Tag: amtrak

Billions for Better Rail Service

  • High speed trains may be sprouting up across the country in light of the recent initiative. (Photo courtesy of Black Leon)

The U.S. government is spending billions of dollars to improve the nation’s railroads and passenger train service. But those billions will be just the beginning of the cost of updating rail service. Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

The U.S. government is spending billions of dollars to improve the nation’s railroads and passenger train service. But those billions will be just the beginning of the cost of updating rail service. Lester Graham reports:

New investments in higher-speed rail are making passenger rail supporters almost giddy. Eight billion dollars from the Recovery Act is seed money for new high-speed routes in California and Florida and improvements for existing routes in other regions.

At a recent National Press Club panel discussion, Amtrak’s Joseph McHugh said Amtrak is not getting any of that money… but it’ll improve the freight railroads on which Amtrak operates its trains.

McHugh: And that means higher speeds, reduced trip time, additional frequencies, improved facilities, and a higher level of reliability for our services all around the country.

Beyond that first eight-billion dollars, the Department of Transportation’s so-called TIGER grants mean a few billion dollars more for further upgrades railroads and depots that tie into commuter rail, light rail and other mass transit.

Supporters of rail are expecting big things from the investments.

But others see spending billions upon billions of dollars on passenger rail as wasted money. They don’t see the utopia of transportation in better, faster trains. Many online comments from readers of stories on higher-speed rail indicate they don’t want the government to subsidize rail projects. They see it as stealing from necessary highway and bridge improvements. Others are more political, saying the government is trying to imitate the high-speed rail of Europe when –they feel– Americans are more independent and prefer cars.

So the debate sometimes devolves into — car versus train. Or individuality versus socialism.

Susan Zielinksi heads up the Universtiy of Michigan’s SMART transit project. She says that’s the wrong way to view it.

Zielinski:I think we get ourselves stuck in the polarization and this isn’t about getting rid of cars.

She says better passenger rail and tying it in to better mass transit gives more people more choices. She notes not everyone has access to a reliable car.

Environmentalists add… the train is just more environmentally friendly. Howard Lerner is with the Environmental Law and Policy Center.

Lerner: On a per-passenger-mile basis, rail is about three times as efficient as travel by car in terms of fuel efficiency, six times as efficient as travel by air. So, there are pretty substantial pollution reduction benefits, both in terms of greenhouse gasses and other pollutants when it comes to traveling by rail.

But the investment of billions of dollars during the Obama administration is generally considered just the down payment on the cost of bringing U.S. passenger rail service into the 21st century. Just a couple of years ago the Bush administration tried to zero-out the Amtrak budget. A future president might do the same.

Susan Zielinksi at the University of Michigan believes the improvements in rail service we’ll see in just the next several years will prove this investment is worth it.

Zielinski: Congress is not going to be able to go backwards on this. This is going to usher in a whole new set of industry opportunities, of economic development in communities, of new opportunities for jobs.

But even people who like the idea of improved passenger rail service say if this doesn’t result in the trains arriving on time… doesn’t fix the problem of having no transportation once they arrive at the depot… doesn’t spiff up the drab Amtrak train cars… and keep train ticket prices reasonable… it’ll be hard not to keep piling into the car or cramming themselves into an airline seat.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

High-Speed Rail Money Slow

  • Some states have shovel-ready rail projects, but others states are just in the planning stage. Here is a high-speed train in Taiwan. (Photo source: Jiang at Wikimedia Commons)

Today, August 24, is a deadline for
states competing for eight billion
dollars in federal stimulus money
for higher speed rail. Shawn Allee reports, this stimulus could
run in slow-motion:

Transcript

Today, August 24, is a deadline for
states competing for eight billion
dollars in federal stimulus money
for higher speed rail. Shawn Allee reports, this stimulus could
run in slow-motion:

Federal Railroad Administration staff are staying late tonight – August 24 – to accept hundreds of applications for higher-speed rail funds.

FRA spokesperson Rob Kulat says the agency wants to give out stimulus money quickly, but, just in case, it’s announced there might be two rounds of applications – not just one.

“It would be a delay, but the idea is to have successful projects, to have them work cost-effectively. If a state isn’t ready financially or technically to implement their plan, then they need to go back to the drawing board a bit. We’re not going to throw good money after bad.”

Kulat says some states have shovel-ready rail projects, but others states are just in the planning stage.

It could be years before they clear the track for faster trains.

For The Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Paying for Risks on the Rails

  • This train in Graniteville, South Carolina, crashed while carrying chemicals called "toxic inhalation hazards." Transporting these chemicals is extremely dangerous, and rail companies think chemical companies should share some of the insurance burden. (Photo courtesy of the Environmental Protection Agency)

Toxic Inhalation Hazards are a class of chemicals with a notorious name: if you inhale them, you die.
On the flip side, they’re useful: Take chlorine. It purifies drinking water. Another is anhydrous ammonia. It’s used for corn fertilizer.
The government feels some toxic inhalation hazards are so important it forces railroads to ship them, even though insurance is expensive.
Shawn Allee says rail lines now want the chemical industry to chip in:

Transcript

Toxic Inhalation Hazards are a class of chemicals with a notorious name: if you inhale them, you die.
On the flip side, they’re useful. Take chlorine: it purifies drinking water. Another is anhydrous ammonia. It’s used for corn fertilizer.
The government feels some toxic inhalation hazards are so important it forces railroads to ship them, even though insurance is expensive.
Shawn Allee says rail lines now want the chemical industry to chip in:

To understand why the railroad industry wants help with insurance, you should know what happened in Graniteville, South Carolina.
Phil Napier is Graniteville’s fire chief. Napier tells me, one night in January 2005, he got paged about a train wreck.
He hopped in his truck and before long, he found the train engineer.

“I stopped to roll the window down and this gentleman told me they had a chemical leak and he couldn’t breathe and he fell to the ground. And immediately, it hit me. It basically took my breath and all I remember is taking a U-turn heading north but I ended up south. There’s a time-zone in there that I have no memory.”

When Napier came to, he got word from his radio: the train carried chlorine and a toxic cloud was spreading.
Napier evacuated Graniteville. Later, he got a look by helicopter.

“We did a flyover. I mean, it was like a Twilight Zone – you could see cars all up and down the highways, with the doors open.”

Nine people died in the Graniteville derailment and chlorine spill. Since then, the railroad industry worried an accident like this could ruin them.

“The lesson we drew from that was, if there is a major catastrophe by the railroad carrying this material, could be forced into bankruptcy and be forced out of operation.”

That’s Ed Hamberger, the head of the Association of American Railroads.
Hamberger calls the Graniteville accident a tragedy for the town and a financial mess for the railroad responsible – Norfolk Southern.

“The accident in Graniteville resulted in damages of 400 to 500 million dollars.”

Norfolk Southern won’t confirm the figures, but consider this: it’s still in court over an incident involving nine deaths.

Experts say if a similar derailment happened in the middle of a big city like Chicago, it could kill at least 10,000 people.
Hamberger says railroads can’t insure against that.
You might think they would refuse to carry toxic inhalant hazards, but the government says they have to – because rail has the best safety record.

“The freight railroad industry has what is known as a common carrier obligation to carry these toxic by inhalation materials. Several of our members have said if they were not forced to, they would not carry it because of that liability threat.”

Hamberger says if the government won’t lift the obligation, it’s fair to require chemical companies to pay some insurance.
And, he says, it would make the public safer.
The argument goes, if chemical companies paid more to insure against transportation accidents, they’d create safer chemicals.

“With regard to the argument the chemical industry needs an incentive to make safer products, frankly, we have all the incentive in the world.”

Marty Durbin is with the American Chemistry Council.
He says chemical companies already pay insurance against accidents in their factories.
And they are looking for alternatives to chlorine and other toxic inhalant hazards.
Durbin says, besides, when trains leave their factories financial risk should be out of their hands.

“You have to have liability throughout the chain that helps motivate safety improvement.”

The chemical and railroad companies will battle this out in front of government agencies for a while.
In the meantime, each year, trains will make 100,000 shipments of toxic inhalation hazards along the nation’s railroads, even if some freight rail companies don’t want to.

For the Environment Report, I’m Shawn Allee.

Related Links

Amtrak Money Not So Fast

  • The stimulus bill includes funds for a light rail Amtrak system, however the money could be tied in up in approval processes for quite a while. (Photo courtesy of the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation)

There’s money in the stimulus package for high speed rail projects. Lester Graham reports Amtrak is waiting to see how the money might be spent:

Transcript

There’s money in the stimulus package for high speed rail projects. Lester Graham reports Amtrak is waiting to see how the money might be spent:


Eight billion dollars is set aside for high speed rail projects. So, where’s Amtrak going to start?


Turns out Amtrak doesn’t really make the decisions. Marc Magliari is a spokesman for Amtrak. He says the passenger train company has submitted a plan to the Department of Transportation’s Federal Railroad Administration. That office is now asking the different state governors what they’d like. Amtrak is just… waiting.


“I’m not going to speculate on the speed under which the FRA will make its make its grant decisions and which grant decisions it will make. That would not be our call.”


We do know any project under the stimulus plan has to be started within the next 18 months.


Amtrak basically has to hope that each governor understands not only his or her own state’s needs, but how their decisions might affect a high-speed rail network.


For the Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.

The Mass Transit Paradox

  • Because of the down economy, ridership is up. But with the economy flagging, transit companies are having to cut routes and raise fares. (Photo by Shawn Allee)

So with the government’s 787 billion dollar stimulus plan now approved, a lot of folks in state and local government are thinking about the federal dollars that’ll float their way soon. Some mayors are especially eyeing the 8.4 billion for public transit. Rene Gutel looks at who wants to spend what:

Transcript

So with the government’s 787 billion dollar stimulus plan now approved, a lot of folks in state and local government are thinking about the federal dollars that’ll float their way soon. Some mayors are especially eyeing the 8.4 billion for public transit. Rene Gutel looks at who wants to spend what:


Mayors from coast to coast see the stimulus package as one big pot of gold. Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon knows exactly how he’d like transit money spent in his city.


“First and foremost, Light rail.”


(sound of a train)


It’s all about light rail. Phoenix is notorious for its car-culture, freeways and gridlock; Residents worry it’s turning into the next L.A., but a brand new twenty-mile light rail line launched in December.


Trouble is, it’s only one line. It goes from the suburb of Mesa and ends in downtown Phoenix.

Mayor Gordon wants to use federal stimulus money to add a three-mile extension. Gordon says it’s the ultimate shovel-ready project. All planned, just add 250-million dollars and it’s ready to go.


“We could sign a contract with America, with the federal government, that we will turn dirt by March 31st, and we’ll create 7,000 new jobs.”


Those new jobs will be around long enough at least to get the rail extension built. But getting a light rail line is not the same as keeping it running.

Look at San Francisco that has a well developed transit system. They have a different kind of wish list that centers on maintaining the system they already have.

Judson True is a spokesman for the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency.


“We want to repair light rail vehicles that have been damaged in collisions, we have some cable car kiosks that we’d like to replace, we have change machines we’d like to replace in our metro subway stations.”


And it keeps on going. The American Public Transportation Association has identified nearly 800 public transit projects nationwide ready-to-go within 90 days.

APTA says the projects will not only create hundreds of thousands of jobs, but reduce fuel consumption and decrease greenhouse gas emissions.

But San Francisco’s Judson True says, while he’s grateful for funding for capitol projects…


“Systems like ours in San Francisco also need help on the operating side, and you see that all over the country.”


People are calling it the transit paradox and it’s hit cities like Denver, St. Louis and New York City.

Because of the down economy, ridership is up. And yet most transit systems rely on local and state money to subsidize operations. But with the economy flagging, cities and states are struggling too – and transit companies are having to cut routes and raise fares.


“You have a catch 22, more riders and you have to make service cuts.”


That’s Aaron Golub, an assistant professor in the School of Planning at Arizona State University. Mass transit’s his specialty. He’s worried about transit systems getting gleaming new buses, and kiosks, and buildings but then not having the means to operate them.


“It would be quite ironic if, for example, Phoenix were able to afford a light rail extension while cutting back on light rail service at the same time. Or the worst case, opening a light rail extension and not being able to operate it at all.”


Golub points to studies that say you create more jobs by investing in current transit operations – not capitol projects.

But many mayors across the nation feel light rail and other mass transit is an investment in their future. They’re ready to take on those shovel ready projects now with the hope that it’ll kick start the economy now and by the time the routes are finished, we’ll be out of the recession.


For The Environment Report, I’m Rene Gutel.

Related Links

All Aboard for Amtrak?

  • The Akron multi-modal transportation center. It was built by the train tracks, but before it was completed, Amtrak pulled out of Akron. Now the only mode of transportation is the bus. (Photo by Julie Grant)

People who like the idea of passenger trains have been waiting for decades for the
federal government to get on board. Now, some think Congress might be ready to
get funding on track for Amtrak. Julie Grant reports:

Transcript

People who like the idea of passenger trains have been waiting for decades for the
federal government to get on board. Now, some think Congress might be ready to
get funding on track for Amtrak. Julie Grant reports:

A few years ago, I took the train from Akron, Ohio to visit my sister in Washington,
D.C. She still teases me about it. What would have taken less than 2 hours by
plane or 6 hours by car took 14 hours by train.

We got side-tracked a lot, waiting for freight trains to go by.

(sound of a train)

That passenger route I took has since been canceled. The trains that come through
now are only for freight.

Moving freight was the real reason most railroad companies started laying down
tracks in the 1800s.

Passenger trains were just a way of getting name recognition and brand loyalty with
the fat cats that owned the factories that needed to move freight. They were treated
well on the passenger trains, and everybody benefited from that great service.

By the 1920s, the government started investing a lot of money in highways.
The age of the auto moved ahead. Passenger trains became quaint.

Companies running trains started going bankrupt. By 1970, Congress voted to
create a national passenger rail line – Amtrak.

Ross Capon is president of the National Association of Rail Passengers. He was
already a leader in the passenger rail movement when the gas crisis in 1979 hit. He
thought gasoline shortages and high prices were going to give Amtrak the jump it
needed.

“When we had prominent cartoonists ridiculing the Carter administration for
discontinuing Amtrak trains, at the same time as gasoline was unavailable to many
people, I thought we were going to be in clover from then on. I was wrong.”

But when gas prices spiked last year, so did Amtrak ridership. Capon thinks, maybe
this time passenger rail will come into its own. Even though gas prices have
dropped, lots of people still want to ride the rails.

I’m visiting the brand new multi-modal transportation center in Akron. But so far, the
only mode of transportation is the bus.

Kirt Conrad is director of planning for the Metro Regional Transit Authority. He says
the center was built along the train tracks. But before it was even finished, Amtrak
pulled out of Akron.

Now if you want to go somewhere, you’ve got to take the bus. But over the past
year, Conrad says, the buses can barely keep up with all the new demand.

It’s like this in many cities across the country. People want to ride the rails – but
there’s no train.

In cities like Dallas and Phoenix, Conrad says trains have been successful.

“The ridership projections are surpassing what they had forecast. So i think the
experience is, you do build it and nationally they have come.”

Many states have been working with Amtrak to improve tracks. And, in some places,
trains go as fast as 120 miles an hour. Passenger rail supporters say for shorter
trips, say a couple of hundred miles or so, trains make a lot more sense than going
to the airport.

But analysts say if passenger rail is going to get on track it needs government
investment.

Conrad says passenger trains need better access to tracks – and better tracks – so
they can move past the slower freight trains.

But Ross Capon at the Rail Passenger Association says Congress is spending
almost all its transportation money on highways and airports.

“The federal government has, to put it crassly, bribed the states for years not to
spend money on rail. Look, we’ll give you 90% dollars on your highway projects,
80% dollars on your airport projects. But if you dare spend money on passenger
trains, youíre on your own buddy.”

But Capon thinks, maybe now, since Amtrak is more popular, Congress might be
ready to increase the amount of federal money it spends on passenger rail service.

Getting rail projects across the nation on the fast track.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Related Links

Amtrak’s Popularity Climbing With Gas Prices

  • An Amtrak train, Pere Maquette, in St. Joseph Michigan (Photo courtesy of Amtrak)

More people are riding the nation’s
passenger train service, Amtrak. It’s to the
point that Amtrak doesn’t have enough train
cars in some areas and the trains are sold out.
Lester Graham reports Amtrak has some other
issues to deal with before it can get on the
right track:

Transcript

More people are riding the nation’s
passenger train service, Amtrak. It’s to the
point that Amtrak doesn’t have enough train
cars in some areas and the trains are sold out.
Lester Graham reports Amtrak has some other
issues to deal with before it can get on the
right track:

Amtrak is seeing more passengers. Amtrak spokesman Marc Magliari says on some of
its busier routes, ridership is up double-digits.

“We’re seeing increases of 20% with no additional capacity. Those are just people who
are taking the train who hadn’t taken it before or who had changed their travel plans to on
a day when the train isn’t sold out, because we have a lot of days now where the train is
selling out.”

That’s because the train is handy – especially on those shorter trips, such as New York
to Washington, Los Angeles to San Diego, or Detroit to Chicago.

Last year Amtrak had more than 26-million passengers. This year it looks like it’ll get
about 27-million. Now, to put that into perspective, 761 million people flew on an
airplane in the U.S. last year.

But, Magliari says most of Amtrak’s competition isn’t the airlines.

“Most of our competition is the automobile and we believe the largest single reason for
some of the increases we’ve had this year is people trying to avoid the higher cost of
driving their own cars and trucks.”

And Amtrak would love to buy some more trains to serve those passengers. But the
railways are already crowded. The same reason Amtrak is getting more passengers –
higher fuel prices – is also the reason a lot of freight is being switched from trucks to
trains.

Jonathan Levine is an Urban and Regional Planning expert at the University of
Michigan. He says, for much of the nation, more freight train traffic is causing Amtrak
some problems.

“The scheduled service is really quite good if and when the trains follow the schedules.
But, those of us who’ve taken those trips know that the probability of having a delay is
rather significant. And it happens because of congestion on the rail lines.”

Amtrak is supposed to get top priority on the railroad. But the freight railroads own a lot
of the tracks. The dispatchers work them. They control the switches. And in this day
of just-in-time deliveries, it’s hard for those railroads to side-track a freight train for
Amtrak to speed by.

Mark Magliari with Amtrak says they’re working on that problem.

“About 70% of our operations—that’s about everything outside the East Coast—is on
somebody else’s railroad. And we’ve seen progress in a lot of these relationships with
the host railroads, making improvements in how they handle us.”

And judging from the increase in ridership, train passengers don’t see it as any different
than an airplane being delayed. And at least it’s a comfortable seat with plenty of room
to walk around, unlike a crowded plane sitting on the tarmac.

Mark Westerfield uses Amtrak. He also works for one of those freight train companies.
We caught up with him at Union Station in Chicago. He thinks the problems can be
worked out for Amtrak, they need to be worked out.

“It needs to be expanded. It needs to be increased. And, I think, I’m very optimistic
about the fate of Amtrak with the price of fuel, the price of gasoline, the congestion at
airports, the security at airports, the fact that a lot of the traveling public is getting older,
as I am, and less willing to be cramped into MD-80s and aging 737’s. I think it’s got a
great future. I really do. It’s gonna require a lot of capital investment.”

Getting that capital investment means getting more support from Congress and state
legislatures. Some members of Congress make a lot of noise about funding Amtrak.
They make is sound as though it’s the only government supported transportation
system out there. The fact is, airports get tons of money from the government. With
rising fuel prices and more ridership on Amtrak, government money for the train might
get a little better traction with Congress in the future.

For The Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

White House Zeroes Out Amtrak, but States Don’t

  • States are trying to support Amtrak by approving funding for existing service routes. (Photo courtesy of Wisconsin DOT)

States in the Midwest are considering funding supplemental Amtrak routes… even though President Bush has zeroed out the Amtrak budget. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

States in the Midwest are considering funding supplemental Amtrak routes… even though President Bush has zeroed out the Amtrak budget. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


About a dozen states contract with Amtrak to provide passenger rail service routes in addition to the national rail network. Some state legislatures have already approved funding the routes for next year. Marc Magliari is a spokesperson for Amtrak. He says several states are looking at the issue right now.


“The legislatures in Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin are still at work on their questions.”


But Amtrak doesn’t really know if it will be around next year. The Bush administration did not put any money in the budget for Amtrak. The White House zeroed out the passenger rail service.


“Zero dollars equals zero trains.”


That means even if the states pay for supplemental service… there might be no trains because all of Amtrak would be eliminated. Neo-conservatives in the Bush administration feel the government should not be subsidizing passenger rail service and are pushing Congress to eliminate the funding.


For the GLRC, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

Politician Retaliates Against Amtrak Supporters

  • A Member of Congress retaliated against his colleagues when they supported Amtrak. (Photo by Michael Sloneker)

A Republican leader in the House of Representatives is retaliating against members of Congress who support Amtrak. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Charlie Schlenker reports:


(According to a news report, the Member of Congress who took
the action, Rep. Istook from Oklahoma, has since apologized and has said that he will do everything in his power to rectify the situation. You can read the report by following this link)

Transcript

A Republican leader in the House of Representatives is retaliating aganst members of Congress who support Amtrak. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Charlie Schlenker reports:


Ernest Istook is a Republican Congressman from Oklahoma. He opposes Amtrak, and he chairs a key subcommittee that controls some transportation funding. Some Republican members of Congress signed a letter asking for additional spending on Amtrak. In the recently passed omnibus spending bill, Istook made cuts in transportation projects in the districts of members who signed the letter. Tim Johnson is a Republican congressman from Illinois and one of the members who spoke up for Amtrak. Johnson says the effort to squelch Amtrak support is petty.


“Well, I am outraged. I think it is unacceptable in a system where the free expression of ideas and particularly advocacy for one’s district is punished.”


Johnson and some of the other rebuked Republicans say they will continue to speak out for Amtrak. Last year, though, 32 House Republicans signed the Amtrak support letter. This year, there were only 21.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Charlie Schlenker.


(According to a news report, the Member of Congress who took
the action, Rep. Istook from Oklahoma, has since apologized and has said that he will do everything in his power to rectify the situation. You can read the report by following this link)

Related Links

Another Cutback in Amtrak Rail Service

  • Amtrak is starting to phase out the Three Rivers route. The National Association of Railroad Passengers is trying to prevent this from continuing. (photo by Michael Jastremski)

Phase-outs have started for an Amtrak passenger train that crosses through the Midwest. It’s the latest in a series of service cutbacks over the last few decades. But some riders are trying to reverse Amtrak’s decision. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach recently rode the rail line in question and talked with some passengers about the pending loss of service:

Transcript

Phase-outs have started for an Amtrak passenger train that crosses through the Midwest. It’s the latest in a series of service cutbacks over the last few decades. But some riders are trying to reverse Amtrak’s decision. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chuck Quirmbach recently rode the rail line in question and talked with some passengers about the pending loss of service:


(sound of train)


Amtrak has started reducing service on the Three Rivers line between Chicago and Philadelphia. By next April, people in Nappanee, Indiana and Akron, Youngstown, and Fostoria, Ohio will no longer have a passenger train in their city.


On a recent morning, Chicago resident Martin Escutia was riding the Three Rivers to see a friend in Youngstown. He had just flown to Chicago from Central America.


“Being as tired as I was, having the opportunity to be able to bed down and wake up at my destination it’s good convenience, it’s good to have.”


Escutia says losing the Three Rivers will put more people on highways and take away a transportation option. The National Association of Railroad Passengers is trying to restore the cutbacks. But Amtrak says Three Rivers service between Pittsburgh and Chicago was only started to haul bulk mail, and Amtrak is dropping the mail service because it doesn’t make enough money.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links