SMART INVESTMENTS IN INTERCITY PASSENGER TRAVEL FACILITIES: A BALANCED MULTI-MODAL APPROACH International Workshop on High-Speed Rail Planning and Operations George List, NC State
Re-Growth, not Expansion
More recent trends Vehicle-Miles and Car-Miles (millions) Year Air Highway Transit Rail Frt 1 Rail Px 1 1960 0.86 762.1 n/a 28.2 2.2 1970 2.068 1111.8 n/a 29.9 0.69 1980 2.523 1530.3 2.3 29.3 0.23 1990 3.963 2148.2 3.2 26.2 0.3 1995 4.618 2427.8 3.6 30.4 0.29 1: Car-miles Centerline-Miles Year Air Highway Rail Water Pipeline 1960 293,003 265,477 207,334 25,253 630,900 1965 268,275 268,898 199,798 23,380 767,500 1970 291,122 271,517 196,479 25,543 919,300 1975 313,178 265,905 191,520 25,543 979,300 1980 341,283 300,456 164,822 25,543 1,051,774 1985 373,891 301,006 145,764 25,777 1,118,875 1990 388,000 305,347 119,758 25,777 1,206,774 1994 394,000 342,834 109,332 25,777 1,260,997
Door to Door Travel Times Matter Human activity is distributed, so travel is required. Large cities are typically not close together. Distances of 100-300 miles are common. Door-to-door travel time is what matters. Travel times of 1-2 hours are always desirable. Speeds over 120 mph are required to achieve these times. Travel Times (15 minute access and egress) Average Line-Haul Speed (mph) D (mi) 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 100 2.17 1.33 1.06 0.92 0.83 0.78 0.74 200 3.83 2.17 1.61 1.33 1.17 1.06 0.98 300 5.50 3.00 2.17 1.75 1.50 1.33 1.21 400 7.17 3.83 2.72 2.17 1.83 1.61 1.45 500 8.83 4.67 3.28 2.58 2.17 1.89 1.69
Railroad Service Near its Peak
One Example Lehigh Valley RR
Another Seaboard Coastline
Passenger Rail Network - 1962
Passenger Rail Network - 1971
Passenger Rail Network - 2005
Amtrak Network - Today
Highway Network Today
Airline Network One Airline
Recent Amtrak Performance During FY 2014 Amtrak carried nearly 31 million passengers, the largest annual total in its history. More than 84,700 passengers per day ride more than 300 Amtrak trains. Amtrak ranks 6th among airlines in domestic passengers carried. In the Northeast Corridor (NEC), Amtrak carried more than three times as many riders between Washington and New York City as the airline industry. Amtrak serves more than 500 destinations; utilizes 21,300 miles of routes; and has more than 20,000 employees. It operates at top speeds of 150 mph (241 kph); and more than half of Amtrak trains operate at top speeds of 100 mph (160 kph) or greater. In FY 2014, Amtrak earned approximately $3.2 billion in revenue and incurred approximately $4.3 billion in expenses. It s overall operating loss was about $227 million, the lowest (adjusted for inflation) in the company's history; it covered 93% of its operating costs with ticket sales and other revenue.
2014 Trip Lengths Medium Distance Northeast Corridor Long Distance State Supported
Passenger Rail Network - Suggested
High Speed is a Focus Today Proposed High Speed Rail Amtrak Service
How is High Speed defined? Multiple definitions in use European Union Directive 96/48/EC, Annex 1: Minimum speed limit of 155 mph (250 km/hr) 124 mph (200 km/hr) on upgraded lines Rolling stock capable of 124 mph (200km/hr) Track for or upgraded to suitability for high speed travel Rolling stock must be capable of safe, uninterrupted travel
Speed Record Trends Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/land_speed_record_for_rail_vehicles
Commercial Services History of Service Introduction Year Country Service 1964 Japan Shinkansen (EMU) 1969 United States Metroliner (EMU) 1970 France TGV (gas turbine) 1973 France TGV (electric) 1976 England HST (diesel) 1979 United States Rohr Turboliners (NY) 1991 Germany ICE Germany 1992 Spain Madrid-Seville 2009 China Guangzhou Shenzhen 2011 China Beijing Shanghai Today s 10 fastest services: France (186mph), Japan (186mph), Spain (186 mph), Belgium (186mph), Italy (186mph), Germany (174mph), United Kingdom (140mph), Finland (138mph), USA (135 mph), Sweden (125mph) Emerging leaders: China, South Korea
Status Today and Projections Cumulative high-speed rail passengers (in millions of passengers)[23][24] Year Shinkansen (see notes) Asia (other) Europe World Shinkansen share (%) 1964 11.0 0 0 11.0 100% 1980 1,616.3 0 0 1,616.3 100% 1985 2,390.3 0 45.7 2,436.0 98.1% 1990 3,559.1 0 129.9 3,689.0 96.5% 1995 5,018.0 0 461 5,479 91.6% 2000 6,531.7 0 1,103.5 7,635.1 85.5% 2005 8,088.3 52.2 2,014.6 10,155.1 79.6% 2010 9,651.0 965 3,177.0 15,417 70.8% 2012 10,344 2,230 3,715 16,210 64.5% 2014 11,050 3,910 4,300 19,260 57.4%
United States - NEC Second commercial service, 1969 120 mph (reduced to 110) 6-10 trains each way per day Northeast Corridor, 225 mi New York Washington PRR / Penn Central / Amtrak
New York State Empire Corridor Fifth Commercial Service: 1979 1976: Seven RTL Turboliners from Rohr TGV derived 1979: 110 mph (Albany-Stuyvesant & Albany-Schenectady) 1993-1995: RTL II s built, track and signal work 1995: 125 mph, Albany-Stuyvesant 1995-1996: RTL III design 1997: RTL III refurbishment contract with SuperSteel 2001: 125 mph, Albany-Stuyvesant, RTL III 2003: Turboliners retired, replaced by diesels and Amfleet 2014: 110 mph is still maximum speed Note: RTGs were also used in Amtrak services from Chicago to St. Louis Milwaukee, and Detroit in the early 1970 s, but at lower speeds (79 mph).
Service Description $200 million program Highest speeds outside of the Northeast Corridor: 125 mph Only other HSR service that has been put in place in US New York - Albany: 142 miles, 14 trains per day Albany Niagara Falls: 320 miles, 4 trains per day At one point, 1.3 M riders per year, today 1.1 M riders
States and Corridors $3.5 B
Not Just a Federal Push Many states have their own services California Connecticut Illinois Indiana Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Missouri New Hampshire New Mexico New Jersey New York North Carolina Pennsylvania Vermont Virginia Washington
Illinois Initiative 35 million annual trips in the Chicago to St. Louis corridor ~99% of them being by air or automobile Goals: Improve passenger transportation network within the corridor Reduce the amount of air and automobile traffic in and out of the city Upgrade existing rail in order to accommodate high speed trains
Funding Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) launched HSIPR as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Received $1.2 billion federal award $400 million more from Illinois Capitol Bill Equipment New passenger railcars from Illinois-based Nippon Sharyo via collaborative $352 million award involving Caltrans Locomotives from Seimens USA
Details Construction started in 2010 Speeds to increase to 110 mph 248 mile trip time reduced by 90 minutes to under 4 hours Fully operational by 2017 New sidings, upgrading bridges, culverts, and signals, new fencing, etc. Over 243 of the 284 miles of new rail installed so far 635,168 new concrete ties 24,000 jobs Additional routes: Elkhart, IN to Dwight, IL (~96 miles) Lenox, MO to St. Louis, MO (~18 miles)
California Initiative Authority created in 1996, board meeting archives from 1998 forward Published business plans date back to 2000 2000: Ridership and revenue study, corridor evaluations, other related studies 2008: Benefit-cost analyses, regional economic studies, train system options 2012: Capital costs, system in context, implementation strategies 2014: life-cycle costs, service plans, operations and maintenance cost models, peer reviews, cash flow models 2015: Construction packages 1, 2, 3, and 4; design-build contract awards 800 miles total Reach speeds of over 200 miles per hour 24 train stations Benefits and costs are confusing, too many nuances, 2014 B/C shows $34b costs, $80b benefits 40m riders when completed Initial service: 2022, Bay to Basin, 2027, Remainder, 2029
Benefits and Costs Expected to recoup the $20 billion/year in economic activity lost to traffic snarls Total cost is expected to be $68 billion (year of expenditure $$) Only $10 billion has been awarded so far $31 billion to construct the section from Merced to the San Fernando Valley To be completed by 2022
Florida Initiative 2000: voters approve amendment to the Florida constitution that mandates the creation of a HSR system 2001: Florida High Speed Rail Act and Authority creation 2004: amendment repealed; the Authority continued to meet, Tampa-Orlando EIS, but with no funding, no action 2009: ARRA provides $8b for HSR; the state takes several preparatory actions; Florida Rail Enterprise replaces the Authority 2010: $1.25b awarded to Florida; 50% of the cost of Tampa-Orlando; $342m added to this from funds rejected by Wisconsin and Ohio 2011: Federal funds rejected by state; funds redirected to other states
Projected Economic Impact Add ~$3.5 billion in GDP to Florida s economy $2 billion in labor income $600 million in tax revenues 10,000 jobs per year during construction 5,000 jobs per year after construction was completed 3 million vehicles removed from the road each year
All Aboard Florida Picked up Miami-Orlando service Spearheaded by Florida East Coast Industries Use right-of way and facilities of Florida East Coast Railway 240 miles, $1.5b for construction, 3m riders per year (projected), 2017 opening 2013: Requested $1.6b in Federal funding 2013: Finding of No Significant Impact from FRA, clearing way for construction 2014: $1.75b private activity bonds replaced Federal funding 2015: site work in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and West Palm Beach and right-of-way improvements 2017: service to commence
Conclusions and Predictions Rail service saw a significant demise across the 1900 s Amtrak was formed to preserve the long-distance routes But today, the trip lengths are short, 100-300 miles States have created their own sponsored services States have become convinced that rail passenger service is valuable High speed rail is being layered on top of existing services California is expecting to create a new ROW Top speeds are likely to be predominantly 110-125 mph Amtrak perceives that electrification is needed for true high-speed operation as well as higher class track and larger track separations Growth of regular and high speed services will continue Multi-modal integration is a key to growth (door-to-door travel) Integration into reservation systems and route guidance systems are also critically important
Questions