 | NARP blogTRAINS: A travel choice Americans want |
Flag Stops: Taking Small, Quick Steps
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
This week’s roundup of news and views in the world of passenger rail and American travel focuses on the need to act quickly, yet deliberately, to do what needs to be done to keep the country moving sustainably.
—Malcolm Kenton
Posted by NARP | (1) Comments
Flag Stops: Digging a Little Deeper
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
A major transportation bill charts new territory, Chinese rail investment attracts major corporations, two passenger rail critics miss the point, and more on this week’s roundup of reactions and ruminations related to rail.
—Malcolm Kenton and Ross Capon
Posted by NARP | (0) Comments
Counting Our Blessings
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Thoughts in light of yesterday’s Washington Metrorail disaster.
Our thoughts are with the families of those who lost their lives and those who were injured in yesterday’s horrific Metrorail crash in Washington, DC. We are also keeping in mind the Metro employees who received a shocking reminder of just how important their jobs are and the awesome responsibility that is in their hands. That yesterday marked only the second train accident causing passenger fatalities in Metrorail’s 32-year history should remind the traveling public how safe mass trasit is. The National Transportation Safety Board has begun its investigation into the exact cause of the tragedy and, as with all such incidents, what we learn from their findings will make Metro and other transit systems even safer in the future.
My experience getting home from NARP’s Washington office yesterday, while harrowing, made me count my blessings. My plan was to take the 5:35 PM MARC Brunswick Line commuter train from Union Station. After almost half an hour waiting at the station hearing only that the track ahead was blocked, I learned via my mobile phone of the accident and determined that my train was not going to depart. I informed my fellow passengers and proceeded to find other means of transport. It took me two and a half hours, two bus rides and a lift from a kind stranger, but I made it home. Had I decided to leave only 15 minutes earlier, though, it could have been a lot worse, and I was lucky to be alive and unharmed.
Yesterday, I saw firsthand just how much a large city relies on its transit network. With a key segment of Metrorail and commuter service out of commission, the number of people forced into buses, cars and taxis, created huge traffic jams. If Metro’s trains and buses did not exist, there is no way the city of Washington would be able to function as it does. The subway network has only been around for three decades, but it literally consitutes the arteries that keep the city’s lifeblood flowing. When one of those arteries gets clogged or fails, the entire body is thrown into disarray.
This should serve a reminder of how indespensible our work is at NARP and throughout the rail and transit industries. We must continue our work to make trains—intercity, commuter and metro—a reliable, convenient, comfortable, and above all, safe travel method available to all Americans.
—Malcolm Kenton
Posted by NARP | (1) Comments
Flag Stops: A Time of Great Expectations
Monday, June 15, 2009
Congress figures out how to pay for better transportation, ample discussion of the future of American travel and urban geography, and why train travel actually does make sense. All that and more in this week’s roundup of reports, reactions and ruminations on passenger rail and transportation policy.
Chairman James Oberstar (D-WI) of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee is set to release his plan for this year’s much-anticipated transportation reauthorization bill on Wednesday. The question now is how, not if, federal surface transportation policy will veer from the status quo. One of the few most effective potential funding sources, however, has seemingly been taken off the table, but there are good reasons not to discount the idea of using the General Fund. Meanwhile, some members of Congress are finally starting to connect the dots between transportation and the climate bill.
We are still working to gain cosponsors for two bills that set good policy objectives, and you can help!
From Southern Pines, North Carolina’s daily newspaper, The Pilot, comes a sympathetic op-ed on Amtrak from the former editor of Passenger Train Journal, also a former Federal Railroad Administration economist. He explains why the national passenger railroad hasn’t been able to satisfy the expectations of politicians and the public, and why we now have an opportunity to get it right. “Expecting great things from Amtrak,” he aptly observes, “is like expecting a Triple Crown win from a horse that has not been fed,” but “with adequate and intelligent investment,” Amtrak can redeem itself.
Also advocating the aggressive pursuit of high-speed passenger & freight rail: the man who headed the Federal Railroad Administration under George H.W. Bush. Gilbert E. Carmichael calls the next-generation rail network “Interstate 2.0.” Steps Carmichael would like to see taken first include a 25-percent tax credit for private railroads to build new capacity, state construction or leasing of high-speed track on existing rights-of-way, and upgrading the electric grid in preparation for railroad electrification.
A detailed, behind-the-scenes report in yesterday’s New York Times Magazine underscores just how much the success of passenger rail in the near future, in the eyes of politicians and much of the traveling public, will ride on the degree to which the Golden State achieves its desired outcomes. The head of Alstom Transport told the autor, “If California is a success, ... I believe it will be the showcase [of next-generation passenger rail in the US]. But if it’s not working well? In the end it could be a failure for many years for this idea in the U.S. So it has to be very carefully done.” Our friends at TFA rightly point out that the author seems uninterested in incrementally improving existing service, essentially asking travelers (like himself) to bear with Amtrak as it is until CAHSR is complete.
A Wisconsin newspaper editorializes against the reestablishment of Amtrak service between Milwaukee and Green Bay. Their objections (and our responses):
If gas prices tripled and quadrupled, train travel might make sense. (Such increases are almost inevitable, so why not be prepared?)If traffic and congestion were stifling, train travel might make sense. (It is in many areas, and will only get worse at the rate we’re going.)
If we could easily get to wherever we wanted to go after getting off a train, train travel might make sense. (Which is why we are pushing for better transit connections within cities as well. Besides, most Amtrak stations have rental cars and taxi services on call.)
If trains were fast enough to overcome all their other inconveniences, train travel might make sense. (110 mph train operation is imminently achievable with existing infrastructure, considerably faster than one can safely and legally drive.)
If we somehow no longer cared about the freedom to drive wherever and whenever we wanted to, train travel might make sense. (Our definition of freedom includes the right to travel to more places without having to drive there or worry about parking. As the population ages, and as more people become interested in reducing their driving for a myriad of good reasons, more people are looking at transportation this way. There’s also the freedom to enjoy the trip and arrive recharged.)
Finally, once you average out all the expenses of owning, maintaining and insuring a car, plus the costs to society from traffic accidents and tailpipe emissions, it becomes difficult to say that driving is “easy, convenient and cheap.”
Richard Florida, a writer on economic geography warns that the current economic crisis means “the end of a whole way of life.” He argues that the United States’ ability to maintain its economic prowess in the years to come will depend on the ability of its urban megaregions to attract a “creative class” of professionals doing high value-added work that cannot be outsourced or done by machines, who “generate and transport ideas” instead of goods. “Positioning the economy to grow strongly in the coming decades will require not just fiscal stimulus or industrial reform; it will require a new kind of geography as well, a new spatial fix for the next chapter of American economic history.” This new geography will be built off of an efficient transportation system that will allow these megaregions to provide a high quality of life for large numbers of people. Building and operating the rail and transit networks that will drive the new economy will mean even more jobs to be had.
Today, we need to begin making smarter use of both our urban spaces and the suburban rings that surround them—packing in more people, more affordably, while at the same time improving their quality of life. That means liberal zoning and building codes within cities to allow more residential development, more mixed-use development in suburbs and cities alike, the in-filling of suburban cores near rail links, new investment in rail, and congestion pricing for travel on our roads.
One traffic-clogged American boomburg is looking towards a more livable future, staking its hopes for manageable growth on a soon-to-come subway line. On the other side of the Atlantic, new rail lines anchor French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s vision for a more integrated, sustainable Paris metro area.
George Will is at it again. This time, he is citing Amtrak’s red ink as a reason why the government would be a poor manager for bankrupt General Motors. Let’see. Amtrak’s federal grant last year was $1.3 billion, of which roughly 2/3 was capital investment and debt service. Last year, GM alone lost $31 billion—that’s the subsidy from shareholders. Then there’s the various government subsidies to auto makers and users, ongoing and emergency, and to highways and aviation. The total federal grant to Amtrak buys (on average) about 10 miles of highway. Furthermore, Will’s assertion that “Legislators treat [Amtrak] as their toy train set?” is an insult to those of us who actually use those “toy” trains to get to real places.
LCL: A Canadian economic development forum touts intercity rail as a solution to traffic woes and a “more civilized” way to travel, yet also “a tall political order;” despite some setbacks, the taxpayer money invested in Orlando-area commuter rail has not been wasted, as critics claim; city leaders in Dubuque, Iowa, get a can-do attitude towards Amtrak service to Chicago, which seems to be only a few years away; and Oklahoma hopes to get its piece of the Obama high-speed rail pie.
—Malcolm Kenton
Posted by NARP | (1) Comments
Flag Stops: Signs of Change
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Highway Trust Fund woes, models for industry nationalization, lessons from Europe, and more in this week’s roundup of rail-related reports and ruminations.
—Malcolm Kenton
Posted by NARP | (0) Comments
Lessons from GM’s Bankruptcy on the Consequences of a Fly-Drive Transportation System
Thursday, June 04, 2009
For decades, NARP has argued that America’s “fly-drive” system, that is, a transportation system over-reliant on highways and aviation and neglecting trains, was bad policy. We focused heavily on the importance of giving citizens more choices, on environmental impact and—as the opportunity opened—on energy supply issues. We also argued that highways and aviation enjoyed significant public subsidies even as many politicians kept telling themselves and the public that such subsidies did not exist, mistakenly believing that user-funded trust funds completely supported those systems. The fly-drive mentality also contributed to the nation’s overall economic problems, to the extent that the housing bubble encouraged construction and purchase of exurban homes in pedestrian-unfriendly surroundings—actions that would not have taken place if people had known where the price of oil was headed. Finally, we said one of the biggest subsidies in transportation was from airline shareholders to passengers enjoying cheap, non-compensatory fares.
Now, the stories of General Motors and Chrysler have made clear fly-drive’s financial unsustainability. Government subsidies and loans to GM and Chrysler now total over $50 billion, including loans which GM and Chrysler may not repay, and the forms government aid has taken have been varied.
Even today, some still say NARP should apologize for the fact that Amtrak requires government funding. Would airlines be profitable if governments did not maintain airports and air-traffic-control systems? Would bus companies be profitable and driving be affordable if government did not maintain the roads? Would the making of the very vehicles that carry the bulk of American travelers have been profitable without repeated help from Uncle Sam? The transportation system upon which our economy is built requires public funding and is one of the best investments we make as a society. The impact of these investments would be maximized if we had a proper balance between the modes to achieve the most efficient outcomes.
The billions that the government is ready to spend to bail out bankrupt GM are only the latest in a series of large public subsidies to automakers. GM has already received $13.4 billion in taxpayer funds, with Chrysler getting another $4 billion, and both companies’ suppliers got a total of $5 billion. The government guarantees manufacturers’ warranties for GM & Chrysler cars, and the Recovery Act provided a tax credit of $49,500 to consumers who purchase new autos. Furthermore, the climate change bill recently passed by the House Energy & Commerce Committee includes a “cash for clunkers” program, which offers tax credits encouraging drivers to trade in existing cars for more fuel-efficient models. This latter program—which, though sold as promoting energy efficiency, does not take into account the energy costs associated with prematurely scrapping useful cars—has been described as a subsidy to manufacturers, their workers and car buyers.
Some incentives for the production and consumption of more fuel-efficient vehicles are necessary to address our energy problems as long as most Americans continue to live in communities planned in such a way as to make driving a virtual necessity. It is also important for the government to help struggling communities that are dependent on auto manufacturing to get back on their feet. But we need strong efforts to minimize the worsening consequences of increased congestion and urban sprawl. More attention should be paid to the goals set forth in S. 1036, the Federal Surface Transportation Policy and Planning Act of 2009—increased use of freight and passenger trains and mass transit and reduced, and reductions in national per capita motor vehicle miles traveled on an annual basis, in national motor vehicle-related fatalities (50 percent by 2030), in national surface transportation-generated carbon dioxide levels (40 percent by 2030) and in national surface transportation delays per capita.
We need a stronger focus on investing in the infrastructure that support those goals and would give Americans more travel choices. Many forward-thinking commentators have envisioned Midwestern factories retooled to produce wind turbines and solar panels. To that list we should add locomotives, railcars, light-rail vehicles, streetcars, subways, and other rail infrastructure. Surely federal investments to correct transportation priorities are at least as worthy as efforts to maintain specific automobile companies. The “priority-correction efforts” would support more quickly achieving President Obama’s vision of an enhanced role for trains in our mobility network. Such spending would yield dividends for years to come, perpetually benefiting people, our economy, and the environment.
—Ross B. Capon and Malcolm Kenton
Posted by NARP | (1) Comments
Flag Stops: Making Tracks (June 1)
Monday, June 01, 2009
This week: Experts discuss the downsides of sprawl, chatter about potential service expansions at all levels, and top US policymakers ride the European rails.
More helpful articles for connecting transportation decisions with the layout of our communities:
- As these maps illustrate, urban areas have small carbon footprints thanks mainly to reduced automobile dependence and convenient transit. It also goes to show that not all suburbs are created equal: many “satellite” towns are well-served by transit, and developers are becoming increasingly alert to marketplace demand for pedestrian- and transit-friendly development.
- An urban studies professor discusses how federal transportation and housing policies subsidized the suburbs, plus a look at how transportation costs affect the affordability of housing.
- Pediatricians say sprawl isn’t good for kids’ health.
- How much freedom does the car actually give you?