Joint effort on track to take shinkansen system to U.S.

The Japan Times ^ | Tuesday, Feb. 23, 2010 | ERIC JOHNSTON

[Willie Green]

When U.S. President Barack Obama took office, one thing he pitched was a "Green New Deal" that would reduce fossil fuel use, and high-speed passenger trains like those in Japan and Europe were part of his sweeping plan.

If there is one thing virtually all Americans whose only form of transport at home has been automobiles appreciate when they come to Japan, it's the bullet trains — a marvel worthy of emulation in the United States.

The U.S. East and West Coasts, the Midwest and Florida have all expressed interest in introducing, or in the case of the East, upgrading, high-speed passenger rail service.

Last month, U.S. and Japanese officials discussed introducing bullet trains in America, and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood hopes to visit Japan in a couple of months to take a ride on a shinkansen.

What is being done to introduce shinkansen systems in the U.S.?

Two companies have been formed to introduce current and future bullet-train technology to the U.S. market. The first, U.S.-Japan High Speed Rail, was set up to sell the N700-I trains currently in use in Japan.

The second, U.S.-Japan MAGLEV, is looking to introduce maglev trains like those now being tested in Japan, where they are not expected to go into operation for at least another 15 years.

Both are based in Washington and funded by the U.S. venture capital firm New Magellan Ventures. They are led by prominent former high-ranking government officials who have been deeply involved with U.S.-Japanese defense relations, including Richard Lawless, the president and CEO of U.S.-Japan High Speed Rail.

Lawless served as deputy undersecretary of defense for Asia-Pacific security affairs.

Over the past several months, U.S. and Japanese officials involved in the project have been holding meetings with the aim of concluding a contract before the end of this year.

Where in America would bullet trains debut?

Michael Finnegan, executive vice president of U.S.-Japan MAGLEV, said the N700-I series may be introduced in various regions, including Florida, Los Angeles-Las Vegas, Texas and perhaps the Midwest on a Chicago-St. Louis route.

He said an initial line may link Tampa and Orlando, Fla., with an eventual link with Miami.

Many of the bureaucratic challenges to introducing bullet trains to this region have been, or are nearly, resolved, he said.

When would bullet trains actually start operating in the U.S.?

Assuming Japan wins the contract, Finnegan said it's within the realm of possibility that the first passengers could board a U.S. bullet train in three or four years. But this assumes a contract is signed by year's end and federal, state and local government, as well as private, funding is arranged.

The federal government has set aside $8 billion for this year to start the project, and Obama will pressure Congress for billions more in the coming years.

Florida, which appears the most likely place to see the N700-I debut, received $1.25 billion of this amount to actually build the line.

But Japan is not the only country hoping to sell high-speed rail technology to the United States.

European and Canadian companies are angling for contracts and are lobbying the U.S. government. In addition, questions linger over when funding will be available and how much the public sector can cough up.

What adaptations would bullet trains have to undergo to run in the U.S. and would they carry freight?

Aside from dealing with possible differences in track gauge, the U.S. side appears to prefer shorter bullet trains than the 14- to 16-car trains that run between Tokyo and Osaka.

U.S. bullet trains would probably require larger seats.

Both Finnegan and Kenji Hagihara, public relations manager at Central Japan Railway (JR Tokai), which has teamed up with the two American companies, say there are no plans to use bullet trains to haul freight. Freight cars in use in the U.S. have various designs, depending on the commodities they carry, and are not streamlined for the types of speeds reached by bullet trains. The standard U.S. gauge — the distance between rails — differs from that of the shinkansen system as well.

However, bullet-train coaches would be able to haul mail and other packaged items, such as Federal Express parcels, and this could interest shipping companies.

What are the chances of a U.S. debut of the next-generation maglev, which is still being tested and won't be introduced in Japan for many years?

The maglev's potential introduction to the U.S. is much further away than the three to four years in which N700-Is could enter service. JR Tokai's Hagihara said company officials are still explaining the maglev system to the U.S.

Even if the various technical challenges to introduce a maglev system are overcome, the amount of money required to build the civil engineering infrastructure would far exceed the $8 billion in stimulus money the U.S. Federal Railway Administration is allocating for high-speed rail this year.

Will it be hard to get enough Americans to park their coveted cars and travel by high-speed train so the rail systems can turn a profit?

U.S. and Japanese officials involved in bringing bullet trains to the U.S. are addressing that question in a number of ways.

Hagihara said his company has emphasized to U.S. officials that bullet trains are energy-efficient, environmentally friendly and will help reduce automobile traffic, which is a major problem for trucking companies that use the heavily congested roads. Also, construction of high-speed rail lines would mean many new jobs.

Finnegan emphasized that with the high cost of gasoline, and the hassles of getting on a plane due to increased security measures since 9/11, more people are open to the idea of taking the train.

He added that the airline industry may welcome high-speed rail lines, especially for routes of less than 800 km, because most airlines don't make money on short-haul flights. A shinkansen system would allow them to concentrate on longer, more profitable flights.

Have consumer safety problems with Toyota Motor Corp. vehicles and bilateral friction, including over the Futenma base relocation, created political concerns among American lawmakers about adopting Japanese technology instead of that of a rival?

Finnegan said most people in Washington realize the shinkansen system represents tried-and-true technology, bullet trains have never been involved in a crash, and introducing them could benefit bilateral cooperation in other ways, including green technologies, an area Obama has demonstrated a strong interest in promoting.

[TADSLOS]

Hey, at least your consistent, Willie. Wrong, but consistent. Beat that glorious progressive Utopian drum some more.

[upchuck]

As you’re loading up the wheels, please don’t forget the illegal aliens. They want to spin too.

[Willie Green]

A Shinkansen in the US? Without Japan's small size population density where rail travel is usually more cost effective, and without massive Big Govt subsidies, I doubt it would work.

You fail to factor in that Third World development (China in particular) and demand for oil will make gasoline less affordable and passenger rail more viable.

[muawiyah]

I really hope you don't view Bullet Trains as advanced technology.

Look, Japan is about the size of California and has only 127 million people versus our 310 million.

The Bullet Trains work there due to the density.

Airplanes and automobiles work in the US ~ again, due to the lack of high density.

Frankly I get the idea most of the big name advocates of highspeed rail are just the sort of people who would spend the nation bankrupt getting their limousines traffic free roads and free parking.

Ain't gonna' happen. We'd have to be up about 2 billion people or so ~ about India's density, to make this type of rail service meaningful.

[muawiyah]

The Autobahn system is modeled after the Pennsylvania Turnpike. It's here and has been for almost 80 years.

The wrecks on the Autobahn that runs near Kitzingen Germany used to keep us awake ~ one big whoomph after another on into the night. These were usually caused by the classic Mercedes vs. Volkswagen competitions.

What you are really talking about are technologically advanced automobiles that can travel 200 MPH without much driver attention or interaction.

That's probably doable within the next 20 years.

Still, higher speeds will require spreading out the traffic more and that's going to force a need for more pavement.

[DTogo]

You fail to factor in that Third World development (China in particular) and demand for oil will make gasoline less affordable and passenger rail more viable.

If we continue to hamstring domestic exploration, that might be the case.

[sergeantdave]

I’m in favor of a high speed train, with no brakes, that runs from Washington to the Marianas Trench. And for every 100 miles it runs, a wheel falls off. And cows on the tracks every 10 miles. And give the Indians limitless arrows and the schedule.

[muawiyah]

Chicago was charging 60 cents for the run from O'Hare to points along the Loop. The Washington Metro charged $3.35 each way, plus $3.50 to park your vehicle at the Springfield station (one of the long runs familiar to tourists) for a trip to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.

The Metro total fare is roughly 10X higher than the Chicago total fare for the same sort of service.

[justlurking]

Beat that glorious progressive Utopian drum some more.

LOL, just last weekend Willie was claiming that I'm the only one that's not convinced he's nothing more than a tax-and-spend liberal troll trying to masquerade as a conservative. His act is getting pretty lame.

Check out his response to me last week:

Streetcars in Dallas would be highly beneficial

Friday, February 19, 2010 14:35:23 · 55 of 57
Willie Green to justlurking

Willie, I tolerate a lot of your crap, but it stops here.

Whooptie-do...
If you think that's going to make me pee my pants, you're dead wrong. LOL!!!

You know very well that the original poster was pointing out that he resents having to pay for your favorite pet train projects via taxes at various levels: federal, state, and local.

Well tough garbanzo beans for him...
I'm a taxpayer too... and I resent having to pay for HIS pet projects with MY taxes.
So that whiney pinhead needs to learn how to compromise so we can get something done.

Even if he never buys a train ticket, he will be paying an incremental amount in taxes to provide the government subsidies that are required to operate nearly every passenger train in this country.

So what?
The government has been subsidizing our nation's transportation infrastructure from Day One (and even before). From the harbor facilities of our Colonial ports and the coastal lighthouses needed for navigation, to the system of inland canals and locks and dams that make our rivers navigable for commerce.... to the original development of the railroads... to the construction of the colonial "postal roads" the US Highway System and the Interstate Highway System, not to mention the subsidized development of the aerospace/airline industry and construction of most of our commercial airports and air-traffic control system... was ALL developed with direct government involvment.

So the bottom line is: it is actually YOU brain-damaged libertarian bottom feeders who seem to think that we can have transportation without government involvement who have no credibility.

Now go back to lurking.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies

---

There is lots more on the original thread. Read it for yourself and decide if Willie's really a Buchananite, or just another troll that has lasted longer than most.

[TADSLOS]

LOL! ME TOO! I’d pay to see that!

[TADSLOS]

Eminent domain is a legitimate government power when used for legitimate public purpose.

As defined by whom? You? LOL!

[Ronin]

Shinkansen trains work in Japan because of a lot of different factors including population density in metropolitan areas and massive government subsidies. They are not always profitable.

Any attempt to build a shinkansen system in America will become an automatic target for the lawsuit industry. I don’t see it happening.

[TADSLOS]

Willie’s been walking this dog for years, before I joined up actually. He’s one of FR’s favorite liberal punching clowns.

[Willie Green]

If we continue to hamstring domestic exploration, that might be the case.

The Bush Administration had the opportunity to advance domestic oil production and failed miserably due lack of effort. It is unrealistic to expect such increased domestic production when the Oil Industry finds it more profitable if the domestic supply is withheld from the market.

[1010RD]

Wait till they get a TSA in place for trains. Everyone will want to drive.

[1010RD]

Teleporters. Trains are so 19th century.

What greater waste can government come up with next?

[Wuli]

From Willie Green

"Sadly, the GOP is on the wrong side of the fence on this issue."

No actually, many in the GOP understand our transportation issues, as well as the differences between the U.S. and Japan better than many who believe mere hope and enough money make for worthwhile government managed projects.

And: "If there is one thing virtually all Americans whose only form of transport at home has been automobiles appreciate when they come to Japan, it's the bullet trains"

Why do you ascribe your own opinions, or even those of some, to everyone as in "virtually all Americans".

I have made many trips to Japan and attach no significant false admiration to the bullet train. Yes, it goes from point A to point B rapidly, in a very Japanese context. By that I am acknowledging the geographic, topographic, demographic and rail system features of Japan.

1st Japan is a narrow arc of islands about 1800 miles in length but only 250 miles at it's widest point. Over 70% of its land mass is mountainous, and the majority of that uninhabited while the population resides on about 10% of the land - and population density along a mass-transit route is the basic starting parameter to whether or not it can be self-sustaining.. The fact that Japan is so mountainous was one of the factors, if not the major factor, that drove the Japanese to develop so many rail lines - from the beginning of it's industrialization, and eventually the high speed lines - where could they possibly have built highways to carry as much cargo in as small of a footprint, across all the mountains? They couldn't have. As they say - "necessity is the mother of invention".

2nd -Is the Japanese high speed rail line - like the "bullet" train - a standalone transportation feature that exists, or could exist on its own? No. The majority of it's long distance customers are "fed" to connections to the high-speed lines by connecting train and bus routes - routes designed (and needed) as "feeder routes" for the long distance high-speed trains. Most of the short-distance or "metropolitan" customers of the high speed lines live in the high-density population centers of Japan. Regardless, the main form of transportation to Japan's northernmost Island (Hokkaido - pop 80+mil) remains inter-Island air transportation.

3rd Like any "too-big to fail" government project, the whole system went bankrupt as too much politics determined how many rail lines ought to be built and where they ought to be built - especially to feed the high-speed lines.. With debts of 28 trillion yen JNR was privatized in 1987 into four companies, who paid all of 9.2 trillion yen to acquire the network. U.S. taxpayers can expect much the same kind of financial history for any rail project the current administration is touting.

4th While I have always enjoyed my trips on Japan's high speed trains, like many of my Japanese friends I am sorry that my schedule is controlled by the train schedule, unlike a long-distance car trip, and like my many Japanese friends I miss the scope and scale of Interstate grade highways to take us everywhere we want to go once our train trip ends. I admire what the Japanese did, in their circumstances, just as my Japanese friends admire the freedom to head out to any destination we want in my car when they come to visit.

From pogo101

"Japan (where the “shinkansen” term and concept come from) has a population density of 873,000 people per square mile. (Obviously the hub cities of the shinkansen are much, much higher.)......The USA’s population density is almost exactly ONE TENTH that of Japan.

BINGO, pogo101 hits part of the issue.

From DonaldC

"I agree, a high speed ground based transportation system is needed in this country."

Where, why, and at what cost? And why should they be built with, and continuously supported with subsidies from taxpayers from all over the country, many of whom will never use them? Just to say we have them? Like the French cheered that they had the Concorde?

The government's involvement might simply mean the taxpayers will be propping up a "high speed Amtrak", and making as much financial sense as does Amtrak as it operates now.

If something is (a) needed, (b) essentially needed and (c) makes economic sense, then taxes are not needed to build it or keep it operating. The only assistance that such a venture may need from the government, if not only (c) is true but (a) and (b) are true as well, might be assistance in helping to obtain the "right of way" based on the "public use" concept. - but that should be the beginning and end of it. Without the support of (a), (b) and (c) all being true, then once enjoined to support the venture the taxpayers will never be free of it because it will never work in a self-sustaining (absent taxpayer supported subsidies) manner.

You can also bet that there is some private interest who stands to gain the most in the immediate sense, from these type of government ventures. So, can anyone ask, how many more people can the entertainment industry in Orlando get if it's out of state customers are not limited as much to Orlando's airport alone, if they can fly into Tampa, hotel there and "train" down to Orlando for the day.

That being the case, Disney and Universal et al should be told to build their own dam railroad and subsidize it in the prices of their Orlando-ventures admission tickets.

[pogo101]

You can also bet that there is some private interest who stands to gain the most in the immediate sense, from these type of government ventures.

[B-Chan]

There isn’t a single airline, shipping line, or motor freight carrier that is self-sustaining, either. Take away the airports, navigation systems, port and harbor facilities, road surface maintenance, and the armies of taxpayer-supported maintenance workers for all these and not one would make a thin dime of profit.

Rail pays its own way. Railroads build, own, and maintain their own infrastructure, and turn a profit as well.

[Vigilanteman]

The Japan Shinkansen doesn't just run between Shin Osaka and Tokyo, it runs between Fukuoka and Morioka on the main line, with feeder branches to Niigata, Nagano and Yamagata.

While I would suppose most of the ridership and profit occurs on the main run between the two population centers of Tokyo and Osaka, I've also rode on each of the named branch lines and there weren't a lot of empty seats.

There are also few geological barriers such as high mountains on the Boston to Washington route which would require tunneling and the like, so even accepting your contention about 2/3rds of the population density, I would contend the cost of construction would be less than 2/3rds the cost.

Further, once you leave Yokohama en route to Osaka, you are two-thirds of the way there before you reach cities with high population density such as Nagoya and Kyoto. If you take the route from Boston to Washington, you have cities of significant size most of the way.