Posted on 12/14/2009 3:59:45 AM PST by Willie Green
High speed rail is a glamorous idea -- it's fun to imagine a train streaking through the cornfields from Chicago to St. Louis in four hours. Less glamorous are some of the fixes that need to be made to Chicago's notoriously slow freight rail system. Talk about projects like "signalize interlocking" and "grade separation," and eyes glaze over.
But the promise of faster passenger rail is inextricably linked to the down-and-dirty business of freight. To make passenger and commuter trains move faster, you have to get the boxcars out of the way.
And to do that, there needs to be more work done on the Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency (CREATE) Program to improve freight, passenger and automobile traffic, according to U.S. Rep. Daniel Lipinski.
"You cannot have efficient passenger train service without the freight rail out of the way," Lipinski said. "They're all using the same track."
Rick Harnish, executive director of the Midwest High Speed Rail Association, agrees that finishing the CREATE projects is essential for higher speed passenger rail and for the freight industry. Demand for freight rail service is expected to double in the next 20 years, and Chicago is still the country's freight hub.
"It's kind of invisible and hard to describe, but [CREATE] is really critical to the future of almost anything that moves by train in the country," Harnish said.
Lipinski's father and congressional predecessor, William Lipinski, was a champion of the CREATE program, which got started in 2003. Since the project is regarded as Bill Lipinski's child, Dan Lipinski jokingly calls CREATE "my brother."
The 71 CREATE projects are intended to make freight traffic more efficient, through track and signal upgrades, and to keep freight, passenger rail and road traffic out of each other's way. One project under construction in Blue Island, for example, involves building a third line from Broadway and 131st Street to 115th Street, to allow easier flow-through for freight, says Blue Island Mayor Don Peloquin.
The $2.5 billion CREATE program got off to a slow start -- its private and government partners had hoped Congress would appropriate about $900 million in the 2005 transportation funding bill, but the law gave less than $100 million. Freight railroads kicked in another $116 million, and the City of Chicago has committed $30 million. As of now, six projects have been completed, and five are under way.
The money picture has gotten brighter over the last year, said Lipinski. The State of Illinois included $300 million for CREATE in its capital bill, along with $150 million for Amtrak expansion and $400 million for high speed rail. CREATE supporters hope for $300 million in federal stimulus money through a grant, as well as money from the next federal surface transportation bill.
The Obama administration has promised $8 billion for high speed rail projects around the country. Illinois hopes to get a piece of that, and Lipinski says he thinks Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood understands Chicago's freight rail issues and the importance of high speed passenger rail in the Midwest. High speed rail money can be used for CREATE.
Eight Midwest states have cooperated to promote a high speed network, with Chicago as its hub, that would link 12 metropolitan areas within 400 miles.
Lipinski points to 10 specific CREATE projects that need to get done to make way for high speed rail. They include the Englewood rail-over-rail flyover at 63rd Street, which would cut rail delays between Metra's Rock Island District, Amtrak, and proposed new freight operations. This also would help high speed rail corridors to the east.
Other key projects are grade separations of the BNSF freight line from Belmont Road in Downers Grove, Harlem Avenue in Berwyn and Maple Avenue in Brookfield.
"The future is very bright," Lipinski said, though he wants the Obama administration to move faster on the next transportation bill, which Lipinski says will create millions of jobs. U.S. Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) has a six-year bill ready to go, but the Obama administration has said it wants to delay writing a new bill for 18 months.
Caught a snippet of a show with Bill Gates & Warren Buffet being questioned by college students.
Warren Buffet getting involved in railroads - because they *cannot be sent to China*.
Watch for Buffet to invest in 300 mph. MagLev passenger trains & routes as the wave of the future. Replacing commercial air travel in high congestion areas.
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/buffett-bets-big-on-railroads-future/
America’s best-known investor, Warren E. Buffett, is making his biggest bet yet on the nation’s economic future by buying, of all things, a railroad.
After deftly capitalizing on the financial crisis with a series of bold deals, Mr. Buffett on Tuesday agreed to buy the 131-year-old Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation, Michael J. de la Merced and Andrew Ross Sorkin write in The New York Times.
Oh, well. I guess free markets are a thing of the past.
“Riding on the City of New Orleans”
barbra ann
Google maps lists the drive time as 4 hours 39 minutes.
In Wisconsin the politicians are dreaming of the same high speed rail. Problem is, their 150 mph trains will have to run around 75mph due to the small communities and rail crossings along all the routes.
You can’t have uncontrolled rail crossings with 150 mph trains and you need long straight corridors. And with Amtrak subsidized 50% or more on some “profitable” routes, the fare base doesn’t exist to cover these incrementally more expensive (build, operate, maintain) projects.
It works in Japan because the country is small. Ditto in Europe. But the US is vast.
The East Coast has Accela - how is that working out? Profitable?
I hope ‘high speed’ means more than just a 15% improvement over car travel.
The rails are mostly owned by the freight companies as are the right of ways.
A four hour trip is faster than an airplane when you could TSA rubber glove time.
IIRC Acela only reaches it’s peak speed somewhere in CT and/or RI. Most of the tracks or switches have not yet been upgraded to make full use of the trains.
I’ve used it a few times between BOS and WAS. It’s only a little bit faster than the regular train.
I don’t know about its particular finances but I believe it is losing money. I expect most non toll roads ‘lose money’ also.
Freight is the big dog. Passenger service is the tail, and a pretty small tail at that.
Buffet’s move was not, as far as I’m concerned, one of his better deals. A good deal for him, though, because he has some power plant interests which use coal and already owned a good fraction of BNSF, something like 20+/-%. So, his total price is a little less than the market price of the stock before the day he bought BN. There’s modest synergy there.
As far as I know, passenger service (over freight lines) in the US have *never* been profitable. Going back 100+ years. I welcome correction if anyone has it.
And when they abandoned passenger traffic they took out the extra rails so they went from three tracks to two or one.
Simple Boondoggle Detector: Acronyms that spell words, universally, indicate boondoggle. Especially acronyms that spell "positive" words like "CREATE" or "HOPE".
Aren't the rails mostly owned and maintained by the freight companies?
Correct.
Amtrak operates passenger service on 21,000 miles (34,000 km) of track primarily owned by freight railroads connecting 500 destinations in 46 states and three Canadian provinces.
Amtrak only owns about 730 miles of track of its own, primarily in the NE corridor.
Is Chicago to St Louis in 4 hours really considered 'high speed?'
No it is not.
Chicago to St Louis is about 300 miles, so a 4 hour trip is only averaging 75 mph or so.
Nevertheless, this would be an improvement for Amtrak service in many areas, and represents the least expensive alternative.
The definition of "high speed" rail varies widely, depending on the specific route under discussion.
For instance, if discussing upgrades to current existing tracks, "high speed" may mean hopes of achieving 90 mph or 125 mph "some day".
Better than what we have, but still not "modern" high-speed rail by Japanese or European standards.
That technology requires all new construction of the railbed and complete separation from freight traffic. Those systems can travel upwards of 190 mph, but are much more costly than simply upgrading existing rail.
And then there is Maglev, which is state-of-the-art, travels in excess of 300 mph, and is very, very expensive.
We won’t need high speed rail. After BO is done we will need travel permits (aka carbon credits) to do any significant travel. Only approved people will be allowed to take long trips.
Passenger traffic has never been financially successful. Whether here, in England, Germany, Japan, it has always been subsidised by the government or by the railroads freight operation.
Outside of the Eastern corridor high speed passenger rail IMHO is a money pit with little or no advantage to a traveler.
I’d say that it can (if you are going city center city center) be of great advantage to the traveler - it’s the taxpayer that is typically at a disadvantage. This disadvantage also applies to highways on poorly traveled routes.
About the only time that passenger service was profitable was in the expansion westward. And even then it was taking new settlers to distant places so more freight could be shipped more often. And most trains were mixed with passengers and freight.
Later the roads added more and more "head end" cars for Railway Express and the Post Office. The USPS car used to be the biggest revenue producing car on most trains. When mail contracts and package delivery were pulled from the roads, they couldn't sell enough tickets to make any consist profitable.
Most commuter trains are profitable only because they follow the same business model as Southwest Air: short hops, no frills, quick turn around.
Amen.
High speed rail is DOA. The cost vs usage would be worse than AmTrak IMHO. We are a nation of highway traffic and airlines Period.
Improve the ability of autos to drive in the 80 to 100+ regions and you will have gone a long way to improve travel IMHO. The vehicles are already available and capable.
The interstate system needs a high speed lane, and the education and experience that comes with the capability. Bad drivers are the only downside, and you are talking about saving billions over HSR.
Train transport (passenger) will never become profitable because they’ll never be more convenient than cars. Americans will never give up their cars. Either you drive to a station, park and get your car robbed and wait on a train only to get into another car to get to your destination or just drive and arrive faster. There is so little market for this inconvenience that it’ll never turn a profit.
Then there is the pesky requirement of actually having rails laid down.
Around here they have been pulled up in favor of ‘rail trails’ which are nice flat 6’ wide paths made of asphalt specifically designed (apparently) to provide dogs with a steady platform for answering nature’s call.
In the end it will remain faster to drive - not to mention the huge subsidy WI will have to give the train. I think I heard the actual cost will be - per passenger - something like $20K per passenger per ride. Of course, the taxpayers will pick up the difference between the $20K and the ticket price of $5-10.
Gotta love that Doyal - always thinking of ways to bankrupt the state.
That’s pretty much what I thought. Even the “glory” routes in the 20’s and 30’s, including the Pullman cars, AFAIK, didn’t have the frequency and steadiness of demand to be profitable and were mostly run as publicity and to keep the freight lines busy.
In New Jersey, ScAmtrak slows down the commuter lines. The freight trains run on different lines for the most part.
Excellent points, one and all! If you look back at the truly successful businesses of America they all had one thing in common, they let those who could, and would, pay more to get more. I have long thought anyone could make it in America by finding something people hate, really hate, to do and then doing it for them for a price. Everyone values something and wants more of that thing. For some it’s time, and if you can provide them with a service that frees up their time they have the disposable income to make it worth your while. Like the earlier post that cited the private auto tag agency that charged $15 to bypass the insult of having to deal with the public tag people.
Of course it’s nowhere nearly as simple as it sounds, but that’s what makes a successful business venture, the ability to find ways around obstacles. In my mind, the more reason NOT to do something work the more reasons to figure out a way to make it work!
OK, I drop you off in downtown Cleveland, then what? How many riders do you need to get within spitting distance of breakeven? How long will it take to get there from Cincinnati and for how much? Can't run these trains on the freight tracks so are we buying right of ways and installing new tracks? When I get to Cleveland I want to visit folks in Chagrin Falls what do I do, take a bus, subway, rent a car?
The numbers don't work outside of a few major cities.
I remember in the 1960s when commercial railroading abandoned passenger service because it was nonprofitable. Freight was another matter.
Oh, well. I guess free markets are a thing of the past.
If the freight line owns the track, it was never a "free market" to begin with.
They own a monopoly on the right-of-way and passenger service wasn't permitted to compete.
Trains of the 20's and 30's were heavyweight steel cars with six wheel trucks and made for a very smooth ride. A steam engine could throw them around without breaking a sweat.
However, running a steam train cost nearly 10 times what it cost to run a diesel and additional diesels had to be added to consists in order to run heavyweights.
Thus the stainless or aluminum streamliners were built by Budd to alleviate the cost of running extra diesels.
It made for colorful eye-candy trains with wonderful names like "Super Chief, The Champion, Nancy Hanks and Silver Meteor but the smooth ride was replaced by as much side-to-side motion as forward motion. Ergo, passenger comfort and convenience of having the family automobile at the destination, driven there on ever-improving roads, facilitated the passenger train's demise.
In the end it will remain faster to drive -
No it won't.
Our Interstates are also starting to crumble due to old age and lack of maintenance.
And the price of Oil keeps going up and up... never down.
We need the passenger rail to start sharing more of the burden.
The northeast corridor is profitable
Johnny Cash was an amazing talent, RIP!
Love the accompanying videos, too.
I’m with you on this one, Willie. If done right — no pork, no graft, a forward-looking plan — high-speed rail just might work.
For example, i can envision enough traffic from Minneapolis to Chicago (and vice versa) to make a true high-speed route viable. As to the destination mobility issue, it’s no different with rail than with air. You’ve still got to arrange ground transportation when you arrive.
It might take a few years’ subsidies, but I think it could work. What sense does it make to tie up 2 hours waiting and parking and TSA time at an aiport for a 2-hour flight? I’d prefer to spend no time waiting and 3 hours on a train.
And for anything beyond a few hours travel, a big “no thanks” to driving. I’d rather take a freakin’ bus!
How much of your own money is invested in rail passenger service?
What universe/dimension/reality are you referring to, because I have trouble imagining that in the current reality?
We have a great Interstate Highway infrastructure.. I always thought that was where we should start with a High Speed rail. A “T” structure placed in the median, with Monorail or Maglev running above. It takes care of most “On Grade” issues and connects large and small communities as well. Provisions can be made to run “Local” and “Express” as needed.
We need a trails to rails program now don’t we?
If done right — no pork, no graft, a forward-looking plan — high-speed rail just might work.
I confess, I have a very difficult time holding back the tears whenever I watch Jimmy Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.