Last night on WTTW, Rich Samuels filed an interesting report on the debate over developing high-speed rail (HSR) along the Lincoln Corridor between Chicago and St. Louis. Watch it:
I'm not sure I understand John McCarron's skepticism.
His first point is that he considers CTA improvements a higher priority than HSR development. What that argument overlooks is that the federal stimulus bill passed earlier this year includes $8 billion in dedicated funding for HSR. That money is going to get spent regardless of whether Illinois pursues a chunk of it. So why shouldn't Gov. Quinn and Sen. Durbin go after $500 million to begin making the improvements necessary to move towards higher speeds?
If McCarron really wants to see more CTA funding, he should turn his attention to the funding structure at the state level.
Later in the report, he makes this point:
"We also have a commercial airline system in this country -- the most elaborate one in the world. We even do short-hops to places like St. Louis and Detroit and Madison, WI. And we did build it and we do come. That's the competition."
Is McCarron saying that there's little demand for dependable, high-speed regional train travel because of the multitude of options for air travel? If so, he obviously hasn't noticed that our current Amtrak system -- undependable and slow as it is -- has been attracting record ridership as of late.
In touting the popularity of our airlines, McCarron also overlooks our "elaborate" system's ever-widening carbon footprint. Reducing both automobile and air travel in favor of rail could have far-reaching environmental benefits. That has to be part of the discussion as well.
Comments
MJQ (not verified) on Wed, 04/01/2009 - 11:37
Regarding one of the last comments, I actually doubt whether 110mph is better than doing nothing now. That speed does trump cars and trucks, but it doesn't compete with regional air travel. In order to even come close to economic viability, there needs to be a large increase in ridership, and HSR won't get that just by aiming for drivers.
BruceMcF (not verified) on Wed, 04/01/2009 - 14:01
Where trains trump air travel is in trips of two hours or less by rail, and for trips of two to three hours it is quite competitive. After all, while the plane goes at a tremendous pace between take-off and landing, there is getting to the airport, check-in, boarding, and often lining up waiting to take off, and waiting for a gate, debarking, and getting from the airport to the destination. With only three to five minutes required for a stop at a through train platform, a 110mph Rapid Rail service can have two or three stations in a metro area, with no check-in delay, and with far more doors for the same number of passengers much faster boarding and embarking, even at busy stations.
And cranking the train up for a top speed of 79mph to SUSTAINED speeds over 100mph substantially increases the number of towns and cities along a route that lie within a two or a three hour trip.
The reason California cannot pursue the same strategy is because of the cost of tunneling to get out of the Bay and out of the LA basin, combined with the distance between the two ... a 220mph system can get between LA and the Bay in under three hours, and be economically viable, where a 110mph system would still cost quite a bit of money, and attract a much smaller share of the biggest transport market in the state.
But here in the Midwest and Great Lakes, we have enough cities close enough together that there are five to ten corridors that will be viable for 110mph Rapid Rail services. And where California will need over a decade for their first services, we can get 110mph services in the next four to eight years.
mSkehan (not verified) on Wed, 04/01/2009 - 19:19
Washington, Oregon and British Columbia began to study and deploy High Speed Rail (HSR) passenger trains through the Cascade Corridor in the mid 90’s. Our Talgo tilt trains, capable of 125 mph, have been running between Eugene Oregon and Vancouver, BC since 1999.
Using an ‘incremental approach’ to building the system, with limited state and dwindling Amtrak funding for trains, track and signal, and operations, has enabled some pretty impressive achievements -- while still being limited to 79 mph by the Feds.
Ridership continues to grow at double-digit rates each year. More than twice as many passengers now choose rail over planes for the trip between Seattle and Portland. Trains get twice the fuel economy over planes and cars, while producing only half the CO2 emissions.
All Aboard Washington is excited the needed improvements are now achievable through the stimulus funding for HSR, and applaud our new administration. With modest capital improvements, new train sets could double ridership in years, not decades. Travel times could be slashed by up to 50% through higher speeds and reduced conflicts with current freight traffic, while achieving significant reductions to both fossil fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Truly a win, win, win for America!
For more information, check out our state adopted HSR plan at: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/83B17378-CDC8-4D57-AA60-4CD64BAF6D9...
And visit our web site at:
http://www.allaboardwashington.org/cms/index.php?/content/rail_projects
Post new comment
Progress Illinois' intention is to foster community and to maintain a comfortable and constructive blogging environment. While we encourage and appreciates different points of view, we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. All comments submitted will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.
We will not publish comments that we consider:
Please leave a name or nickname when commenting, as it makes it easier for others to respond directly.