Over the past few years, a popular image of a high-speed national railway concept started making the rounds on social media. The image, originally created by Alfred Twu, a graphic designer, was created in 2013, but really started to gain popularity in early 2020 when it started getting shared around on Twitter.
While this image is mainly shared more as a joke than an actual proposition, a system like this would drastically improve domestic travel in the U.S.
The concept of a high-speed railway has been brought up more and more as of late, but this concept was first discussed in the U.S. in 1965, just a few years after Japan had completed its own system.
There are a few misconceptions about what a high-speed rail is. As of right now, America has only one “high-speed railway” that runs from Boston to Washington D.C. However, this train isn’t actually a high-speed railway, it is just marketed as that. A high-speed railway must exceed 160 mph to be classified as a high-speed train, which is something this train never does. The train’s max speed is 135 mph; however, the trip actually averages 62 mph.
The main advantage to a high-speed rail system is the positive impact on the environment. A 2013 Yale study showed that a high-speed rail system would reduce air pollution in the U.S. High-speed railways run on electricity rather than jet fuel. Electricity is obviously way better and more sustainable, making this the greener option.
Another main benefit to a high-speed railway is how many jobs it would create. Creating a system like this requires new infrastructure to be built. In 2020 a bill in the House of Representatives was introduced to give $205 billion to create a high-speed rail system across the country. While the bill never went anywhere it was predicted to add over 1.6 million jobs.
The travel time also wouldn’t increase all too much. While, yes, the actual time that you’re on the train would be higher than the time you are on a plane, airports take a long time to get through. Right now especially, some airports are recommending people get there up to four hours prior to boarding. This adds time to traveling that just wouldn’t exist with a high-speed rail system.
There is a pretty big downside to this system, however — the cost. It would be very expensive to build all the infrastructure for this. The end cost would end up being in the trillions, which is a lot of money to spend on something. Though, it would be worth it. The positives of this system outweigh the costs.
A national high-speed rail system would improve domestic travel in this country as well as benefit the environment. This is a system that works in so many other countries around the world, it’s time the U.S. catches up.
Mark Warren can be reached at [email protected] or on Twitter @MarkWarren1832
Rudy Niederer
Take a look at the Cascadia High-Speed Rail corridor plan. Governments should consider the CHSR design work of private people. Ignoring them does hinder value generation for the nation.
Mira
Imagine being in a first world country and not even having a high-speed train system. Embarrassing.
Chang
It isn't as practical for the U.S. to invest in a high-speed rail as it is for other countries. We have cities on the east and west coast that are closer together than others, as well as Austin and Dallas in the south; however, the train systems that are already in place are not used there either. The U.S. has highway infrastructure that continues to meet the needs of Americans. It is interesting, but the American people have never truly been big on using trains to travel to places. Also, if you see how poor our current infrastructure is, what makes you think we can sustain a high-speed rail that is not only harder to upkeep, but also costs more to create.