news-record.com

OPINION

Editorial: Faster train service will draw passengers

Article
Comments (8)

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

(Updated 3:00 am)

Nearly 700,000 passengers boarded trains in North Carolina last year, the state Department of Transportation reports. That number needs to grow, and it will -- when rail travel becomes faster and more reliable.

The state has been working for years to help plan and develop the Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor. It received a boost last week with a $545 million grant from federal stimulus funds. It's not as much as requested or needed but enough to advance the project a long way down the line.

The goal is to move passenger trains along a 500-mile route from Charlotte to Washington, D.C., at top speeds of 90-110 mph and an average speed of 86 mph. That won't match the "bullet trains" in Europe, Japan and China that reach tremendous speeds, but it would mark a significant improvement over current performance. Amtrak schedules say the "Crescent" can deliver a Greensboro passenger to Washington in six hours, 12 minutes, while the "Carolinian" takes seven hours, 47 minutes. If the train can't beat driving time, its appeal is limited.

Speed it up, and the equation changes. Motorists can't (legally) average 86 mph from Greensboro to Washington. If they try to go that fast, they risk a speeding ticket. But their real problem will be heavy traffic, especially in congested urban areas.

Where high-speed rail is available, travelers like its comfort and convenience. They can read, sleep, work on the computer, send text messages or walk to the dining car. And they can save time.

In this country, unfortunately, rail travel has suffered from neglect and mismanagement. But it's time to end the lethargy and catch up with more forward-thinking countries. Building more highways, or adding more traffic to existing roads, isn't a sustainable growth model. Rail must be a part of our transportation future.

It won't be inexpensive to get there. Rail lines have to be modernized. In many areas, parallel tracks have to be added so that more trains can use the lines. Crossings have to be eliminated, which requires building more bridges. But infrastructure improvements make good investments and put people to work. Better train service also will reduce auto traffic and emissions and increase economic development opportunities for cities along the high-speed corridor, including Greensboro. There should be a strong passenger rail component to the Triad's transportation network and for making Greensboro more of a travel destination, whether visitors are coming to attend a basketball tournament, see the International Civil Rights Center & Museum or any other attraction.

Rail needs to be the way to go for many more people in North Carolina.

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Comments

View Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

buzzman

February 3, 2010 - 5:08 am EST

Without actually checking, I suspect that there are enough stops to delete the average speed to the point where the total travel time decrease will not be enough to warrant spending all this money. But, it's just our tax dollars, so spend away!

Sawdust

February 3, 2010 - 6:43 am EST

Pepole will be able to read, eat, text, talk on the phone, and work on their computers while on the train. Hell, they do all that while they're driving, so what's the big deal?

The big deal to me is: We don't have the money. We're broke. Past broke, way past broke, 12 or 14 trillion dollars past broke, not including the unfunded liabilities for our social programs. But there's enough money for Obama to buy votes. As long as the political class isn't spending their own money. cost is no object.

rfium

February 3, 2010 - 7:03 am EST

Hey Sawdust,
You are right. We're broke.
It really is a Catch 22. We need to get the economy going. If we spend money, we better be darn sure that we get the biggest bang for the buck because we are going to increase the debt.
i believe that we should do a cost/benefit analysis. If we can help the economy by increasing long term sustainable jobs, then maybe we should spend.
I don't think a high speed rail system will do it.

Escapee1

February 3, 2010 - 8:45 am EST

Here are the reasons why train travel WILL NEVER be a viable option for the majority of folks living in NC and in other states across America: 1. We're spoiled...we do not want to give up the convenience of coming and going as we please in our cars and trucks. 2. Too many stops along the train routes...defeats the purpose of train travel due to time lost. 3. Too inconvenient to get to and from the train station...you either have to leave your car there, get a ride to the station via taxi or bus and wait yet AGAIN for that service. We have subsidized the Amtrak elephant for years and it has NEVER made a profit, now we're going to be forced to pay for yet ANOTHER rail project that will waste even MORE of our taxpayer dollars...SHAME!

Beachwalk

February 3, 2010 - 12:08 pm EST

This deal is a loser from the start. This is nothing but more money (which we don't have) wasted. Go ahead and build it, China will own it in a few years.

tonymo

February 3, 2010 - 12:54 pm EST

Good Lord man, simply do some research on the massively expensive, highly subsidized light rails in many of our cities today. On most, ridership is almost non-existent outside morning and evening rush hours. Despite the abject ignorance of Joe Biden who contends that these light rail are not significantly subsidized, they are in fact, according to a recent report on this issue by John Stossel, subsidized significantly more than ANY other form of mass transportation (he gives the numbers), and carry the fewest number of people!

AMTRAK has cost the taxpayers about $30 billion since inception in the 1970's, when we were assured that AMTRAK would be profitable in THREE years. Alan miust also believe that Obamacare will REDUCE the deficit, and cover ALL Americans!

kjeffers2

February 3, 2010 - 8:17 pm EST

Comment of support here. While it's unfortunate that too much money has been wasted in the past, we need more transportation options. First think about thousands of elderly people who can still get around quite well, but need to lay down the keys. Think about others who don't have cars at all because of expense, especially when we deal with outrageous gas price hikes. To be honest, all of us are living with borrowed money as we have entrusted it in the banking system, which is only responsible for $250,000 worth of our money at any given time, unless we have entrusted it in some other accounts (i.e. IRA's). As one of the taxpayers that one could also consider "the children and grandchildren who will have to pay for this", I'd rather spend taxes on this than continuing to send troops overseas long after the good effects are gone. Also, while the demand may appear low, with airline travel declining, having reliable, faster trains is another option in cross-state travel. People leave their cars at home and use taxis/shuttles for the airport, I think many will be willing to do so for train travel that's clean, on time and reasonably price compared to airline tickets.

Sawdust

February 4, 2010 - 9:29 am EST

If we really "need" more transportation options, then those options would need to be profitable on their own, without taxpayers subsidies. Continued subsidies for Amtrak tell me that it wasn't really needed, it was just another project that some politician wanted in order to buy votes.

This country's political class seems to think that just because something works in Europe or Asia it will work here. That may well be true in some cases, but in others it is not. I don't see or hear of anyone clamoring for an Autobahn-type highway, where we can drive as fast as we like.

It will be interesting to see how many politicians and commenters will urge us to copy Canada's health care system, after that Canadian bigwig comes here for his heart surgery. Systems which work in other places, or in the case of the heart surgery don't work, aren't necessarily going to work here. And I say again, we're broke. Busted. No money.