Evacuation problems make a compelling argument for high-speed train
Hurricane Gustav is a wake-up call to Congress. America needs to fund and implement an alternative and effective means of transportation.
Who can forget the images of cars backed up on I-10 as nervous residents flee the approaching storm? And how many air travelers are stranded in New Orleans now that the airport has closed?
In Europe, there’s an additional transportation option: modern trains capable of speeds of up to 180 miles per hour.
People lobby to have lines installed close enough to their homes to up their real estate values and diminish their commuting time, just not so close that they can hear the trains or feel their rumble. And mile for mile, they cause substantially less pollution than planes or cars.
The European Union enacted legislation last year that will require national rail systems to open up to operators from other countries by 2010. And, equally important, they will require train sets that are interoperable, unlike the old Orient Express that had to change engines are border crossings because of different rail gauges. Ultimately, there will be a pan-European high-speed train system.
Imagine what a difference a high-speed train could have made in New Orleans.
Karen Fawcett is president of Bonjour Paris.
You may also be interested in these articles
Comments
3 Responses to “Evacuation problems make a compelling argument for high-speed train”
Please share your thoughts...
While I wholeheartedly support the need for high-speed rail in the US, I seriously doubt it would have made any difference in New Orleans. You’re talking about evacuating hundreds of thousands of people, not a couple hundred per train. And it’s not like you need to move these people across the country, just a hundred miles or so. Plain old buses would be just as good.
You’ve made an excellent point and I can’t disagree. But the US needs to focus on alternative means of transportation and concentrate on its own infrastructure, heath care, education and more. When you live in the EU you come away with a different perspective. Please don’t think I’m saying everything is perfect. However there are different priorities.
Quite apart from the capacity issue there is a reliability issue. In normal circumstances railways (high speed, or not) are generally reliable here in Europe. However, you are talking about severely abnormal weather with very high winds. High speed rail almost always equates to electrification with overhead wires. Those wires are vulnerable; in Japan, where tropical storms occur, they have wind speed machines that automatically shut off the supply when wind speed gets too high. I would expect a responsible operator to move their trains out of the danger area long before any risk arrived.
Yes, the evacuation should (that is should not will) take place before the worst winds arrive but nevertheless I think trying to use a Hurricane to justify HSR is just plain wrong and could actually backfire.
HSR is a great means of transportation in the right circumstances. Whether New Orleans is actually a prime candidate is questionable. You need relatively large population centres within a maximum of 4-6 hours rail travel time to make HSR work. Is that the case for New Orleans?