High Speed Rail from San Francisco to LA Will Make an Even Greener California
by Alex Smith, San Francisco, California 
on 11. 9.08
220 MPH Train Will Be Built in California
California voters approved a key measure Tuesday that will link cities across the coast on a high speed rail system that will travel at 220 MPH. Right now the drive from San Francisco to LA takes at minimum 6 hours along long roads that are often traffic packed. If a Californian opts for the train, the Amtrak Coast Starlight’s journey takes a minimum of 12 hours and is known for running behind thanks to other freights on the tracks. The new high speed rail, proposed by the California High Speed Rail Authority back in May, will link these two major cities by a 2 hour and 40 minute trip at around $55 for a one way fare. More below the fold.
Tuesday a majority of Californians voted yes on Proposition 1A. The Proposition approved an almost $10 billion down payment on the rail system’s construction. The new line will link Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay area, Los Angeles, Orange County and San Diego and is expected to carry around 100 million passengers a year by 2030. The rail is expected to be in service in a minimum of nine years.
The new rail line will reduce California’s need for 12 million gallons of oil a year and will also reduce the state’s annual carbon footprint by 12.7 billion pounds. It is projected to reduce traffic congestion, create 450,000 jobs in the state and generate a surplus of $1.1 million a year.
More on California's High Speed Rail:
California Votes on High Speed Train
California High Speed Rail Initiative
Andy Wants a High Speed Rail for Christmas
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Travel Green and Save Money without Giving Up Anything (Except Your Carbon Footprint)
- What is the Cheapest and Greenest Way to Travel?
- Top 10 Things to Bring On Your Cross-Country Bus Trip
- Track Buses by Phone, Internet, Bus Stop
- 6 Driving Fundamentals You Must Master to Extend the Life of Your Vehicle
- Save Over $1,000 with These Six Green Tips
Way to go, California.
But will Californian voters allow gay couples to ride these trains together...?
What is green about it?? The infrastructure required to build such a monstrous beast will dwarf even the effort of the Hoover Dam. This incredible infrastructure, spread out over 800 some total miles, will most certainly not be green, and take decades to dismantle and clean up, leaving clear marks on the land as it goes. That's not green.
RE: "But will Californian voters allow gay couples to ride these trains together...?"
Being a gay person who is surviving the fall-out of one of the most rights-hostile elections in history in the US within the state of California, I can state that I don't think that the situation here is really that dire, however, ignorance remains a problem throughout the US, particularly in the isolated and peripheral areas like those in California which boosted Proposition 8 over the top. Urban centers are not a problem. It's the suburbs and rural areas that are at fault here.
Having a high speed train system can only help civil rights as people become less separated by cars and distances and have to reconcile living together and commuting together more and more. That's just one of many reasons why I voted for the train system. I remember the feeling of togetherness it brought me traveling through Europe. I feel that it will in the end have the same social benefits for California. This is a point which has never really been brought up in the measure 1A debate which I think needs to be emphasized.
As for the environment. Well, the benefits of trains displacing planes and cars on freeways and more paved lanes and atmospheric noise and pollution should be obvious. The amount of new solar and wind installations slated to be constructed in the state of california in the coming 10 years alone will easily power the entire system, making transit essentially guilt-free as the state really doesn't have that much in the way of any coal-fired electricity stations, and most of its power is generated by well-regulated clean-burning natural gas, hydro, and other renewable resources.
dan asks "What's green about it??", citing the environmental impact on the right-of-way.
I suppose you're right, in absolute terms. It would be greener to go back to walking, riding horses or not traveling at all. As appealing as life among the Shakers, Minimites, or Luddites might be, going that route is asking too much of most people today.
In more practical, relative terms, high-speed rail would do wonders for getting people out of cars and out of planes and on to public transit. Please reconsider your opposition to high-speed rail.
Respectfully,
Steve
Agreeing with Steve here: The train project is greener than it is not, unless you are a "radical" environmentalist, and then in that sense, nothing is green at all except sitting in place and doing nothing what so ever. (basically).
Here's what's green about it:
• Gets people out of gas-hogging cars.
• Substitutes electricity as a source of motive power as opposed to use of fossil fuels. California's electricity is for the most part generated from clean sources, mainly natural gas, wind, solar, and hydro. This means that it will help to clean the air in a state that wastes about $28 BILLION a year on air-pollution related illnesses.
• Decreases commute times. Makes workers who commute long distances or travel frequently more productive, freeing additional resources for environmentally-minded expenditures.
• Gets more people out of heavily polluting aircraft. The aircraft industry is one of the top two most polluting modes of transit. You can realistically offset pollution from trains. You can't do that with aircraft at this point in time.
• Provides increased public focus on clean modes of transit and environmental impact, further impacting people's decisions about environmental issues down then line.
That's just what comes to mind immediately.
You could provide reasons until you're blue in the face as to whey it isn't green.. But the truth is, nomatter what, it's greener than the alternatives that it replaces (more freeway lanes, more cars, more planes). If you can't understand that, then we can't have an intelligent discussion on the matter..
I can just see the next fake celebrity billy idol sell out type riding his motorcycle or sports car to go faster!