Introduction
High speed rail is one of the most exciting (and controversial) new developments in infrastructure today. With several lines already in place, and plans for more to come in the future, they have never been more relevant in the conversation of making a more efficient and interconnected future.
History
The first high speed train became available to the public on October 1st, 1964, in Tokyo Station in Japan, right before the Tokyo Olympics. Called the Shinkansen, it was part of a plan to present a new Japan to the world, one that used its brutal work ethic to bring about innovation and technological advancement instead of war and destruction. With max speeds of 130 miles per hour, it cut down the 319-mile journey from the country’s political capital to its commercial hub of Osaka to just four hours. Due to Japan’s compact size and rapidly urbanizing population, the train proved to be a huge commercial success.
European nations, inspired by Japan, started working on their own solutions. In 1981, France opened its own 161-mph “TGV” line between Paris and Lyons, and by the end of the century, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Britain all had their own lines.
Since then, both high speed lines and trips have increased exponentially. China alone has over 484.48 billion miles of railway travel per year. With increasing public enthusiasm and government spending each year, these numbers are only expected to climb.
How they work
Traditional high-speed trains work much in the same way that normal “low speed” trains do- they have wheels that sit on tracks and power lines to supply electrical energy. Although the high-speed tracks are significantly stronger than others, most trains still run-on standard gauge and can be integrated into existing infrastructure. Additionally, fast lines are specially made with wide, banked turns to reduce chances of accidents on curves.
However, newer maglev trains forgo traditional wheels and tracks. Instead of using an engine to create forward thrust, these trains have a magnetized coil called a guideway that runs across the length of the track, where alternating current is used to create a magnetic field that interacts with the magnets on the underside of the train.
Like the name suggests, this allows the train to levitate 1-10 centimeters off the ground and achieve speeds of over 300 miles per hour due to the greatly reduced friction. Currently, due to the very high cost, there are only six maglev trains in the world available for public use.
What about the US?
Currently, the United States does not have any real high-speed rail lines, and arguably, that’s a good thing. To begin, high speed rail is extremely expensive. China’s state-sponsored rail program, which accounts for 60% of all high-speed rail tracks worldwide, is currently $850 billion in debt. In the US, where lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle are gawking at the gargantuan amount of government spending in the past twenty-four months as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting any more unnecessary spending would be political suicide.
Additionally, all the countries who have invested in high-speed trains already have a robust network of 80-100 mph lines that are heavily trafficked. In comparison, the United States, which decided to spend money developing its interstate system for automobiles post-WW2 instead of its railways, struggles to maintain even its low-speed lines in many parts of the country. Spending billions on individual trains that serve only a small part of the country over modernizing entire regions would simply be a waste of resources.
An extremely well-thought and researched post. Very very professional. I do think Maglev trains or something similar will be the future for long distance travel, but as you said with Covid setbacks, it may be a long time coming. Most passenger planes fly at around 500 mph, so if we could get a train to that speed but we get to skip the whole security process of flying, I think everyone would agree that’s a good thing. Plus these can be built underground. I would also imagine they would be more eco-friendly than massive planes, but that is pure speculation.
You make a very interesting point about how installing a modern rail system would potentially wreck the United States government. I always thought it would be a step in the right direction to offer a green alternative to planes and cars without giving any thought to the strain that would put on the federal budget. But taking into account the price of doing such a thing, I can see how it would not be feasible. Also, I didn’t realize how much money trains cost to make and install.
I found everything you brought up in this post to be very interesting. I have personally found myself wishing at times that there was a train station where I live in North Eastern PA that could take me into cities like New York or Philadelphia for a day. While trains like these used to exist, they became more and more expensive to maintain as less and less people chose to use them. With how popular car travel is in a country like the United States, with both rural and urban citizens, I think it would take a massive cultural change for people to ever turn back to trains again. They would first need to be proven to be inexpensive and efficient, and it would seem that only the latter is true right now. Hopefully in the future, trains could be proven as a viable method transport again.