I just took three trains to make a connection in the Seattle Airport. American’s don’t travel by train much, yet our airports are equipped with well-maintained, efficient electric trains. In this country, the climate crisis cannot be separated from the issue of our archaic transportation system.
The city council of Portland, Oregon (allegedly the greenest city in the country) recently voted to go ahead with the plans for a new bridge over the Columbia River which divides the city from its largest suburb, Vancouver, Washington. The bridge will cost an estimated $4.2 billion, and if history is any guide, the project will probably go over budget.
For (roughly) the same amount, we could have high-speed rail between Seattle and Vancouver and increased public transit between Portland and Vancouver, providing a substantial economic boon to those cities and everything in between and saving immesurable emissions generated by unnecessary SEA-PDX air traffic.
35% of flights in the United States are 300 miles or shorter. Investing in a modest number of high-speed rail routes could cut our dependence on air travel substantially. Not only would this cut our net carbon emissions - trains rides are less expensive and more pleasant.
There were only 10 people on my flight from Portland, less than a third of the plane’s capacity. With the price of oil recently soaring ever-closer to $200/barrel, air travel is increasingly costly and unattractive. It was hard enough to accept it when they took away our in-flight meals - now many airlines are charging to check a bag, and Jet Blue recently announced plans to charge for pillows and blankets.
New technology is sexy - surely I’m not the only one who got a little giddy when I saw sketches Google’s windmill-kite contraptions - but a huge part of our clean energy future must be a reevaluation of the technologies we have. Transportation is responsible for roughly 30% of American CO2 emissions which make up 25% of the global total.
Presented with the question of planes, trains or automobiles, choosing is easy. Getting government and corporate support for the rail infrastructure we need won’t be, but it can be done. In our drive towards a just and prosperous clean energy future, let’s not forget about that clunky old technology from the past that helped build America in the first place.
Here’s to the new American railroad.
Subscribe by Email!
Subscribe by RSS!
Share on Facebook
Great article Alex. Totally in agreement. Trains are replacing cars, only a matter of when. Keep up the great work and blog.
Hear, Hear. As a Portlander, I’d love to see high-speed rail to Seattle, Eugene, and San Francisco. What a great post from IGHIH. Do you know of any initiatives to promote rail over building more bridges? I haven’t heard much of this in the news.
Generally speaking trains (or trams for short journeys) are the most efficient (emissions and fuel wise) way of getting across land. Things change a bit across oceans and sea!
I have to say though that a lot of American diesel trains seem to be ‘gas guzzlers’ compared to European trains. It just reflects the direction the US has gone regarding design and fuel use over many many decades.
I think the other problem we all have is the obsession with speed and time. If we were happier with a slower pace of life, then slower more efficient forms of transport would work well. The ’standard’ speed electric trains (up to say 140mph) have lower emissions and fuel consumption than high speed trains (say over 140 mph) that need special tracks.
It may be getting a little easier to get congress to fund our rails. There has been a bill sponsored recently, I just can’t find it right now. If you do a search for Amtrak in Google news, you will find quite a few good articles from the last couple of months. Amtrak is says it will set a new record this year for ridership and is having problems meeting the demand of new riders cause by the oil prices.
I took a trip this summer and all I have to say is our rail infrastructure is a joke now. It’s hard to believe that our railroads were once the best in the world. The railbeds are in horrible shape and Amtrak only owns like 800 miles- I think. They lease the rest from the freight companies and are at the mercy of the freight schedules, often putting the Amtrak trains behind schedule.
And to answer the above comment. A diesel locomotive may be a guzzler, but I guarantee that they use less and pollute less than an equal number of auto’s on the road. Just my 2 cents tho.
Brian
Of course, using any “green” transport - public or a Prius - is an easy choice. The consumer feels like they are making the difference through the act of using it. They are the “activist” when the start the car. Or when the flip the switch of the CFL lightbulb. But most other green products have all the “goodness” in the manufacturing and the consumer is expected to do little but hand over the cash. Maybe we should look at how to get consumer more involved and make them feel better about themselves rather than just make them feel like better consumers? More on this at http://angryafrican.net/2008/08/13/build-it-green-and-they-will-buy/
Sorry ‘Angry African’ but the fundamentals of car ownership and driving can not compete with scheduled mass transport when it comes to emissions per passenger. Whatever you do to a car to make it more efficient, technology improvements can be made to public transport to make it more efficient as well.
It has little to do with design, the issue is basic statistics and the way different transport options can be operated or are used.
Some CO2 emissions figures from the UK government (DEFRA):
Rail: 60.2
Tram: 65.0
Small motorbike: 72.9
Bus: 89.1
Medium sized Hybrid car: 126.2
Small car: 183.1
Large car: 296.4
These are typical UK vehicles and rolling stock of varying ages. Figures are gCO2 per passenger km. The reason why public transport does well is because it is ’scheduled’ and as such less convenient. Also those figures are based on relatively poor load factors that modern public transport suffers from because people prefer cars!
The best a car can ever do is for a fully loaded car to equal a quarter full bus!
The bus figure above is based on a load factor of 9.2 persons and a bus can carry about 40 or so people.
Hey gooseberry,
Two quick things.
1. DEFRA calculated their emmissions for busses, rail, trams etc for passenger kilometer. But not for cars. cars is straight emmissions per car. So, two people in a hybrid is lighter than everything but a rail - and then more by just 3. Don’t worry - I use public transport, we have one small-to-medium size car and travelled less than 10,000 in two years in the car!
2. My question was more on how do we get people to use something more and feel as if they are part of the change? Transport is an easy as it translates into an action the consumer is taking. They feel “green”, but most “green” products out there do not give them the opportunity to be “green” in their actions. Only in the puchasing of the product.
Hi angryafrican
Your right, the DEFRA figures are for a car and not per passenger, i hadn’t noticed that, thanks for pointing it out.
But the fact is 90% of British cars are usually only carrying the driver at any particular time.
So approximately the car figures are close to gCO2 per passenger km !
As a Portland “ex-patriot” now living in California, I definitely miss the beer, great urban design, and friends and family of my home town. However, I am excited to be a Berkley-ite now with access to a very functional regional rapid transit system. And assuming I register to vote down here before November, I’m also excited to be able to vote in favor of a new high speed rail line that would link San Francisco and Sacramento to Los Angeles (and points in between). The California High Speed Rail Line, which will be on the November ballot, would make it possible to travel from SF to LA on a comfortable 3 1/2 hour journey, powered by clean electricity (a growing portion of which comes from clean, affordable American energy sources). Sounds like the future to me, even if it uses a relatively old technology (high speed rail lines have been providing efficient and rapid travel options for Europeans and Japanese for decades…).
I am a subscriber to trains magazine and it is my understanding that an average twenty to thirty year old diesel electric locomotive averages about 15 mpgs, but think of all the trucks one freight train takes off the roads and newer engines getting more and more efficient. There should be a mandate that all railroads in the U.S. have to switch over to clean electricity methods to propel their trains, and make room for Amtrak. I have never taken a train or a plane though it sounds as if my hometown of Dubuque may be getting a passenger train to Chicago, and to the Quad Cities and air travel is a pita and their prices ever skyrocketing. Our minds have been warped to think that cars and planes are the only way to get around since the 50’s, reverse this!