An article by Raju Chebium and Maureen Groppe in the Indianapolis Star discusses the possibility of high speed rail in the Midwest. The federal government has set aside $8 billion to develop high speed rail in this country. This is a significant but insufficient amount of money for development of high speed rail in this country. The French, Chinese, Japanese, and Spanish are apparently far ahead of us in this technology. In our area, the primary corridor would be from Chicago through Lafayette and Indianapolis to Cincinnati.
From my limited perspective of one round trip from Lafayette to Chicago, the main challenge isn’t the potential speed of the train and the rail, but the congestion of the corridors. Our trip from Chicago to Lafayette took upwards of 5 hours because we were rarely going at anything like top speed and spent a lot of time sitting still on the tracks.
Gov. Daniels does not seem to be a fan of this:
“I would just observe that that wouldn’t go very far if the idea is to actually build some of these,” Gov. Mitch Daniels said after Congress passed the stimulus bill, which included the $8 billion. “I wouldn’t want Indiana to get left holding the bag — an enormous bag — for some system that’s put in place and then began losing money, which these things tend to do.”
His first point about how far the available money will go toward actually completing a project is certainly relevant. Even though it happened a century and a half ago, Indiana remains scarred by overly ambitious transportation projects that could not be funded to completion. (The Indiana Mammoth Internal Improvement act included turnpikes, railroads, and canals; none of which were completed has been one of the defining pieces of Indiana history.)
The Governor’s other point about whether the rail would be a profit center seems to miss the mark, however. How much money do our roads make for the government? None. They lose quite a bit of money. The relevant question is whether the cost/benefit ratio of rail outweigh the cost/benefit ratio of the roads or other transportation it would replace — including potentially such things as reduction in pollution and fuel consumption; and – if fuel consumption is reduced enough, potentially reduction in military expenditures necessary to maintain the oil supply.
At the end of the day, it seems to me that if Spain and France can manage high speed rail, so can we. Anyone with experience traveling in Europe know how well their train systems work and how they affect the overall effectiveness in transportation for those areas?