Posted on 06/11/2010 7:43:40 AM PDT by Willie Green
America has a “waiting problem.”
Think about the time you spend waiting in traffic jams… at the doctor/dentist’s office… at restaurants… at the gas station.
And how about the six months of your life spent waiting at traffic lights? Or the five years you’ll spend just waiting in lines at retail stores, the post office, DMV, etc. (Early buyers of Apple’s products likely spend far more.)
And according to Robert Poole, Director of Transportation Policy at the Reason Foundation, the average air traveler now spends two to three hours waiting at the airport. Granted, much of that is due to more rigorous security screening – time that is generally well spent – but air travel delays and traffic jams are only going to get worse, as more people take to the skies and roads.
In short, we wait an average of 45 to 62 minutes every single day. And that’s less time spent with family and friends, or doing other more productive, enjoyable activities.
Other countries have already recognized the problem and have addressed it for years. But the United States has failed miserably. So how can we improve our “waiting efficiency?” There’s a solution…
A Great Idea… Until Henry Ford Drove it Off the Rails
It’s called high-speed passenger rail.
I’ll get to the high-speed part in a moment. First, a quick overview of the U.S. rail service today.
Much of America’s freight still travels by rail. In fact, more than two billion tons plowed across the country in 2007 (the latest data available). It’s the transport mainstay for coal, lumber and other heavy industrial products and machinery.
Passenger rail service in the United States dates all the way back to 1830 when the “Best Friend of Charleston” – the first steam-powered train – traveled six miles with 141 passengers on board.
Boston, Baltimore and other major cities quickly established major railroads, due to the lack of river access to U.S. inland areas. And the idea of being able to travel, regardless of weather conditions – and at high speeds, too – was a big hit with most Americans.
As a result, passenger rail service soared…
But then Henry Ford came along and changed the playing field. When he introduced the mass-produced automobile in the following decade, rail travel fell by 18%.
And today?
700 Miles and a Tank of Gas Later…
Fast-forward to 2010…
You’d think that in today’s high-tech age, we could combine speed with efficiency and wouldn’t spend so long waiting. But that’s not the case. And with transportation, it’s an increasingly expensive wait for most Americans.
Take the average car, for instance. Fully loaded with five passengers, it gets about 100 passenger-miles-per-gallon (PMPG).
And according to the Department of Energy, the average passenger jet only gets about 36 PMPG. Of course, the trade-off there is speed.
But how about that speed/low-cost equation? Especially for regional travel? Europe and Asia already manage it. And we can here, too.
The answer lies in the method that squeezes out 700 PMPG.
You got it… high-speed trains. You can string their “cars” together and carry far more passengers than the average commercial jetliner. And these trains blast along at speeds of nearly 250 MPH.
So which company is behind this rapid rail transportation?
This Company Feels the Need… the Need for Speed
Take a quick jaunt around the globe and you’ll see this company’s trains in use all over the place…
The company we’re talking about is Siemens AG (NYSE: SI) – the largest manufacturer of high-speed trains in the world.
Its Valero high-speed train technology is the world’s most successful. Siemens currently has 160 trains in operation and hundreds more on order.
And for speed-hungry America, it’s the perfect fit…
“All Aboard!”
Siemens is pushing hard to get its Valero high-speed train technology widely adopted across the U.S. rail network. Interest is high, too. There are several high-speed rail projects in the works…
Critics argue that few people will ride the high-speed rails. But frankly, that’s a myopic view. They’re not counting on expensive gasoline, because cheap gas is a thing of the past.
As if further proof were needed, U.S. politicians simply need to look around the world to see what other countries are investing in transportation and energy infrastructure.
They need to roll up their sleeves and get the same things going here.
And while you wait, you might want to hop onboard the Siemens train and pick up a few shares.
Good investing,
David Fessler
The efficiency of rail is dependent on the huge mass of the train to give it great momentum that requires only the energy to overcome rail friction to keep going. That is what gives you 700 mpg. That number is reduced with each stop. It is the reason that they did not stop trains to collect mail in the old days, but grabbed it as the train passed by. Rail is great only for cargo travel over long distances with few stops. A bus is more efficient for short hops and stops.
Gov Doyle in Wisconsin has been trying so hard to get rail from Chicago, through Milwaukee and Madison, and dreaming of going to Minneapolis/St. Paul. It has been a big debacle here, and even if the Feds were to completely fund the construction, the ticket prices would be outrageous just on the maintenance costs. It is all just a waste.
Seraphicaviary
The highway funds are stripped by the workers and contractors being paid out of the fund and by the congressmen who award them the contracts.
I don’t think the highway cheerleaders are any different from the government funded railroad cheerleaders. Just choosing a different poison. Both need billion$ of government money. Both are controlled by traffic lights. Both are granted their land by politicians for political reasons.
“At 25 mpg, a personal vehicle would have to carry 28 passengers to have the equivalent fuel efficiency of a train.”
I’ve seen one of those. Isn’t it called a bus?
I remember living in Denmark - wonderful integrated bus-train system - every unit timed to meet others at interchange points.
Time from home to office by bus-train-bus was 75 minutes. Time by car was 15 to 20 minutes. I don't know what it is in Danish Euroland today, but in those days car purchase was 'encouraged' by a 150% (I seem to remember) sales tax. (It was a pure coincidence that all cars had to be imported.)
““Trains work in Europe because they’ve taxed fuel to $7.00 per Gallon.”
Do you mean $7.00 per LITER, which is about $19.00 per gallon! /s “
And the real funny thing is that Europe is a whole lot closer the persian gulf than we are.... Wonder what is making gas so expensive there??????????????
My car get’s far less milage in city driving then highway driving too. It is just a number and probably little far fetched but you cannot deny that rail is more fuel efficient.
My point is that highways cost just as much to build and operate. But it is what the people want.....for now.
Do you understand the difference is only their immense taxes?
That being said, it is not a Federal responsibility and it should be able to stand on its own in the marketplace.
I do favor the Federal government establishing a high speed rail standard for the 50 states (57 if you’re Obama) as is their role under Article I Section 8. At least with a federal standard, if states decided to link up their high speed rail networks, they would already be compatible.
I am very close to agreeing with your view.
I do, however, believe that there is a legitimate federal role in providing funding for acquiring rights-of-way and constructing the railway track and infrastructure. In most cases, the private sector would be more efficient at operating the vehicles and rolling stock that travel on that infrastructure.
This model would be more consistant with how we fund our airways, highways and navigable waterways.
Decades as Chicago Rail Chief (was called to testify.. may have taken just 56K) stepped in front of a train one morning in a romote area, one witness. Insiders & their knowledge (investors like in the Games) in the "Path of Progress".
Money and sucicide(s) make for a deadly cocktail in ChicagoLand Politics.
MPG is also based on averages.
“Do you understand the difference is only their immense taxes? “
Really, I thought the blam was America and George Bush’s Fault....
/sarc
That makes sense. I’ll ask permission from Mr. Green to revise and extend my remarks. :)
You are correct. This is about concentrating populations and restricting mobility.
http://www.siemens.com/sustainability/en/understanding/international_guidelines.htm#toc-5
Yep, and in order to get the OK to build the rail through the intervening states and counties the builders would have to agree to stop in every town.
This is what happened with the multibillion dollar tax sucking white elephant light rail system in my old home town (Miami) - it's a 22 mile system with 22 stations, and there are no expresses - every trip stops everywhere.
“You can’t say that about your highway. Talk about government control.”
When speaking of the highways, you are correct. However, almost EVERY SINGLE sub-division road was built by the original developer. So, you can’t even get out of your driveway, to get to your train station, if not for private developers.
“The highway funds don’t cover the cost of maintaining or building highways anymore. The haven’t for some time.”
The passenger fees have not covered the cost of maintaining or building the trains and tracks and MOST stations! That’s why my taxes help pay for people to ride Amtrak!
Still have to get to and from the station (never mind all the waits involved at the stations and en route).
This is the problem you refuse to address, Willie: getting to/from the train takes about as long as just driving to the destination!
High speed rail from Atlanta to Savannah? Show me how that is going to take less than five hours door-to-door.
High speed rail from Atlanta to Syracuse? Oh, right, won’t be any because high speed rail is a linear solution to an area problem. Even if there was, it would still take more than 14 hours door to door.
Every way I look at it it’s still easier faster cheaper to just pile the family into the SUV.
As stated up thread, $7.00 per liter.
Trains work in Europe because they are much smaller than we are (both in Geography and physiology). Travel distances are minimal (What's the driving time from Paris to Munich? 4 hours maybe. Whats the driving time from DC to Chicago? 12 hours?)
They have greatly decreased personal space requirements. Interpersonal space in Germany is about 12" here it is 18" to 24".
They don't mind being crammed into small spaces with lots of stinky people they'd normally not associate with. Because they've been forced to live that way since feudal days. High speed rail is a really cool technoilogy that solves no real world problem. It will NEVER work in these united States outside of theme parks.
Might I ask why you are posting for a failed idea?
The last time this came up, there were accurate, detailed, and definitive reasons posted as to why the trains you are advocating are a bad idea.
If you are convinced they are a good idea, can we see the data?
Add up all the cars and buses driving to the station and back again - the mileage takes a big hit.
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.