedly the richest nation in the world, yet we are led to believe we can't afford basics that other poor counties take for granted. high speed rail could go as fast as 6,000 mph! (vactrain) and that would call for a new alignment, to say the least. oh yea, as the richest 1 or 2% gain fabulous wealth, we beg and and are surprised with the most modest of successes to up-grade to our system a few mph, i forgot the reality ;-(
shody
-
Having lived in Vancouver BC for 3 years..I can tell you the folks in BC are far from getting a fast train..indeed already it takes from Peace Arch to Vancouver station over 11/2 hour to get there...and then of course was/is the ongoing toss-up with immigration.
The line follows the old industrial corridor..from Peace Arch, over to New Westminster...over a very decrepiet rail bridge and then along the north shore of the fraser...
-
I think it is very important to have good solid long term centralized governmental planning in this because as oil runs out and gets more prohibitively expensive, the aircraft industries will become very cost in-effective. People will necessarily cut back on travel and tourism.
NASA is doing massive science and engineering work to make aircraft a lot more efficient and that is very good. And in addition to that work the government ought to do science and engineering studies on HSR. The Interstate highway system was planned for a long term in building the roads and connecting points and the HSR ought to be equally planned for the long term.
Fifty years from now most people who travel long distances, like from LA to NYC, ought to be on affordable HSR and with roughly comparable times from door to door, with air travel.
-
thank you! l am glad to see some thoughtful vision in this topic. high speed rail would go 6,000 mph, if vactrains are developed. that is 10 times faster than present day air travel and uses a very small fraction of the energy to operate.
"trains move one ton 425 miles on a gallon of fuel" downhill, with a tail wind. lol! still, that got to beat planes for efficiency
i can't help but wonder if big oil is blocking vactrain construction. it isn't very complex in many important ways.
how about 3 systems side by side, low speed local collector train, high speed city to city and vactrain international metro to metro, transcontinental routes to form a global network as shown on Discovery Channel's Extreme Engineering program "Transatlantic Tunnel".
shody
-
"3 systems side by side"
Sounds good to me.
I had not heard of vactrains, they sound like a great idea.
And that railroad ad ought to be debunked, because I doubt that a gallon of fuel will even start up one of those large traction motors, let alone get a freight train up to speed. Maybe at crusing speed?
But the idea that steel wheels on steel rails is very friction efficient is a valid point.
-
In some ways the term "high speed rail" is creating unnecessary controversy. It would make more sense to talk about "regular & reliable rail," since that's the first step in most parts of the US outside the Northeast Corridor.
I travel to Eugene and Seattle occasionally by Amtrak Cascades and would do so more frequently if service was more regular and reliable. I care less whether speeds exceed 79 MPH or reach 125 MPH than there is a reliable trip to Eugene and Seattle in roughly the same time as driving, which would create a very pleasant trip.
I'd rather have my federal gas tax dollars invested in rail, which reduces oil dependence and keeps money in local economies, than spent on ever more highways, which increases dependence on oil and exports money.
WSDOT invests more in rail than ODOT; I'd like to see ODOT, Governor Kitzhaber and our state legislators provide more support for rail in Oregon.
-
i'm glad you posted this. i agree with this, accept that if trains ran every ten minutes, on time would not be much of an issue. or if they ran every 30 minutes and accommodated bikes (they probably do but do they do so easily and efficiently? i don't know) and autos that riders self loaded, and had ticket prices that reflected their energy efficiency and therefor didn't need government subsidies, would people then more to use trains more?
there seems to be some unknown force that makes trains less attractive to ride than they should be ;-(
-
In an ideal world it seems as if high speed rail systems in this country and even continent would be a tremendously good idea. I suppose I shouldn't be, though I am, surprised at the resistance to this even in the "progressive" pacific northwest. This coversation lacks optimism about this type of solution to obvious global problems created by our modern modes of transportation. While cars and highways have served well for certain individuals in that industry it is not a sustainable nor a healthy solution. Higher rates of asthma near highways cost people money, and often poor people. We need to come up with sustainable solutions to transportation. While many of these details are important, they seem obvious and self-evident. All excuses just sound like whining by the wealthy, powerful and self-righteous. I'd love to hear someone speak from a place of compassion for public health and safety within policy decisions. Shelley Lorenzen clearly just didn't want a rail system to be an eyesore in her well protected Lake Oswego suburban. Where is the sacrifice? Where is the long term thinking? A report just came out that by 2050, in 40 years, the planet will be UNRECOGNIZABLE. What are we going to do about that? Ignorance of this in order to cede with modern industry should not be acceptable.
I love trains and I would ride a high speed train undoubtedly. I love the max and gasoline exhaust makes me sick, physically. Do people really not recognize the amount and degree of toxicity from daily cars, buses and airplanes? I am baffled at all of the excuses that choose to not recognize this.
-
Currently high speed rail would not affect me. I ride the train to Seattle for amusement once every decade. I would like to see well thought out high-speed rail that is integrated with urban mass transit. I don't know to what extent rural communities should be served by high-speed rail.
What I don't want is "high speed rail service" that picks up passengers every 14 feet. High-speed rail is beneficial in high-density population countries like Japan and China, but it doesn't make since for the western U.S. Maybe the east coast could benefit more from high rail.
In the west I'd like to see improvements of existing trains to transport people and goods more efficiently, but not high speed rail which sounds like "tracks to nowhere." If we're building high rail to create jobs, that is short sighted. Once the infrastructure is built most of the railroad builders will be unemployed again.
-
So John Charles whines that if private investers won't do it, nobody should.
But looking back over history, if we had followed that long disproved Conservative ideology we would not have the current railway system, the internet, the highway systems, the aircraft industries, our basic scientific research programs, our basic engineering research programs, on and on.
Our government of The People, by The People, and For the People has long been one of the greatest job, and consequently wealth, creators on the planet.
-
Yes. Yes. Yes. Please bring high speed rail. Not only would our family utilize high speed rail from Eugene to Portland to Seattle weekly, but we would most likely not need a second vehicle! Big supporters of this!
-
I like high-speed trains, but I'm sick of our public treasuries being treated like piggy banks for private profiteers.
If we, the people, buy a transportation system, we must own it. If we own it, our workers ought to build and run it.
With jobs and paychecks they can purchase goods and services in their communities, creatiing and sustaining more employment and generating tax revenues to support public amenities -- like high-speed trains -- for the common good.
-
I very much agree with you about the public owning what we pay for, instead of giving it away to privateers.
Let the privateers make their profits at each end of the lines while the public owns the public utilities and infrastructure that enables that business to happen.
The Public Commons ought to stay in the ownership hands of the public.
-
Government Subsidy vs Ridership Fares (Air vs Rail, for instance)
If we want to talk about USERS PAYING FOR capital expense, etc... then should we also raise the price for AIRPORTS to ensure that they pay their way.
Airports are heavily SUBSIDIZED compared to their capital costs.
That should be the point of comparison, rather than Morrison being a toll-bridge funded by passage of chickens as the guest (John Charles) said!!
There is nothing wrong with subsidizing High Speed Rail. It's mostly a result of the greed of Oil, Rubber and Steel barons of the early 1900's that the US' investment in rail of all sorts (street car, passenger rail, etc) dwindled in favor of their ability to build roads and cars.
Anyone who's ridden the rails in Europe understands how rail investements are indeed investments... People moving around are not doing so as mere beanbags. They're moving $$, business, opportunity, etc.
It's definitely INVESTMENT.
-
i posted a negative comment about government subsidies. i would like to expand on this theme. i would like subsidies for rail and high speed rail, and a government run system that answers the public vs a private one that focuses on PROFITS as their top priority instead of serving transportation needs.
i don't mind subsidizing the most efficient system, but the system should be implemented regardless; it is the most energy efficient system, it shouldn't be withheld because a of lack of a governmental stamp of approval, that was my point
one problem with a for-profit system is big oil would have a profit motive to make passenger trains less desirable in order to sell more gas to individual cars. oil could simply pay them to make a crappy system. come to think if it, they could do that to the government, but we have more oversight options, which we need to demand now in this case with crappy trains, public or private. lol!
what i don't get is why our trains are the most energy efficient system and the most expensive with the least scheduling choices compared with buses, planes and autos? should we be running the hell out of them?
do we have to hire amtrak? why can't we have a good system with peoples needs in mind? is big oil interfering some how? amtrak never answers me, they are a silent untouchable monster with no need to respond and every reason to ignore me
shody
-
If this isn't paid for by the riders, it should be scrapped, like any new, non-essential pork projects that are supposedly tied to "stimulus". We already have a subsidized rail system. When will we realize we can't afford to spend beyond our means? I balance my books at home and it's way past time my government employees had to, as well.
So far, the supposed stimulus, from where the money for this is supposed to come, has done nothing to stimulate our broken economy. Why? Because we're so far in debt and our people have such little confidence in our ability to pay it back that the economy stays stagnant. Once we start being responsible in DC about how we spend money, the economy will turn around, based on solid fiscal responsibility and control. Let's start with this dumb idea.
-
Yeah kind of hard for the private sector today to run a profitable passenger rail line in this corridor with a free I-5 freeway next door. Afterall we had a profitable privately-run extensive passenger rail system throughout this nation but it was put out of business by a free publically owned and maintained high speed extensive road system. Anti-rail "libertarians" always conveniently overlook the government money poured in roads for 100 years and the resulting destruction of private sector taxpaying railroads (puzzling opinion for people who call themselves libertarians).
John Charles, um no, people are not lining up to pay for roads. All the plans for toll roads have been killed by the public in Oregon.
Great, so lets admit that its okay in todays world to have infrastructure receive public money along with schools so that we can have a prosperous economy and society.
-
Thank you, Jaymee and Emily, for hosting me on the show today! And thank you to all the engaged listeners who posted and phoned in. I posted some additional thoughts about this topic on OSPIRG's blog: http://bit.ly/goTpvp.
-
Emily, you sound like you might have a respiratory virus. Better hydrate, take Zinc and Vitamin C....you wouldn't want to worsen to laryngitis. ;)
-
Has anyone noticed yet that the proposed $4.0 billion Columbia River Crossing will cost more than Washington DOT's plan to upgrade the railroad between Seattle and Portland, and run hourly express trains? These trains will carry thousands of passengers a day, and relieve the whole of I-5 between these points. By contrast, the CRC project will do little more than create a wide spot on I-5, since there is nowhere for more traffic to go in Portland. Even the DOTs admit that. How about some sanity here ?
-
Comments are now closed.
The Pacific Northwest Corridor connecting Vancouver, BC, Seattle, Portland and Eugene can be a workable high speed rail segment. Tying these cities together would help economic cooperation, tourism, and become a magnet for jobs and promote sustainable mass transit. Amtrak currently runs some faster European equipment, the Acela trains, but it is held up by freight traffic and bottleneck segments. High speed rail need dedicated special track and extra straight, flat and level routes.
It is interesting that in the past 10 years, China went from coal powered steam locomotives to the world's fastest and only operational next-generation Magnetic Levitation equipment. And it has built more high speed track, train and links than Europe or Japan did in the past 50 years. And they do it for about a third the cost of western companies.
Faster trains, better technology, and lower cost. Like our transcontinental railroad project, maybe we should hire the Chinese again. California has already entered into partnership talks with Beijing and may be on track for the first operational train on the continent.