Rail in the US

There has been a lot of talk about high-speed rail lines in states like Ohio, Wisconsin and California. With the political changes bringing new governors and congressmen into office, it’s difficult to think that much will change.
The Economist mentions the political divide:

”Yet high-speed rail has become an ideological issue, supported by Democrats and opposed by Republicans with little reference to the specifics of any given project. The left views it as a near-perfect form of stimulus: creating “unoutsourceable” jobs; reducing congestion; making life easier for business; trimming carbon emissions and laying the foundations for a bigger and thus even more beneficial train network to come. Republicans, meanwhile, consider high-speed rail the physical embodiment of runaway spending, imposed from Washington by an out-of-touch elite despite its whiff of European socialism.

The project in California is also contentious. Although the rail project would create a lot of jobs and link major cities, citizens are concerned about the high speeds and potential damage to farmland. California’s budget is already an issue: the project could cost upwards of $40 billion.

All of this debate while recent statistics lament the poor state of American infrastructure.

The fact is, America evolved and expanded based on oil and private automobile ownership. But we know that these are not sustainable in a world becoming more strapped for resources. I get frustrated when I think about how big business and its ties with politics are handicapping the US. We are a country of great minds and an exceptional (if not expensive and slightly flawed) education system. Why can’t we be the forerunners in moving from fossil fuels and waste to renewable energy and efficient use?

A separate article from The Economist discusses the potential for trains powered by hybrid technology.

Perhaps the reluctance to make changes also has to do with size. Since America is much larger than any European country, 200 miles could put you in another state. In Europe, it will probably take you into another country. In many instances it’s probably cheaper and quicker to fly when traveling within the US. But if there were a high speed train run efficiently enough and with enough demand to keep costs down, would flying always be a better option in the days of TSA pat downs?

Maybe a passenger rail infrastructure isn’t necessary because there isn’t a demand. Or is there no demand because no system exists? Perhaps governmental agencies could conduct surveys into the most used lines and make inquiries into potential new lines to meet the movement of people, then overhaul those. A line between New York and Chicago exists via Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, but what an amazing trip that would be if it weren’t over a day in length.

Our economy has changed as well. We aren’t the producers that we were following WWII when the United States was at its height. We aren’t competitive on international markets and businesses send far too many jobs overseas because of this. What can we do to create jobs in the United States? Well, we could start by taking the time and spending the money to improve our infrastructure. This is a long-term investment and it isn’t cheap. It’s hard for Americans to understand the concept of “long-term,” since our rabid consumerism is based on having things now rather than later. The sky is the limit to understanding and developing new technology. The United States continues to lag behind because of old ideas and the power of big business. What people don’t understand is the amount of money and jobs that can be gained with investment in these new technologies, not to mention the uncountable benefits of a sustainable society.

Of course, this is not without its problems. Freight lines don’t want to share the track with passenger lines and freight rail is still used very heavily. Amtrak has authority over some local lines (like in suburban Philadelphia) which sometimes causes problems between SEPTA and Amtrak in negotiating usage. Improving and laying rail is expensive, and high speed rail requires high quality track. The other question is one of mentality: will people use these new lines? For those of us who have lived abroad, not having to own and drive a car is wonderful. Even in Albania I can get where I’m going provided I leave at the right time. I wish I could travel across the US with such little effort but our public transportation structure makes that difficult. We have chosen to develop based on the individual and not the collective (surprise), and our public transportation is evident of this fundamental aspect of the American mentality.

For those who say the US is simply too large to connect by rail, one look at the projects and lines in China is evidence to the contrary. China already has 4,000KM of track in operation and over 6,000KM of high-speed rail under construction (with another 3,000KM planned). The United States has 362KM in operation and 1,200KM planned, making rail another area where the US lags behind. It’s time to make the hard decisions and the expensive investments now to improve the future.