Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
Passenger
»
Railroads may reject high-speed projects

Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
As I mentioned in a post above, last fall, I posted my comments in which I questioned whether railroads would be leery of the controls that might be placed upon them by government if they accepted “free money” from the government to upgrade their infrastructure in order to accommodate national public HSR.  The same question arises in connection to the proposed use of rail corridors to accommodate a new power grid that is being planned. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> When I consider the prospect of a publicly owned track infrastructure, a publicly owned power distribution system on the track corridors, a publicly owned HSR system on the track corridors, and a privately owned freight business operating on the track corridors; I wonder if the private freight business might be the minority player in this public/private business model.  <o:p></o:p> Adding to this scenario, is the fact that the FRA and the Obama administration have announced plans for dramatic changes in the freight rail industry that include taking 80% of long haul truck freight off of the highways and placing it on rail; and electrifying freight rail with publicly produced renewable energy delivered over a publicly owned distribution system.  <o:p></o:p> Here is the link that I posted with my comment last fall: <o:p></o:p> <A href="http://www.sj-r.com/high-speed-rail/x1938840934/High-speed-rail-spending-to-be-a-boon-to-freight-rail-companies" mce_href="http://www.sj-r.com/high-speed-rail/x1938840934/High-speed-rail-spending-to-be-a-boon-to-freight-rail-companies">http://www.sj-r.com/high-speed-rail/x1938840934/High-speed-rail-spending-to-be-a-boon-to-freight-rail-companies</A> <o:p></o:p> Here are some excerpts from the article, including a reference to "climbing into bed with Washington," as the original poster here called it.  When you look at the whole context of this subject, I am sure you will agree that the comment is most apt:   <o:p></o:p> New, publicly owned rail corridors could allow faster passenger trains, but would cost billions more than sharing track with freight companies.  The challenge is figuring out ways to speed up passenger trains while also providing reasons for freight rail companies to become partners the government.  In some cases, that boils down to taxpayers footing the bills. <o:p></o:p> The freight rail industry liked what it heard on Oct. 14, when Joseph Szabo, head of the Federal Railroad Administration, told a House subcommittee that the Obama administration is committed to a world-class freight rail system and that the public benefits when the government spends money on tracks owned by freight companies. <o:p></o:p> “I think freight railroads are an amazing success story, the way regulation was reduced and firms behaved,” says William Garrison, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at the University of California-Berkeley who is considered one of the leading geographers of the 20th century.  “They’ve got good management, good attitudes.  They understand their technology.  They run tight ships.  They know their markets.” <o:p></o:p> Garrison says he doesn’t believe high-speed passenger rail will prove either popular or cost effective, and he can’t understand why railroads would consider partnerships with the government after decades of fighting to be left alone.   “If I were a freight railroad, I would be very wary of this,” Garrison said.  “In my judgment, they would no benefit.  I think they’re getting in bed with the devil.”     (My emphasis added.)
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag