By Peter B. Fleischer
First published: Friday, February 20, 2009 in the Albany Times-Union.
Much has been written about the economic crisis facing upstate New York. One has to hope that the recently signed Federal Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act will stimulate meaningful recovery for the nation, the state and the 6 million residents of upstate New York.
Rail is one way to get upstate moving again, an idea that has endured through decades of false starts. And rail, whether high speed or inter-city, was generously funded in the recently-passed stimulus bill. With its existing tracks, rights of ways, riders, freight and strategic location, New York state should be eligible for these funds and should move aggressively to use them wisely. Why rail?
First, rail connects. Shrinking the distance between New York's far-flung cities might well stimulate growth and development in distressed communities from Newburgh to Niagara Falls. Improving the links between Albany, Schenectady, Utica, Syracuse, Rochester and Buffalo and a new Pennsylvania (Moynihan) Station in New York City would facilitate commerce and accelerate economic revitalization. A modern rail network could better connect New York with neighbors from Boston, to Montreal, Toronto, Cleveland and Pennsylvania. History and geography argue for New York to lead this effort.
Second, rail provides the consumer and the shipper of goods with an option beyond the truck and the car. That choice, is, in turn, good for our congested roadways, better for the quality of our air, and likely to lead to lower costs as competition returns to the business of shipping our goods.
Third, rail produces jobs. We can build and assemble rail cars right here in New York, just as the Metropolitan Transportation Authority does. The railroad needs steel rail, cement ties, modern signal systems, improved track beds, as well as station improvements for both the able and the disabled traveler. While not all of this would be made in New York, creating jobs in Pennsylvania, Ohio and elsewhere fulfills the goals of the stimulus and it just might help get New York a bigger slice of the federal pie.
What kind of a railroad?
Well, first, it would not have to be Amtrak. Operation of this new railroad should be competitively bid. There are plenty of successful European operators. Amtrak might improve. Let them all compete.
Second, it would not have to be dominated by the current freight operator. New funding and a new emphasis on rail in New York could go a long way toward easing the uneasy truce that exists between Amtrak passenger service and the freight lines that now own and operate most of the track. Investment in modern and adequate passenger rail service could end most or all of the current competition between passenger and freight service that markedly slows passenger speeds.
How fast?
The answer depends on how much we want to pay and on how long we are willing to wait. Today, it takes almost six hours to go from Albany to Buffalo, given the age of the tracks and the necessary but de-prioritized sharing with the freight trains. The one-way trip costs roughly $60. For trips beginning in New York City, add 2.5 hours and $45.
By comparison, European trains, such as the TGV, achieve speeds of 200 miles per hour at much higher cost. Is such service possible here in the Empire State?
Yes and no. It would cost perhaps as much as $20 billion to achieve TGV levels of service. Such speeds and technology, however, are likely to require an entirely new right of way, separate from the one that was created in the mid-19th century. Carving out such a right-of-way in the 21st century would likely trigger NIMBY fights and environmental challenges in a string of communities from the Hudson River to Lake Erie. Twenty years might go by.
What can be done?
A right-of-way exists where track once was for most of the Albany to Buffalo route. This alignment could be used for train service at up to 110 miles per hour using existing technology, linking these cities with intermediary stops in under three and a half hours. Achieving this level of service might cost as much as $3 billion and could be finished in a decade. To open this path, no major environmental or siting fights are likely. At this pace and price, rail service could become competitive with air travel for the longer stretches and superior to the car for the medium-length trips. And for the shorter trips, say Albany to Utica, or Buffalo to Rochester, rail might even become a means of commuting. Many speed and reliability improvements are shovel ready and can be achieved in just a few years. A 2006 New York State Senate report details dozens of actions needing millions, and totaling just over a billion, that could be advanced.
With $8 billion designated for rail in the stimulus, and reports that President Barack Obama will seek an additional billion dollars for rail in each of the next five years, New York has a rare opportunity to seek its fair share, fund a doable and meaningful effort and by doing so change the way we, and perhaps our neighbors, get around.
New York's claim to be the Empire State is directly linked to its historic leadership role in transportation innovation. This year we celebrate Henry Hudson's exploration by sail, Robert Fulton's steamboat, and by extension, the building of the Erie Canal. Later innovations include the New York Central Railroad, the New York City subway system and the Thruway. New York today faces energy and climate change challenges no less significant than the economic ones. A modern railroad would provide choice in how we get around this large state and would help meet the state's energy and climate change goals. Through jobs, better connections and faster and cheaper movement of goods, rail would help our main streets, town centers and urban areas. If the old adage is true that civilization follows transportation, now is the time for the Empire State to get back on track.
Peter B. Fleischer is the executive director of Empire State Future (www.empirestatefuture.org), a nonprofit advocacy organization focused on the economic revitalization of New York's cities and the incorporation of smart growth principles in land use and development decision-making.
Original found at timesunion.com
