WASHINGTON (AP) — After a half-century as more curiosity than convenience, passenger trains are returning to prominence in some parts of the nation. The high cost of fuel, along with traffic and airport congestion, is drawing travelers back to trains for commuting and for travel between cities as much as 500 miles apart.
Californians are considering selling billions of dollars worth of bonds to start on an 800-mile system of bullet trains that could travel at 200 miles per hour, linking San Francisco and San Diego and the cities in between. In the Midwest, transportation officials are pushing a plan to connect cities in nine states in a hub-and-spoke system centered in Chicago.
The public is way ahead of policymakers in recognizing trains as an attractive alternative to cars and planes, said Representative James L. Oberstar, a Minnesota Democrat who is chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Amtrak, which struggled for years to attract riders, drew a record 28.7 million in the year ended Sept. 30. That is 11 percent more than the year before and the sixth straight year that ridership has increased. Ticket revenue hit a record $1.7 billion, a $200 million increase from a year earlier.
Rail travel is gaining greater favor in Congress, which provides subsidies to keep Amtrak rolling. Lawmakers are trying to find ways to deal with high energy prices, congested and aging infrastructure, and an air traffic control system that relies largely on World War II-era technology. Congress recently passed legislation setting a goal of providing Amtrak $13 billion over five years, a major vote of confidence. The measure also encourages the development of high-speed rail corridors and contains $2 billion in grants to states to enhance or introduce service between cities. The money still must be appropriated. President Bush, an Amtrak critic who has opposed anything more than minimal money for the rail service over the past eight years, signed the bill Oct. 16.
Unlike Europeans, whose cities are connected by passenger rail networks, relatively few Americans travel by rail except in the popular corridor from Washington to Boston, in parts of California and routes extending from Chicago. Outside the Northeast, ticket fares usually do not cover direct operating costs.
Still, some states are pushing for more and better passenger train service. In California, voters will decide Tuesday whether to start the most ambitious rail project undertaken by any state. The ballot measure would authorize nearly $10 billion in bonds to pay for planning and construction.
Proponents say a high-speed rail system could help reduce congestion at California airports, lessen dependence on foreign oil and decrease greenhouse gases. Critics say that the state could be forced to raise taxes to pay off the bonds and that the money would be better invested in urban transit systems and highway construction.
– from nytimes
Californians voted in favor of an 800 mile high speed train system that will stop in every major city from Sacramento to San Diego. According to the High Speed Rail Authority, California is the 12th largest source of greenhouse gas emission on earth, 41% of which come from transportation. Traveling at 220 miles per hour, the trains will reduce greenhouse gases by up to 12.7 billion pounds annually, the equivalent of removing 1 million cars from the road each year. Set to begin construction as early as 2011, California’s high speed rail will create 450,000 new jobs and reduce dependence on foreign oil by 12 million barrels a year.
Californians waste countless hours and tanks of gas sitting on congested freeways and idling at stop lights. If population trends continue, by 2030 the state could have up to 100 million people, more than doubling its current number of about 40 million. California’s new FLY trains will use on average 1/3 the amount of energy required for air travel and 1/5 that of car travel.
As with any project as ambitious as 800 miles of high speed rail, there’s a strong opposition. Opponents to the proposition claim that energy-saving predictions are inflated and taxpayer costs underestimated. If California’s train project reaches even half of its proposed goals of reducing greenhouse gases, dependence on foreign oil, and freeway congestion its worth the expense. The United States is the among world’s largest oil consumers and contributors to greenhouse gases. Its high time we take some cues from European and Asian countries and develop efficient alternatives to driving and flying.
– from inhabitat
If the tax money is spent on roads and airports, what about the fuel cost and congestion. Public transport systems are always best.
Its strange countries like india is not pushing this. We are making the same mistakes that north did last decades. Its sad.