High-Speed Rail Would Save Oil, Create Jobs, Study Finds

June 18, 2010 By Chad Vander Veen

OMAHA, Neb. -- A frank discussion about realities of high-speed rail's economics and viability was one of the high points of this week's Meeting of the Minds conference on sustainable cities this week. With billions in U.S. taxpayer dollars being spent on high-speed rail projects, panelists sought to sort out facts from fiction.

Stephen Robillard, vice president of High Speed Rail USA at Siemens AG -- which builds trains and light rails -- said that if 10 percent of drivers switch to high-speed rail ridership, the U.S. would save 550 million barrels of oil annually and that one high-speed railcar equates to taking 200 cars off the road.

Robillard cited a study that Siemens AG prepared for the U.S. Conference of Mayors that investigated the economic impact of high-speed rail service to various cities. By 2035, Los Angeles would see 55,000 new jobs created and $7.6 billion in new revenue; Orlando, Fla., would support 20,000 new jobs and see more than $2 billion added to the local economy; while high-speed rail to Albany, N.Y., would generate 4,700 new jobs and $500 million.

The numbers induced some howling from the audience, some of whom wondered how realistic the figures were. Robillard admitted the numbers were estimates only.

"It's hypothetical, but it's based on experiences from other countries," he said, pointing to Germany, France and Spain, where high-speed rail flourishes. "Spanish high-speed rail has taken 50 percent of the business from airlines. Between Cologne and Frankfurt, air travel has disappeared, replaced by high-speed rail. Paris and Lyon as well."

Robillard and the other panelists agreed that key to making high-speed rail succeed is investment in intercity rail.

"Intercity rail has been a neglected stepchild for 30 years. It is the missing link," said Bruce Agnew, director of the Cascadia Center for Regional Development, a group working to get high-speed rail service in the Pacific Northwest. "There has to be commitment at all levels of government to make it work."

Axel Meisen, Chair of Foresight for Alberta Innovates -- Technology Futures, a Canadian government-supported research firm, said high-speed rail service could also be a boon to secondary cities along train routes.

"I think high-speed rail could have a very significant impact on secondary cities. A stop in a small town along the way could inject a spark of life it would not otherwise get," Meisen said.

But, he cautioned, "If that stop adds 20 minutes to a two-hour journey, the returns are diminished."

You may use or reference this story with attribution and a link to
http://www.govtech.com/technology/High-Speed-Rail-Would-Save.html

| More

Report: High Speed Rail An Economic Driver

Comments

Bill Stewart in SF | Commented June 23, 2010

The California high-speed rail initiative campaign was originally telling us it would cost $30B to build, and tickets would costs $55, roughly competitive with Southwest Air prices. Now they're estimating $40B and $110 tickets. And the figures for jobs generation don't count the jobs that are lost because that $40B isn't in the economy being used for other things.

Anonymous | Commented June 30, 2010

I believe that a high speed rail would be beneficial but without more public transportation within and around cities where the rail makes stops it will not be successful. For example, if I have a doctors appt in a suburb of LA, the rail might take me within fifty (X number of miles) miles of my destination, how could I (cheaply) cover the last leg of my journey. In the countries that the article mentions, there are numerous options for this type of travel. They have subways, intra urban and inter urban buses as well as various forms of taxis. I think in order to have a high speed inter urban rail there would have to be a general expansion of available transportation.