Thursday, May 28, 2009
Transportation High-Speed Rail to Vancouver?
Posted by Erica C. Barnett on Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:42 AM
Not gonna happen, says The Tyee (Vancouver), in the first part of a four-part series:
The truth is as hard and cold as a steel rail: Neither U.S. President Barack Obama's multi-billion-dollar rail stimulus package nor Washington State's long-range plan to revive passenger rail in the Pacific Northwest envisions the creation of high-speed service to Vancouver.The B.C. Ministry of Transportation also has no plans for high-speed rail. Instead, as a direct result of years of inaction, Minister Kevin Falcon appears to have helped turn away hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. stimulus funds that were allotted to improve track conditions north of Seattle.
The Government of Canada has specifically excluded British Columbia from discussions about the creation of high-speed rail lines in Alberta, Ontario and Quebec. And the Harper government is literally barring a Washington State effort to bring a second daily Amtrak train across the border. ...
"Our approach is an incremental approach. To put in Acela-type tracks would be way beyond the realm of possibility," [Washington State Department of Transportation] spokesperson Vickie Sheehan told The Tyee.
"We are building conventional inter-city rail," said Sheehan, who works in the State Rail and Marine Office.
"I don't think anyone here envisions going faster than 79 miles per hour any time soon. The corridor is very curvy," she added.
Sheenan was equally blunt when asked whether there is any scenario under which Washington State would consider creating a new high-speed rail corridor like those in Europe and Japan.
"Not at all," she said.
Read the whole thing here.
Share via
1
won't it be awesome when the black thugs can get easily get to places where they can rob white people!?! celebrate divershitty!
4
It's stimulus dollars and it's going to 110 mph rail lines.
Which, sadly, is twice as good as what we have right now.
Which, sadly, is twice as good as what we have right now.
5
Getting the right of way would be near impossible, and there's no fucking way you can lay that track where there are existing railroad lines; we need that for transporting goods, not for a pie-in-the-sky fantasy. Additionally, high-speed rail is not energy efficient. Until that energy comes from renewable sources, high-speed rail will only make pollution and carbon emissions worse.
6
The second train a day thing is infuriating, though, as someone who takes that rail line quite frequently. The trains are full every Fri/Sat/Sun. The schedule is horrible, but people still ride it because it's better than dealing with bus or car customs and it's a beautiful ride. WSDOT and BCMOT put in money to upgrade the rail lines, and it's ready to go; we were promised last August, but the Harper government screws it.
(The Amtrak Cascades schedule still says 'coming soon!')
What would that second train a day mean? Not only more tourism and more rail for BC, but it would mean a train that goes from Vancouver, pauses in Seattle, and continues on to Portland (and vice versa).
(The Amtrak Cascades schedule still says 'coming soon!')
What would that second train a day mean? Not only more tourism and more rail for BC, but it would mean a train that goes from Vancouver, pauses in Seattle, and continues on to Portland (and vice versa).
7
Will, in your own special way you are every bit as stupid as the idiot @1 who thinks Big Scary Negroes™ take Amtrak to rob your house.
Keshmeshi is correct: there's no place to put the tracks. The problem isn't on the Canadian side, but along the Sound here in Washington. But she is (theoretically) wrong about the energy; if high-speed rail WAS in place, and was competitive on time with air travel (keeping in mind the airport trip and wait at both ends), it could reduce air trips enough to be a significant net gain.
There are at least a dozen nonstop flights a day between SEA-YVR.
Keshmeshi is correct: there's no place to put the tracks. The problem isn't on the Canadian side, but along the Sound here in Washington. But she is (theoretically) wrong about the energy; if high-speed rail WAS in place, and was competitive on time with air travel (keeping in mind the airport trip and wait at both ends), it could reduce air trips enough to be a significant net gain.
There are at least a dozen nonstop flights a day between SEA-YVR.
8
@7,
You might be right, but I'm not that hopeful about high-speed rail reducing air trips that much, but maybe the California line will change my mind.
You might be right, but I'm not that hopeful about high-speed rail reducing air trips that much, but maybe the California line will change my mind.
9
Right. Let's wait another 50 years so that the whole of western washington is more developed, with strip malls and housing everywhere and then let's buy the land to improve rail. Brilliant!
Because land next to a railroad is soooooo valuable and expensive now, we cannnnn't affoooorrrd it.
Oh here's a great idea! Let's spend $8 billion for a two mile tunnel under downtown!
We can't afford anything obviously, we just couldn't ever afford to buy land and straighten out tracks and widen the right of way to have frequent intercity rail or commuter rail, the whole rest of the world does it but we are so **uniquely poverty stricken** it's off limits to discuss.
OK now let's get going on that $8 billion two mile tunnel!!
Because land next to a railroad is soooooo valuable and expensive now, we cannnnn't affoooorrrd it.
Oh here's a great idea! Let's spend $8 billion for a two mile tunnel under downtown!
We can't afford anything obviously, we just couldn't ever afford to buy land and straighten out tracks and widen the right of way to have frequent intercity rail or commuter rail, the whole rest of the world does it but we are so **uniquely poverty stricken** it's off limits to discuss.
OK now let's get going on that $8 billion two mile tunnel!!
10
I don't need high-speed rail from VYR to SEA, I just need *some* rail between the two cities. I'm not getting on some bus with AMTRAK written on the side of it to be driven over the border to get to Bellingham, Everett or, usually, all the way to Seattle or for points more south.
The whole point of taking the train is because it's suppose to be much more comfortable and you can actually get up and move around.
A train is still a hella lot less of a hassle to board at a downtown station than getting all the way out to the airport, futz around waiting, boarding a plane, maybe being delayed, disembarking in Seattle, waiting around for baggage, getting into the city - and all done in the same time or less.
Christ, I want a train between these two cities. Add a station in White Rock for some commuters and I can't see how this thing would flop.
The whole point of taking the train is because it's suppose to be much more comfortable and you can actually get up and move around.
A train is still a hella lot less of a hassle to board at a downtown station than getting all the way out to the airport, futz around waiting, boarding a plane, maybe being delayed, disembarking in Seattle, waiting around for baggage, getting into the city - and all done in the same time or less.
Christ, I want a train between these two cities. Add a station in White Rock for some commuters and I can't see how this thing would flop.
12
No place to put the lines ... so, you admit that Japan is a very flat island with no mountains, then, right, Fnarf.
LOL. They have high speed passenger rails in quite a few countries with mountains. Maybe you should stop believing your interwebs and your fake pages on wikipedia ...
LOL. They have high speed passenger rails in quite a few countries with mountains. Maybe you should stop believing your interwebs and your fake pages on wikipedia ...
14
Why do we need high-speed rail when we don't even have decent conventional rail lines? Shouldn't we go for the less sexy but more functional (and much more affordable) standard rail system first?
15
Will, you prove my point. You are stupider than dirt. You have no idea what you're talking about, and your facts are wrong. Seriously, how do you even get dressed in the morning?
The "there's one here, so we'll just put one over here" exercise in handwaving is profoundly unconvincing. How about if we ask someone who knows something, anything, about US railroad law, land use law, engineering, geography...? What do they say? Guesses? Anyone? Or even get a fucking map. Will, have you ever seen a map? If yours says "Japan" on it, you're looking at the wrong one. Jackass.
The "there's one here, so we'll just put one over here" exercise in handwaving is profoundly unconvincing. How about if we ask someone who knows something, anything, about US railroad law, land use law, engineering, geography...? What do they say? Guesses? Anyone? Or even get a fucking map. Will, have you ever seen a map? If yours says "Japan" on it, you're looking at the wrong one. Jackass.
16
@10, I've taken that train you describe several times. Great ride. Frequently out of service, for reasons out of Amtrak's control. White Rock? Cute town. Nobody's ever going to ride the train from there, though. Where the hell too?
As for "less hassle", well, let's see: twelve non-stop flights a day suggest maybe it's worth the hassle to fly.
The most fun way to get to Vancouver is to fly the float plane from Lake Union to Victoria and then across the Strait. Crazy fast, and crazy views from what feels like ten feet off the ground.
As for "less hassle", well, let's see: twelve non-stop flights a day suggest maybe it's worth the hassle to fly.
The most fun way to get to Vancouver is to fly the float plane from Lake Union to Victoria and then across the Strait. Crazy fast, and crazy views from what feels like ten feet off the ground.
17
The problem with the second train is *entirely* Canada's problem. The equipment is ready, the crews are ready, but Canada has decided that they need to charge for the customs folks for the second train (they don't charge for the customs folks for the existing train, but that's not important right now) Until that's resolved, there will be no second train, because WA state money cannot be used on Canadian government functions.
Also, the big problem with the Seattle-Vancouver route is the dismal condition of the tracks north of the border. Again, no US money can go towards repairing those tracks, so it's up to the Canadians to take care of it.
For the record, BNSF does well by Amtrak: They minimize delays because they want the on-time incentive money. They work with the state to address a lot of the bottlenecks that have plagued performance in the past, so that we are finally seeing real incremental improvements. While high speed rail is still well off in the future (if on the horizon at all) raising the national rail speed limit of 79mph (Which is in effect except for the NE corridor and parts of the desert SW) would open up all sorts of possibilities. But it involves some wonky details that only a railroad professional could intelligently address, so I won't even try. (It's been explained to me on numerous occasions, but I'm much more interested in the bar car than how fast the train can go, and why)
Also, the big problem with the Seattle-Vancouver route is the dismal condition of the tracks north of the border. Again, no US money can go towards repairing those tracks, so it's up to the Canadians to take care of it.
For the record, BNSF does well by Amtrak: They minimize delays because they want the on-time incentive money. They work with the state to address a lot of the bottlenecks that have plagued performance in the past, so that we are finally seeing real incremental improvements. While high speed rail is still well off in the future (if on the horizon at all) raising the national rail speed limit of 79mph (Which is in effect except for the NE corridor and parts of the desert SW) would open up all sorts of possibilities. But it involves some wonky details that only a railroad professional could intelligently address, so I won't even try. (It's been explained to me on numerous occasions, but I'm much more interested in the bar car than how fast the train can go, and why)
18
That's because Customs is a federal responsibility, CVD.
Not provincial.
If you ever get bored, read up on the division of powers between the federal and provincial governments in Canada.
And the current feds are conservative shiites.
Not provincial.
If you ever get bored, read up on the division of powers between the federal and provincial governments in Canada.
And the current feds are conservative shiites.
19
I work with a lot of White Rockers who would definitely consider commuting at least one way if the train schedule was decent. Less hassle than sitting on cramped express buses and less stressful than sitting in traffic.
So now we have the Vancouver mayor, Gregor Robertson, pushing for a high-speed rail while he's in Oregon this week. Might as well reach for the sky but, damned, the absolutely worse case scenario should be just upgrading the tracks as they are and getting in regular-speed trains into service, whatever whining and winging it takes to whichever government.
And our Prime Minister, Mr. Beigey-beigey-creepy-middle-manager-type-who's-so-innocuously-blah-he-can't-even-give-me-a-hate-on, seems to be pretty clueless of anything west of Toronto so I'm not surprised there's little real substained push for any rail improvements by people who can pull the purse strings open and get this thing done.
The corridor idea is such a feakin' no brainer. Too bad it couldn't have been somehow looped into all this Winter Olympics construction bullshit... .
So now we have the Vancouver mayor, Gregor Robertson, pushing for a high-speed rail while he's in Oregon this week. Might as well reach for the sky but, damned, the absolutely worse case scenario should be just upgrading the tracks as they are and getting in regular-speed trains into service, whatever whining and winging it takes to whichever government.
And our Prime Minister, Mr. Beigey-beigey-creepy-middle-manager-type-who's-so-innocuously-blah-he-can't-even-give-me-a-hate-on, seems to be pretty clueless of anything west of Toronto so I'm not surprised there's little real substained push for any rail improvements by people who can pull the purse strings open and get this thing done.
The corridor idea is such a feakin' no brainer. Too bad it couldn't have been somehow looped into all this Winter Olympics construction bullshit... .
21
There's no reason not to upgrade regular service except the shitheadedness from Canadian officials about the customs issue.
Upgrading the current right-of-way to Acela-style high-speed rail is also feasible, if expensive. (The guys at Seattle Transit Blog are all over the details of this--it's not pie-in-the-sky stuff, but just complicated.) That's the realistic agenda for now. It's true that freight priority is a problem here and elsewhere, but they do get a benefit too if speeds improve, and a lot of the incremental upgrades will massively reduce the number of current delays.
Real HSR will have to wait for a less timid national government on issues of transportation. Hopefully Obama's plans so far are merely the "down payment" he said they were, but if not the need for HSR is only going to increase regardless of who's in the White House.
Upgrading the current right-of-way to Acela-style high-speed rail is also feasible, if expensive. (The guys at Seattle Transit Blog are all over the details of this--it's not pie-in-the-sky stuff, but just complicated.) That's the realistic agenda for now. It's true that freight priority is a problem here and elsewhere, but they do get a benefit too if speeds improve, and a lot of the incremental upgrades will massively reduce the number of current delays.
Real HSR will have to wait for a less timid national government on issues of transportation. Hopefully Obama's plans so far are merely the "down payment" he said they were, but if not the need for HSR is only going to increase regardless of who's in the White House.
23
The reason why we can't have high-speed rail in the US (especially not in the western part of it) is our massive underpopulation problem. A Washington State guidebook I bought for my home-stay mom in Japan points out that the state is 48% the size of Japan. Washington state has somewhere near 7 million people in it. Japan has 130 million or so. That's why they have high-speed rail and we don't.
Some population numbers:
France
64,057,792 / 545,630 = 117.4 people / km2
Japan
127,078,679 / 374,744 = 339 people / km2
China
1,338,612,968 / 9,326,410 = 143.5 people / km2
Some population numbers:
France
64,057,792 / 545,630 = 117.4 people / km2
Japan
127,078,679 / 374,744 = 339 people / km2
China
1,338,612,968 / 9,326,410 = 143.5 people / km2
24
Is the HeraldNet not talking to officials in Vancouver or something? Read the article:
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/2009052….
Who to believe?
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/2009052….
Who to believe?
Most Commented on Slog
-
Straight Up by Dan Savage
-
Stephen Fry v. the Catholic Church by Dan Savage
-
Neologism Needed by Dan Savage
-
Palin's Cheat Sheet by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Toilet Brush Off by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
Tea Party Crowd Believes That Only Good Spellers Should Vote by Dan Savage
-
How's That Hopey, Changey Stuff Working Out For Childhood Obesity? by Dan Savage
-
This Shit Will Never Get Old by Eli Sanders
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (24) RSS