hardiho’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Population Density and rail passenger service

  The connection between population density and availability of intercity rail passenger service is tenuous at best. According to the CIA World Factbook and the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the U.S. state of Ohio and the European nation of France have nearly identical population density -- 108.10 (Ohio) vs. 108.09 (France) people per square kilometer. California, Illinois, North Carolina., Michigan, Wisconsin, Washington, Missouri, Vermont and Alaska all have lower population density than Ohio but each listed state financially supports intercity rail passenger service while Ohio does not. Spain, with a population density of only 78.43 people per square kilometer, has perhaps the most ambitious high speed rail development program in all of Europe. When completed, it will have by far the most miles of newly built dedicated hsr trackage in all of Europe. It would appear that public policy decisions, rather than population density, play a substantial role in determining which places have viable intercit rail passenger service. It would also appear that U.S. public policy decision makers have a rather curious perspective on what factors should most strongly influence their decisions regarding transportation alternatives.

  J. Howard Harding Rail Transportation Advocate

  On A candidate finally discusses public transit ... at a random lunch posted 1 year, 7 months ago 30 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Rail Subsidies Where Appropriate

  Seattle to Chicago is the most heavily-used, least subsidized route Amtrak operates with only one train per day. It is also one of the few remaining full-service routes operated by Amtrak -- including full dining car and lounge car service with multiple sleeping cars. Routes with reduced amenities generally have lower ridership, lower revenues but disproportionately reduced costs (that is the per passenger mile subsidy tends to be higher on reduced amenity trains).

  Currently efforts are under way to vastly expand U.S. rail passenger service, in part via targeted federal capital investment in rail infrastructure. S. 294, passed by the U.S. Senate several months ago, would begin that process by providing a federal/state capital investment partnership program similar to the federal/state highway program. Companion legislation will soon be introduced in the U.S. House.

  On Tuesday, January 15, 2008, the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Commission released Transportation for Tomorrow, a report on the status and future of America's highways, bridges, and transit systems, before a crowd of reporters and transportation insiders at the National Press Club.  NARP Executive Director, Ross Capon, a member of the Commission's Passenger Rail Working Group (PRWG), was present.  In NARP's release regarding the report, Capon noted that "this long-awaited report takes a hard look at the quality-of-life, economic, environmental, and energy consequences of our current transportation policy and maps out a realistic strategy to address current and upcoming needs." Focusing on the passenger rail aspect of the report, Capon said "Transportation for Tomorrow" builds upon NARP's proposed "Grid and Gateway" train network which we unveiled this past summer.  In particular, many of the routes included in the report were originally a part of NARP's plan, as well as the idea of using rail to increase the level of connectedness between rural and metropolitan areas.  NARP's release concluded, "Capon thanked the Commission, especially Wisconsin Secretary of Transportation Frank Busalacchi," who chaired the PRWG.

  J. Howard Harding Rail Transportation Advocate

  On A candidate finally discusses public transit ... at a random lunch posted 1 year, 7 months ago 30 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Obama on Rail service

  Senator Obama's support of expanded rail passenger service is encouraging. Many of the comments in response to his pro-rail remarks are seriously disappointing especially considering this is an environmentally-supportive site.
  First, according to Edition 26, the latest edition of the Transportation Energy Data Book  from Oak Ridge National Laboratory's website:
  in 2005, domestic airlines on average consumed 20.5% more energy per passenger-mile than Amtrak, while cars consumed 27.2% more than Amtrak.  Looked at the other way round, Amtrak consumes 17.0% and 21.4% less energy per passenger-mile than airlines and cars, respectively.  [One passenger-mile is one passenger traveling one mile.]

  Those percentages are derived from these Oak Ridge figures (British Thermal Units or BTUs per passenger-mile, 2005 data), organized here most to least efficient:

  Amtrak: 2,709
  Commuter rail: 2,743
  Rail transit: 2,784
  Certificated air carriers: 3,264 (excludes international services)
  Cars: 3,445

  notes of interest:

  Amtrak consumed 14.6 trillion BTUs in 2005, which was 8.2% less than 15.9 trillion in 2003 and 19.3% below Amtrak's peak year of energy use (2001, with 18.1 trillion BTUs).
  Amtrak in 2005 consumed 65,477,000 gallons of diesel fuel and used 531,377,000 kilowatt hours. [Both figures exclude consumption by commuter railroads for which Amtrak provides services.]
  This indicates that 62.3% of Amtrak energy is diesel fuel vs. 37.7% electricity.

  The tables you may find most useful are:
  Table 2.12 Passenger travel and energy use, 2004
  Table 2.13 Energy intensities of highway passenger modes, 1970-2005
  Table 2.14 Energy intensities of nonhighway passenger modes, 1970-2005
  Table 9.10 Historical Amtrak figures including car-miles, train-miles, etc.
  Table 9.11 Summary statistics for commuter rail operations, 1984-2005
  Table 9.12 Summary statistics for rail transit operations, 1970-2005
  Table A.15 Intercity Rail Fuel Use
  [Note: Table 2.12 has 2004 data because 2005 data is not yet available for some modes. As the relevant footnotes explain, the airline statistics in Table 2.12 include "1/2 of international scheduled services" whereas those in Table 2.14 do not include any international services. This report also has considerable freight data.]

  The "What's New" page for Edition 26 reports that, "The transportation share of U.S. energy use reached 28.4% in 2006 which is the highest share recorded since 1970." The page also reflects a disturbing trend towards less information:

  "Due to more stringent data restrictions imposed by R.L. Polk, the latest number of vehicles by age that we are allowed to publish is 2001." (Tables 3.5 & 3.6)
  The American Metals Market discontinued the survey which collected information on the average materials in a domestic car; therefore, the 2003 data are the latest available. (Table 4.14)
  The Census Bureau has discontinued the Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey; the 2002 data are therefore the latest data available. (Tables 5.4-5.9)
  The Department of Transportation has discontinued the National Household Travel Survey; therefore, the 2001 data are the latest data available. (Tables 8.5-8.13 & 8.17)
  The EPA has not published new data from the National Emissions Inventory since the 2002 data; thus, Tables 12.1-12.11 remain unchanged.

  Comments on other dubious responses will follow.
  

  J. Howard Harding Rail Transportation Advocate

  On A candidate finally discusses public transit ... at a random lunch posted 1 year, 7 months ago 30 Responses