Compared to Japan, which just opened the newest section of its high-speed rail network, the concept has struggled to catch on in the U.S.
The White House unveiled its vision for new train corridors in 2009, but so far there's been little progress. Finally, though, plans to start laying the tracks for a faster future are afoot, reports CBS News correspondent Jeff Pegues.
The Bullet Train in Japan covers 320 miles in just 2 hours and 25 minutes, traveling at close to 190 mph. Amtrak's Acela trains can reach only about 150 mph, but now there are high-speed rail projects underway in the U.S. that will boost that top speed by 50 mph.
Within six years, Texas developers are promising a link between Dallas Fort Worth and Houston at 205 mph. In California, another project hopes to bring a 200 mph system linking cities including San Francisco and Los Angeles by 2028.
Texas Central High-Speed Railway CEO and Chairman Richard Lawless believes payoff is just down the tracks.
"Once the system is up and operating, people will appreciate its efficiency, its safety and its dependability, and that's what we have to do here; we have to demonstrate that this system can work in the United States," Lawless said.
Chairman of the California High-Speed Rail Authority Dan Richard said his state has three of the five busiest Amtrak routes.
"We know that there's a tremendous potential for ridership," he said.
Over the years, high-speed rail initiatives in the U.S. have typically not gone very far.
Between 2009 and 2010 alone, three projects in Florida, Wisconsin and Ohio failed when their funding was cut.
"That's an example of one that has turned into a real boondoggle," California Rep. Jeff Denham said.
Denham represents one of the California districts through which the planned system will travel, and says the $68 billion price tag is a waste of money.
"There aren't ridership numbers to be able to balance the project, and there also aren't private investors willing to invest in it because there will not be profit if you don't have ridership," Denham said.
The Texas project is being funded privately, but it too is facing growing opposition that could stop it in its tracks.
A state representative has proposed legislation that would require elected officials in every city and every county to approve the project.
Cattle ranchers like Rhonda Page Jordan are against it.
"It's not feasible, it's not reasonable, and it's not necessary," Jordan said.
She owns land near Houston that's been in her family for more than 130 years. The high-speed rail line could force them to move.
"Anyone in the United States, and perhaps the world, looks at the state of Texas, and they see cows, cowboy boots, horses and people that farm and ranch," Jordan said. "If they were to try to take Texas Central Railway right through this property, they're going to destroy the very thing that makes Texas the great state it is."
For both projects, it's taken years to get to this point, but they remain on track. In California, where the population is expected to reach 46 million by 2035, high-speed rail is seen as a solution to its growing transportation needs.
Poster Comment:
Why is it always farmers and ranchers who stand in the way of progress? Heck, if it wasn't for expansion of our railroads, those ignorant hayseeds would still be taking up to two full months to drive their cattle from San Antonio to Abilene along the Chisolm Trail, fighting off rustlers & Injuns.
yeah ,yeah .Comrade Jerry Brown called people who oppose his rail plans 'declinists'. Now a majority of Californians opposed it .
This is another case of government trying to create a market where none exists. Where is the demand for high speed rail in California or anywhere else in the country ? What this really is is an attempt by lawmakers to bring more pork to their districts.
If you look at the example from other countries ,it isn't hard to say that the experiment is a failure .
This is another case of government trying to create a market where none exists. Where is the demand for high speed rail in California or anywhere else in the country ?
Google shows a boatload of inefficient, puddle-jumping short-hop commuter flights from SFO to LAX. I bet many of them would prefer high-speed rail as being more comfortable and convenient, not to mention less expensive to travel. Plus the high-speed rail can more conveniently service other communities along the way. The airways along the west coast are overly congested and unsafe anyway. If you provide those passengers with high speed rail as an alternative, that opens up the skys to safely accommodate the much longer airline routes.
I'm all for cross-country high speed rail. But let me tell you about my (Amtrak) experience with LOW-speed cross-country rail.
I was going from Reno, Nevada to 30th Street station in Philadelphia.
The Amtrak guy asked me: 'What's in all of these boxes?'. I said: 'Computers and various electronics.'
Amtrak guy said: 'No. We won't take it. We won't be responsible.' So that was that, and my brother took the stuff back to his apartment. (Shipped it UPS weeks later.)
But the other stuff? When we got to 30th street (after running out of turkey sandwiches on the snack bar lounge car) - SLAM SLAM SLAM - those boxes went onto the concrete floor behind the baggage car. SLAM! SLAM! SLAM!
8 or 10 feet of SLAM!
Glass and ceramic kitchen-ware - couldn't be bad - eh? We've got to totally rebuild the country's railroad infrastructure before I ever take a train again.
Reno to Philly is a pretty long haul. I think the future of passenger rail is more for shorter, regional trips that are less than 500 miles. Longer transcontinental service will probably remain quicker and more efficient by airlines.
But polite, 1st class service is getting pretty scarce nowadays no matter which way you go. Nevertheless, Amtrak can still be a much more relaxing and enjoyable experience compared to being crammed 5 abreast like sardines in an aluminum tube at 35,000 feet for several hours.
Nevertheless, Amtrak can still be a much more relaxing and enjoyable experience compared to being crammed 5 abreast like sardines in an aluminum tube at 35,000 feet for several hours.
I respectfully disagree. At least on a plane(s) the nightmare is OVER in a few hours.
Yes, you get to talk to all sorts of different people from all over the country (on a train). This is very interesting - if you have nothing else to do.
But the journey is interminable. Goes on and on...
If you are trying to run a business - and establish a new office in a new location - ehhh - frustrating as heck.
I'd much rather ask the stewardess/steward on the plane for a pillow - sack out - and awake at my destination. Then get back to a productive task.
Yeah, that's why I think the real market potential for true high-speed rail (150+ mph) is for regional commuting between cities that are 450 miles apart or less. At that speed and distance, high speed passenger rail is a very time and cost effective alternative to short-hop airlines.
Longer distances, the airlines are still much better. (Unless you have plenty of time to spare and really enjoy watching the scenery just keep rolling past the window!)
