7 Reasons you should support American High-speed Rail
High-speed rail (HSR), a 20th century marvel used around the world, is finally getting past planning stages in several states, but it isn’t hard to find someone griping about it. Our lawmakers and authors all too often call into question high-speed rail’s impact on property rights, its over-all cost and potential burden on taxpayers, and its viability as a mode of transportation. With the general media’s negative representation of high-speed rail, it is easy to see why people have such an abysmal outlook on it as a solution for our mobility needs and why there is opposition to new projects in California, Florida, Texas, and the east coast.
It is clear that there are some locations where high-speed rail (HSR) would be excessive or unrealistic, but there is a definite need and demand for these systems in key corridors across the US. I will list here just some of the many reasons that we need to prioritize rail travel in general and specifically HSR. My purpose here is to be the voice of reason in regards to this highly beneficial and widely-used technology so that more people will support an effort to have a connected America— for ourselves and for our children and grandchildren.
1. Most industrialized countries with the highest GDPs already have HSR
The closest thing the US has to HSR is Amtrak’s Acela express, which most of the world would not consider as high-speed considering it only tops 150 mph for a relatively small portion of track. Other countries’ rail systems have trains that frequently exceed 200 mph. I won’t get into the long and painful history of why the US does not already have a robust HSR system here (I’ll give you a hint, it’s lobbyists), but it is clear that we are lagging decades behind other countries. The stagnant modes of travel in the US are frankly an embarrassment, and it prevents us from being as competitive in the global market as we could be.
And logically, it would follow that if every other major industrialized country has high-speed rail, there must be at least some merit to it, right?
2. Rail is comparatively energy efficient
Rail is one of the most efficient ways to move large numbers of people from one population center to another. Just think the next time you’re on an interstate how many cars there are in your field of vision and how many have only a driver. How incredibly wasteful is that? One train can serve hundreds of people. The combined energy it takes to hurtle those hundreds of cars down the road is monstrous compared to what it takes to power a single train, being electric or diesel-powered.
3. HSR has zero greenhouse gas emissions
Speaking of energy, HSR runs on electricity, so it does not emit any greenhouse gases. If people choose HSR over taking a car, assuming that the power plants are run on renewable sources, there would be a net reduction of emissions. Of course we need to move our electricity power to clean energy, but HSR would have a direct positive affect by eliminating automotive emissions. And it at least lays down the foundation for an emissions-neutral transportation system.
4. Many HSR systems are quiet
A major complaint among our rural Texas folks opposed to the Dallas to Houston HSR project is that the trains are going to be barreling through at all times, day and night, causing an incredible disturbance and, as a result, lowering adjacent property values. For what it’s worth, the Dallas Houston project led by Texas Central Partners plans on having several trains an hour during peak ours, only one train an hour during off times, and no trains late at night. While I cannot say that there won’t be at least some noise involved, I can say that comparatively HSR systems are quieter and less intrusive than, say, a highway. The Japanese Shinkasen train technology being considered for the project is well known for being a quiet system. This system needs to be compared to the alternative: an interstate, highway or highway expansion in which cars and eighteen-wheelers are zooming down several lanes at all hours, not to mention the honking and police sirens when things go wrong.
5. Rail recovers more of its operating costs
It’s no secret that most passenger rail and HSR systems do not make a profit (there are some heavily used systems that do, but most don’t). I fully support any private-sector HSR venture (Texas Central Partners, All Aboard Florida), but looking at similar systems overseas, it seems to be more common that HSR is supported by government in some form. Many opponents to HSR use this as an argument not to pursue it — it’ll be another extension of government and a burden on taxpayers. Well, here’s the thing. Roads and airlines (including airports) don’t make a profit either.
But something I desperately want people to understand is that government-subsidized HSR is not a bad thing! Historically, one of the things government is good at is infrastructure. We have a choice as citizens to prioritize any form of government-subsidized travel, whether it be roads, airports, or rail. If rail recovers more of its operating costs, isn’t that a better deal?
6. Rail hubs generate enormous economic returns
If you want your city to see economic progress, build a rail terminal. Property values soar around adequate rail stations as businesses and restaurants gather to establish themselves where passengers disembark. In many places, rail stations act as social centers or malls where people can shop, eat, and gather while waiting for the next train or meeting your friends.
In fact many HSR companies are so sure that stations will create value that they buy the property surrounding stations so that they can watch the value rise and sell it off for a decent profit to recover the up-front capital costs involved with the original infrastructure — a method known as value capture.
7. HSR takes automobiles off the road
This last point is certainly the most important. The main competition that rail and HSR faces is automobile travel. And while we can all agree that automobiles provide many benefits and conveniences for us and are a needed mode of travel in the 21st century, they have also caused significant damage to our communities and society as a whole.
The more we build up our highway and interstate system, the more we contribute to automobile reliance and suburban sprawl. In huge parts of our country, the only way that people can get around is by car. The saddest part is that most people in these regions don’t know that it doesn’t have to be this way! Increasing car dependency puts a huge financial burden on families and disproportionately affects the middle class. If we could build up our cities instead of out, we could reduce this car dependency and strive for healthy lifestyles for our communities, including relying on bikes, public transit, and rail for inter-city travel. It has become clear time and again that building more roads does not solve problems with traffic or congestion — it only routes people to new roads that eventually become congested and become another piece of infrastructure that requires maintenance and repairs.
Let me also remind you that relying less on cars ultimately will save lives. Rail travel is extremely safe. Although Amtrak derailments, such as the tragic Philadelphia crash, make huge press stories, train deaths account for a negligible amount compared to the number of people who die at the wheel every day. The Shinkasen trains in Japan have a zero fatality record in more than 50 years of operation. While automobile accidents result in tragic death, paralyzing people for life, irreparable burns, or lasting guilt from accidentally killing someone, let’s also look at the over-all economic cost.
Imagine an automobile accident on the interstate: the police are called to the scene, paramedics rush in, perhaps a firetruck needs to be there, victims are transported to the emergency room, and towing services are called to remove the vehicles from the road. The victims will likely spend some time in the hospital depending on the severity of their injuries, but hopefully return home. In addition to the lost time that affected everyone stuck in traffic congestion on that road, think of all the public money that was spent by that ordeal! Police, firemen, paramedics, doctors, nurses — all of those services receive government subsidies. Many argue that operating a HSR is expensive and a burden on taxpayers, but they are clearly not thinking of the public financial burden of automobile accidents.
So the next time you see one of those media articles talking about HSR as a “boondoggle,” or a “pipe-dream,” or “another government debacle,” please keep these 7 points in mind. The next time you find yourself stuck in traffic on the last couple miles into a big city, remember that you could be riding a train and waving to all those sorry cars on the road. And especially remember this. The next time you go to the ballot, the politicians you vote for are the people who have the power to make these dreams come to life or utterly destroy them. What we want our transportation system to be like is in the realm of our governments, whether we like it or not, and it will be paid for by our tax dollars. We have the choice and the power to decide what kind of transportation we want for the 21st century.
