HSR: California x 1.3 = Spain

From a discussion I took part in on the California HSR blog, "Jo" pointed out an addendum to my comparison of my France to the midwest cooridor, which showed that France had a similar population, area, and economy to that of New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. "Jo" calculated

Spain:

Population: 47,265,000
Area: 195,364 sq mile
Density: 231 sq mile
GDP: $1,497 Trillion

California:

Population: 38,041,000
Area: 163,696 sq mile
Density: 242 sq mile
GDP: $1,9365 Trillion

Or, in other words, Spain, which is building out HSR like crazy, is essentially 1.3 Californias, with a notably smaller economy. If Spain can do it, there certainly is no reason California can't. Thankfully, it looks like the last pieces are falling in place in California and construction is scheduled to begin this year.

High Speed Rail–Density Distraction

It is absolutely certain that one of the first objections anti-HSR individuals will express is that the US has too low of a population density to support HSR.  This is logical, if you believe that our purchase of Alaska somehow diluted the population density of New York City.  Of course, that argument would be absurd.  What matters is local and regional density, not nation-wide density.  The question is what parts of the US have sufficient density for HSR, and which ones will during the time-frame of their operation.

The “mid-west corridor” serves as a good example of a typical place that is suitable for HSR.  Specifically, this discussion will focus on five state – New York, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Indiana, which form a fairly densely-populated corridor between New York and Chicago.  The population, land area, population, and GDP of this five-state region stacks up very comparably to France, which has one of the world’s best HSR systems, the TGV, which not only servers over 100 million riders a year, but has set numerous speed records and generates annual profits of over a billion dollars.  In contrast, no true high speed rail exists in the United States, with the closest example being the Acela Express, which barely averages half the speed of HSR.

 

Location	Population	Area (sq mi)	Density	GDP ($bil)
New York	19,570,000	47214	415	1157
Illinois	12,875,000	55584	232	644
Pennsylvania	12,764,000	44817	285	576
Ohio	11,544,000	40948	282	483
Indiana	6,537,000	35867	182	268
Total	63,291,000	244249	282	3127
France	60,876,000	210688	289	2560

 

A robust mid-western HSR system might look something similar to the map below.  One line would leave westward from Boston, travel across upstate New York, along Lake Erie to Cleveland, where it would become the “Tri-C” line heading south through Ohio into Kentucky.  A second line would leave New York City, head west to Pittsburg and then bend back north to meet the first line at the Cleveland airport before heading straight west to Chicago.  There it would turn south for St. Louis.  Several small and medium size north-south connectors and the DC-Boston line would fill out the grid pattern.  The total distance of track covered within the five-state boundary is just shy of 2500 miles (4000 km).  France, for comparison, has about 1200 miles of HSR in operation, 130 miles under construction, and over 1600 miles in the planning stages.

 

 

It is clear that at a regional level at least, the mid-west corridor states have sufficient population density to support HSR.  This argument is only going to grow stronger with time, as the population of the US is projected to rise by more than 50% during the remainder of this century.  The only possible objection I see here is that local population density might be insufficient – that while our cities have enough people, they are too sprawled out.  There is some truth to this, but this ignores both the fact that our population is going to grow, and the fact that the very act of building HSR will influence future density patterns.  Land near HSR stations is some of the hottest real estate on earth.  Build it and people will move there.

 

What goes for the mid-west applies elsewhere.  The entire eastern seaboard has population densities similar to the mid-west corridor.  Florida has a population density of 350 people per square mile.  California’s population is 242 per square mile, but half of the state is empty deserts and mountains and virtually all the people reside on either the coast or the central valley.  Even the eastern third of Texas, where most of its residents reside, has a population density similar to France. 

 

There may be good reasons not to build HSR along our eastern, western, and southern coasts, as well as the mid-west, but density is not one of them.  They already have sufficient regional density to support HSR and will only have even higher densities for the foreseeable future.

High Speed Rail - Build It and They Will Ride

 

Over the coming weeks, I am planning on presenting a series of blog posts defending the construction of a nation-wide network of high speed rail (HSR) trains.  This would be a major endeavor for our nation, costing in its most expansive forms, such as the "Dream" system shown above, sums on the order of a trillion dollars.

Having used the Japanese Shinkansen HSR system many times and ridden the French TSV once, I am absolutely convinced that HSR is the best transportation system for mid-distance intercity travel.  In the range of 100-400 miles (150-600km), HSR is as fast or faster than flying, faster than a car, and far more comfortable and timely than either, while costs are similar on a per-mile basis.  Additionally, HSR results in about a quarter of the carbon emissions relative to flying and driving, while reducing many other major pollutants by similar amounts.  HSR, like all forms of public transit, tends to increase property values, enhance economic activity, provide mobility for the elderly, handicapped, and young, and help foster the "walkable urban" communities that compose some of the most sought-after real estate in the country.  Oh, and did I mention that HSR is TSA-probing-free?

Given that our projected population in the year 2100 is almost 478 million, finding ways to move the additional 160 million Americans who will be living here a century from now is a long-term project that we cannot ignore.  It is also likely that more roads and more airplanes are simply not the answer, both due to issues with congestion and limited returns on trying to cram more vehicles through the same spaces, and due to the fact that both are heavily reliant on oil, whose price is almost certainly going to rise with time.  HSR, which is compact, self-contained, and electricity driven, can complement both our two existing networks intelligently, while greatly improving our chances of successfully integrating so many new Americans.