Excerpt from the Prologue of Save Gas, Save the Planet: John Addison’s book about hybrid and electric cars, pathways to low carbon driving, and the future of sustainable transportation. © 2009 John Addison. All rights reserved.

Transportation 2.0

During the next 20 years we will witness a major shift from vehicles that are mostly mechanical to vehicles that are primarily electronic. The success of hybrids heralds this new era. Electric motors are replacing internal combustion engines. In the parlance of technology, we could call this Car 2.0.

The transition to Car 2.0 is complicated. Current batteries are not sufficient for all vehicle uses. Hybrids, plug-in hybrids, and hydrogen fuel cells will compete in extending the range and performance of vehicles with electric drive systems. The engines in these vehicles will be next generation biofuels blended with petroleum fuels.

Slowly but surely, electricity will replace most petroleum fuel. The source of the electricity is in transition as renewable energy replaces coal-powered generation of electricity. A smart grid will increasingly deliver solar and wind power from remote locations to the hearts of our cities.

We are also witnessing more than Car 2.0; we see the beginnings of Transportation 2.0. In 2008, use of rail and public transit set records as Americans drove 100 billion less miles than in 2007. Modern cities use electric powered light-rail. In the future much of those cities will be connected with the electric-powered high-speed rail that is common in Europe and parts of Asia.

Five million new jobs can easily be created in building electric vehicles, expanding public transportation, connecting our great nation with high-speed rail, installing solar power, wind power, other renewable energy, and building a network with smart grids. To create these jobs, however, a smaller number of jobs will be lost as fewer low-mileage vehicles are built, as electric components replace mechanical, and as renewables replace fossil fuel.

More will be required than the $17 billion provided at the end of 2008; needed is vision and a will to change. The transition to Transportation 2.0 will not be smooth; it will not be pretty. Some corporations, jobholders, and special interests tied to old paradigms will continue to fight change and continue to sue states that try to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, this will be a squandered opportunity for those corporations to be global leaders and to be job creators.

As this book goes to press, the auto industry is in a great transition. The future will be bright for those that seize the opportunity to lead in Transportation 2.0. Because automakers are financially challenged, some of the new vehicles, which are discussed, will not come to market. Some will not make it into production. Yet many exciting new vehicles will be in your immediate future. The solutions are here. They are described in the chapters that follow.

Visit Amazon for free look inside or discount on paperback and kindle ebook.

© 2009 John Addison. All rights reserved.

Transportation 2.0 – Save Gas, Save The Planet Excerpt is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

Clean Edge included high-speed rail (HSR) for the first time in its annual Clean Energy Trends report which tracks key developments in clean-energy markets. China is leading the surge in HSR according to Clean Edge:

China’s Ministry of Railways spent $88 billion on HSR projects in 2009 – part of an existing $300 billion plan to expand and connect all of the country’s major cities with a projected 10,000 miles of dedicated HSR lines by 2020.

There will be more high-speed rail added in China over the next five years than the rest of the world combined, says Keith Dierkx, director of IBM’s Global Rail Innovation Center in Beijing. Global HSR manufacturers like Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Alstom, GE Transportation, Siemens, and others have formed joint ventures or partnerships in China. A Canadian-Chinese joint venture, Bombardier Sifang, recently won $4 billion from the Chinese government to manufacture up to 80 high-speed trains. These same companies are developing opportunities in other emerging countries like Brazil, Russia and South Korea.

HSR’s main development challenge is its high price tag. The 800-mile Beijing-to-Shanghai line will cost an estimated $32 billion – in the same cost ballpark as the gargantuan Three Gorges Dam hydroelectric project.

Maglev potential projects in Japan, China, and the United States are also discussed in the Clean Energy Trends.

A United States 17,000 mile high-speed rail system is envisioned. With 30 states committed to renewable energy growth, electric HSR will help the nation be less dependent on oil. Clean Fleet Report forecasts that high-speed rail ridership will exceed one billion within three years, from over 600 million today. Clean Fleet Reports about U.S. High-Speed Rail.

China Also Leads in Renewables Growth

“Despite severe economic conditions, clean-energy markets were able to hold their momentum in 2009 as many regional and federal governments and private corporations focused on clean-energy investments as a way to pull out of the global economic tailspin,” said Ron Pernick, Clean Edge co-founder and managing director. “From the smart grid and energy efficiency to renewable energy generation and advanced battery storage, clean tech continues to be a major driver of regional job growth, economic recovery, and technological competitiveness.”

China is expected to lead RE growth. China could end up spending $440 billion to $660 billion toward its clean-energy build out over the next ten years, according to estimates discussed in the Clean Energy Trends. The report’s key findings include:

wind power (new installation capital costs) is projected to expand from $63.5 billion in 2009 to $114.5 billion in 2019. Last year’s global wind power installations reached a record 37,500 MW. China, the first-time global leader in new installations, accounted for more than a third of new installations, with 13,000 MW.

Solar PV will grow from a $30.7 billion industry in 2009 to $98.9 billion by 2019. New installations reached almost 6 GW worldwide in 2009, a nearly sixfold increase from five years earlier. But because of rapidly declining solar PV prices, industry revenue in 2009 fell about 20 percent, from $38.5 billion in 2008. Utility scale PV is expected including a 2GW plant in China using First Solar.

The global production and wholesale pricing of ethanol and biodiesel reached $44.9 billion in 2009 and is projected to grow to $112.5 billion by 2019. In 2009, the biofuel market consisted of more than 23.6 billion gallons of ethanol and biodiesel production worldwide.

Clean Edge is the world’s first research and publishing firm devoted to the clean-tech sector. The company offers insight and intelligence on emerging clean-tech trends, opportunities, and challenges for a range of clients, including companies, investors, governments, and nonprofits. The company publishes the annual Clean Energy Trends and Clean Tech Job Trends reports; produces the annual Clean-Tech Investor Summit (in partnership with IBF); maintains a number of benchmark clean-tech stock indexes with NASDAQ OMX including CELS, QGRD, and QWND. The annual Clean Energy Trends report, now in its ninth year, can be downloaded for free.

China Invested $88 billion in High Speed Rail in 2009 is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

U.S. Car Ownership Drops by 3.5 Million in 2009

In the United States, we embarrassingly have more vehicles than people with driver’s licenses. We have 246 million vehicles. AAA estimates that it costs $8,000 per year for each car owned, which creates a financial burden on cash-strapped Americans.

To the rescue are 10 positive trends that helped Americans scrap 14 million cars in 2009, while only buying 10.5 million new ones. The 2009 drop was the only large decline in the past 50 years shows the U.S. Department of Transportation.

1.    Urban Density. For the first time, most Americans live in urban areas where they need fewer cars, have better public transit, can share cars, and accomplish more trips with walking.

2.   Public Transit. Americans made 11 billion trips on U.S. transit in 2008, a 50-year record. Use dropped only slightly despite transit operators being forced to cut some routes and remove buses as the recession drove down local sales tax revenues needed for public transit.

3.    Smart Growth. Community and regional planners are making cities vibrant, with work, services, and play close at hand. Portland, Oregon, is a role model in creating urban density and great public transportation. California with SB375 is requiring regional plans that integrate development, transportation, and greenhouse gas reduction. Join me on May 11 at the American Planning Association in Chicago when I present “More Smiles, Less Miles.”

4.    One Car Households. The average suburban U.S. household has two vehicles. Some more. The average urban U.S. household has one vehicle. More American families and roommates are going from three cars to two cars to one car.

5.    Employer Commute and Flexwork Programs. Major employers are saving employees billions in travel costs. Employers sponsor ride sharing, last mile shuttles from transit, and guaranteed ride homes. Some employers have web sites and lunch-and-learns to help employees in the same zip codes match-up for car pooling. 57 million Americans work at home, at least part-time, with the help of flexwork programs. Employer programs have helped with reduced car ownership.

6.    Recession. The recession dispelled the myth that demand for cars and gasoline is price inelastic. When consumers are stretched, demand is elastic. About 20 percent of a U.S. carowner’s disposable income is spent on the car, maintenance, insurance, and fuel. Oil prices have more than doubled since their bottom in March 2009. The era of cheap gasoline is over as producers go to more expensive techniques such as deep oil drilling and strip mining Canada for tar sands.

7.    Cash for Clunkers removed 700,000 vehicles from the U.S. roads.

8.    Rail Connected. City transit is enhanced with regional commuter rail and with rail connected cities. Our latest World Series was dubbed the “Amtrak Series” as fans easily whisked between New York and Philadelphia. Rail connects the transit systems of cities into effective regional transportation. Fewer cars are needed. Yes, the United States lags behind Europe and Japan. Even China is implementing 5,000 miles of high speed rail. Given small hope, suburban rail and rail connected cities are on the rise in parts of the United States. APTA Center for High-Speed Rail

9.    Car Sharing. In 600 global cities, cars can be used by the hour.  Car sharing is popular with individuals and fleets. At many university and colleges, students with good grades can participate at age 18. Add transit and bicycling and many students live car free. Zipcar’s  350,000 members each take over 15 personally owned vehicles off the road. Members of Zipcar and car sharing programs report a 47% increase in public transit trips, a 10% increase in bicycling trips, and a 26% increase in walking trips. The success of car sharing has lead to success of bicycle sharing in Europe, giving millions last mile solutions between transit stations and employers and other city destinations.

10.    Intermodal Intelligence. Internet savvy people now use Google Maps, 511, car share apps, and smart phone GPS apps to compare car directions and time with public transit directions and time. With a few clicks on a social network a shared ride is arranged, or a shared car reserved. In the old millennium we got everywhere by solo driving in gridlock. In the new millennium we plan and use a mix of car driving, transit, and other modes to save time and money.

Ten Reasons for drop in Car Ownership is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

Enlightened communities are in the transition from being car-centric to being people-centric. Homes, public transportation, and businesses that serve neighborhoods are designed in close proximity. A people-oriented development often has a rapid transit station at its center, or at least a bus stop that is frequently served. Nearest to the station are higher density apartments and condos. Streets are alive with people and convenient shops. A short walk from the station is less density and single family homes. Walking is the easiest way to get around.

While the sprawl of many cities forces long commutes, there are three United States cities where at least 30 percent of employment is within 3 miles of the central business district: New York, San Francisco, and Portland. In these cities, people find it easy to take light rail or buses between work and home. A surprising number walk. For those that drive, they save by traveling fewer miles. People-oriented development increases real estate values.

In California, there is a strong interest in integrating transportation planning, regional development, and climate solution planning. Last week, 240 leaders of government, private industry, and non-profit leaders converged at CALSTART’s Target 2030 conference. Vehicles, fuels, and transportation planning were themes for many speakers and discussions.

Shelley Poticha, CEO of Reconnecting America, sited the statistic that if someone can walk to transit, they are 5 times more likely to use public transit and only drive half the miles of those who cannot walk to transit. Reconnecting America works with real estate developers and transit agencies to develop more housing within walking distance from transit, services, and shopping.

Mary Nichols, Chairwoman, California Air Resources Board, took center stage as a key executive in implementing California’s Climate Solutions law – one of the world’s most comprehensive approaches to reducing global warming. Some of the implementations are complex, such as the low carbon fuel standard. Other solutions are more straightforward. She observed that California could reduce its petroleum consumption by 5 percent if everyone walked an extra half-mile daily instead of covering the distance in a car.

Some cities with intelligent urban planning make it easy for people to live near work, friends, and fun. Portland has limited the boundaries of the city and invested in rapid transit. The results are impressive. The citizens of Portland save $2.6 billion per year, estimates economist Joe Cortright, Senior Fellow with The Brookings Institute.

Mr. Cortright identifies that a billion less going from Portland to foreign oil, is a billion more that is being spent on local goods and services, and being invested in local homes and businesses. For Portland, sustainable development and efficient transportation are good investments.

Learning from the success of cities such as Portland, California passed a law (SB 375) requiring regions to develop integrated urban and transportation plans that reduce long commutes and reduce regional greenhouse gas emissions.

Michael McKeever, Executive Director, Sacramento Area Council of Governments, identified a major opportunity for Boomers who want smaller homes with more community services. Fifty percent of new California home sales could be for this target market.

Baby Boomers, specifically 78 million Americans born between 1946 and 1964, are starting to shift to work that requires less travel and provides more fulfillment. Some will retire in the next few years; most will reinvent how they live and earn money. Millions of these Boomers will accelerate the shift to new urbanization as they move from the suburbs to cities. Freed from the demands of needing individual cars for long daily commutes to work, they will discover that it is easier to live “car-light” or car free in a city.

New urban development could create millions of jobs in construction, public transportation, and infrastructure. Making it a reality is not easy. California is facing a $40 billion budget deficit, creating tough choices such as new gasoline or sales tax, or major cuts in education, health care, and emergency services. The 480 cities which need to plan for the future lack funds for comprehensive planning. More urban density requires infrastructure upgrades from sewer pipes to reliable electric grids.

City living is not for everyone. Many prefer to raise families in the suburbs with their dream homes inside gated communities and their jobs located miles away. In the suburbs, the environmentally conscious share rides in hybrid vehicles, work at home at least a day per week, and are clever about letting their fingers do the walking. Others enjoy rural living near communities oriented around farming, ranching, mountains, and water.

Sixty-five percent of Americans live in the top 100 metropolitan areas. In cities, millions find work and play convenient. Some estimate that two-thirds of the urban areas that will exist in 2030 do not exist today. This gives us an incredible opportunity to develop in a sustainable way with near-zero emission transportation.

As I interviewed countless people, gathering their stories and ideas for Save Gas, Save the Planet, urbanites delivered a consistent message – people living in cities burn less gas and cause less global warming than those living in suburbs and rural areas. In cities, trips to grocery stores, friends, and work are often done by walking. Light rail and bus service is predictable and fast in cities. In cities, everything is closer together.

Copyright © 2009 John Addison. This article includes excerpts from John’s new book – Save Gas, Save the Planet. Last year, John and his wife moved from suburbia to the city, living 2 blocks from public transportation, now John’s primary mode of travel.

People-Oriented Development is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

California voters approved the bond measure that commits state funds of almost $10 billion only when matched by $10 billion of federal funds and another $10 billion of public-private partnership funds. Congress and the new president are likely to support matching federal funds for high-speed rail. In this tight economy, high-speed rail will get better results for less money than using federal funds to widen California’s freeways.

Last May, President-elect Obama said. “We are going to be having a lot of conversations this summer about gas prices and it is a perfect time to start talking about why we don’t have better rail service. … [I]t works on the Northeast corridor. They would rather go from New York to Washington by train than they would by plane. It is a lot more reliable and it is a good way for us to start reducing how much gas we are using.”

Public-private partnership funding is also likely, because the rail system will be profitable. Build-own-operate models are popular in transportation with those that are likely to bid on building the system and providing the equipment. The McKinsey Quarterly in February 2008 reported that the world’s 20 largest infrastructure funds now have nearly $130 billion under management.

Support for rail and public transportation is nationwide, not just in California. Voters across the country in 16 states approved 23 measures out of 32 state and local public transit ballot initiatives, authorizing expenditures approximating $75 billion. For example, in Los Angeles, a $40 billion measure passed that will finance new and existing bus and rail lines. In the Seattle area, people voted to expand commuter rail and express bus service and to create a 55-mile light rail system by approving $17.8 billion.

Will Californians park their cars and ride the rails? Last year, LA Metro carried 64 million riders. In the Bay Area, BART carried 104 million riders. The new California High Speed Rail will link both these systems and 25 multi-modal public transportation systems in total. The forecast of 100 million passengers per year by 2030 may be conservative.

Because the rail will be powered by electricity, it is valuable to look at the power sources. In California, by law, 20 percent of the electricity will be from renewables by 2010. By 2020, it must be at least 33 percent. California is subsidizing one million solar roofs that include net metering. Pacific Gas and Electric is installing 800 megawatts (MW) of utility scale solar photovoltaics (PV). For 20 years, Kramer Junction has been delivering 350 MW of concentrating solar power. Added megawatts of wind, geothermal, and biogas projects are being added. By law, utilities must be 33% renewable by 2020. With California’s implementation of greenhouse gas emission cap and trade, renewables are likely to be the low cost source of electricity by 2030.

Using renewable energy, California’s High-Speed Rail is likely to be zero emission before 2030, saving over 20 billion pounds of CO2 annually and over 12 million barrels of oil annually.

In addition to 160,000 construction jobs over the next two decades, high-speed trains will generate 320,000 permanent jobs by 2030, growing to 450,000 jobs in 2035, according to the business plan.

For the LA to SF travel, train fares are expected to be 50 percent of an airline ticket. In 2030 LA-SF travel is forecasted at high-speed trains will carry 45%, air transportation 26%, and the automobile 29% of the total transportation market between the two biggest metropolitan areas in California. This will keep intra-state air travel constant and avoid an airport overcapacity crisis.

California High-Speed Rail builds on the success of other systems around the world.

The 456-mile Northeast Corridor (NEC) which links Boston, New York and Washington D.C. is a successful rail corridor which is vital to the economy of the northeastern United States. It currently carries well over 200 million rail passengers. There are over 500 passenger trains per day in and out of New York City, 400 commuter trains, and 100 Amtrak trains.

Amtrak’s Acela service which operates on the NEC between Boston, New York City and Washington, D.C. is the only passenger rail service in the United States that approaches high-speed standards traveling at maximum speeds up to 150 mph on about 35 miles. In comparison with high-speed trains operating in Europe and Asia, the Acela service would be considered a conventional rail operation. For example, Acela trains make the 226-mile trip between New York and Washington D.C. in about 2.75 hours, traveling at an average speed of about 80 mph.

In years past, I conducted many workshops on the east coast. It was always faster and easier to take Amtrak from Washington D.C. to Philadelphia and on to New York, than to fly. The stations are conveniently connected to public transportation, rental car service, and car sharing.

For 40 years, Japan, has been the role model in high-speed rail. The entire Japanese high-speed train network of 1,350 miles currently carries over 335 million passengers a year.

In France the TGV network, consisting of over 1,160 miles of new interconnected high-speed lines, carries over 100 million passengers each year. Spain and Germany continue to expand high-speed rail. London to Paris can be pleasantly traveled in 2 hours and 15 minutes. Eventually most of the European Union will be seamlessly integrated.

Twelve countries around the world take advantage of high-speed rail – from the United States to China. Soon the number will be 20 countries as Mexico, Russia, and others add their systems.

Oil usage in the United States and many other countries has peaked. At the moment, this is largely thanks to drivers’ reacting to high oil prices and a recession by replacing solo drives with employer commute programs and public transportation. Oil usage is likely to continue declining as efficient multi-modal transportation systems are linked together with high-speed rail – a cool solution for a heating planet.

California Plans High-Speed Rail is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

Public transportation and corporate commute programs have helped America finally reduce its dependency on oil, with vehicle miles traveled reduced for the first time. Now, our financial crisis is putting this in jeopardy.

Although public transportation is rescuing Americans, will Americans rescue public transportation? Record ridership, shrinking tax revenues, frozen funds, and fuel prices are overwhelming transit budgets. Where more routes and buses are needed, cutbacks are instead being made.

This Tuesday votes in 33 states will make decisions about the fate of transit funding. In California, decided will be the fate of California’s High Speed Rail.

The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) called on Congress on October 29 to pass economic stimulus legislation that includes funding public transportation projects to create new jobs. APTA has identified 559 public transit “ready-to-go” projects, worth $8 billion, from Chicago to Atlanta, and from NY to LA.

Testifying before the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, APTA Chair Dr. Beverly Scott, who is also general manager and CEO of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), testified, “We simply must get our economy back on track, and the most important way to do that is to create new jobs, and give our citizens the tools they need to find jobs and keep working.”

Dr. Scott continued, “Not only do transit systems need assistance for capital projects, transit providers also need help to maintain their current services. Transit systems across the United States are being forced to choose between raising passenger fares or cutting service to make up for shortfalls in local funding and the increased cost of diesel fuel this past summer. The burden is so great that 35 percent of public transportation providers who responded to another recent APTA survey have been forced to cut or plan to cut the level of passenger service they provide in spite of the growing demand. Transit needs to be part of the solution to – not the victim of – the current economic crisis. This could not happen at a worse time. Public transportation ridership has grown dramatically this year, and we need to continue that growth.”

Even the collapse of AIG is having a devastating effect on transit. Dr. Scott as testified, “From the early 1990s to 2003, the Federal Transit Administration urged transit systems to enter into innovative financing deals known as Sale-in/Lease Out and Lease-In/Lease Out (SILO/LILO) transactions. These transactions helped transit systems finance large, capital intensive projects by selling their assets to investors and leasing them back. The transit agencies received up-front one time payments in consideration for future tax benefits for the investors, until these transactions were prohibited in 2003. To secure these transactions, sale proceeds in the form of Treasury securities were placed into an account that AIG and a small number of other insurers guaranteed. Under the terms of the contracts, transit agencies are responsible for replacing the guarantors of the secured assets if they fail to maintain a certain bond rating- often ‘AAA’ status. Unfortunately, because AIG and the other insurers have lost their ‘AAA’ rating, and there are no available financial institutions to replace them, the equity investors are able to find the transactions in default. Under this scenario, through no fault of their own, transit agencies could be forced to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in fees to make the investors whole. The banks have the opportunity to gain 100 percent of the tax benefits that have been disallowed, which would in turn devastate transit agencies, which will be required to pay more than $2 billion to the banks immediately.” Congressional Testimony

Will we keep America moving, our will be go back to being stuck in our cars in gridlock, burning billions of dollars of extra gasoline from countries that are glad to take our money?

John Addison publishes the Clean Fleet Report.

Transit Records in USA is a post from: Clean Fleet Report

These days, Fiona Ma, needs to find new courage every day. As California Majority Whip, she takes on the tough issues and is a force in making things better. For every important issue, there are vested interests on all sides whether it is better health care, better transportation, stopping global warming, or keeping California’s $1.7 trillion economy moving forward. Among her many responsibilities, Assemblywoman Ma chairs the Legislative High Speed Rail Caucus.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) believe they just may have the answer — an 800 mile statewide high-speed rail system that would serve more than 32 million passengers per year by 2020. Because the rail will be powered by electricity, and because of the efficiency of moving up to 1,200 people per train, CO2 emissions may be reduced by 12 billion pounds per year by 2020, and 18 billion pounds by 2030.

If you have ever been stuck in gridlock trying to get to work between Orange County and LA, or between San Jose and San Francisco, you will appreciate that the high-speed rail would add the equivalent of a 12-lane superhighway. Express high-speed trains will take one hour and fifteen minutes between San Diego and Los Angeles, and a little over two and one-half hours from San Francisco to Los Angeles.

CHSRA is upgrading their 2020 forecast to 68 million, from 32 million, and 94 to 117 million passengers by 2030. As Hall of Fame baseball great Yogi Berra observed, “It is difficult to forecast, especially about the future.” 2020 annual passengers will depend on California voters approving the November bond, matching funding, and regulatory approval. CHSRA forecasts are achievable. By comparison, Europe already provides 250 million annual rides, and Japan over 300 million.

High-speed rail systems, using the new grade-separated high speed lines planned for California have not had one fatality in 41 years. Neither automobiles nor airplanes can match the safety of high speed rail.

California high-speed rail addresses a number of goals. Our current highways cannot support the planned growth to 50 million people. Only the USA and China use more oil than California. If there are more price hikes, or if supply is disrupted by war or terrorism, where will California get its needed billions of gallons of gasoline, diesel and jet fuel? Draughts, likely caused by climate change, are already hurting California agriculture and industry. California is unlikely to meet its targeted reduction of greenhouse gases without high-speed rail. Especially damaging are the greenhouse gas emissions from short-haul air travel. The per passenger greenhouse gas emissions of flying from LA to SF are equivalent of each person driving solo in a large SUV. Carbon Calculator

On November 4, 2008, if a majority of California voters approve Proposition 1A, California will have high-speed rail. Proposition 1A is supported by many cities, chambers of commerce, clean air groups, and by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. A majority of Republican and Democratic legislators approved the measure. Although California faces rush-hour gridlock without high-speed rail, a project with a starting price north of $33 billion will face special interest opposition.

With HSR, it’s about money. Proposed is that Californians approve a bond of $10 billion for one-third of the cost. One-third would be matched by federal funds and one-third by private investment. Although some anticipate cost overruns, more are worried that the price of not acting will be much higher. Because California is implementing AB32, the high-speed rail may be able to sell carbon credits to help finance the project and operations.

Since high-speed rail will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 18 billion pounds per year, you would think that all environment groups would support the measure. While there has been some support, the Sierra Club opposed disrupting environmentally sensitive areas and areas of wildlife migration, specifically in the Los Banos area. Beyond some local opposition, however, the national Sierra Club strongly supports high-speed rail. The California League of Conservation Voters endorses Proposition 1A stating, “Developing viable high-speed rail connecting Northern and Southern California is an essential component of California’s transportation future. A high-speed rail system throughout California would deliver an estimated 117 million travelers into downtowns well-served by local transit, all while reducing the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.”

Southwest Airlines successfully sued and stopped high-speed rail in Texas in the 1990s. Texas is now staring at a $183 billion price for the Trans Texas Corridor as a 4,000-mile-long stretch of 10 auto lanes and six railroad tracks for high-speed freight and commuter trains. This is over twenty times higher than if they had not been stopped from implementing high-speed rail years ago. Opponents of high-speed rail carefully follow Mark Twain’s advice, “Never put off until tomorrow what you can do the day after tomorrow.”

Even airlines do not voice opposition for high-speed rail. Today, Southwest cannot get the expanded gates and routes in California due to lack of airport expansion everywhere from San Diego to Los Angeles to San Francisco. Some airlines may support high-speed rail as it will more easily bring people to SFO and be part of bringing passengers to other airports more quickly.

Most are optimistic that voters will approve a bond issue for high-speed rail. Voters are faced with high gasoline prices and concern about California’s economic future. More people are commuting longer distances as they are unable to sell their homes in today’s difficult real estate market.

Even if voters approve the bond, high-speed rail will not move forward unless there are matching federal funds. Congressman Jim Costa believes that will happen. As he states in his op-ed: “Congress has begun to take action to help make the idea of high-speed rail in California a reality. Two bills I introduced, HR 4122 the American Investment in Safe, Reliable High Speed Rail Act and HR 4123, the High-Speed Rail Authority Development and Formation Act, will help bring federal dollars to California to invest in the proposed high-speed rail system. The Senate also passed S. 294, which will help high-speed rail development in America…. Overall, for every dollar invested in this system, we will see two dollars in return.” Capitol Weekly Article

Will Californians park their cars and ride the rails? Last year, LAMTA carried 64 million riders. In the Bay Area, BART carried 104 million riders. With gasoline prices rocketing, Amtrak ridership on the Capitol Corridor is up 16% this March over a year ago; on the San Joaquins it has jumped 27%. Although Californians will not exclusively ride rails and rapid transit, but they will ride more and drive less. In fact, high speed rail will integrate with public transportation. All 25 HSR stations will be multi-modal. For example, to get to Sacramento I currently take BART to Richmond, then get on Amtrak in the same station.

As a manager covering several states, I used to travel weekly on airplanes. Point-to-point always required at least four hours to get to the airport, get thru security, taxi in the runway, fly, taxi in the runway, then rent a car. In contrast, when taking a train from Washington D.C. to New York, I found that train travel was faster than airlines and better integrated with public transportation. With high-speed rail, airline travel to cover a few hundred miles would never be a personal option.

Travel between Washington D.C. and Boston is now even faster with speeds of up to 150 miles per hour on Amtrak’s Acela, the only high-speed rail in the United States. Now you can get from the nation’s capital to downtown Manhattan in less than three hours; an impossibility with airline travel and the fastest taxi driver in New York history. Over ten million passengers road this Northeast Corridor in 2007, making it the most popular train route in the U.S. Acela is now profitable.

In 12 years, 32 to 68 million passengers may be riding on an even faster system in California. The high-speed rail will keep California’s economy moving forward, with more jobs, more energy security and far less emissions.

The Clean Fleet Report endorses California Proposition 1A.

High-Speed Rail at 357 Miles per Hour is a post from: Clean Fleet Report