Gray 1

Kristen Gray
Ms. Blakelock
English 2100- 30
28 April 2015
High-Speed Rail in the United States: a hard sell during the 21st Century
High-speed rail, or HSR, is a much faster train travel system than any other
ordinary traveling by rail. Since it is drastically faster than the modern railing system, it
needs its own special track to be able to handle a great force. These speedster trains have
been constructed in many major cities around the globe, cutting travel time significantly
for passengers. But, with an unimaginable force of speed, there is also an unnerving high
risk that the travelers and operators take each and every day. Many of the high-speed rails
can reach up to almost 200 mph. High-speed rails are taking the world by storm, but there
are many factors, reasons, and arguments on why the United States should consider
upgrading to high-speed rail; with every reason there is, there is also a counter argument
as to why high-speed rail will negatively impact the country we live and thrive in today.
Major debate over high-speed rail has been taking place for years now, since
various other countries are continuing to invest in high-speed rails. But, one critical
person has set in motion a plan for high-speed railing in the United States. When
President Barack Obama was elected in 2008, he set aside a $8 billion to construct highspeed rail in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Because of this action by the
federal government, several state governors, including our own, exhibited backlash to this
government spending, which they believe was "foolish" since that money could have
been used in several other ways, such as our amounting debt as a country, now towering

Gray 2
into the billions, or even to provide states with funding for programs or local buildings.
They believed the money could have been spent in a much more efficient way than how it
was. This caused a major debate, both by federal and governmental figures opposing and
supporting this course of action; some saw it as a huge positive gain for the country that
could lead to very promising additions to the US, while others thought otherwise. The
leaders had some key ideas as to how HSR could benefit the US: it could reduce the
amount of fossil fuels that are being used, reduce traffic congestion, oil dependence from
other countries, pollution, and it has a massive advantage in speed and can save both time
and money. While others had some key arguments as to oppose the idea: it would cost
billions of dollars and take years of planning, the rail line would only hit the major
regions, there isn't enough space for a project that massive, and the policy and laws for it.
In the article Challenges And Recommendations For Advancing High-Speed Rail Policy
In The United States, the governors continued to say it "represented wasteful government
spending." The reason behind this comment is that it's not just one governor who is
expressing distress over the amount spent, it is multiple. When there are numerous other
leaders in the country not approving with a hefty decision that isn't only costing them
money, but their residents money, the decision will be called into question as to whether it
was "wise" or "foolish". However, the federal General Accounting Office supports the
high-speed rail plan and development. The office describes that the success rate for the
high-speed rail developmental plan depends upon three key factors: ridership potential,
costs, and public benefits.
The United States government has taken into consideration the many other
countries that have pursued the art of high-speed rail. FRA and Congress have devised

Gray 3
plans for high-speed rails in the past, but none of the policies could hold up to their
potential. They have looked into the technologies and have taken interest in them, but
new projects continued to come up before HSR could be taken seriously or put into
action. From the article, Challenges and Recommendations for Advancing High-Speed
Rail Policy in the Untied States, officials have researched why other countries developed
high-speed rails, looking into the specific reasons why they constructed the fast railing
system. Some studies have shown that many high-speed rails were constructed for easier
traffic flow, especially in Korea and Taiwan. These two countries needed a breather with
all their traffic flow on the roadways and their own modern rail line, commonly known as
conventional rail. Compared to the United States, our HSR system would pass through
the major cities, even four here in Ohio, such as Cleveland, Dayton, Cincinnati, and
Columbus. Other major ones would consist of San Diego, Washington D.C., Atlanta and
many others to help reduce the flow of traffic and the congestion it brings. Along with the
HSR, officials were looking into constructing more modern rail systems to cities in the
metropolitan area such as New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and others.
Europe also devised a plan for integrating high-speed railways into their system of
travel. Europe also had a modern day railroad network set up, but they wanted to add
more to it to relieve the congestion built up by adding high-speed rail to increase capacity
load, as well as a more high-quality service in which they would provide. Because of
these two main key points Europe was adding to their travel system, this would thus in
turn create a new need for economic development and expansion throughout the
continent. However, France took a whole new system for using their high-speed rail
trains. France was using passenger and freight to travel on the same lines, this caused

Gray 4
many problems for both sides. They added high-speed rails to break up the two travel
networks; the line they had constructed first, that France was previously using, would
belong to the freight trains to move cargo around. The newly constructed high-speed rail
would in turn remain strictly for the passengers of France, vastly improving the travel
time, as well as creating more space for the freight lines to use, since the passengers
would no longer be harboring or occupying the space they once had. Along with these
statistics, in the same article previously stated, as well as one that backs up the data titled
Policy & Practice: Transport and Megaregions: High-Speed Rail in the United States,
Germany and China are doing a mixture of what France has done. Germany developed
high-speed rails for the improvement of passenger travel times, while China used highspeed trains for a combination of France and Europe; to create economic stimulus for the
economy to grow and flourish, while freeing up space on the freight lines so they could
travel with a bigger load.
With more countries switching to high-speed railing to mobilize their society
more and free up the traffic that has built up, the system of high speed trains began to
look more enticing to the United States. The HSR policy created faced many challenges
but only a few stood out more than the rest and that presented more of a challenge: a
bigger, more difficult one to conquer. Grand Challenges for High-Speed Rail
Environmental Assessment in the United States lists five key challenges that the US faces
when determining what to do about constructing a HSR system. The first challenge that
the article discusses is that there is not enough space to fit such a large construction
project, with all the different modes of transportation that the US has to offer: air travel,
road travel, other railway systems, there isn't enough room to fit a HSR. If the US were to

Gray 5
implant a high-speed railway and incorporate it into our lifestyle, there would need to be
a large amount of space. All of the different travel systems would over lap with each
other. The second challenge, much like in the first couple paragraphs of this essay, is the
rider ship and the model of the HSR system that would be used. Studies have been
conducted and still are being conducted, Behrens and Pels in 2012, Burgess 2011, Wang
and Sanders 2011, etc. These tests had to deal with what types of passengers would
travel using the new HSR system, if any would, and where the best place would be to
construct one, and what type of model they would use.
The studies that were conducted discussed what type of model the train would be
and what kind of impact would it have on the environment and health of the people living
near and around it, much like the previous article . No one cares to live near a train line
today, much less one that is traveling about 200 mph. Residents would either move away
from the railway or be attracted to it since it is brand new and would bring in all sorts of
business. But with all new businesses, there is always criminal activity that follows. For
the environment aspect, HSR would require an excessive amount of space, which would
tear down trees, neighborhoods, open fields, or buildings that are abandoned or no longer
in use. Along with these topics in Grand Challenges For High-Speed Rail Environmental
Assessment in the United States, the articles questions if the US would even have enough
resources to support such a large project. Another huge challenge, along with the
environmental impacts that it would have, whether they be positive, negative, or even
both. This goes for the economy around the area and the rest of the region and country.
Installing a high-speed rail system in a certain region could have a huge impact on that
specific area, as well as the country's economy. The article's researchers have suggested

Gray 6
that these impacts could deteriorate local communities around the railway, or even
massive cities or some of the smaller ones. If there were to happen, it would cause a huge
economic dip in our society and cause numerous other problems. However, this could
bring in major corporations or other types of global businesses into the region, which
could cause either more crime or bring in more jobs; a HSR could potentially be a hole
for tourist traps, such as casinos. Thus, cause a deterioration of our society or it could
potentially save it. This is why dealing with HSR is a major challenge in the US; there are
hundreds of possibilities that could happen and not knowing what could potentially
happen with a project is an exhausting challenge in itself. A fourth challenge developing a
high-speed rail in the United States would be future technologies. A HSR is an extremely
futuristic artwork of technology, especially with its high speed travel. With our cars
becoming more futuristic each year, as well as planes and boats, this would cause a huge
gap between our society. With futuristic vehicles come new ways to find fuel sources. For
example, electricity, heating, cooling. We are now upgrading to using turbines in certain
windy areas to produce electricity to houses, the economy is using solar panels to transfer
sunlight into energy. Our technologies are becoming more futuristic each day, there are
all sorts of new ways for us to improve our society.
With the HSR, there is bound to be some new type of fuel, pushing this society
further into the future, while some are stuck in the past, whether not being able to afford
upgrading or just not wanting to. The last and final challenge would drastically impact the
economy and is simple. If HSR were to become part of the US, other types of travel
would slowly decrease because everyone would be transferring to the new and improved
way to travel: high-speed rail. Air flow would slow down due to it being costly and

Gray 7
tangled with hassles, regular train travel would slow since there aren't that many train
lines for passengers, car and boat travel would slow as well because they aren't as time
efficient. With all these challenges, said challenges would have sub-challenges because of
the impact would affect the economy and society no matter what. The challenges would
cause a ripple effect across the country.
There are numerous objections to high-speed rail being brought over to the US,
but with every objection, there is always a plus that goes along with it. They could bring
multiple benefits to our economy, boosting our population, creating new jobs, etc.
However, it can also bring our nation down environmental wise, it can also impact the
economy in a negative since any economy is extremely fragile and anything can result in
it to crumble. I see both sides of the argument, but I more so lay towards the side of it
impacting us in a harmful way. I think that we don't have the room to place high-speed
rails within our country; there would be thousands of acres of wildlife destroyed just so
we can have another source of transportation. Also, we don't have the money nor the
resources for such a large project.

Gray 8
Works Cited
Ashiabor, Senanu, and Wenbin Wei. "Challenges And Recommendations For Advancing
High-Speed Rail Policy In The United States." Journal Of Transport Geography
31.(2013): 209-211. Business Source Complete. Web. 2 Feb. 2015.
Chester, Mikhail V., and Megan S. Ryerson. "Grand Challenges For High-Speed Rail
Environmental Assessment In The United States." Transportation Research Part
A 61.(2014): 15-26. ScienceDirect. Web. 24 Feb. 2015.
Liu, Rongfang, and Andy Li. "Forecasting High-Speed Rail Ridership Using A
Simultaneous Modeling Approach." Transportation Planning & Technology 35.5
(2012): 577-590. Business Source Complete. Web. 25 Feb. 2015.
Ross, Catherine L. "Policy & Practice: Transport And Megaregions: High-Speed Rail In
The United States." TPR: Town Planning Review 82.3 (2011): 341-356.
Humanities International Complete. Web. 25 Feb. 2015.