Developing High Speed Rail Right - In Review

Over the past few weeks I have been discussing the best way for the US to develop a new High Speed Rail System. Future posts will move the imaginary ideal system into the midwest and southeast United States. Before moving on, though, we should take a look back to where we've gone:

1) Make the Northeast Corridor true High Speed Rail.
2) Build the Lackawanna Cut-off from Scranton to New York City
3) Transform the Maple Leaf Route from New York to Toronto via Albany, Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo, and Niagra Falls into a true high speed rail line.
4) Extend the high speed Northeast Corridor to Richmond and Newport News, Virginia
5) Connect Boston, MA to Albany, NY via Springfield, MA
6) Connect Springfield, MA and New Haven, CT via Hartford, CT
7) Upgrade and complete the Keystone Corridor between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, PA via Harrisburg, PA
8) Connect Chicago and Windsor, ON Canada with High Speed Rail enabling through service to Toronto, New York, and Massachusetts.

With these plans, the following states would have high speed rail service: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, the District of Columbia, Virginia, Delaware, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and the province of Ontario, Canada. It would also serve 8 of the top 25 metropolitan areas in the United States by population and the largest city in Canada. Not a bad start.

New Infrastructure Funding Method? Don't Bank on it.

Last week, when announcing his plans for a new round of infrastructure spending to stimulate the economy, Obama reached back to 2008 to pull out a plank from his campaign platform. When campaigning on the economy, president Obama made the creation of a national infrastructure bank to fund projects of national significance an priority.

Until last week, it was a priority that took a back seat to issues like health care reform and ending the war in Iraq. Congressmen James Oberstar (D- MN) and John Mica (R-FL) tried to raise the idea as part of a surface transportation authorization act to renew the years-obsolete federal transportation authorization. This idea was squelched by the White House and Senate leaders who wanted to focus on other matters. Now, with elections looming and the potential for GOP control of congress come January, any type of infrastructure bank or surface transporation reauthorization does not have a good prognosis.

I think the infrastructure bank is a great idea, though, because it depoliticizes transportation spending. Transportation spending often takes the form of pork-barrel spending. Congressmen and Senators push projects in their home districts to 'bring home the bacon' to their constituents. Money spent in their district means more jobs and more prosperity for their voters, and come election season they can boast of the Ben Chandler train station or the Mitch McConnell interchange as contributions their political influence made to bettering the lives of the people in their district.

What pork barrel infrastructure leads to is projects like freeways to rural areas and bridges to nowhere. Airstrips in sparsely populated eastern Kentucky and rail lines in Wyoming. It also leads to projects with little conherence and coordination, like an unconnected freeway or commuter rail that drops commuters off at an airport at the edge of town. A central infrastructure bank could plan projects so that the country could get the greatest return for its investment and conditions would be right for a national intermodal transportation system to emerge.

A national infrastructure bank could also take pressure off of states dependent on large highway and commuter rail infrastructure. Illinois, New York, Ohio, New Jersey, Arizona, Texas, California and Florida have sagging budgets because past conservative administrations have passed down a legacy of infrastructure neglect that carries a heavy price tag. Well targeted federal investment from a vigorous national infrastructure bank would repair infrastructure to the point that economic activity could safely proceed without breaking the state treasury.

There are a few reasonable objections to the establishment of an infrastructure bank. Such an institution would sever the act of appropriating tax revenue from the officials elected in the House of Representatives. Constitutionally, one of the reasons our founding fathers entrusted the House with the powers of the purse was that they were directly elected by popular vote. Appropriations bills originating in the House carry the power of popular will behind them.

As a result, the infrastrucuture built by the proposed bank would not necessarily be the infrastructure that the people want. Then again, since the commercial needs of the country don't often run parallel to the individual desires of its citizens, this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I can't imagine, though, that there won't be objections from congressmen who represent rural districts and their often conservative constituents. An infrastructure bank awarding grants to projects nationally would certainly distribute a much higher proportion of funds to urban areas where commuter networks, metros and freeways with high price tags are more of a necessity.

Despite its shortcomings, I think the national infrastructure bank would be a step in the right direction for the country to help rebuild and repair its crumbling pipes, roads, and rails. It would strip congress of the temptation to write pork legislation and target the projects that would serve the most people and do the most good. Hopefully the proposal gets some traction in congress.

To the Midwest

Since we have extended our imaginary High Speed Rail system across Pennsylvania to Pittsburgh and across New York State and across the international border to Toronto, Ontario it is time to connect the US's third largest city, Chicago, to our high speed rail network.

Since Pittsburgh is the western terminus of our rail lines in the United States it might seem logical to connect to Chicago through the steel city, but I think the high speed rail system - and American workers - would be better served by a line connecting Chicago to Windsor, Ontario via Gary and South Bend, Indiana and Kalamazoo, Ann Arbor and Detroit, Michigan.



The train would traverse the route covered by Amtrak's Wolverine service and passenger trains of past ages like the International and has the potential to foster greater economic cooperation and trade between the Canadian core and the American midwest and rustbelt regions.



Why take this route? For a variety of reasons. For one, eastern Michigan desperately needs economic development and extending high speed rail there could stimulate some modern manufacturing and financial business in the region. For another, Canadian rail operator VIARail will be building high speed rail from Windsor, Ontario through Toronto to Montreal, Quebec, linking the Chicago-Windsor line to the New York City - Toronto line, making throughn transit possible between New York and Chicago and opening up the midwest region to the east-coast and Canadian rail traveling culture

A thought for Pennsylvania

The Northeast Corridor kisses the southeastern corner of Pennsylvania, and our previous plans have a new high speed rail line running from New York City to Scranton, PA and Binghamton, NY. We should next focus on connecting Philadelphia, the corridor's second biggest city, to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania's western Metropolis.

This would create a more than 340 mile east-west connector for the 6th most populous state paralleling the Pennsylvania Turnpike both in route and in economic significance.

The corridor is already half-way built with Amtrak's Keystone Connection, a 110mph electrified rail line from Philadelphia to Harrisburg. It would not take much work for this rail line to be upgraded to true high speed status. West of Harrisburg, the tracks go through the rugged Allegheny region of Pennsylvania. Substantial expensive upgrades would be needed here.

This would provide US High speed rail's first connector towards the midwest as Pittsburgh is within a short distance of both Ohio and Michigan, clearing the Appalachian barrier to our growing imaginary high speed rail system.

10 Great Projects to spend new stimulus on

Here are 10 Shovel Ready Projects Obama Can Use to Boost Jobs (that aren't already funded/in progress)

10) Florida East Coast Corridor

This would only take a few hundred million dollars to make operational for passenger rail, and would connect urban centers like Miami and Jacksonville to the Treasure Coast, the Space Coast, Daytona and Palm Beach. Most of the preliminary work has already been done and the State of Florida is seeking funds to make this project a reality.

9) The Pioneer Route

A study completed in 2009 suggests that re-establishing this old Amtrak route, defunct since 1997, is indeed feasible. Running from Denver to Seattle, it would connect underserved communities in Wyoming and western Oregon as well as the Boise, Idaho area.

8) The Lackawanna Cut-Off

As I already wrote, this is a perfectly engineered high speed rail line that only needs a few hundred million dollars worth of work to make operational again.

7) East Side Connector

This would be a new subway under the Hudson River to extend the Long Island Railroad to Penn Station, taking pressure off Grand Central Terminal and providing commuters from the east one-seat rides to midtown Manhattan.

6) The Sunset Route

Truncated to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina left a swath of devastation in it's wake, the Sunset Route could easily be restored between New Orleans and Jacksonville or Orlando. The stations are already built and Amtrak is interested in seeing service restored as it would close a major east-west gap in their service.

5) The Northern Flyer

An extension of the Hearland Flyer, a train from Fort Worth, TX to Oklahoma City, OK that would bring the train to Newton, Kansas or Kansas City, MO to connect with other services east and west.

4) Unifying the Boston Transit System

Boston is the only city I know of that has two different commuter rail systems, one from the north and one to the south. As of right now there is no direct connection between the two systems. In fact, the terminus for high speed rail in New England is Boston and until such a connection is built, no lines northward and procede through the Boston metro area. It would also allow Amtrak to offer a 1-seat ride from Washington, DC to Portland, Maine.

3) Iowa Passenger Trains

This would be two trains, one from Chicago to Dubuque, Iowa through Rockford, Illinois and one to Des Moines through the Quad Cities area. Iowa and Illinois have been on board with these trains for a couple of years now, they are just waiting for Amtrak and the government to push the button.

2) Light Rail

Many metropolitan areas have ambitious plans for constructing or expanding their light rail systems but lack the local and state funds to make it happen. Houston, Dallas, Seattle, St. Louis, Kansas City, the Tampa Bay area, northern New Jersey, Minneapolis, Denver and Detroit would all benefit for more federal funds for light rail.

1) Baltimore Tunnel Project, The Hudson River Tunnels, the Hells Gate and the Portal Bridge

The biggest bottlenecks on the high-speed Northeast Corridor should be opened up to reduce delays and allow trains to run closer to their optimal speeds. These long-planned projects would cost billions and there is little will in statehouses to spend that kind of money in the middle of a recession. Obama's stimulus could help make the Acela Express a truly high-speed rail line.

Building Another Link

Now that we've branched the Northeast Corridor off into lines serving Scranton, Toronto, Norfolk, and Albany, it is time to consider building another link in our growing imaginary high speed rail network.

As ridership increases it is important to form alternate routes between large urban areas to relieve congestion and to serve more communities. Studies have shown that many people are hesitant to change forms of transportation or even between different carriers that share the same form; this is the reason that most people where I live (Lexington, KY) won't drive 60 miles to the nearest Amtrak station (Maysville, KY) to take the train.


So the next line upgraded to true high speed rail should run between New Haven, CT to Springfield, MA. This line would connect the current Northeast Corridor as it bends to the east from New York City to the Albany-Springfield-Boston connection.


As it stands today the state of Connecticut is already moving forward with plans to upgrade the line to make it accessible to commuter trains with an eye towards providing high-speed rail service in the future.


The cost of upgrading and electrifying the 65-mile line is certainly within reason as most of the route is double tracked and is currently in use as part of an Amtrak route.

Connecting Boston

This post is a continuation of a series of thought experiments that follow a planned, coordinated expansion of high speed rail across the United States in a rational way serving the communities that need it most and the areas most ready to use the technology.

Now that we have extended high speed rail lines connecting with the existing Northeast Corridor in New York and Washington, we should consider the northern terminus of the Acela Express route, Boston.

Boston is the third largest city served by the Northeast Corridor after New York and Philadelphia. It boasts a well-developed and comprehensive public transportation system that includes light rail, rapid transit, and commuter rail. Thus Boston's culture is very amenable to the use of trains. There are many improvements to HSR in and connecting to Boston that should be seriously considered.

A priority should be connecting Boston to Springfield, Massachusetts and Albany, New York with high speed rail. This route is nothing new. In 1901 the Central New England Railroad ran passenger service through here, and Amtrak currently offers one train each direction a day along the route as part of its Lakeshore Limited service from Chicago.

Springfield is a growing metropolitan area with a commuter and tourist culture that looks to the areas south and east. It's population would be well served by high speed rail bringing them closer to destinations along Cape Cod and Downeast Maine.

By connecting Boston to Albany via high speed rail, we would also connect it to the already discussed service through Albany to Buffalo and Toronto. Direct Boston to Toronto service would include cities like Rochester and Syracuse, giving another economic boost to the hungry communities in upstate New York.

Now our growing high speed rail system finally begins to take on a different shape - instead ofb just lines branching out, it is becoming a webbed network of interconnected cities. The next line we build should be another link in the web, rather than a new branch.

Interestingly enough, Amtrak is already considering improving and expanding the Northeast Corridor, but their plans are somewhat conservative and underwhelming when considered against the infrastructural and economic needs of the population they serve.

Looking South

Now that we've made New York a hub for high-speed rail from the northwest and the west by linking it to both Toronto, Ontario and Scranton, Pennsylvania, we should look to another direction for future expansion of HSR. Remember that this is how the billions of dollars we are going to be investing in this technology would ideally be spent, not how it actually will be spent.

Washington, DC is currently the southern terminus of the Northeast Corridor, the United States' only HSR line. Expanding the Northeast Corridor from here is difficult because the mountains make the regions west of Washington less dense and not ideal for HSR travel.

Any extension to the south would have to go through Richmond, Virginia, a city around 100 miles south of Washington. Virginia has already expressed interest in expanding the northest corridor to Richmond. From Richmond there are several good options open to expanding High Speed Rail, but the next closest metropolitan area is the Norfolk/Newport News/Hampton Roads area. The existing Amtrak route, owned by CSX Transporation, could be upgraded and expanded into Norfolk proper to serve the port and naval base there.

So after turning New York into a high speed rail hub, our high speed rail system should be expanded to serve northern and eastern Virginia, one of the fastest growing regions in the country and an area where public transportation that could serve HSR has recieved increasing attention.

Looking North

For the next extension of the Northeast Corridor, the government should keep New York City as its first priority. Others along the Acela Express route might argue that they should not be neglected - certainly, cities such as Philadelphia, Washington, Boston, New Haven, and Newark are worthy of becoming rail hubs with their own high speed branch lines.

New York is the largest city on the Northeast Corridor and the central city on the busiest rail line in the United States. Therefore, I propose that the next expansion of high speed rail after the Lackawanna Cut-off be the Maple Leaf route through Albany, Syracuse, Buffalo, and Niagra Falls to Toronto.

Why pick this route?

To revitalize the Erie Canal region of New York and the northern tier of the rust belt. To link the US and Canada through high speed rail.

New York already has improvements to this route as part of its rail plan. The federal government should step in and prioritize it as a new high speed rail line.

It would require that American and Canadian officials create an international HSR system with customs and immigration services that operate like streamlined airports. Since the system would only bridge two countries, the entire process could be expedited to happen efficiently and safely at every stop before and after boarding. Thus while detrained passengers stroll through customs, the train speeds away to it's next stop. This would be a model for future high speed service across the border to Windsor, Montreal and Vancouver.

It would also establish Toronto, Buffalo, and Albany as new high speed rail hubs. Future expansions of HSR would certainy link to and through these cities.

The First High Speed Rail Line in the World

The Lackawanna Cut-Off was the world's first high-speed rail line. Built at a gentle grade (or slope) with no road crossings and no rail intersections, the line connects the steel town of Scranton, Pennsylvania with the ports in New York and eastern New Jersey. The Delaware, Lackawanna, and Western wanted a safe and fast way to run freight through the rugged terrain of the Pocono and Kitatinny mountains.

The line was completed in 1911.

In the 1980's the railroads abandoned the line as truck and air transportation became the preferred method of moving freight through the region and as the steel and cement industry in eastern Pennsylvania evaporated, but the line remains physically intact today.

Now, in a new millennium, the idea of efficient, fast and safe rail travel has been reborn in the United States. The federal government has set an ambitious plan to connect superregions like the Texas Triangle and the Pacific Northwest together using trains that run over 110 miles per hour.

One hundred years ago the DL&W was already doing that over the Lackawanna Cut-Off.

So far, $10.5 billion has been dedicated to establishing high speed rail in the United States.

For a mere $551 million the Lackawanna Cut-Off could be restored, connected to the existing high-speed Northeast Corridor, and an underprivileged region of eastern Pennsylvania could be New York City's new exurb.

The passenger rail line would serve Sussex County, New Jersey, the Delaware Water Gap, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania and the Pocono region between New York and Scranton. The Scranton-Wilkes Barre area could see an economic resurgence with the growth of a reverse-commute into the metropolitan area.

New Jersey Transit, which operates trains approaching New York from the west, already has a proposal to make it a reality. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and other New York politicians have expressed their desire to restore the line and extend it to Binghamton, NY to serve New York state's oft-neglected southern tier.

Why not start the US's high speed rail revolution where it started?

We should restore the Lackawanna Cut-Off.

Wisconsin Republicans: Other Wisconsin Republicans should back High Speed Rail

Much has been made of Scott Walker's rabidly anti-rail gubernatorial campaign in Wisconsin.

Now other Wisconsin Republicans are trying to talk sense into him and are extolling the potential benefits of a high speed rail line from Milwaukee to Madison.

Gas prices to return to $4 a gallon?

Yes, you read that right, the price of a gallon of regular gas may once more reach over $4, not due to lack of supply but the combination of fervent speculation and mushrooming demand.

It is true that gas prices are showing a steady, measurable march upward. While the trend suggests that $4/gallon gas is certainly possible, prices between $3 and $3.50 are more likely.

That is still pretty expensive.

Maybe you should schedule your vacation by train this summer?

Amtrak on pace for another record year

It seems that the Obama Administration's investment in passenger rail is paying off as Amtrak reports it is on pace to a record-setting year for ridership. Even more surprising is that the increase in ridership is being seen both on corridor trains and long distance services.

Americans are learning that Amtrak is a fun, safe, clean and convenient alternative to the hassle of the airports and the drudgery of highway driving.

How high speed rail should be built: Part 1

When it comes to high speed rail funding, the Obama administration may be looking for progress in all the wrong places - but it is still possible for them to get on the right track.

It seems that the first grants for high speed rail are largely going to places where the use of intercity passenger rail and public transportation has not caught on. The Obama administration likely sees this as a way to educate new communities about the benefits of public transportation and to encourage them to build their own systems and support the use of their taxes to build out infrastructure.

However, if the Obama administration is serious about building a usable - and well used - national high speed rail system, there is only one place to start: the northeast corridor.

The northeast corridor is home to the most densly populated and the most transit oriented cities in the country and the Acela Express, the closest thing to a high speed rail line in the United States passenger rail system operated by Amtrak.

The Acela service connects Washington, DC, New York City and Boston via a 457 mile corridor that it traverses in around 7 hours. The train is capable of reaching speeds of over 150 mph but due to track conditions and the regulations of agencies which own portions of the route, the trains often run at less than half their maximum speed.

If 220 mph service was insituted along the corridor, travel times between the cities could be halves. Since its inception, the current Acela service has captured 40% of the travel market along the northeast corridor. 220 mph trains could lead to the demise of wasteful and inefficient shuttle flights between northeastern cities and allow for greater connectivity between businesses in the region. A person could live in a suburb of Boston and commute to Philadelphia to work without having to set foot in an automobile or an airport.

Amtrak has already studied the possibility of upgrading the operating speed of the Acela service - they have already invested in adding WiFi to the trainsets. Replacing or upgrading the Acela trainsets to increase their operating speed is also in discussion. Members of the Republican opposition in Congress have signalled some support for increasing the speeds while criticizing the funding decisions made by the Obama administration.

Furthermore, the cities along the northeast corridor - Boston, Providence, New London, New Haven, New York, Newark, Trenton, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore and Washington - all have well developed transit networks to take people to and from rail terminals. The populations of these cities are well acclimated to using rail and public transit. 9.8 million riders use the Amtrak trains along the corridors annually.

Finally, if the Obama administration had made the wisest decision to start high speed rail development in the northeast, the next hubs of high speed rail would be established in Boston (pop 4.5 million), New York (pop 8.3 million), Philadelphia (pop 5.8 million) and Washington (pop 5.3 million).

Next time we'll explore what the next logical step after upgrading the northeast corridor would be - lines spoking out from those hubs.

High Speed Rail Recover Funding: An Overview

In January the Obama administration committed $8 billion in recovery act funds to the development of a high speed rail system in the United States. It marks the first such investment since the Acela service was initiated on the Washington, DC to Boston corridor in December of 2000.

Rather than focus the money on a single line, the administration has decided to distribute the money among a number of projects as 'seed money' to initiate higher speed passenger rail service. Whereas in most developed countries futuristic trains carry patients over international boundaries at over 200 mph, in the United States the aim for many of these lines is to incrementally increase speeds to 110 mph.

The largest investment goes to California, which seeks to establish a comprehensive system between Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Sacramento, and Anaheim that stands apart in that it would actually reach speeds of 220 mph. The cost of such a system is estimated at over $30 billion - the Obama administration's modest investment of $2.3 billion would be only the beginning.

The Administration gave $1.25 billion to Florida to initate service between Tampa and Orlando. This project was seen as the most shovel ready - the state had reserved the median of I-4 as a high speed rail right-of-way for years. Florida had estimated a cost of $2.6 billion to build the line. The state plans future extensions to Miami and Jacksonville.

The third largest winner of economic stimulus funds for high speed rail is the corridor between St. Louis and Chicago, where the government hopes to increase top speeds to 110 mph and add additional trips between the cities. This line is part of the Chicago-hub midwest high speed rail plan that involves 110 mph corridors from Chicago to Detroit and Minneapolis as well as St. Louis. Eventually these three trunk lines would be increased to 220 mph service and new 110 mph lines would run to Omaha, Cleveland and Louisville.

The line between Minneapolis and Chicago got a major boost when $822 million in funding was granted to implement 110 mph service between Madison and Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The line between Chicago and Detroit will recieve $244 in improvements that include relieving congestion on the southeast side of Chicago that has plagued railroads for a century.

A new 79 mph service between Cincinnati and Cleveland will fill in a major gap in Amtrak's passenger rail network and put service on one of the most populated corridors in the country. The government dedicated $400 million to get this service up and running.

In the Pacific northwest almost $600 million has been dedicated to lay extra siding tracks and straighten the line between Portland, OR and Seattle, WA. The states hope additional round trip service along the corridor will be possible, as well as additional trains to Vancounver, BC.

The Southeast High Speed Rail corridor recieved $520 million to increase service speed and frequency between Raleigh and Charlotte and to relieve congestion between Washington and Richmond.

The remaining $512 million was distributed between projects in the mid-Atlantic, New England, Texas, and Iowa.

One thing jumps out at me from all these numbers - overwhelmingly these funds went to areas where a tradition of public transportation use does not exist. Though significant state investments in rail have been made in Illinois, North Carolina, California and Washington state, these funds are overwhelmingly going to places like Wisconsin, Florida, Missouri and Ohio where passenger rail use is an unproven x-factor at best.

The gamble the administration is making is that increased availability and speed will lure more users to these systems, and by providing seed money to geographically diverse regions they might instigate political and social interest in building out these systems.

I think this money would have been better spent elsewhere - I agree with the decision to spend it on rail, but not necessarily on these lines. In future posts I hope to discuss where this money would have been better spent.

The Steel Backbone

The Steel Backbone is a new blog dedicated to following American infrastructural development in the 21st century. Welcome!