Thursday, November 20, 2008
News Project Runway
Posted by Dan Savage on Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 9:44 AM
The third runway at Sea-Tac opens today—and there's already talk of building a fourth runway. Maybe we should follow California's lead and invest in high-speed rail instead? California voters—lately pilloried in this space—voted to build an "800-mile high-speed train system serving Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento, the Central Valley, the Inland Empire, Orange County and San Diego." If we can get Oregon to sign on, we could have high-speed rail corridor running up and down the entire west coast.
Yeah, yeah: deficits and stuff. And building rail will be more expensive than plunking another runway down at Sea-Tac. But building rail will be less traumatic, process-and-lawsuit-wise, and it's better long-term investment, and rail is ultimately a cheaper, and more environmentally-friendly way to move people and goods.
Share via
2
...and don't stop in Seattle. Continue the high-speed train on up to Whistler and down to Mexico City.
In the face of an economic crisis and budget downturns, the voters of Washington recognized the need to build better transit infrastructure. So, maybe even in a time of deficits, they'd recognize the importance of such a project and support it?
I love the idea of a rapid train to San Francisco.
In the face of an economic crisis and budget downturns, the voters of Washington recognized the need to build better transit infrastructure. So, maybe even in a time of deficits, they'd recognize the importance of such a project and support it?
I love the idea of a rapid train to San Francisco.
4
I recently watched a documentary on Spain and how it has a high speed train system that eliminated the need to fly to destinations or take cars. People want to be closer to the ground and trains pollute less. Anyway there is an article here
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/02/…
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/02/…
5
Also, I do like the comment in the article I mentioned above that if the train is more than 5 min. late the passengers are refunded their fare. Try getting that out of an airline.
6
A high speed train with stops at Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, Eugene, and on down to San Francisco and LA would be phenomenal. I don't even live on the West Coast and I would have used something like that 3-4 times in the past couple of years.
Trains are popular on the East Coast partly because there is an obvious route from Boston to NYC to Philly to DC (and the population and demand to support travel along this route).
In the Midwest, train travel is more difficult because the primary need is from Chicago to other cities (St. Louis, Indy, Detroit) -- a train system would look like a wheel with spokes as opposed to a straight line (you'd have to go through Chicago to get from St. Louis to Indy, for example). A lattice connecting all the cities would be impractical.
But on the West Coast you have a natural and obvious route between your major cities.... Wish we could snap our fingers and make it so.
Trains are popular on the East Coast partly because there is an obvious route from Boston to NYC to Philly to DC (and the population and demand to support travel along this route).
In the Midwest, train travel is more difficult because the primary need is from Chicago to other cities (St. Louis, Indy, Detroit) -- a train system would look like a wheel with spokes as opposed to a straight line (you'd have to go through Chicago to get from St. Louis to Indy, for example). A lattice connecting all the cities would be impractical.
But on the West Coast you have a natural and obvious route between your major cities.... Wish we could snap our fingers and make it so.
7
And just think Dan!
You can suck off the conducter in the bathroom and get a train run on your ass while Terry and DJ play gameboy in the sleeper car! You could travel in the way you are accustomed, AND actually spend time with your family!
It IS a win win!
You can suck off the conducter in the bathroom and get a train run on your ass while Terry and DJ play gameboy in the sleeper car! You could travel in the way you are accustomed, AND actually spend time with your family!
It IS a win win!
8
The train in Spain is awesome. I've done that route, and even though it was before high-speed, it was a completely wonderful experience. The other benefit I like about trains is that the stations tend to be located centrally in cities, giving you pretty immediate access to your destination, rather than flying into some exurb and then trying to figure out ground transportation into town.
9
Because lord knows the connections between portland and vancouver is where most of our air travel is coming from.
10
And just think Ecce!
You can troll the Slog on the train wifi system and get a train run on your ass while your pretend family plays gameboy in the sleeper car! You could troll in the way you are accustomed, AND actually spend time with your pretend family!
It IS a win win!
You can troll the Slog on the train wifi system and get a train run on your ass while your pretend family plays gameboy in the sleeper car! You could troll in the way you are accustomed, AND actually spend time with your pretend family!
It IS a win win!
11
@8: and you can show up to the station 10 minutes before your train is set to go, leaving less time to sit around the station and more time to sleep/drink/whatever in the city you're in. Plus, you can see the countryside go by. I took a long-ass train from Berlin to Vienna because trains are awesome (as said above) and it was great, watching all the little towns go past the window...
12
I wouldn't be too sure about the costs of runways vs rail. The estimate for an additional runway at LAX was $11B. Assuming that the costs of additional runways at LAX, SF, Seattle and Portland are roughly similar, rail that could take some pressure off all of those might be competitive.
13
Oooh and it could have a couple of forks off to Vegas and Phoenix. Of course the one to Phoenix could extend to Albuquerque where it would naturally turn left.
14
Bellevue -- If there isn't the demand for a Seattle to Vancouver leg, don't build it. But, the beauty of a straight line fail system is that there is demand between Seattle and Portland and between Seattle and Eugene, and Portland and Eugene...
Any one of those legs might not have the demand on its own, but together the total demand for the entire rail line could make it viable. As opposed to here, where there will never be enough demand between St. Louis and Indy, say, and there are no natural geographic connections to be able to build upon whatever demand there might be.
Any one of those legs might not have the demand on its own, but together the total demand for the entire rail line could make it viable. As opposed to here, where there will never be enough demand between St. Louis and Indy, say, and there are no natural geographic connections to be able to build upon whatever demand there might be.
15
Errr. "straight line rail system". This mandatory Preview thing might be helpful if I actually ever re-read my posts before submitting.
16
this is the kind of government spending we need to do, deficit be damned. forget the bailouts, start spending on progressive infrastructure.
17
I doubt most Sea-Tac air traffice comes from Portland, Vancouver, and San Francisco, as this post seems to suggest, but someone should feel free to prove me wrong.
18
You'd be surprised, BA. There are something like 50 flights a day to Portland.
The problem with a West Coast line is rail right-of-way. There's only one, and it's owned by freight. That's why Amtrak is so slow; we already have some fairly fast trains, but they mostly run at 30 MPH just like the slow ones do. To have high speed rail, you'd have to have a dedicated line, and the ROW is much too narrow for two. New rail ROW is not practical; it would cost TRILLIONS to buy the land and cross the obstacles.
The problem with a West Coast line is rail right-of-way. There's only one, and it's owned by freight. That's why Amtrak is so slow; we already have some fairly fast trains, but they mostly run at 30 MPH just like the slow ones do. To have high speed rail, you'd have to have a dedicated line, and the ROW is much too narrow for two. New rail ROW is not practical; it would cost TRILLIONS to buy the land and cross the obstacles.
19
I counted 34 flights but still, best case scenario how long would it take and how expensive would it be?
20
@18 for the reality check. It is fun to dream, though, of the very rail-friendly Obama somehow leading Congress to seize ROW to make it happen.
21
I'm also thinking of taking cars off the road, not just flights. In the last couple of years, I've only flown from Seattle to Eugene once, but I've driven from Portland/southern WA to Eugene (and back) a couple of times and I'm about to do it again this weekend.
Thanks for killing my dreams, Fnarf.
Thanks for killing my dreams, Fnarf.
22
High speed passenger and freight rail makes it possible to see cool games and theater and cruise bars in other cities and party to and from them on the train.
Nothing like a game day train to a soccer match or the rave a state over!
Nothing like a game day train to a soccer match or the rave a state over!
23
Hell, I drive to Portland to fly to Phoenix because it's several hundred dollars cheaper right now.
24
For all of your pro-high speed rail talking points, visit California High Speed Rail Blog. The sidebar has handy subject guides to posts, like Energy/Peak Oil, Jobs/Stimulus, and (my favorite) Debunking the Deniers. With some adaptation, you can crib most of your arguments from here.
25
How 'bout we just privatize Amtrac and Seatac and they can build whatever they can run at a profit?
27
It would be great to have a high speed train from Vancouver to Eugene and from Sacramento/San Francisco to San Diego/TJ, but the problem with a West Coast high speed line is what's in between Eugene and Sacramento: Jack Shit.
Which would you choose: a 6 hour train ride from Portland to San Francisco or a 1 hour flight when they're roughly the same price?
Which would you choose: a 6 hour train ride from Portland to San Francisco or a 1 hour flight when they're roughly the same price?
28
I don't mean to kill your dreams, Julie. And maybe there is a way, by utilizing highway rights-of-way or something. But it's going to be really difficult. Gillsans points to another problem -- and, really, the Jack Shit starts at Portland, not Eugene, because honestly Eugene ain't much.
29
I would LOVE rapid train service along the coast. But we need more than that, we need to head east as well. Rapid Train service from Seattle to Chicago anyone?
31
Just Me: Yes, it's just you. Seattle to Chicago is 2000 mi. A 200 mi/h non-stop train would take 10 hours; more realistic scenarios would require 15-20 hours.
Notice that one of the common characteristics of countries where high-speed rail is a significant part of the national transportation mix is that almost all trips are less than 500 miles.
Notice that one of the common characteristics of countries where high-speed rail is a significant part of the national transportation mix is that almost all trips are less than 500 miles.
32
Deficits are irrelevant at this point in time, if the spending is for the right things. Our country is in the midst of an economic crisis, and now is the time when deficit spending is appropriate to kick-start the economy. Aid to the financial sector is part and parcel with the lie that is trickle-down economics. Building regional rail, schools, roads, bridges, power transmission lines from remote areas where solar and wind energy can be generated, etc. would create hundreds of thousands of jobs for unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled workers throughout the country. Where's the financial crisis if you give unemployed people good-paying jobs and they then can pay their mortgages? There isn't one.
If we spend the right way now, we can engage in a modernization program that would improve our transportation infrastructure, education facilities, and promote renewable energy sources; we dig ourselves out of the financial crisis; and some projects could be self-financing.
If we spend the right way now, we can engage in a modernization program that would improve our transportation infrastructure, education facilities, and promote renewable energy sources; we dig ourselves out of the financial crisis; and some projects could be self-financing.
33
Sure! I'd love a high-speed rail line that goes all the places I'm going now without the need for an airplane: Japan, Hawaii, Denmark, Germany, Italy... Wait. Something is not working here.
34
#31 You beat me to it. High speed trains aren't matter transporters. Traveling to Chicago at 100mph average speed (maybe a little low, but realistic for current tech) isn't that much better than driving at 70mph.
The only advantage to a train is the bar.
The only advantage to a train is the bar.
35
Sounds like a good depression-era project. Obama's stimulus package probably will have money for stuff like this.
Even moderately-fast trains would be a *huge* advantage over current Amtrak, which just borrows the rail lines from the coal companies.
Even moderately-fast trains would be a *huge* advantage over current Amtrak, which just borrows the rail lines from the coal companies.
36
High speed trains over modest distances not only save on flights, but on road trips too.
Right now, because of the lines for security, it is actually faster and cheaper to drive from Seattle to Portland than to fly. Same for Seattle to Vancouver BC. That is the primary reason you don't see very many flights between these 3 cities.
If you did a high speed train from Vancouver BC to Seattle to Portland, you'd take a huge load off of I-5, as well as the airports.
Right now, because of the lines for security, it is actually faster and cheaper to drive from Seattle to Portland than to fly. Same for Seattle to Vancouver BC. That is the primary reason you don't see very many flights between these 3 cities.
If you did a high speed train from Vancouver BC to Seattle to Portland, you'd take a huge load off of I-5, as well as the airports.
37
What this, while going into pros/cons on rail verse airports, no one has even touched on the subject of opening one of the other large airfields for air travel? How about rather than further expand SeaTac, King County Airport is opened up, or even better a terminal is added up in Everett?
I'm all for rail, but if there is a big argument concerning airport capacity, and people are so heavily invested in the concept, why does SeaTac's monopoly continue unchecked, especially when this area has no shortage of suitable fields?
I'm all for rail, but if there is a big argument concerning airport capacity, and people are so heavily invested in the concept, why does SeaTac's monopoly continue unchecked, especially when this area has no shortage of suitable fields?
38
There are 10 officially designated high speed rail corridors in the US. By definition, that means speeds of at least 110mph, which implies dual track, adequate bypass tracks and dispatch priority for passenger trains (or dedicated passenger tracks).
Eugene to Vancouver, BC is one of the designated HSR corridors. The section between Eugene and Sacramento is not.
http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/203
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has published rules regarding level crossings and associated quiet zones that you should consider before arguing that only true bullet trains will do. What makes sense in Japan, France, Spain, the Northeast and California may not in the less densely populated Northwest or Midwest.
http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/217
http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/1318
If tracks are shared with freight or commuter trains using FRA-compliant equipment, then in principle the high-speed trainsets must also be FRA-compliant. The rules relate primarily to passive crash safety and mean that US passenger trains must be much heavier than those elsewhere in the world. The Talgo trains plying the Pacific Northwest corridor today are an exception that was grandfathered in before the rules were tightened. Even so, the first and last car of these trains must remain empty.
Adding weight is particularly problematic in the context of active tilt trains, which are employed on fairly winding legacy tracks to ensure passenger comfort, cp the cautionary tale of the Amtrak Acela Express in the NEC.
http://www.ebbc.org/rail/fra.html
FRA restrictions on using off-the-shelf HSR train technology that complies with international standards are a major reason for the decision to rely on all-new track in California. Note that Caltrain, a commuter rail operator in the SF peninsula, has done crash simulations of the crash behavior of compliant and non-compliant equipment in grade crossing accidents in an effort to obtain a waiver for migrating its fleet to European EMU equipment after electrification. Crashes between trains at even moderate relative speeds are extremely dangerous to any people on board, so they must be avoided with appropriate signaling and train control technology.
http://www.caltrain.com/pdf/project2025/…
(see appendix C)
-----
The Pacific Northwest corridor is eligible in principle for a slice of the $1.5 billion in HSR funds allocated in HR 2095, which Pres. Bush recently signed into law. Obviously, any tracks north of the border would have to be funded by the Canadians and, there would have to be immigration posts at the stations, unless a way can be found to deal with that while the trains are moving.
This bill also allocates some funds for improving the safety of rail operations, e.g. positive train control upgrades. This technology will now be mandatory on selected portions of the US rail network by 2015.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd…
The Pacific Northwest corridor might also be eligible for additional HSR funding if a bipartisan bill introduced by Sen. Kerry (D-MA) and Sen. Specter (R-PA) ends up becoming law.
http://kerry.senate.gov/cfm/record.cfm?i…
More...
Eugene to Vancouver, BC is one of the designated HSR corridors. The section between Eugene and Sacramento is not.
http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/203
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has published rules regarding level crossings and associated quiet zones that you should consider before arguing that only true bullet trains will do. What makes sense in Japan, France, Spain, the Northeast and California may not in the less densely populated Northwest or Midwest.
http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/217
http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/1318
If tracks are shared with freight or commuter trains using FRA-compliant equipment, then in principle the high-speed trainsets must also be FRA-compliant. The rules relate primarily to passive crash safety and mean that US passenger trains must be much heavier than those elsewhere in the world. The Talgo trains plying the Pacific Northwest corridor today are an exception that was grandfathered in before the rules were tightened. Even so, the first and last car of these trains must remain empty.
Adding weight is particularly problematic in the context of active tilt trains, which are employed on fairly winding legacy tracks to ensure passenger comfort, cp the cautionary tale of the Amtrak Acela Express in the NEC.
http://www.ebbc.org/rail/fra.html
FRA restrictions on using off-the-shelf HSR train technology that complies with international standards are a major reason for the decision to rely on all-new track in California. Note that Caltrain, a commuter rail operator in the SF peninsula, has done crash simulations of the crash behavior of compliant and non-compliant equipment in grade crossing accidents in an effort to obtain a waiver for migrating its fleet to European EMU equipment after electrification. Crashes between trains at even moderate relative speeds are extremely dangerous to any people on board, so they must be avoided with appropriate signaling and train control technology.
http://www.caltrain.com/pdf/project2025/…
(see appendix C)
-----
The Pacific Northwest corridor is eligible in principle for a slice of the $1.5 billion in HSR funds allocated in HR 2095, which Pres. Bush recently signed into law. Obviously, any tracks north of the border would have to be funded by the Canadians and, there would have to be immigration posts at the stations, unless a way can be found to deal with that while the trains are moving.
This bill also allocates some funds for improving the safety of rail operations, e.g. positive train control upgrades. This technology will now be mandatory on selected portions of the US rail network by 2015.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd…
The Pacific Northwest corridor might also be eligible for additional HSR funding if a bipartisan bill introduced by Sen. Kerry (D-MA) and Sen. Specter (R-PA) ends up becoming law.
http://kerry.senate.gov/cfm/record.cfm?i…
Most Commented on Slog
-
Life and Death in a Recliner in South Carolina by Dan Savage
-
Pit Bulls! by Dan Savage
-
Becoming a Man by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Hot & Drunk by Dan Savage
-
$2,600,000,000 by Dan Savage
-
I Hate You, Garrison Keillor by Jen Graves
-
All The Best Men Are Taken by Dan Savage
-
Unreal Americans by Dan Savage
-
Precious: Brutal New Classic or African-American Bruno? by David Schmader
-
Meanwhile in Vancouver by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (38) RSS