How fast high speed rail

He also believes the federal government made a fatal misstep in allowing Amtrak to run the projects, rather than opening it up to more experienced foreign competitors. Instead, the money has mostly been spent improving what rail the US already has, and increasing capacity, speed, and frequency. At the most basic of levels, says Peterson, federal money got out on time, with little to no fraud or abuse —not always a given with government projects.

By , more than half of the projects funded had been completed, with the last handful now in their closing months. Vermonters now have miles of new rail across the state, with umpteen rail tiles, switches, and crosses upgraded or replaced. In Illinois, two bridges on the Chicago to Milwaukee corridor have been replaced, allowing 16 daily passenger trains to cross them without needing to slow down. By , the 24 miles between Trenton and New Brunswick, in New Jersey, will be traversed at speeds of up to miles per hour —a genuinely high speed.

All over the country, trains are somewhere between a little and a lot better , thanks to the ARRA. Some of these projects had an outsized impact on a local scale, even as they failed to make national headlines. With a significant change in leadership and approach, Amtrak is now on track to make a profit in , for the first time ever.

All over the country, there are underserved segments of around miles which are ripe for high-quality rail, he added. By providing your email, you agree to the Quartz Privacy Policy. Skip to navigation Skip to content. Discover Membership. Editions Quartz. More from Quartz About Quartz. Follow Quartz. Nevertheless, advocates point out that HSR is a mature technology, unlike these other rail transport schemes, and so is a much lower risk investment for governments and urban planners.

Both maglev and hyperloop are very costly, and pose potential health and safety risks that conventional HSR does not. HSR advocates further argue that the throughput in terms of numbers of people moved from place to place for a given investment provided by high-speed rail far outpaces those provided by highways or airports.

In the chart to the left, the US High Speed Rail Association depicts how high-speed rail offers significant time savings compared with flying or driving between downtown San Francisco and downtown Los Angeles in California. Transportation benefits. Many would argue that economic development should not be the main measure of a transportation system, but that its ability to move people and goods should be the primary consideration.

That is how highway and airport projects are evaluated. Every country that builds HSR does so for the high capacity, sustainable mobility it delivers, first and foremost, with economic development and better safety as beneficial side effects.

Energy savings. Reducing the number of cars on roads and highways translates into big energy savings and a reduced demand for oil. According to International Union of Railways UIC data, high-speed rail is more than four times as energy efficient as driving in cars and nearly nine times more efficient than flying. Environmental considerations.

High-speed rail clearly offers a path to lower greenhouse gas emissions than other modes of transportation. If HSR services can entice people out of their cars by offering convenience and speed at a low cost, this would significantly reduce societal energy consumption and carbon emissions. In addition, CHSRA estimates that starting in , the state will see a reduction of 93 to flights daily, which translates into improved air quality and improved health, along with the economic benefits of a more energy-efficient transportation system.

In many countries, laws and policies are already in place requiring businesses and consumers to reduce their emissions, and a consensus toward those trends is emerging over time. High-speed rail can offer the triple bottom line economic, social and environmental sustainability that many policymakers have called for over the years. Author: Richard Nunno. Table of Contents. Credit: Bernese media. Approved but not started construction. Vacca noted that the bond act does not specifically say the trip must go to Transbay.

Through the years, the train authority has remained committed to competing with airlines. By , it projects bullet trains will carry 40 million passengers, including 5 million captured from airlines and 32 million from cars. Robert Poole, a transportation expert at Reason Foundation, a libertarian nonprofit, said competing with airlines in California will be fraught with risk, since so many potential travelers live closer to airports than the future train stations and the air market is so highly developed.

Poole notes that Florida is building its Brightline passenger rail system, which will be operational from Miami to Orlando by , at much lower cost with 79 mph to mph speeds. The aim is to divert motorists from crowded highways. Follow me on Twitter rvartabedian. Ralph Vartabedian is a former national correspondent at the Los Angeles Times and became a special contributor in April He joined the newspaper in and has covered many technical subjects, including aerospace, auto safety, nuclear weapons and high speed rail.

He has won two Loeb awards and was a Pulitzer finalist, among many other career recognitions. She helped her husband start a far-right militia group. Colonialism, power and race. Inside California ethnic studies classes. All Sections. About Us. B2B Publishing. Business Visionaries. Hot Property.

Times Events. Times Store. Facebook Twitter Show more sharing options Share Close extra sharing options. Viaducts, like this one pictured outside the city of Madera, could allow trains to reach higher speeds. By Ralph Vartabedian. The authority says it can still meet its trip time commitments, though not by much.