New Report: High-Speed Rail Will ‘Boost Economy’
A high speed rail system in Michigan and the Midwest -– with a stop in Dearborn -– will boost the economy, create nearly 58,000 jobs and reduce highway and airport congestion, according to a new report issued this week by a non-profit, non-partisan public interest advocacy organization.
The new report – Connecting the Midwest – by the Public Interest Research Group in Michigan (PIRGIM), analyzes the potential of high-speed rail to the Midwest, and looks at benefits specific to eight Midwestern states, including Michigan.
Key findings of the report include:
• A completed Midwest high-speed rail network will create nearly 58,000 permanent jobs, and support 15,200 jobs during the 10 years it would take to construct the project. Improved passenger rail service would tap Michigan’s manufacturing base to supply equipment for high-speed rail.
• Traffic congestions costs major Midwest metropolitan areas more than $10 billion annually in lost economic output. Midwest high-speed rail will reduce air travel by 1.3 million trips and car travel by 5.1 million trips per year by 2020, curbing congestion.
• A high-speed rail connection between downtown Detroit and Chicago would feature 10 trains per day, and reduce travel time between the cities to 3 hours and 46 minutes — faster than driving, and competitive with air travel (with airport waiting time taken into account).
• Improved passenger rail service in Michigan is already making an impact: Improved controls allowed Amtrak to increase speeds along parts of the Detroit-Chicago corridor in 2002 and 2005. Amtrak ridership on Michigan trains increased 24 percent between fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2009, despite the economic downturn.
• High-speed rail will give consumers more transportation options. Fully 69 percent of Michigan residents would live within 15 miles of a high-speed rail station, and 71 percent of the state’s workforce would be employed within 15 miles of a station. Regionally, 58 percent of Midwesterners, or 35 million people, would live within 15 miles of a high-speed rail station; 17 million would live within five miles of a station. More than one out of every four jobs in the region would be within five miles of a station.
• An Amtrak passenger uses 30 percent less energy per passenger mile than a passenger car, reducing dependence on oil. The system would prevent 188,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year by replacing less efficient car and plane travel. The amount is equal to the annual emissions of 34,000 cars.
“As the saying goes, ‘you are either part of the problem, or part of the solution,” said Meghan Hess, PIRGIM program associate. “High-speed rail is a part of the solution – boosting our economy and creating jobs, modernizing our transportation system and helping to solve our nation’s oil dependency, worsening congestion, and pollution. High-speed rail gets us moving, in the right direction.”
In January, the Obama administration announced that 31 states will receive a portion of $8 billion in funding to build and plan for high-speed rail under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The Midwest received funds totaling $2.7 billion for rail projects in six states. A $244 million Recovery Act grant will pay for new rail stations in Dearborn, Troy and Battle Creek, as well as track improvements that will assist commuter lines between Ann Arbor, Detroit and Howell.
“The proposal being presented today represents a realistic program to raise passenger train speeds on the Chicago-Detroit corridor,” said John DeLora, executive committee chair of the Michigan Association of Railroad Passengers. “While it will not create true ‘bullet trains’ such as those running in Europe or Japan, it will create a program of incremental improvements, which will offer 100 mph train speeds over most of the route, dramatically shortening trip times.”
The report urges Congress to invest adequate resources in intercity rail and set performance standards to fully realize rail’s potential. It calls on the President and Congress to articulate a national vision for high-speed rail similar to the vision outlined by President Eisenhower for the Federal Highway system.
Dearborn Mayor John B. O’Reilly, Jr. also supports improvements in the local rail system.
“Dearborn is an integral part of multiple rail initiatives, encouraging more people to use trains for commuting to their jobs or college classes, and for attending special events and visitor attractions,” he said in a written statement. “We are also excited about our new intermodal passenger train station. We are in support of the Midwest High Speed Rail Initiative because it broadens the economic opportunities for our community and promotes even greater environmental benefits.”
September 22nd, 2010 at 9:46 am
How comes the report leaves out any discussion of the cost of running the trains. Once again, there are no passenger trains in the United States that operate profitably. The people who put the report together never discuss the data they rely on for their assumptions. They drink a strange kool-aid. Just remember how the “People Mover” was supposed to be profitable. How about the consultants who forgot about putting curb cuts into the city owned parking lots. These experts leave out the important stuff, like what is it going to cost to ride the trains.
September 22nd, 2010 at 11:00 am
I think this idea, coupled with the fact that we have more and more bike paths is great! I look forward to not having to drive my car and riding instead.
September 22nd, 2010 at 1:31 pm
This is another Big Fella brainstorm, and as usual the City will be left holding the bag. We need train talk, like he needs another hole in his head. Do something for the business people in Dearborn who are suffering, instead of playing cho-choo Charlie.
September 23rd, 2010 at 2:24 pm
“Create nearly 58,000 jobs”. Where do they come up with these numbers? They might as well have pulled 72,000 jobs out of thin air. I am just sick and tired of politicians thinking we are a bunch of numbskulls!
Maybe the Mayor will hire the company the Administration and City Council hired for the CSO Project. The Rail System will be up in no time.
Isn’t there a new ELECTRIC CAR out there that we are trying to sell to help the economy? I guess we won’t need to buy an electric car or any other car in Michigan since we will all be using the rail system. Who needs to be the automobile state anymore. People who work at car companies can go work on the rail system after they loose their jobs.
It is going to cut air travel too. More jobs gone there as well.
Don’t we need jobs in Michigan to go to while using the rail system? Not to mention Michigan’s population is down. Don’t we need people to use the rail system?
I agree with Diogenes, No discussion of money to maintain the system. As it is we are trying to get Obama funny money to make it happen in Dearborn.
September 23rd, 2010 at 9:46 pm
This is awesome!
September 24th, 2010 at 9:53 am
A report from PIRGIM is about as credible as a report from ACORN. To say they have a “social agenda” that brings a certain bias to their “report” is putting it way too mildly. Cars (let alone trucks or SUVs) are not part of their worldvision.
Seriously – if this is what the administration is relying upon to make their case for spending all this money – its just a sad, pathetic joke. Their job numbers are just plain silly.
Diogenes, etc, is absolutely right – if you like throwing money down a hole for the Peoplemover (I’m employed in Detroit, so my tax dollars at work, ya know), you’re gonna love subsidizing this turkey – it will make Amtrak look profitable.
September 24th, 2010 at 10:20 am
Wake up people. Quit being lazy and falling for lazy political rhetoric. The same politicians that harangue Obama and his tax payer funded handouts are laughing all the way to the bank. No politician turns down money, period. Senator Corker from Tennessee, had no problem voting against the “Auto Bailout” and then showing up in Spring Hill extolling the recent success of general Motors job creation. Governor Palin had no problem campaigning on refusing federal funds for a “Bridge to nowhere” yet she still took the money and spent it on other things. Dig deeper. the facts are simple. the same politicians that vote no with one hand, take with the other. If O’Reilly does not take this money someone else will. Dearborn has always been logistical waypoint between Detroit and Chicago. Do i trust this Mayor ? No i do not. However this rail line will be built. The question is simply, how does dearborn benefit from it. Rail transport is heavily reliant upon tax payer subsidies in virtually every country that uses it. That does not diminish its efficacy. The interstate highway system is entirely funded by taxpayers. The airline industry is also heavily dependent upon taxpayer largess for its survivability. No modern mass transportation system exists in the modern world that is not heavily funded by its citizens. The model does not exist. China is undertaking a multi billion dollar infrastructure to build the largest most efficient rail transportation network in the world. Transport by rail is on of the fastest growing sectors of logistics in this country. To simply disregard infrastructure based on lazy reasoning is absurd. No sane politician Republican or Democrat ever turns down money. The facts are the facts. If O’Reilly does not take this money South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, or Alaska will.
September 24th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
Realty Bites: well said! the other folks complaining should just step off the platform!
September 24th, 2010 at 10:26 pm
Sorry RB – not so truthy. While all transportation is subsidized in some manner by taxpayers – tis the nature of infrastructure – passenger rail transport is at the very high end of that “per mile” calculation. So there is a difference. And this is allocating scarce resources to a mode that has low demand from consumers. So . . . even less maintenance on our terrible road system?
And Dearborn is the logistical waypoint between Detroit and Chicago? Huh? It borders Detroit, you know. At that point, run it right into Metro Airport (not some loser bus connection) and let folks have a logical waypoint instead. As to the propensity of politicians to accept money, duh, but as my mom said, “doesn’t make it right.”
September 25th, 2010 at 10:47 am
Of course demand is low when our rail system is a joke. There hasn’t been any significant investment in our rail infrastructure since before WWII.
Meanwhile Europe has surged way ahead of us. Pretty soon you’ll be able to take true high speed rail from Naples to London or Lisbon to Berlin. Even China is way ahead with high speed rail linking Hong Kong way in the south to Harbin way in the north or Shanghai in the east to Urumqi way out in the middle of the desert northwest of China.
But I guess what everyone here against it is admitting is the US just doesn’t have the capability or willpower of Europe and China to create a full transportation system.
September 25th, 2010 at 10:49 am
Also, the PeopleMover is a completely different beast. That was supposed to be a full system extending through Detroit. What was built was just the loop to connect all the lines that were going to extend down the spokes. So, again, if you have a crippled system of course very few people will use it.
September 25th, 2010 at 3:03 pm
Really, the price per mile calculation that states rail transport is not cost effective VS auto, takes into account the true costs of of auto transit. Any true cost comparison would factor in the externalities of automobile travel. IE congestion, traffic deaths and injuries, pollution, loss of tax revenue due to parking allocation, insurance rates, policing costs, urban sprawl etc. In a real cost comparison rail transport costs less. Furthermore cities that provide reliable rail transit are not suffering demand Just visit London, Paris, Barcelona, New York Toronto, Chicago, Hong Kong, DC Metro.In addition The US Department of Defense cites dwindling petro based resources and increased world demand from emerging countries as an impending global crisis. In conclusion Dearborn is a logical waypoint between detroit and Chicago. Dearborn has a population of 100,000 people is home to FMCO global operations, two universities, ample lodging and and bisected by a north south / east west interstate system. Why would you not build a stop here. Rail transport is not a simple answer to our reliance, on exhausted petro supplies, or a cost free method of transport. However the plan being proposed deserves to be heard. I am skeptical of all the benefits put forth in this study. Often benefits are oversold and costs not mentioned, however this plan could work. What we have now is penny wise and pound foolish.
September 25th, 2010 at 6:39 pm
WE ARE NOT GONNA GET 58,000 JOBS FROM THIS PROJECT!
Here is the reality folks:
LIES, LIES, and LIES…
Gov. Granholm said Pres. Obama’s economic stimulus plan has created 42,000 jobs for Michigan in the past 6 months.
An example of how they are making up numbers to justify wanton spending of “OUR MONEY”.
The Battery Program was projected to create 63,000 jobs in Michigan.
Battery maker A123 Systems Inc. (Livonia) recieved $249 million. Employing about 300 workers.
Johnson Controls Inc. (Holland) recieved $299 million. Expected to employ 90 workers by late next year.
A total of 390 jobs from a $548 million taxpayer investment.
September 25th, 2010 at 10:08 pm
MANY POUNDS FOOLISH OUR MAYOR,PENNY WISE OUR CITY COUNCIL. THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY HAVE TO MAKE THE DIFFERENCE … GO TO THE COUNCIL MEETINGS AND BE HEARD ! ASK QUESTIONS , DEMAND ANSWERS NOT A STORY LINE …
September 26th, 2010 at 11:11 am
Whatever Gov. Granholm has said about the stimulus has nothing to do with high speed rail, and a proposed rail stop in Dearborn. High speed rail is an efficient method of moving people under certain circumstances. This specific project is perfectly suited for leveraging the comparative advantages of Rail. This project is simply not a wanton spending of money. A strong skepticism of Government contributes to a healthy democracy, abject stubbornness and a refusal to accept to reality is a sign of a fool.
September 26th, 2010 at 12:00 pm
Sloppy – you are so right – I include myself when I say that we make no difference bitching here we need our voices to be heard at the council meetings. People from the city do read the postings and it makes no difference to them because on here we only a few voters. I would love to see their reaction if people got up and questioned every dollar that they are spending.
September 26th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
After spending this past week in Norther New Jersey and taking the train and subway into NYC for a ball game and several other trips into Manhattan I am all for improving our rail service, including light rail. I would definitely ride to work if it were avaable. Trains in NJ were packed SRO even late at night.
September 28th, 2010 at 10:44 am
Before anyone jumps on the light rail bandwagon, I suggest they look at the history and cost of building the systems in Seattle and Los Angelos. The ridership estimates were so far off, that the experts were obviously smoking something. If that is to far away, look at the original figures for the estimated ridership of the People Mover. Lastly, just how many people do you really think are going to come to Detroit/Dearborn from Chicago or even Ann Arbor?
Finally, we are not running out of oil. There is a great book out call”The Prize” which explains why we are not running out of oil.
September 29th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
The current consumption of fossil fuel resources by the United States is unsustainable. Increasing demand from Brazil, Russia, China, and India will create great uncertainty in world wide energy markets. This is a fact covered in multiple US Department of Defense white papers. I have read the Prize, and found the book greatly informative. That being said the book is over twenty years old, and the author Yergin makes for a better historian than forecaster. Yergin has continually missed the mark on the spot price of oil and has continually put forth oil production numbers that are both overly optimistic and unattainable. As for the theory that oil is a renewable resource, that is totally false and not taken seriously by anyone even remotely familiar with the scientific method. The initial capital necessary to build a high speed rail corridor between Detroit and Chicago would be significant. The cost would have to be offset against the highly inefficient current transportation methods. AS for ridership numbers, efficient rail has very high ridership numbers where it exists. Furthermore comparing a rail corridor between Detroit and Chicago to the People Mover is really a lazy comparison. Lastly thousands of people travel everyday between Detroit, Ann Arbor, and Chicago.
September 29th, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Right now there is a project on I-94 where they have each outside lane closed both ways to install light poles. These could be footings for a light rail system between the burbs and Detroit that could run over any bridges and have stops that have stairways down to the overpass (clearly at some point it would have to go over Michigan Ave.. How stupid are we? I took the train from Dearborn to Detroit and it took 45 minutes. In addition – have you seen where it drops you off??? You thought the old Cass corridor was a bad neighborhood. This project is a JOKE. Even if they offered couppns with a 50%discount you stil need a way to work or to entertainment – unless you want some crack rock you might be able to get it at the station downtown.
September 29th, 2010 at 9:43 pm
Rail systems are nothing but liberal ideas to waste more money,hell obama is for a national rail system,shouldn’t that tell us all we need to know?
The Limbaugh rule says if there is a “D” next to the candidates name then don’t vote for them,i am going to take it a step further,if any idea or proposal originally comes from a person with a “D” next to their name then reject the idea always!