High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program (USA)

[M II A II R II K]

Gov. Quinn Announces Illinois as First State to Begin High-Speed Rail Construction


September 17, 2010



Read More: http://chicagopressrelease.com/news/...economic-boost

Governor Pat Quinn today was joined by officials to announce the start of a $98 million project to upgrade an initial 90 miles of Union Pacific railroad track between Alton and Lincoln in preparation for high-speed rail service. This initial phase will create approximately 900 direct and indirect jobs, and represents the first high-speed rail upgrades in the nation. In total, developing the Chicago-St. Louis High Speed Rail corridor is anticipated to create and retain approximately 24,000 direct and indirect Illinois jobs. The project is funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).

“I am proud to announce that Illinois is the first state in the nation to begin high-speed rail construction,” said Governor Quinn. “When the corridor is completed, travelers will be able to go from Chicago to St. Louis in under four hours, making Illinois the high-speed rail hub of the Midwest. This project is an essential to strengthening Illinois’ economic recovery, creating jobs and developing long-term investment in Illinois.”

Illinois’ high-speed rail signature route: Chicago to St. Louis, received $1.1 billion for corridor improvements. The improvements will allow passenger rail service to operate at speeds up to 110 mph, and will significantly reduce travel times between the two cities. The corridor is part of a Midwest network that connects major cities across the region to Chicago. Under Governor Quinn’s leadership, the Midwest system received $2.6 billion in the initial round of ARRA funding, more than any other region in the nation.

[Carcharodon]

Northeast Corridor: Infrastructure Master Plan and Vision for High Speed Rail

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/Conten...=1241245669222

[202_Cyclist]

Although it isn't high speed rail, these improvements are still good to see. More good projects, creating jobs, funded by the Recovery Act.

Vermont receives funding for Amtrak

By CHRIS GAROFOLO
Brattleboro Reformer
Thursday September 30, 2010

“BRATTLEBORO -- Vermont's congressional delegation and the U.S. Department of Transportation announced Wednesday the release of $50 million in federal stimulus money for upgrades to the Amtrak passenger track from St. Albans to Vernon.

Recently approved by the Federal Railroad Administration, the improvements to the 190-mile stretch will allow trains to decrease travel time by roughly an hour through Vermont and Massachusetts in the country's single largest rail improvement project. The infrastructure investment will also create numerous construction jobs and revamp the railroad for both freight and passenger trains in the long-term.


An Amtrak train prepares to head north at the Brattleboro station. (Reformer file photo)

Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., said improvements to Amtrak's Vermonter (running from St. Albans through Brattleboro's station to Washington, D.C.) will help Windham County businesses and commuters while boosting the region's growing tourism economy….”

http://www.reformer.com/ci_16211629?source=most_viewed

[M II A II R II K]

Is high-speed rail on track in the U.S.?


http://www.usatoday.com/travel/exper...eed-rail_N.htm

Taken any fast rides on the rails lately? In Japan, the Shinkansen bullet trains can cruise at 186 mph. In Germany, the ICE can reach similar speeds. In China, it's 220 mph. High-speed rail lines are in use throughout France, Spain, Italy, Taiwan, South Korea and other countries around the world.

And now, if President Obama has his way, true high-speed rail will spread throughout the United States as well. But the challenges—and the costs—are daunting.

Funding boost

The Obama administration has been boosting rail since taking office, but an indication that America had gotten serious came back in January, when President Obama and Vice President Biden announced a federal investment of $8 billion for high-speed intercity passenger rail. At that time, Obama argued: "There's no reason why Europe or China should have the fastest trains when we can build them right here in America."

A breakdown includes details on the following regions:

•Florida

•California

• Chicago-St. Louis-Kansas City

• Madison-Milwaukee–Chicago

• Charlotte-Raleigh-Richmond-Washington, D.C.

• Eugene-Portland-Seattle

• Detroit-Chicago

• Ohio

• Northeast

Here's a rundown of some key arguments against investing in high-speed rail:

•Cato Institute: "Saving energy and reducing pollution are worthy goals, and if high-speed trains could achieve these goals, the president's plan might be a good one. But since they cannot, it isn't."

•Heritage Foundation: "Even in a strong economy, building HSR makes little sense, offering minimal reductions in travel times at exorbitant costs...The country would be better off either not spending the money or spending it on something productive."

•Reason Foundation: "[The] conflict between freight and passenger service is one of the little-noticed problems with what really should be called 'moderate-speed rail.' You can optimize a rail network for freight or for passenger service, but not for both."

[202_Cyclist]

The New York Times has a debate on their website about high speed rail in the US.

Will We Ever Have High-Speed Trains?

NY Times
10/14/2010

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate...peed-trains?hp


Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
A Chinese high-speed train, which travels at 220 miles per hour, leaving Wuhan for Guangzhou in December, 2009.

"High-speed rail systems have long flourished in Japan and Europe, and now in China, 42 new high-speed lines with trains that travel at more than 210 miles per hour will open by 2012. In the United States, trains that go faster than 100 miles per hour are mostly a pie-in-the-sky dream.

President Obama included $8 billion for high-speed rail projects in the stimulus bill. But Republican gubernatorial candidates say they will block Obama's initiative and are refusing to take the money. Still, the dream goes on. Amtrak recently issued a $117 billion proposal to build a system in the Northeast corridor, with trains that could travel between Philadelphia and New York in 38 minutes. There is no financing plan.

Will high-speed rail ever happen in the U.S.? Is it a matter setting priorities, or would these systems make little economic sense even if the political will exists?"

[M II A II R II K]

High-speed rail sought for B.C. to U.S. run


October 20, 2010

Read More: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-col...#ixzz131orLBU6

B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell and Washington state Gov. Christine Gregoire promise to get moving on a high-speed train that could transport passengers far down the U.S. west coast. "We hope it will go not just from Vancouver to Portland, but on to California," Gregoire said in a joint news conference in Vancouver Wednesday. Washington state has already won a $600 million grant from the U.S. government to amp up their rail line from Oregon through Seattle, and that also includes money for the track to Vancouver, she said.

But Campbell said he still has to convince the federal government to help out with the "significant investment" required north of the border. "We have not had the same kind of aggressive approach in Canada as they have in the United States with regard to high-speed rail," he said, adding that he's working to get Asia-Pacific Gateway Minister Stockwell Day on board.

Campbell said he's behind the proposal to improve the quality of B.C.'s track and rail because it will get cars off the road and save commuters from waiting in long border lineups. "When I'm talking about high-speed rail, I'm talking about high-speed rail. I'm not talking about a train, I'm talking about a train that gets us from one place to another quickly, so that we don't have to use our cars," he said. The train would travel upwards of 175 km/h and is part of President Barack Obama's national agenda, according to a Washington state official.

Amtrak high-speed trains like this one in Boston could one day run from California to Vancouver. (SignalIPAD)

[JDRCRASH]

^ Imagine, Vancouver to Tijuana.

[mhays]

The Vancouver-Seattle-Portland segment is PERFECT for rail improvements. It's three cities with decent centralization and transit focus, all spaced perfectly for rail.

The current slow service does well. The regional Amtrak service (vs. the long-haul West Coast service) has two per day Vancouver-Seattle and four per day Seattle-Portland, the latter moving to six per day soon aided by stimulus dollars. Travel time is a little slower than driving, but ridership is good....a good case study that trains are preferred by a lot of people who have viable alternatives (for example people traveling between my company's Seattle and Portland offices).

True high speed is a daunting challenge. We have a severe lack of rail ROW. I'd love to see new ROW created so we can do true HSR. In the meantime, incremental improvements to the existing line, such as those funded by local dollars and stimulus, are a great idea for not only Amtrak but freight and commuter rail too, given that they all share our anemic main line.

[Busy Bee]

^Yeah . There is a great background of the PNW's rail challenges in a chapter of the book Waiting on a Train. The most ideal concept would of course be a tremendous investment in dedicated true HSR alignments, bypassing the choked, zigzaggy freight alignment.

[M II A II R II K]

Government to announce $2.5 billion for high speed rail


http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69O52C20101025

The government will soon distribute $2.5 billion for high speed rail projects nationwide with California and Florida to receive the largest amounts, state and congressional officials said on Monday.

The Transportation Department would not confirm details ahead of an expected announcement later in the week, but the agency's secretary, Ray LaHood, notified members of Congress about the awards earlier in the day.

California is set to receive $902 million, most of it going to projects in the Central Valley region. Florida will receive $800 million.

"This is a great announcement for California that will create jobs at a time that we really need them," said Senator Barbara Boxer in a statement. Boxer, a Democrat, is in a tight race for re-election against Republican challenger Carly Fiorina.

The Golden State, which has the third highest unemployment rate in the country at 12.4 percent, has approved selling $10 billion bonds to build a rail line stretching north to south.

California already received $2.25 billion for rail development under the U.S. economic stimulus plan approved by Congress last year.

The current round of federal funding will not come from the stimulus package, which set aside $8 billion for building faster passenger trains. Instead, it is sourced to a separate grant program.

In January, Florida received $1.25 billion from the stimulus plan to build a line from Orlando to Tampa.

U.S. Rep. John Mica, who could take over chairmanship of the Transportation Committee if Republicans win control of the House in the November 2 elections, said the project is in the hands of voters who will decide whether to connect mass transit to the high-speed rail in a special ballot.

"The Orlando-to-Tampa project will be the first new intercity passenger rail project built in the U.S. in decades, and it must be financially viable and connect into regional fixed transit systems," Mica said in a statement.

[M II A II R II K]

DOT Releases Second Round of High-Speed Rail Grants, Bringing Good News to California


http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2...to-california/

In the shadow of the coming elections, California’s large commitment to its rail program continues to be rewarded by Washington; a focus on the Central Valley encourages long-term thinking about the state’s future train network.

Ten months after allocating $8 billion to intercity rail projects across the nation, the U.S. Department of Transportation has announced an additional $2.5 billion in investments designed to encourage the spread of rail passenger transportation. Unlike the first expenditures, these funds do not come from President Obama’s early 2009 stimulus but rather from the FY 2010 budget. Though the FY 2011 budget may also include funding for this mode of transportation, that spending has yet to be agreed upon by the Congress, making today’s announcement the last definite federal distribution of rail dollars.

Each state receiving funds will for the first time be required to contribute its own funds to its respective project. The DOT has asked for 20% or more to be covered locally. The list of projects shows a distribution of funding spread across the country, though many of the states have received only relatively small planning funds so far.

As I discussed earlier this week, the decision by Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood to devote $800 million to the Tampa-Orlando high-speed corridor indicates that the government expects to use this Florida line as a model for the rest of the country once it opens as early as 2015. Now that funds have been allocated, it appears that were he to win, once-skeptical Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Scott may not be such an opponent as he once suggested, indicating that this project is highly likely to move forward no matter who wins next week’s election. The Democratic candidate, Alex Sink, is a strong supporter.

Yet the $715 million to be spent on California’s Central Valley high-speed line is of more consequence for the future of the country as a whole, since it will form the central element of the nation’s fastest and most comprehensive set of fast train corridors. When including the $2.25 billion the state received in January for the program and the $10 billion voters approved in 2008, the state now possesses enough funding to begin construction on a large segment of the planned 700-mile network — though the full $45 billion, 220 mph program is far from being completed.

The federal government’s decision to allocate specifically to the Central Valley corridor between Bakersfield and Merced suggests that Washington hopes to grow the fast train system from the center, out. In the first round of grants, the government failed to pinpoint exactly where it wanted California to begin construction — so the rail authority is currently evaluating where to spend those initial funds. Now that a large amount of money has been earmarked specifically for the Central Valley, the state should think seriously about investing most of its funds there for now. Unlike the San Francisco Bay alignment to the north and the route through the greater Los Angeles area, the Central Valley line has encountered little resistance from locals, so its completion could come more quickly. Showing that the state can move forward with actual construction, instead of simply more planning, would be a good move politically.

[afiggatt]

The Department of Transportation press release with a link down the page to a PDF document listing all the awards for the FY10 HSIPR funds and a few awarded from leftover FY09 money can be found at http://www.dot.gov/affairs/2010/dot19210.html.

Besides the high profile awards to the California and Florida HSR programs, there were a number of other awards for improved or new service:
Iowa - $230 million to start a Chicago to Iowa City service. Will be 79 mph max speed on the new tracks, but restores service to communities that have not had passenger rail in some decades.
Connecticut - $120.9 million (out of $220 million requested) for upgrading/restoring the Amtrak owned New Haven to Springfield Mass line. Candidate line for future electrification.
Michigan - $157 million total (out of $322 million requested) for the Kalamazoo to Dearborn segment of the Chicago to Detroit corridor to buy 135 miles of rail line from Norfolk Southern and improve it. Critical project to keep the Chi-Detroit service viable and be able to get it to 110 mph speeds on the 97 miles owned by Amtrak and the 135 miles to be brought.

Smaller awards of note:
North Carolina - $22 million for eliminating 8 grade crossings and relocating the Charlotte station to the business district. With the $520 million awarded to NC in January, combined with the detailed planning for the Richmond VA to Petersburg to Raleigh line puts the Southeast HrSR corridor a nice step closer to reality.

Delaware - $13.3 million to add 1.5 miles of a high-speed 3rd track and bridge replacement to fix a bottleneck in the NEC south of Wilmington DE. I think I have been delayed on southbound Regionals help up at 30th Street Station because of this bottleneck although there is the another 2 track section north of the (2 track) Susquehanna bridge.

In the throw them a small bone award category, $87,863 to Kansas to upgrade the Lawrence KS station.

[Busy Bee]

Seems like an appropriate place to put this news...

These looks promising aesthetically. Siemens is extremely competent in this department. I'm sure they will come out looking slightly more conventional, but I have confidence these will look great. Much better than the AEM-7's operating on the Keystone Corridor and the NEC.



xxx


Amtrak orders Siemens 200 km/h Cities Sprinter locomotives

29 October 2010

USA: Siemens Mobility has won a $466m order to supply Amtrak with 70 ACS64 'Amtrak Cities Sprinter' electric locomotives with a top speed of 200 km/h, the supplier announced on October 28.

Deliveries are scheduled to run for six years from 2013, with the locomotives being deployed on the Northeast Corridor and Keystone Corridor as part of Amtrak's programme to reduce journey times and increase service reliability.

The Amtrak Cities Sprinter will be a version of Siemens' Eurosprinter family adapted to meet FRA crashworthiness requirements, incorporating redesigned crumple zones, an enhanced cab safety cage and anti-climb features, which will bring an increase in weight.

The locomotives will be rated at 6·4 MW and able to run on 25 kV, 12·5 kV and 12 kV AC supplies, with regenerative braking. To ease maintenance it will be possible to remove the traction motors and wheelsets without lowering the bogies.

To meet Buy America regulations the locomotives will be produced at Siemens' light rail vehicle plant in Sacramento, California, with the Alpharetta and Norcross plants in Georgia supplying traction motors and propulsion equipment.

'This order for the Cities Sprinters is our first opportunity to supply a Siemens locomotive to the American locomotive market, the second largest market in the world', said Siemens Mobility CEO Hans Jörg Grundmann. 'This order shows that we are capable of offering the right solutions for regional and long-distance passenger rail service in the USA'.

Link to rest of story

[202_Cyclist]

Key GOP lawmaker cool to high-speed rail grants

By JOAN LOWY
Associated Press
November 3, 2010

"The Republican lawmaker in line to head the House Transportation Committee says he wants to re-examine $10 billion in federal grants for high-speed train service, one of President Barack Obama's signature programs.

Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., the committee's ranking GOP member, told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday that he believes high-speed trains are a good idea, but he doesn't agree with the projects selected by the Transportation Department for funding.

The biggest awards announced last January were $2.3 billion to California to begin work on an 800-mile-long, high-speed rail line tying Sacramento and the San Francisco Bay area to Los Angeles and San Diego; $1.25 billion to Florida to build a rail line connecting Tampa on the West Coast with Orlando in the middle of the state, eventually going south to Miami; $1.1 billion to Missouri and Illinois to improve a rail line between Chicago and St. Louis so that trains travel up to 110 mph, and $810 million to Wisconsin to build a new line between Madison and Milwaukee, which eventually could be part of a line connecting Minneapolis to Chicago..."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...,7671412.story

[Busy Bee]

Mica suggested possibly scaling back the Florida project to a line that runs between the Orlando airport and theme parks and tourist destinations in the Orlando area.

I just fucking threw up in my mouth! So he wants to take the nations first true HSR project, which is about to get under way, and turn it into a theme park shuttle which will benefit NO ONE but tourists flying into Orlando. And here I thought Mica 'got it.'

[lawfin]

^^^Come on are you really surprised. The New Wisc Governor literally ran on a "No trains" platform. Christie in NJ squelched a transit project sorely needed between NJ and NY.

Now this republican comes out against transit.......gee....shocking.


Republicans / Conservatives simply want roads that is all. Cato, Heritgae, Reason, the Heartland institute here in Chicago see transit as anathema......it of course has nothing to do with their incestuous relationship will petro-companies...nah.

In conservative / republican mind.......negative spillover effects....ie pollution, sprawl, embedded cost of thinly utilized infrastructure.........good.

Positive spillover.....like transit increasing density, reducing pollution, increasing healthy lifestyle...bad


Both are subsidized....one just subsidizes bad spillover; the other postive spillover.

Now after Tuesday and the election of a large swath of the crazy caucus I do not feel well about transit future.

Thats ok....the plutocrats will be driven in their fortified SUV to their gated communites by the increasing population of willing peasantry who will be relegated to horse and buggy or donkey in their vision for america.

[Crawford]

Mica makes sense, and everyone here knows it.

Obama wasted billions by throwing it around like pork. High speed rail is a good idea, but only where there will be significant ridership.

No one is going to ride a suburban Orlando--suburban Tampa high speed link. Complete pork, and part of the reason Obama has been such a failure. That was Obama's best funded route. Apparently he couldn't find a more deserving location.

Or what about high-speed rail in Iowa? Sounds like a real winner. I'm sure millions are clamoring to ride to Council Bluffs.

High speed rail should first be spent in the Northeast. Then maybe California. All these other routes are jokes, and are just Obama payback.

While I'm not happy with this most recent election, one of the positives is that Obama's dumb-ass initiatives will likely be halted. Health care will be pared back, rail will be stymied, and tax increases will be stunted. No progress on immigration or environment but Obama could care less about these issues. Then maybe in two years someone from the Democratic party will have the cojones to run against Jimmy Carter 2.

I really wanted Hillary to win, and believe she would have done a much better job than Obama. He has been an all-around failure, and leaves many folks like me with the undesirable choice of right-wing wackos vs. Obama making the wrong choices on the big issues.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Crawford

I really wanted Hillary to win, and believe she would have done a much better job than Obama. He has been an all-around failure, and leaves many folks like me with the undesirable choice of right-wing wackos vs. Obama making the wrong choices on the big issues.

^ Oh, puhleez.

Obama passed every major initiative that he promised during his campaign, and you know it. If you didn't like them then you should have voted for McCain (I'm assuming you didn't, of course).

My only complaint about the rail dollars are that it should not have been given the label "high speed rail" because it's clearly not. I agree with spending money on improving passenger rail outside of the northeast, especially in the midwest, because more frequent service in these routes have already demonstrated dramatic increases in ridership--there is a real untapped market out there.

Regarding Clinton, I agree she would have been effective, but I'm not convinced she would have accomplished much more than Obama did, especially facing a GOP that was willing to oppose every Democratic initiative in lockstep. Don't forget that the Clintons got walloped in the 90's when they attempted to reform health care.

[202_Cyclist]

While I'm not happy with this most recent election, one of the positives is that Obama's dumb-ass initiatives will likely be halted. Health care will be pared back, rail will be stymied, and tax increases will be stunted.

Please explain which tax increases you're talking about? The Recovery Act had $300B in 'Making Work Pay' tax credits, there was thousands of dollars potentially available for each taxpayer for Lifetime Learning tax credits, hundreds (perhaps thousands) more dollars for home energy rennovations. Obama also proposed extending the R&D tax credits and accelerating the depreciation tax credit for businesses--- ideas previously supported by Republicans and the US Chamber of Commerce.

One of the big failures of Democrats was to explain to people just how many tax credits there were and, especially, to counter the nonsense about the Recovery Act by noting that more than 1/3 of its spending was for tax cuts yet the GO(B)P still voted against this.

[Crawford]

^
202, I don't want to take this thread too far off-course, but Obama wants huge income taxes on the rich, while also raising their taxes to pay for healthcare. Top rates would skyrocket.

I am not in support of skyrocketing tax rates when the economy begs for investment. I think the Republicans are likely to reduce or put a halt to both increases, which is fine with me in this economy.

I have no problem in theory with proposed tax increases, but not to buy crappier health care, not to fund more generous public pensions, and not to built bullet train lines in Nebraska.

If tax increases could be legally tied to real investments in research, education, transportation, infrastructure and the like, I could support them. But I don't want higher taxes for empty trains to Tampa or Council Bluffs.