High-speed rail on way to becoming a reality in U.S.

(Photo of futuristic high-speed trains side-by-side in Taiwan station from Flickr and photographer James Tung)

With U.S. population predicted to grow about 40 million in the next 20 years, we clearly will need some major build-out to move all these folks around. More highways? More airports? More, better and faster trains? Probably all three, but the latter makes the most sense for the planet, and we’re running far behind the rest of the world on trains. Rail here gets little respect. (see previous post)

Trains are an efficient way to move people up to 500 miles. You may be surprised to learn 80% of travel in the U.S. is within those bounds and one-third of the trips in and out of busy O’Hare Airport in Chicago are 500 miles or less. (This and other key information comes from James McCommons’ book, “Waiting on the Train.”)

As the highways and the skyways get more congested, causing frustration and long delays, it’s increasingly easy to listen to railroad buffs argue the case for trains – especially if they can move faster and more frequently than they do now, and get places on time.

Amtrak inter-city trains would be able to go up to 110 mph if they had better equipment and tracks where they could move freely, unhindered by freight trains.

And then there are the high-speed bullet trains – up to 220 mph – that Europe and Japan take for granted and even China is racing ahead on.

It may take 10-15 years, but high-speed rail seems to be coming – with support from the Obama Administration and many states.

California leads the way
California (as is often is the case) is likely to be first with a bullet train. Despite the car culture there, driving on choked freeways is no fun.

California voters approved a nearly $10B bond issue in 2008 to build a bullet-train line from LA to San Francisco (time: 2½ hours). Eventually it will extend to San Diego and Sacramento. The total cost is estimated at $40 billion. The state recently got $2.3B in stimulus funds to further its plans. The route is already selected and engineering is under way.

California is one of several states to put some of its own money into passenger rail, investing $2B since 1976. (Others include Illinois, Wisconsin, Washington and North Caroline.) California owns its own trains and is good at connectivity, having buses ready to pick people up at the train stations.

The Chicago connection
The Midwest also has a plan, using Chicago as a hub, to reach cities like St. Louis, Milwaukee and Detroit. It just got $2.2B in stimulus funds to work on the Chicago-St. Louis run. A portion of that line should soon be able to carry trains at 110mph. The Midwest has been planning for years and would like to link up with cities from Cincinnati to Kansas City over time. Stops in college towns would bring a lot of passengers onpoard.

Florida too got stimulus money ($1.25B) to develop a route from Tampa to Orlando. The state has been getting 400,000 new residents each year and has to think about transporting them. High-speed rail has been on-again, off-again over the past few decades. Former Gov. Bob Graham loved it, Jeb Bush hated it. But much of the planning is done and the state applied for the stimulus funds and got them. In addition to Tampa and Orlando, planners are eying Disneyland as a profitable stop. Future expansions would likely go to Miami and Jacksonville.

A national plan
The U.S. High Speed Rail Association has a plan (hit play on map to see it develop) that would link the country with high-speed trains by 2030.

Sure it would be expensive, but so are highways and airports. The federal government has a Highway Trust Fund but there’s no similar fund for trains. There should be.

Building high-speed rail would provide lots of jobs. California alone predicts 150,000 temporary and 450,000 permanent ones. This could be a major infrastructure project to put people back to work.

I know, you’re thinking the states are bankrupt and won’t be able to help finance such grand plans. But there are creative ways, such as selling bonds and forming public-private partnerships. Advocates say the revenue will be enough to pay back investors.

One current campaign is to get Congress to up its contribution to high speed rail to $4B a year for 5 years. This year the House voted that much, but it ended up being $2.5B. Obama has asked for $1B a year.

To join the campaign, go to fourbillion.com

(Special thanks to James McCommons and his book “Waiting on the Train” for much of the information here. Other sources: The National High-Speed Rail Association and Polk County Democrat.)

Provocative NASA study puts road traffic ahead of power plants as cause of climate change near-term

(Picture of auto traffic from Flickr and photographer Lynac)

A new study from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies says tailpipe emissions will cause the most global warming over the next decade. Next comes heating homes by burning wood and cow dung in poor countries. Third is methane from cows.

Electric power is further down the list, though it will be the prime source of warming by century’s end, the study predicts. The provocative study, by a team led by NASA’s Nadine Unger, was published this month in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Policy implications
Does this mean we should turn away from fighting the coal industry and focus more on electric cars, high-speed rail and aid to third-world countries? Possibly. We may have a little more time than we thought to shut off coal – as far as global warming is concerned.

But this is just one study. It will need to be confirmed by others.

And the reason behind the findings is troubling. It all has to do with the release of aerosols that block the incoming sunlight and have a temporary cooling effect. Tailpipe emissions don’t have much of those, while coal-fired plants do. Some aerosols, such as sulfates and organic carbon, have a very short-term cooling effect (they are rained down in just a few days), while greenhouse gases stay aloft for decades.

Of course this is a double-edged sword. Aerosols have a known harmful effect on human health and on the environment. That’s why industrialized countries have been phasing them out.

A choice we don’t want to make
Do we have to choose between climate change and our health? Unger says, “no,” that we need to phase out unhealthy aerosols, but that an immediate focus on transportation will give us the biggest bang for our buck in the next decade.

A sound way to proceed is by attacking all sources – tailpipes, burning of wood and dung, cattle-produced methane AND power plants. If we can remove many of the sources of greenhouse gases, we won’t need unhealthy particles in the air to block out the sun.

To read about the study and see graphs go to NASA’s Web site.

See Q&A with Unger. (Caution: Don’t be biased by her picture. She’s a pretty blonde.)

If you want to read the study abstract.

(Sources: NASA, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, fastcompany.com)

High-speed rail chugging along with stimulus $$

(Photo of inside of high-speed train in UK from Flickr and photographer Jon Curnow)

Can the U.S. develop a viable high-speed train system that will lure people out of their cars and reduce air travel, thus cutting down on CO2 emissions?

High-speed rail is the transportation priority for President Obama, and it recently won $8 billion in stimulus funds plus $2.5B from Congress (the president asked for $1B.) Obama is seeking another billion in his 2011 fiscal year budget.

That’s only a drop in the bucket. Requests for stimulus funds exceeded $50B, and a nationwide high-speed rail system would cost an estimated $600B. But hopefully the initial allocations will prime the pump for more federal, state and private money in the future, so some of the projects can reach fruition. The stimulus money was spread over half the states and 40% of congressional districts. So many officials will now have an interest in adding money as time goes on.

Maybe we can approach the level of many European countries and Japan, though they have a huge head start because of our powerful auto and oil interests. China, which is investing heavily in rail, just launched a link between Zhengzhou and Xi’an, with a top speed of 217mph. Europe and Japan high-speed trains reach speeds of about 220mph.

Where the money went
The bulk of the stimulus money went to California, Florida and the Midwest:
• California got $2.3B for a planned line linking San Diego, LA and San Francisco.
• Florida received $1.25B for a Tampa-Orlando run.
• The Midwest got $2.2B for initial steps for a network linking Chicago with Detroit, Milwaukee and St. Louis. The goal is to make those cities reachable in the same time it would take to drive or fly.

The remaining $2B in stimulus was divided among 20 other states for planning and upgrades, including $112 million for the high-speed Northwest Corridor connecting N.Y., Washington and Boston.

The California and Florida lines aim for speeds up to 150mph, while the Midwest network would reach 110. Regular passenger trains now go up to about 80mph.

Trains emit much less CO2 than planes and cars, anywhere from 3 and 10 times less, depending on the type of train (electric is best) and other conditions, says French company UIC. About 80% of high-speed trains in Europe are electric.

Advocacy groups in the U.S. include the
Midwest High Speed Rail Association, Western High-Speed Rail Alliance, and the new U.S. Center for High-Speed Rail, which has set up a Web site for information sharing.

See map of corridors receiving stimulus money.

See earlier EarthlingAngst post explaining high-speed rail.

(Sources: ClimateWire, E&E TV, CNN, Greenwire, E&E Daily, Midwest High Speed Rail Association, Federal Rail Administration)

Obama needs credit for environmental successes

(Photo of Obama from Flickr and jmtimages)

Despite the failure so far to pass a climate bill in the Senate, or to help forge a final international agreement in Copenhagen, the Obama Administration has, without much fanfare, quietly reversed destructive Bush environmental policy and ramped up green jobs development as it sets a course for a cleaner energy future.

Carl Pope, outgoing executive director of the Sierra Club, told the Mercury News, “This is by far the best first year on the environment of any president in history.” In just one year, he said, the president reversed most of Bush’s anti-environment actions over eight years.

The League of Conservation Voters gave him a B+ for is first year.

Among the accomplishments::

Reversing Bush policies
Fuel efficiency: Instead of fighting California’s request to the EPA to let the state restrict tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions (something many other states wanted too), Obama’s EPA granted permission and then the president announced new federal rules increasing fuel efficiency 40%, from the current average of 25 mph to 35 mph in 2016.

Regulating GHG: Bush avoided taking action on the Supreme Court decision giving the EPA power to regulate GHG under the Clean Air Act. This EPA is now finalizing a Big Polluter Rule, under which is would be able to restrict emissions from sources emitting more than 25,000 tons per year.

Oil and gas drilling: This Administration blocked Bush’s rule to open the California coast and 77 sites near Arches and Canyonlands national parks to drilling. Interior Sec. Ken Salazar also announced major reforms for oil and gas leasing on public lands.

Bisphenol: The Food & Drug Administration said bisphenol-A in plastics poses a significant danger to babies and young children.

Ozone: The EPA announced new health-based ozone standards.

Yellowstone: The Administration negated a Bush rule allowing more snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park.

Funding clean tech through ARRA
Green technologies will get a strong shot in the arm from stimulus funds, with an estimated $80 billion targeted for everything from weatherization and other efficiency measures to public transit and high speed trains to hybrid and electric cars to electrical grid improvements and renewable sources like wind and solar. Only $5B of that money has been released to date, with another $26B committed. The DOE says the delay was needed to establish rules about how the funds could be spent.

Obama is emphasizing the importance of creating jobs for the energies of the future, but the results will also to cut GHG emissions.

Additional actions
In the first year, the Administration also:
• Said it would catalog GHG emissions from large sources.
• Ordered that 500,000 federal buildings and 600,000 federal vehicles cut GHG emissions.
• Began developing standards for more efficient appliances.
• Required federal agencies to consider climate change in environmental reviews.
• Broadened guidelines for mass transit projects to receive federal funds.
• Signed into law a bill to create 2 million acres of new wilderness that bans logging, mining and new roads in federal forests and deserts in 9 states, including Joshua Tree and Sequoia national parks.

The president doesn’t get a lot of credit for all this – and more – because things were so bad in the Bush years, and the news focus has been on the economy and health care. But we are slowly moving forward despite Congress and the big lobbies. That’s why it is so important to defeat Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R-AK) resolution to keep the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases. Tell your senators to vote no.

(Sources: Sierra Club, mercurynews.com, Center for American Progress, White House blog)

With gas prices high, California picks route for high-speed train from LA to San Francisco

(Photo showing alternate plans for high-speed rail from Flickr and photographer lazy Tom/ Marcel Marchon)

News Update 4: A high-speed train line that has languished on the drawing boards for years has gotten a push from the rising price of gasoline, which is about $5 a gallon in California. In a unanimous vote, the state’s High Speed Rail Authority has selected a route for the 700-mile, 2½-hour trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles. Next comes a place on the November ballot for voters to OK a $40 billion bond issue and a state law to assure that’s legal. There is some environmental opposition to the route, Pacheco Pass (blue in picture) which goes through some undeveloped land. The California Air Resources Board said a high-speed train line would cut greenhouse gases by 1 million metric tons a year. (Source: ClimateWire, Greenwire, Environmental Law & Policy Center)

High gas prices driving Americans to more fuel-efficient smaller cars, and to trains

(Photo of the cost of filling up a F-150 pickup, with graffiti, from Flickr and photographer ugas1/Christy C)

Weekly Angst: With the price of gasoline climbing ever higher, Americans are seeing green. Whether it’s all economics or in part concern about global warming, train ridership is up and sales of motor vehicles are shifting from trucks and SUVs to compact cars, all to the benefit of the environment. The trend is hard to miss. Here are some news items from the past two weeks:

Train ridership up; Amtrak funding bill faces Bush veto
Amtrak ticket sales rose 15.6% in May, over a year ago, and officials say ridership is up about 11% for the year. They attribute half the increase to high gas prices. Train advocates are asking more federal money to help trains compete with airplanes here. About 1% of passenger miles are by train in the U.S., while France, Britain and Germany see 6-8% and Japan 18%. Amtrak is slow and inefficient while France, Germany and Japan have high-speed trains on dedicated tracks with special signals, allowing them to go 150-185 mph. A House-approved Amtrak bill faces a veto from the White House because it doesn’t contain reforms. Dem presidential candidate Barack Obama said he’d fight for funding with reforms. GOP candidate John McCain has in the past voted against subsidies for Amtrak. (Sources: Reuters/New York Times)

Train industry asks incentives to expand nation’s rail system
The railroad industry defended recent profits before a Senate panel last week and asked for incentives to expand rail nationwide. Saying rail profits are lower than most industries, the Association of American Railroads pointed to the environmental benefits of trains, noting that they are 3 times more fuel-efficient than trucks. An industry ad campaign says freight trains can carry a ton of freight 436 miles on a gallon of diesel. (Source: E&E Daily)

GM to close 4 truck plants, re-evaluate its Hummer
General Motors announced it will close 4 North American plants that make pickup trucks and SUVs and will add a shift to 2 plants that make smaller cars. GM reaffirmed its commitment to its plug-in hybrid, the Chevy Volt, and said it would re-evaluate the Hummer.

Ford Motor Co. says it will cut back on trucks and SUVs too
Ford also is following demand and cutting production of trucks and sport utility vehicles and focusing more on smaller cars like the Focus and Edge. The F-150 pickup, which has long driven profits for the company, is in less demand. Further cuts may be required, officials said.

GM to help set up filling station for hydrogen fuel-cell cars
General Motors is partnering with Clean Energy Fuels Corp. on a hydrogen fuel-cell refueling station near Los Angeles International Airport, as the first step toward a network of such stations in California. For now, it will be used by test drivers for the fuel-cell Chevy Equinox, expected to be for sale by 2014 at the latest. Fuel-cell cars emit only water vapor. (Sources: Greenwire and Reuters/New York Times)

Toyota plugs its electric/gas plug-in hybrid, expected in 2010
Toyota said it will introduce a plug-in hybrid with a next-generation lithium-ion battery in Japan, the U.S. and Europe in 2010. Sales of smaller Toyota cars rose sharply last month, the company said, with the Corolla up 17%. Hybrid sales are flat – for the simple reason that they are in very short supply, due to a backlog in getting parts. Toyota plans to open plants for hybrids in Thailand and Australia, to sell cars to the developing world. (Sources: Greenwire, Bloomberg)

Industry leaders ask for federal help in jump-starting plug-ins
Top auto officials told a forum in Washington, D.C., this week that U.S. companies need government support for R&D to compete with Asia, which dominates in development of batteries for electric plug-ins. There’s also a need for consumer tax breaks to encourage early adopters to buy this type of car and break down resistance to something new. (Bills stalled in the Senate call for such consumer incentives.) With that help, plugs-in, which are technically feasible, can become a booming market, said GM President for North America Tom Clarke. In the same week, the Bush administration announced a $30 million R&D program for plug-ins. (Source: Greenwire)

Chicago considers switching all taxis to hybrid by 2014
Following the lead of New York City, key Chicago Ald. Ed Burke (14th ) and Transportation Committee Chair Tom Allen (38th) want all taxi cabs in the city to be hybrids by Jan. 1, 2014. Cabs are replaced every 4 years. The two said they want, starting next year, to mandate that all replacement cabs be either hybrid or run on alternative fuels, such as compressed natural gas, biodiesel or hydrogen. At this point there are 50 hybrid taxis on the street. I rode in one last week and the driver was please it cost him about a third as much for gas. (Chicago Sun-Times)

This is the kind of movement we need, away from gas guzzlers. Let’s hope it continues, even if high prices are a pain in the pocketbook. (Easy enough for me to say. I have a Prius.) Europe’s petrol prices are much higher than ours and they have long had smaller cars and better trains.

House approves funding for Amtrak, high-speed trains, study of biofuel use

(Photo of an Amtrak train in Bloomington-Normal, IL, from Flickr and photographer Jim Frazier)

Washington Report 2: The House of Representatives voted 311-104 Wednesday for an Amtrak reauthorization bill that includes $1.75 billion over 5 years for developing 11 high-speed intercity rail corridors. It also provides $2.5 billion for states to provide new or improved intercity rail. Another provision funds studies of how a biofuel blend instead of straight diesel could cut CO2 emissions and the feasibility of bio-based lubricants. The Senate passed a similar bill in October. Now the two go to conference to resolve their differences. President Bush has threatened a veto but both chambers passed their bills by more than a two-thirds majority so would likely be able to override a veto. A bipartisan transportation panel had recommended a high-speed network across the country, costing an estimated $66.3 billion by 2015. (Source: E&E Daily)

Honda Civic GX 'cleanest' car

News Update: Honda Civic GX ranked No. 1 in the 2008 Greenbook Online, edging out the Prius. That’s because the car runs on compressed natural gas and has practically no greenhouse gas emissions. Owners can tap into a gas line and fill up their car right in their garage. The car, on display at the Chicago Auto Show this year, is only available in New York and California for now. Other clean-green cars:
2. Prius, a hybrid by Toyoto
3. Honda Civic Hybrid
4. Smart FourTwo, the little European Smart Car 2-seater
5. Toyota Yaris
6. Toyota Corolla
7. Mini Cooper/Clubman
8. Ford Focus (the only American car in the top 12)
9. Toyota Camry Hybrid
10. Honda Civic
11. Honda Fit
The cars are measured on greenhouse gases, other tailpipe emissions, fuel economy and manufacturing emissions (estimated).
(Sources: greencars.org, ELPC) (Photo of Civic GX filling up with natural gas from Flickr and photographer geognerd)

You can help track climate change by recording early blooms
Everyone who wants to can record the first buds and leaves they observe on a new Web site to help scientists determine the effects of climate change on ecosystems. Project Budburst, at http://www.budburst.org, was designed by scientists and launched in February. As the Earth warms and climate changes, flowers are blooming earlier in many places, causing problems for pollination if bees and migrating birds aren’t there yet. (Source: Miami Herald)

Eurostar high-speed rail sees growth of business travelers
Eurostar’s high-speed trains between London, Paris and Brussels carried 5% more passengers last year, the company’s CEO recently told a business conference, and 30% more business travelers in the past 2 years. He predicted a doubling of the Eurostar 3,100-mile system by 2018, noting that travelers are becoming concerned about emissions from airplanes, which have risen 90% in the past 14 years. The airlines are resisting a plan by the European Union to include them in its carbon emissions trading program. (Source: Associated Press)

Etc.: GM vice chairman calls global warming a “total crock of shit” but insists his views have no bearing on the company’s commitment to clean cars … 10,000 black taxis, or town cars, in New York City must go hybrid within 5 years, joining 13,000 yellow cabs … new BP CEO says renewables aren’t bringing in enough profits and they may sell off some wind, solar and biodiesel … Iditarod (dog sled race) moves starting place farther north, due to lack of snow … Virgin Airlines to use fuel-cell cars as VIP limos starting this month … Sierra Club launches campaign to stop 6 planned Dynegy coal-fired plants in 6 states … Alaskan native villages threatened by rising seas sue 24 utilities, oil and coal companies for damages caused by global warming.

1-minute Angst: high-speed trains

Summary for Feb. 25-29

Could high-speed trains work in the U.S. or is it too big? Railroad man Craig Burroughs says at 250 mph we could get from Chicago to LA in less than 10 hours. High-speed freight trains would take lots of heavy trucks off the roads, making highway expansion unnecessary and dramatically reducing expensive maintenance of truck-damaged roads.

House OKs renewable-energy tax credits, again, but Senate could balk at money coming from Big Oil. And White House threatens to veto. One hope: add it to budget reconciliation bill … McCain gets zero from League of Conservation Voters for 2007 non-votes.

Freight trains compete with trucks to carry Asian imports from ports, getting more investment … efficiency best way to cut energy demand, study says … nuke developers go to South despite excess capacity there.

Water supply for Southern California, in Lake Mead, could be gone by 2021, because of drought and reduced snowpack … Chile suffers worst drought in decades, while ocean water must be pumped to Andes.

For full text, see below.

Q&A: Electric and high-speed trains

Craig Burroughs is a railroad man I met at a Sierra Club meeting. He touts trains as the solution to a lot of our global warming problem, and he knows what he’s talking about. Starting with the Rock Island Line after college, he spent most of his career developing short-line railroads. Now that he’s “retired,” he’s working with a nonprofit on what has been his dream since he was 9: a trans-world high-speed railroad. Much of the year he can be found in Anchorage planning a railroad from China to Canada, with a tunnel under the Bering Strait. In the fall he covers college football games for his online column, Red Zone. Last year he went to 79 games and a short time ago passed a career 1,000-mark. He’s put 800,000 miles on his Oldsmobile station wagon, but says he’d much rather take the train.

Q: You say trains should be electrified. How is that better than diesel?
A: It doesn’t have emissions. And the electricity could come from cleaner sources, like hydropower and (in Chicago) nuclear. A nationwide network of electrified trains would drastically reduce the need for expanding our highways.

Q: How does the U.S. compare with the rest of the world on electrified trains?
A: It’s just about at the bottom of the list. We have the smallest percentage of electric mainline rails of any industrialized country in the world. Japan is just about all electric. Germany and France went directly from steam to electric. They did it the intelligent way because they didn’t have General Motors telling them how to do things.

Q: Where do we have electrified trains in the U.S.?
A: We have high-speed electric trains in the Northeast Corridor, from Washington, through Baltimore and Philadelphia to New York.

Q: Are all high-speed trains electric?
A: Yes. In other countries they can go 180 mph, and 225 mph in France. There’s a new line under construction in Japan that will be able to go 250 mph.

Q: Would we need to lay new track for high-speed trains?
A: The Northeast Corridor is on tracks engineered and built in the 1800s, so those trains can only go 120 mph (still faster than Amtrak’s 79 in the rest of the country). New tracks would be needed for really high speeds.

Q: Why don’t we have more high-speed lines here in the U.S.?
A: They think you can only have them where cities are close. But Chicago and Milwaukee are only 90 miles apart. And Detroit, St. Louis and Indianapolis are all within striking distance. We should have high-speed rail there now, as an alternative to short-hop airlines and highways – both a major source of pollutants.

Q: What about the rest of the country? Is it too spread out?
A: A train going 250 mph could go from Chicago to LA in less than 10 hours, and from New York to LA in less than 15. You wouldn’t have to get there 2 hours early, and the ride would be smooth instead of bouncing up and down in the air currents. You could see the country instead of the tops of clouds.

Q: What about freight trains? Can they use the same tracks?
A: Yes, if they are built as high-speed trains. High-speed freight trains would take heavy trucks of the highway, eliminating most of the need for frequent, expensive highway maintenance.

Q: Where would the money come from?
A: If it were like the highway system, we could do it with taxes, instead of pouring the money down a rat hole in another country and killing people. We could save people instead; we’re killing 45,000 each year on the highways.
(Photo of high-speed train in Amsterdam from Flickr and photographer Mike Noestheden.)
To get involved, learn about the Midwest High Speed Rail Assn., which will link you to Save Chicago Transit.
To read about high-speed rail expansion in Europe, see the blog treehugger . For a PR video on California's plan for a high-speed system, see YouTube.