On December 27th of last year, China’s newest high speed train, the Harmony set the world record by traveling over 1,100km in 3 hours (Mitchell). The Harmony has propelled China into the league of high speed rail such as Japan and the European Union, all of which have trains running at over 150mph. The United States, however, has yet to become a member of this club. The fastest train in the U.S., Amtrak’s Acela Express, which operates on the crowded Northeast Corridor, travels at a much slower rate, traveling between Boston and New York (around 300km) in 3½ hours (Mitchell), much slower than the Harmony train in China.
President Obama’s administration has displayed much willingness to address this technological gap. During the State of the Union address, President Obama made particular mention of high speed rail, declaring that there was “no reason Europe or China should have the fastest trains” (Obama). His administration has provided billions in investment for a network of high speed rail throughout the country, with one of the newest networks being developed in Florida.
Unfortunately, the President’s plan has faced increasing opposition from conservative groups, such as the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation. These groups believe that the high initial costs and low potential for profits in high speed rail shows that the creation of a high speed rail system will never be feasible for the U.S. Randal O’Toole, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute calculated that the cost of the Midwest high speed rail system planned by the Obama Administration would cost about $1.85 of capital investment per annual passenger mile, compared to the average freeway cost in the Midwest of $0.68 of capital investment per annual passenger mile (O'Toole 5).
While Mr. O’Toole’s calculations might be correct, his assumption that the higher cost suggests that the rail line is an unwise investment might be greatly simplifying the cost-benefit analysis of the issue. While high speed rail might not be an inherently profitable (very few lines actually break even), its effect on the economy of areas cannot be underestimated. In Spain, for example, remote towns have been linked to larger cities like Madrid and Barcelona through the country’s high speed line (Burnett). The city of Zaragoza, the midpoint on the high speed rail route from Madrid to Barcelona, has profited greatly from its location on the high speed rail line, which has brought in much business to the city.
High speed rail networks will grow exponentially in importance as oil prices continue to rise and the time cost for flying increases. In order to remain competitive in tomorrow’s markets, the United States needs to develop high speed rail networks to connect regional economies and build prosperity. Obama’s high speed rail plan is a fantastic first step for the country, but should by no means be considered the end goal.
Group home page(s)
