|
HSR 
Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 20:52:59 PDT
|
(noon. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
 Last week I presented a draft of a national Steel Interstate plan. The focus was on the Institutional Framework required to be able to build it, including the source for the interest subsidy to finance its up front capital cost.
Possibly lost in the wall of words was an important point, which was focused on by some commentary: the users are paying the capital construction cost. As a country, we need it, so as a country, it makes sense to find a way to jumpstart it and have it available for the oil prices shocks that are coming in this next two decades.
... but once it starts getting used, that's what will cover the original construction cost. One way we can tell we are heading toward Economic Freedom is that it helps pay for itself.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1896 words in story)
|
|
Sun Mar 07, 2010 at 18:12:43 PST
|
(noon. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Energy Independence
 It often seems there is a deep canyon lying between what we can do and what needs to be done as a community, as a local region, as a state, as a national region, or as a nation.
But the Steel Interstate is a national program that a coalition of determined groups of advocates scattered across the country could get going. It bridges regional interest conflicts, and offers a way to advance some of the interests of so many - Interstate motorists, advocates of freedom from cars, organized labor, the largely disorganized army of the unemployed, advocates of ecological sustainability, advocates of mitigating climate chaos, and Progressive Patriots, to name just a few.
Of course, I want to talk process, but it seems to be network maps that catches people's interest. So how I will go about this is alternating Map and Process.
|
|
There's More...
:: (9
Comments, 3670 words in story)
|
|
Sun Feb 21, 2010 at 16:08:27 PST
|
(noon. No Olympics until 3 pm. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
 Today's Sunday Train is focusing on attacks that have been launched against Ohio's 3C plan, which was granted $400m in the HSR round of Stimulus II grants. There are attacks from Republicans, engaged in their usual games of negotiating in bad faith and basing critiques on focus group testing of talking points rather than substance. There are attacks from "transport experts", calling for all of our HSR spending to be focused on the coasts with no systems developed to serve the needs of flyover country.
There is even an attack launched against the award of funds to Ohio by President Obama's Department of Transportation paradoxically by a kossack who goes by the name of "Ohiobama".
So today is focused on examining the attacks and seeing what there is to them. And lest it seem that this is a single-state issue, many of these same arguments may be used against all of the plans already in place between the Rockies and the Appalachias, as well as the Pacific Northwest and the South Atlantic Coast.
In honor of the "3C" project (Cleveland/Columbus/Cincinnati), I have Three C's of Attack" the "Conservative" attack, a "Claim-to-Fame" attack, and a "Clown-Train" attack.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 2412 words in story)
|
|
Sun Feb 14, 2010 at 16:36:23 PST
|
(10 am. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
 I've been like a hare chased by a hound this weekend, darting this way and that, so while I've got a lot of topics I could be writing on, I've got nothing coherent for a full fledged diary. So this week will be bits and pieces and this and that.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1059 words in story)
|
|
Sun Feb 07, 2010 at 16:05:39 PST
|
(noon. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
 Disclaimer: Nothing said here should be taken to imply that airport/train connections are the primary transport task for either light rail, mass transit, conventional intercity rail, or high speed intercity rail. In other words, the focus of an essay in a regular weekly series on one particular topic does not imply anything along the lines of "most important thing".
However, recently, I keep running into the issue of taking the train to the airport. I read an recent article in an air travel industry publication that focused on the airport connections associated with the projects funded in the $8b HSR funding. I read an older piece about the proposed intermodal station in Chicago that would allow our Ohio trains to get to O'Hare. And the proposal to terminate the California HSR at the redesigned Lindbergh Field came up as part of the discussion at the California HSR blog.
So with the Super Bowl coming up to distract things, I succumbed to what was clearly fate, and am going to discuss taking the train to the airport.
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 1785 words in story)
|
|
Sun Jan 31, 2010 at 16:03:15 PST
|
(noon. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
 Huh, seems me that whatever the state of my various concerns, the agenda of the Sunday Train has been taken over by the White House ... funny how announcing the recipients of a total of $8b will do that.
The Transport Politic (aka Yonah Freeman and the TTP commentariat) has a very complete rundown. The allotments over $200m are: - California, $2,344m
- Florida: $1,250m
- Illinois: $1,236m
- Wisconsin: $822m
- Washington: $590m
- North Carolina: $545m
- Ohio: $400m
So, what's the money for? Join me below the fold.
|
|
There's More...
:: (13
Comments, 1641 words in story)
|
|
Sun Nov 29, 2009 at 16:43:05 PST
|
( - promoted by buhdydharma )
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
 I've been reading James McCommon's Waiting on a Train. And in cowed deference to the FCC, I will put the disclaimer up front that, yes!, I was more likely to read it and talk about it because Chelsea Green gave me a free review copy - since I would otherwise have had to wait until both it and I was in the library at the same time ...
... {of course, making me more likely to read it and talk about it is a gamble, since I'm not going to change my view of it because its a free copy - so if you have any publisher friends, warn them that if they reckon a book is a piece of garbage, they'd be better advised not to send a review copy}
The Chapter that is inspiring today's Sunday Train is "Amtrak Cascades: it's all about frequency".
"Uznanski" is Ken Uznanski, former passenger rail chief of the Washington DoT: "Once those intermodal trains can go through Stampede Pass, it will take some traffic off the main line and free up more room for additional passenger trains," said Uznanski.
By bringing the number of trains up to eight a day between Vancouver and Portland, ridership and ticket revenue will increase significantly. Currently ticket sales - what is known as farebox - cover 43% of the Amtrak Cascades' operating expenses; the state subsidizes the remainder. Run eight trains daily, however, the farebox recovery goes up to 70%.
|
|
There's More...
:: (5
Comments, 1791 words in story)
|
|
Sun Nov 22, 2009 at 14:12:19 PST
|
(11 am. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence, crossposted from MyLeftWing
I return to 2007 for "America was made for HSR" (Agent Orange links retained as the other blog I was posting to at the time is no longer up)
Wow, what a ride. Sometimes on Thursday ...
Thursday 22 March 2009, that is ...
... it felt like the America was made for High Speed Rail diary was going 200 mph itself. And I kept the ride going, cross posting the diary on the Euro and Booman Tribunes. And based partly on comments here and partly on comments there, kept polishing up the map.
Like the first diary, this is only a sketch, and 200mph routes are not the be-all and end-all of passenger rail, and this isn't a silver bullet ... but damn if it isn't one silver BB that is cool as all hell.
Now, I'm going to say the lessons follow below the fold in no particular order, so that if you see an order, I can call it serendipity, and if you don't see any order ... I told you so. ...
... (and anyway, any excuse to use the word serendipity is a good excuse, it's such a lovely word ... and you'd never believe how I stumbled across it ... but that, dear readers, is another story) ...
... with some additional reflections from late 2009.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 2383 words in story)
|
|
Sun Nov 15, 2009 at 14:13:49 PST
|
( - promoted by buhdydharma )
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
Now New and Improved with Poll Technology
Programming Note: I recently received for review a copy of Waiting on a Train by James McCommons, published by Chelsea Green Publishing. I'll likely be talking about it next week, but til then, you can read James Kunstler's Intro online at AlterNet.
Back in early September, I discussed the Steel Interstate in the context of the Appalachian Hub. The concept of the Steel Interstate is electrifying main rail corridors and establishing 100mph Rapid Freight Rail paths.
 The broadest application of this concept is the proposal to Electrify STRACNET, the STrategic RAil Corridor NETwork.
The Appalachian Hub, recall, is a hypothetical Emerging / Regional HSR passenger rail network, modeled on the Midwest Hub and Ohio Hub plans.
And it is hypothetical, of course, because the state governments of the Appalachian regions have been laying down on the job. The High Speed Rail corridor planning framework established under the Clinton Administration in the 90's is a bottom-up system, with states establishing High Speed Rail commissions, advancing plans to the stage of gaining designation as a HSR corridor, sorting out the financing, and applying for Federal funding.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 1357 words in story)
|
|
Sun Nov 08, 2009 at 15:04:18 PST
|
( - promoted by buhdydharma )
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
 A few weeks back, SubsidyScope, "launched by The Pew Charitable Trusts, aims to raise public awareness about the role of federal subsidies in the economy", pursued its mandate into transport subsidies, coming out with a study with the headline figure of $32 subsidy per passenger for Amtrak.
Why Amtrak? Why not provide a headline figure on federal subsidy per motorist or airplane passenger? Critics of the report suggest that the answer is simple - consider, for instance, Charleston WV mayor Danny Jones: Jones admits Amtrak relies heavily on subsidies, but so do other modes of transportation, he said.
"I think it's just easier to see how much of it's subsidized with Amtrak," he said.
And there is a lot of merit in that. Further, SubsidyScope is not focusing on Government subsidy, but on Federal subsidy. Not only is it harder to analyze government subsidies to driving and flying, given how many direct and indirect subsidies there are to take into account - but many of the subsidies are at the state and local government level, so for SubsidyScope's purposes they "don't count".
But its worse that that. Even accepting SubsidyScope's twisted framing of the issue of government subsidies - the actual core part of the analysis that they themselves perform is hopelessly bad. The gory details, and then the numbers that pity forced me to rescue from the clutches of SubsidyScope, below the fold.
|
|
There's More...
:: (9
Comments, 2102 words in story)
|
|
Sun Nov 01, 2009 at 12:04:15 PST
|
(noon. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
Crossposted from MyLeftWing, also in Orange
The big knock against high speed rail is, of course, that it does not run door to door. This is, of course, why the passenger air transport market is such a strategic target ... it is an existing fuel-inefficient mode of transport where everyone travels as a pedestrian. And a well designed high speed rail system will deliver the target market among pedestrian travellers from as close or closer to their origin, and drop them off as close or closer to their destination.
But those are not the only passengers that HSR will be catering to. A term I have heard railfans use for this type of activity is "recruiting" patronage, so, after the fold, I step through some of the important current, and potential, recruiters.
    
|
|
There's More...
:: (9
Comments, 3019 words in story)
|
|
Sun Oct 18, 2009 at 16:17:10 PDT
|
( - promoted by buhdydharma )
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
also Agent Orange
 Let construction or upgrade of a rail corridor be proposed, and almost immediately the cry goes up, "but we can't afford it! It costs too much!".
Confusing the response to this cry is that there are two quite different types of "cost too much" - real, and financial.
There first "cost of rail" question is the real cost question: what is the full economic benefit, including all material and energy impacts saved versus other alternative, versus the full economic cost.
___________
Note: The first kind of "cost versus benefit" question is the kind that Ed Gleaser fumbled so badly when he assumed Zero Population Growth in east Texas, no congestion today between Houston and Dallas on the intercity road network, either deliberately or through negligence bypassed important intercity transport demands along the route of his corridor, and presumed that the only available option was the most capital-intensive type of rail corridor, the all-new, all-grade separated, Express High Speed Rail corridor.
____________
The second "cost of rail" question is the financial cost - given the complex, sometimes ad hoc, and often inconsistent sets of rules we have established for allocating resources for both investment in transport infrastructure and paying for transport operations, how do we "pay for" construction or upgrade of those rail corridors that our best analysis of cost and benefit indicate are wise investments.
That second question is what I am looking at today.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 2917 words in story)
|
|
Sun Oct 04, 2009 at 13:28:34 PDT
|
( - promoted by buhdydharma )
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
crossposted from The Hillbilly Report
 Today, the focus is on one lovely rhetorical ploy used by anti-rail advocates to try to put one over on people with limited experience with trains. This relies on the false framing that "trains is trains", and uses something that is true about a particular kind of local rail transport to mislead people about 110mph Emerging High Speed Rail in particular.
Randall O'Toole, working for The Cato Institute (Sourcewatch), recently completed another of his series of propaganda pieces against High Speed Rail, for the "Show-Me Institute". Sourcewatch does not have much on the "Show-Me Institute", but it does note that in 2006, a contribution of $50,000 to the "Show-Me Institute" appeared in the annual report ... of the Cato Institute.
And what is this shell game? - High capacity, high frequency local mass transit rail systems yhtive best with high population densities
- Therefore the higher the population density, the better for High Speed Rail
- Therefore the Northeast Corridor shows the best that is possible for High Speed Rail
Didja catch it? Local mass transit rail and intercity High Speed Rail share people sitting in carriages with steel wheels running on steel rails - nowhere near enough in common to support the weight of the "therefore".
In reality, the Northeast Corridor could well be over the threshold where population density starts to undermine High Speed Rail operating ratios.
|
|
There's More...
:: (6
Comments, 1708 words in story)
|
|
Sun Sep 13, 2009 at 13:57:01 PDT
|
( - promoted by buhdydharma )
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
crossposted from The Hillbilly Report, also available in Orange
The Appalachian Hub Part 2: The Charleston WV Hub
 The increasingly infamous Appalachian Development Highway program started out with the goal of supporting the potential for genuine economic development in Appalachia by improving transport links into and within the region.
And yet, with the decentralized, state-based system for planning 110mph, 125mph and 220mph High Speed Rail systems, there is the threat that the very problem that the Appalachian Development Highway system was established to address will be re-created as we modernize our regional passenger transport backbones from asphalt to steel.
An Appalachian Hub project would aim to drag these laudable goals into the 21st Century by filling the gaping hole in Eastern US planning for High Speed Rail systems. "Would", since this is an exploration of what such a system might look like if West Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee joined this planning process - not a report on ongoing, formal projects such as the Midwest Hub or Ohio Hub.
|
|
There's More...
:: (3
Comments, 1316 words in story)
|
|
Sun Aug 30, 2009 at 12:33:59 PDT
|
|
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence , crossposted from The Hillbilly Report
 It is widely remarked that the US Department of Transport map of High Speed Rail Corridors leaves a lot of obvious holes.
Often, this reflects a misunderstanding of what the DoT is mapping. This is not a "Master Plan". There is no HSRail planner division inside the Federal Rail Administration inside the Department of Transport that is working away at deciding which corridor should be added to the corridor.
Instead, what they have mapped are the corridors that are eligible for HSRail funding. The way that things are set up is that a state or group of states do some planning, petition Congress be designated as a HSRail corridor, or added to a corridor, or for less sweeping changes petition the Department of Transport to revise an existing corridor, and {*voila*}, that's a designated corridor.
|
|
There's More...
:: (25
Comments, 1920 words in story)
|
|
Mon Aug 24, 2009 at 08:46:11 PDT
|
(11 am. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
 Morris says he and his tag-team High Speed Rail partner Ed Glaeser ... that's HSR or #HSrail for short ... are taking at least a one week break. So Robert Samuelson steps into the breach.
He repeats the old familiar argument: - (1) Amtrak requires operating subsidies.
- (2) Rail operators overseas had the same problem.
- (3) Rail operators overseas found out that increasing the speed solved the problem.
- (4) So if we do the same thing, it will lose money.
Why does (4) follow from (1), (2), and (3)? It doesn't, of course, its just guilt by association given the form and shape of an argument to allow intellectually dishonest rhetoric to pass as if it were real argument.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 377 words in story)
|
|
Sun Aug 23, 2009 at 08:48:53 PDT
|
(10 am. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
 Freakonomist Eric Morris finishes up his tag-team attack with Ed Glaeser on the HSR policy with a post that confesses to the hack jobs both are doing on HSR policy - but works hard to spin the confession into a defense of the hackery.
Eric Morris's efforts have been clearly the weaker of the two, to the point where Ryan Avent, who wrote blog posts to pick apart the analytical flaws of Ed Glaeser's four part series as well as the first posts by Eric Morris, responded to Eric Morris' last effort via twitter: @ryanavent: Eric Morris closes HSR series by referring readers to Randal O'Toole. You know, in case you thought he and Glaeser were aiming for an honest critique
The main takeway point from below? So the bait and switch is as follows. By overstating the costs and understating the benefits of Express HSR, "it costs too much", or is only useful in a very few special cases, and therefore we cannot afford its "transformative benefits". And by ignoring the fact that the benefit of investing in Emerging HSR is greater than the cost, and focusing on dismissing the quality of the benefits, the Emerging HSR is "unworthy" of investment because it is not "transformative" enough.
|
|
There's More...
:: (1
Comments, 2451 words in story)
|
|
Sun Aug 16, 2009 at 16:38:13 PDT
|
(noon. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
I've seen this before ... indeed, it was mentioned recently in some discussion threads of Libertarians Against Choice ... the effort to play divide and conquer by arguing "if it doesn't go 220mph, it isn't worth doing".
John Hilkevitch of the Chicago Tribune asked last Monday Are 110mph trains on the right track? (secondary link - I'm having trouble with the primary), establishing at the outset the false frame that 110mph and 220mph trains are two different "tracks" and we have to choose between them.
This is, of course, nonsense. Indeed, the first generation of bullet trains were 125mph trains, which is the second tier of the three-tier Department of Transport system.
However, there may be more going on here than just the run of the mill "make stuff up based on my uninformed reaction without finding out the facts" that seems to dominate the op-ed pages.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 1797 words in story)
|
|
Thu Aug 13, 2009 at 11:19:10 PDT
|
(noon. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Crossposted from The Hillbilly Report, crossposted to Agent Orange
Burning the Midnight Oil for Living Energy Independence
Ryan Avent has provided high quality debunking of many of the flaws of Ed Glaeser's ongoing analysis of Cost and Benefits of HSR. His current piece, Ed Glaeser's Rail Fail, does not let us down.
Hell, I decided I'd read Ryan Avent's piece first, before reading Glaeser, so I would not get riled up and start a long rant, only to find that Ryan has explained it more clearly ... and to more total readers, to boot.
But I got riled up anyway. Ed Glaeser in the most recent piece comes out with a blatant lie, and one that'll trap almost all casual readers.
|
|
There's More...
:: (2
Comments, 525 words in story)
|
|
Sun Aug 09, 2009 at 13:47:59 PDT
|
(noon. - promoted by ek hornbeck)
Recently, I speculated on what was behind the recent surge in op-ed articles using slipshod reasoning to attack the policy of the Obama administration to support investment in High Speed Rail travel options for the American Public. And, I stress, it was speculative:However, just as with our Freakonomist Eric Morris, its a lot easier to adopt the stance of declaring "skepticism" and use that declaration as a magic incantation to dispense with any need to actually find information. Simply paint a specific Sustainable Energy Independence project as receiving "uncritical support", declare yourself a skeptic, and you are free to spout the a Libertarian anti-HSR talking point without dwelling on such messy things as facts and figures.
However, in searching for specific examples of the "libertarian talking points" that I referred to, I came across this excellent collection at the Midwest High Speed Rail Association, in their High Speed Rail: Fact versus Fiction, where they collect a series of talking points from the three main anti-public-transport think tanks - Cato, Heritage, and the Reason Foundation (just google if you need the links).
|
|
There's More...
:: (10
Comments, 2272 words in story)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reform Immigration -
March for America
Sunday, March 21
March on Washington
Saturday, March 20
|
