I'm not intimately familiar with the various high-speed rail projects in Texas, but this sounds like a different proposal that the "texas triangle" system modeled on the TGV. -- TEXAS HIGH SPEED RAIL: ON THE RIGHT TRACK? by Wendell Cox 08/23/2012 The Central Japan Railway (Note 1), which operates one of only two high-speed rail segments (Tokyo Station to Osaka Station) in the world that has been fully profitable (including the cost of building), proposes to build a line from Dallas to Houston, with top speeds of 205 miles per hour. This is slightly faster than the fastest speeds now operated. This line is radically different from others proposed around the nation and most that have been proposed around the world. The promoters intend to build and operate the route from commercial revenues. There is the understandable concern that eventually, the promoters will approach the state or the federal government for support. Not so, say Texas Central High Speed Railway officials. According to President Robert Eckels, not only is there no plan for subsidies, but "investors would likely walk away from a project that couldn’t stand on its own." He also told the Texas Tribune “If we start taking the federal money, it takes twice as long, costs twice as much,” Eckels said. “My guess is we’d end up pulling the plug on it.” Eckels is a former Harris County Judge (Houston), a position the equivalent of a county commission or county board of supervisors chair in other parts of the nation. Eckels developed a reputation for fiscal responsibility during his tenure at the county courthouse. The Texas project is in considerable contrast the California High Speed Rail project, which if built, is likely to require a 100 percent capital subsidy and perhaps subsidies for operations. It is also different from the Tampa to Orlando high speed rail project, which would have required a 100 percent capital subsidy and was cancelled by Florida Governor Rick Scott. The Texas project can also be contrasted with the Vegas to Victorville, California XpressWest high speed rail line that would require at least a $5.5 billion federal loan and a subsidized interest rate. Our recent Reason Foundation report predicted that XpressWest would not be able to repay its federal loan from commercial revenues and could impose a loss on federal taxpayers of up to 10 times the Solyndra loan guarantee loss (see The Washington Post, "Solyndra Scandal Timeline"). From the horrific record of private investment in startup high speed rail lines and the huge losses that have been typical, I am certainly skeptical. The Taiwan high speed rail private investors have lost two-thirds of their capital investment and debts are guaranteed by the government. The Channel Tunnel rail line to St. Pancras station has been bailed out by British taxpayers. However, if any company can make money at high speed rail in the United States, it would be the Central Japan Railway. So far the Texas Central High Speed Railway seems to be doing it right. Like the other intercity modes, the airlines system and the intercity highway system (Note 2), this project would be paid for by people who use it. Without government subsidies or loans, the Texas Central High Speed Railway will certainly have an incentive to get the sums right. If they are not, it sounds like the plug will be pulled. If they are, high speed rail could be on the right track in the United States for the first time. More power to them. ------ Note 1: Central Japan Railway, and other companies purchased the assets of the Japanese National Railway in the late 1980s. The nationalized railway had run up a debt of nearly $300 billion, which was eventually transferred to taxpayers. Note 2: There is a small subsidy to the airline system from the Federal Aviation Administration. Intercity highways have been financed by users until contributions from the federal general fund in recent years. However these contributions have been far less than diversions over the past 30 years from highway user fees, principally to mass transit a major transfer of highway trust fund interest to the general fund and now ongoing interest transfers. http://www.newgeography.com/content/003042-texas-high-speed-rail-on-right-track
High speed rail between Houston and Dallas should be a no-brainer. However I am a bit skeptical that operating revenue would cover initial capital cost. I am almost certain that the train would run operating profits, its just covering the initial startup cost that would be difficult. Regardless, this should happen.
I've always been a fan of rail in Texas if it can be done in an economically responsible manner. I haven't seen enough proof it can be.
Well I've read up on this and supposedly they've secured a large amount of ROW already. Not 100% sure, but I think they're planning on using the I-45 median for much of the route.
To nitpik, High speed rail is a specifically defined term (by an authority). It isn't just a term to use loosely as you have above. Different authorities have different definitions, however. Generally, they all say the system must maintain a sustained speed above a given threshold. In the US, it's above 110mph. In Europe, its above 155mph on new tracks or 125mph on old tracks. Basically, it is an irrelevant statement to remark if Amtrack is or is not high speed as a matter of opinion. Being "high speed" is a factual statement based on measurements. If The Federal Railroad Administration says its so, then it is.
As someone who's rode Acela several times, I disagree. Could it be better? Yes of course. But as it is it's still superior to both auto and plane travel.
The scale of roads we have is not necessary at all. Extremely large freeways such as the Katy Freeway aren't necessary. We could have spent the $3 billion used to widen the Katy Freeway to build a comprehensive transit system, something that would do even more good for Houston.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/HRTYNxtbnjI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
