Amtrak's High-Speed Rail Plan: Can't We Do Better?

[^_^ 5,021]

On Tuesday, after years of furious debate, Amtrak finally announced plans to build a high-speed railway from Boston to Washington, D.C.

The proposed line will make it possible to travel from Beantown to the Big Apple in 86 minutes and from New York to the nation's capital in just over an hour and a half. It will link the East Coast with a futuristic, 220-mile per hour bullet train, employ thousands of people, and generate an estimated $900 million per year.

Unfortunately, it will also take a generation to build. The proposal estimates that construction will take 25 years and will be finished by 2040, at a cost of $117 billion.

For rail enthusiasts, it is easy to make unflattering comparisons between America's poky rail system and that of almost every other technologically-advanced, industrialized country. But in some ways, this proposed line makes the U.S. look even worse. It's not just China and Germany that are doing better with high-tech rail infrastructure -- and the jobs and higher economic activity that go along with it. The proposed East Coast rail line is put to shame by the efforts of earlier and less-advanced governments, from Teddy Roosevelt administration to the rule of Tsar Alexander III of Russia.

Here are a few infrastructure projects that show more national ambition and moxy -- and took much less time to accomplish:

The Panama Canal

Between 1904 and 1914, U.S. engineers oversaw the construction of the Panama Canal. While the 48-mile long trench is just over one tenth of the distance of the proposed Washington-Boston train line, the canal runs through some of the most treacherous, disease-ridden land in the Western hemisphere. The amount of work involved is astounding: construction on the canal consumed an estimated 12 million pounds of dynamite per year and displaced enough dirt to build a pyramid over three quarters of a mile high. In addition to spending millions of dollars and hiring thousands of workers, U.S. President Teddy Roosevelt also had to create a new country: faced with slow-moving, bureaucratic Colombian negotiators, he supported a Panamanian independence movement which supported the new canal. Even with all this, the Panama canal took only ten years to build -- a third of the time that it will take the U.S. to connect Boston and Washington.

The Chunnel

In 1988, after over 150 years of discussion and debate, the United Kingdom and France began construction on the Chunnel, a 31-mile long undersea tunnel connecting Kent, England to Coquelles, France. Actually consisting of three tunnels, the Chunnel is the longest underwater tunnel in the world, and is 250 feet deep at its lowest point. It is used by both passenger and freight trains, and connects high-speed rail lines in the United Kingdom and France. Finished in six years, construction took only 20% of the time allotted for the Boston-to-DC rail line.

China's Golmud to Lhasa Railroad

China's controversial railroad from Golmud to Lhasa connects Mongolia to Tibet, effectively drawing in two of the country's more far-flung regions. At 709 miles, the line is 60% longer than Amtrak's proposed route, and was a much tougher build. Unlike the relatively gentle topography of the Northeastern U.S., the Golmud to Lhasa rail covers some of the roughest terrain in the world, including over 340 miles of permafrost. The line runs across Tanggula Pass, the world's highest-altitude rail, and has two of the longest tunnels in the world, as well as 675 bridges. Construction on the line began on June 29, 2001 and finished on October 12, 2005. At four years, three months and fourteen days, it took a little over one ninth the amount of time that Amtrak has allotted for the DC-to-Boston route.

The Trans-Siberian Railroad

Connecting Moscow to Vladivostok, the Trans-Siberian railway is the world's longest railroad. At 5,753 miles long, it spans seven time zones and is the primary route across much of Russia. While it is more than 13 times as long as the proposed D.C-to-Boston line, the Trans-Siberian rail took 22 years to build -- eight years less than Amtrak has proposed for its route.

The Trans-Continental Rail

From 1863 to 1869, the Union Pacific and Central Pacific railroads built a line from Council Bluffs, Iowa to San Francisco, California. The new route, which linked to the East Coast's extensive rail infrastructure, ultimately connected the U.S. from coast-to-coast. Containing 1,777 miles of track, the transcontinental railroad was funded by 30-year bonds issued by the U.S. government, and was helped along by government land grants. Despite covering over four times the distance of the D.C.-to-Boston line, the line took only six years to build.

The Moon Shot

The race to the moon began on October 17, 1957, when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, a small satellite, into orbit around the earth. Almost immediately, the U.S. government launched the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics (NACA), the predecessor to NASA. Dating the race to the moon from Sputnik's launch to the July 20, 1969 -- the day Neil Armstrong stepped on the moon -- it took eleven years, nine months and three days, just over a third of the time that Amtrak has budgeted for the D.C. to Boston line. In terms of distance, the trip was roughly 238,857 miles -- or about 540 times the distance between Washington and Boston.

Of course, there are some important differences between Amtrak's project and these other efforts. After all, Chinese planners don't have to worry about civilian land easements; for that matter, neither did the Russian royal family. Yet the bureaucratic hurdles blocking the Panama canal were easily as difficult as those in the way of the proposed East Coast rail line, while the engineering difficulties of the moon launch dwarf any issues that Amtrak's planners are likely to face.

Ultimately, what separates Amtrak's attempt at high speed rail from earlier engineering marvels is a unified, cohesive sense that this project is a priority for the U.S. Unfortunately, amid calls for Amtrak to disband and demands for the privatization of rail travel, national cohesion is one commodity that Amtrak may not be able to rely on.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/media/amtraks-high-speed-rail-plan-cant-we-do-better/19653890/

[mawilson 2,133]

The proposal estimates that construction will take 25 years and will be finished by 2040, at a cost of $117 billion.

Wow... 25 years to build a stupid railroad. Even the Soviet Union had us beat 13 times over.

[mawilson 2,133]

Of course, there are some important differences between Amtrak's project and these other efforts. After all, Chinese planners don't have to worry about civilian land easements; for that matter, neither did the Russian royal family.

How about the fact that the Russian railroad was built in 1891-1913, using 19th century technology?

Edited September 30, 2010 by mawilson

[patient2010 93]

[Heracles 417]

China is currently investing $350 Billion USD on high-speed rail, capable of reaching speeds in excess of 250 Mph and using a range of high-speed technologies like Maglev trains. They will have built 9,900 miles of high-speed rail by 2020.

I guess fail or Bronze is the new American standard.

Edited September 30, 2010 by Heracles

[mawilson 2,133]

China is currently investing $350 Billion USD on high-speed rail, capable of reaching speeds in excess of 250 Mph and using a range of high-speed technologies like Maglev trains. They will have built 9,900 miles of high-speed rial by 2020.

I guess fail or Bronze is the new American standard.

It's sad.

At this rate, I'll have to move to Australia before this decade ends.

[Heracles 417]

It's sad.

It really is dude. I'm not saying it like haha look at America but in the sense of ####### is going on here? How as a country, since I am here, do we allow the rest of the world to overtake? As pike of all people put it, China has sown the seeds to kill it in the next decade - end of story.

Seriously, everything we do here is now sub-par. While AUS is rolling out a 100Mbit/s to 1Gbit/s national broadband network, the US is looking at 4Mbit/s by 2020 - no kidding.

Edited September 30, 2010 by Heracles

[mawilson 2,133]

It really is dude. I'm not saying it like haha look at America but in the sense of ####### is going on here? How as a country, since I am here, do we allow the rest of the world to overtake? As pike of all people put it, China has sown the seeds to kill it in the next decade - end of story.

People use to say the same thing about Japan back in the 80's (that it would overtake the US

and become the world's largest economy) and look where Japan is now.

Seriously, everything we do here is now sub-par. While AUS is rolling out a 100Mbit/s to 1Gbit/s national broadband network, the US is looking at 4Mbit/s by 2020 - no kidding.

Well I can get a 25 Mbit/s Verizon FIOS line for $65/month today - unlimited data of course.

Can you get that in Australia? I don't think so - all Australian plans seem to have a

data usage cap. For example,

http://go.bigpond.com/broadband/?ref=Net-Head-Int-Plans-Broadband

$70-100/month gets you BigPond Elite 200GB Liberty plan with speeds up to 20/1Mbps (ADSL2+)

or up to 8Mbps/384kbps (ADSL) or Cable up to 30/1Mbps3.

Not bad, but once you reach the cap, they slow you down to 256kbps.

[Heracles 417]

People use to say the same thing about Japan back in the 80's (that it would overtake the US and become the world's largest economy) and look where Japan is now.

China is not Japan; since then, the US has fallen down most lists, in most rankings.

Well I can get a 25 Mbit/s Verizon FIOS line for $65/month today - unlimited data of course.

Can you get that in Australia? I don't think so - all Australian plans seem to have a

data usage cap. For example,

http://go.bigpond.com/broadband/?ref=Net-Head-Int-Plans-Broadband

$70-100/month gets you BigPond Elite 200GB Liberty plan with speeds up to 20/1Mbps (ADSL2+)

or up to 8Mbps/384kbps (ADSL) or Cable up to 30/1Mbps3.

Not bad, but once you reach the cap, they slow you down to 256kbps.

You're in a city, what about the rest of the country?

Nevertheless, I currently use crapcast and they have a limit of 250G. Various AUS internet provides - as you have over 30 to choose from in most cities - now offer 1TB plans and that is without the FTTH build-out.

Here is another example, for $38 in France, you receive: 100Mbit/s FTTH, Voip and 120 channel TV service.

Edited September 30, 2010 by Heracles

[The_Dude 1,142]

People use to say the same thing about Japan back in the 80's (that it would overtake the US

and become the world's largest economy) and look where Japan is now.

Well I can get a 25 Mbit/s Verizon FIOS line for $65/month today - unlimited data of course.

Can you get that in Australia? I don't think so - all Australian plans seem to have a

data usage cap. For example,

http://go.bigpond.com/broadband/?ref=Net-Head-Int-Plans-Broadband

$70-100/month gets you BigPond Elite 200GB Liberty plan with speeds up to 20/1Mbps (ADSL2+)

or up to 8Mbps/384kbps (ADSL) or Cable up to 30/1Mbps3.

Not bad, but once you reach the cap, they slow you down to 256kbps.

Most of the major carriers are looking into and implementing in test markets capped data packages.

[mawilson 2,133]

China is not Japan, since then the US has fallen down most lists, in most rankings.

If Japan couldn't do it, I seriously doubt that China can pull it off. Can you name

a single quality product that was designed and made in China? I can't.

You're in a city, what about the rest of the country?

Ironically, it's not available everywhere in NYC, but they cover NJ pretty well.

Here is another example, for $38 in France, you receive: 100Mbit/s FTTH, Voip and 120 channel TV service.

Is that true?

[Heracles 417]

If Japan couldn't do it, I seriously doubt that China can pull it off. Can you name a single quality product that was designed and made in China? I can't.

It depends on how you look at it. For logistical reasons, Japan was really in no position to properly compete with the US. China, the EU, Brazil and Russia are making some serious progress. The US now only accounts for 24% of the world's GDP, versus over 50% a few decades ago. For countries like AUS, they just need to focus on the rest of the world and they will kill it, like they are killing it. Canada made the mistake of putting all of their eggs into the US.

Another convenient mistake many here make is grouping the US, when discussing x, when we all know the present US is about individualism. Therefore, since the US is so heavily into individualism, surely it should be compared and contrasted as such. No point in comparing GDP, as it does not [by a long-shot] reflect the average American or the median US city.

Ironically, it's not available everywhere in NYC, but they cover NJ pretty well.

I'm still waiting here too, though it's a housing estate away. The problem with FIOS or Uverse from AT&T is that there is zero competition. What AUS is doing by building a wholesale FTTH network is as pro-capitalist as it gets, as it promotes competition; considering any private carrier can lease it to sell their services. Duopoly and monopolies are flaws of Capitalism remember, right-wingers here seem to forget this.

Is that true?

Yeah, I read about it when I was looking for the US proposal, but lost the damn link. I've heard others from France mention it before too. Then again, look at other countries in Asia that already offer 1Gbit/sm, while we wait for FIOS.

Edited September 30, 2010 by Heracles

[Ban Hammer 13,659]

Unfortunately, it will also take a generation to build. The proposal estimates that construction will take 25 years and will be finished by 2040, at a cost of $117 billion.

in other words, plan on it being 400 billion.

[Heracles 417]

in other words, plan on it being 400 billion.

Governments tender projects out to the private sector. Repubs might want to read up on how a government functions, as well as the concept of taxes. Hint: your government is not your enemy.

Ironically even $800 trillion for Military related bullcrap is apparently an investment, even if it involved borrowing it from China, Iran, Venezuela etc.

Edited September 30, 2010 by Heracles

[Ban Hammer 13,659]

Governments tender projects out to the private sector. Repubs might want to read up on how a government functions, as well as the concept of taxes. Hint: your government is not your enemy.

Ironically even $800 trillion for Military related bullcrap is apparently an investment, even if it involved borrowing it from China, Iran, Venezuela etc.

congrats on missing my point entirely and using my post to soapbox on about your pet complaints.