Planet Gore

Why High-Speed Rail in the U.S. Won’t Work

Megan McCardle has a great piece over in The Atlantic on the reasons why the U.S. can never have a high-speed-rail system like the one they have in China. In short, the distances between America’s largest cities is far too great for the trains to ever make sense. An excerpt:

The longest trip between the major cities on the Chinese map is just slightly longer than the DC-Chicago trip would be.  It’s no coincidence that the only place we have anything that could even be arguably dubbed HSR is the one area where four cities are pretty tightly clustered together.  And that doesn’t go very fast because it uses existing rights of way, and because the politicians that fund it like to have it make stops in their city.  (Q:  Why does the Acela stop in Wilmington, Delaware, which is a quick drive from Philadelphia?  A:  Because Joe Biden likes to ride it.)  Stops are the enemy of speed.


Moreover, the Chinese government does not have to worry unduly about things like environmental impact and acquiring the right of way.  For truly high speed rail, you need a long straightaway with few curves or inclines.  That means it’s very important to lay the rail in the best possible path, or near it.  Trying to do this between, say, New York and Chicago would mean approximately a century of court battles with homeowners, environmental groups, local NIMBYs, and sundry others.  Moreover, many desirable routes are occupied by our enormous network of highways, and only someone with a very rich fantasy life could believe that we are going to rip out the highways to put in a rail network.


I know–carbon emissions!  The environment! Don’t we eventually have to deal with these problems?


Sure. But high speed rail is less of an environmental gain than regular rail; it takes a lot of energy to move that fast.  One can argue that because it is more attractive than regular rail, it is still a bigger environmental gain, because more people will switch from planes to trains. 

The whole post here.

Most Popular


Nancy Pelosi Should Go

One of the most reliable tendencies of politicians is that they think they’re more important than they are. This is not a partisan point. It’s as true of Republicans as it is of Democrats, as a general rule -- though it wouldn’t shock me if it’s more acute in more Democrats than Republicans for the simple ... Read More
Science & Tech

The Social-Media Panic

‘Make no mistake: 2016 will never happen again.” Historians are not always reliable predictors of the future, but Niall Ferguson’s analysis of how Silicon Valley and the center-Left would react to the successive and surprise victories of Brexit and Donald Trump is proving correct. Conservatives and ... Read More

Running With Trump

Jeff Roe, who managed Senator Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign in 2016, has a message for Republican congressional candidates: Don’t run from Trump this year. Instead they should “[f]ix bayonets and charge the hill.” What exactly does this mean? It’s not that they should “support the president’s ... Read More
Law & the Courts

One More Point on McCabe . . .

One point to add to Jonathan Turley’s column about Andrew McCabe, and the glaring double standard of whether an FBI official will face obstruction-of-justice charges if he’s caught lying to an FBI internal investigation. In 2015, McCabe's wife Jill ran for a state senate seat in Virginia and received ... Read More

The Pope Francis Challenge

An unforced error from a Vatican communications office the other day drove me a little something like crazy. The nature of the unforced error is that it is wholly unnecessary and typically distracting. And so it was. Days before, as the fifth anniversary of Pope Francis’s election as pope was approaching, a ... Read More