When President Obama submitted his 2010 budget to Congress, it added $1 billion for US High Speed Rail (HSR) Corridor Designations in each of the next five years. Coupled with his $8 billion commitment from the economic stimulus package, that sums to $13B that does not require matching state and local funds. It is the largest amount ever spent on passenger rail in America. His actions, outlined by this 2009 map created by the U.S. Department of Transportation, also formed a poetic bookend to President Lincoln authorizing the trans-continental railroad project amidst the Civil War. The first Black President, whose mantra is “Change We Can Believe In“, has kick-started HSR across the continent amidst two wars and a huge recession. What’s not to like?
In the last 20 years, Congress has authorized our Freeway System to receive $30-33B/year in federal funds and our Aviation System to receive $10-16B/year. In stark contrast, Amtrak rarely got more than $1B/year in federal funding and most of that went to the Northeast Corridor, our incomplete, but promising HSR corridor to date. Thus, woefully underfunded Amtrak legacy rail lines elsewhere suffer from:
* inadequate tracks, bridges and tunnels
* sharing tracks with slow moving freight trains
* too many places where autos cross over train tracks
* people and animals wandering onto unfenced tracks
* trains traveling in opposite directions that alternate sharing a single track
* average train speeds too slow to be a freeway or short flight alternative
Though the Department of Transportation plan upgrades many Amtrak routes and makes important contributions to true HSR in the Northeast, California and Florida, the plan does not sufficiently address the massive scale of transportation-related problems awaiting us in 15 years. The Obama Administration is still dancing around facts motivating all other world leaders to build comprehensive networks of 155+ mph HSR trains by 2020-2025. Instead, the plan overplays 110 mph top speed trains running in many densely populated corridors between large metro areas. Even worse, compared to the original Interstate Freeway Map in 1955 showing a 10 year build-out, the US High Speed Rail Corridor Designations Map leaves so many route gaps it Iooks like the first step of a gradual 40 year build-out to true HSR. Governors, Senators and Representatives of the 16 states who look at the HSR Corridors Designations map and see no direct benefit to their constituents, have little motivation to support the plan.
By comparison to our meager HSR kick-start, Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Indonesia, France, Spain, United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal, Denmark, Sweden, Poland, Czech Republic, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, South Africa, Turkey, India, Brazil, Argentina and Venezuela are investing single-, double-, and triple-digit billions of dollars. Four countries investing single-digit billions, they are investing a much higher percentage of their GDP than America, in one case as high as 8% of GDP. Those nations are not measuring HSR success by single-dimensional, short-term operating profit criteria. Instead, they treat electric-powered HSR and Transit investment as multi-dimensional, long-term assets that:
* reduce oil dependency
* reduce trade deficits caused by importing oil
* reduce greenhouse gases, particularly CO2 and Ozone levels
* expand national transportation options for socio-economic activity
* create new industries of sustainable manufacturing jobs
* increasing national transportation safety
* foster urban redevelopment centered around train-transit stations
* create collateral economic advantages for freight transport
Since the current Department of Transportation emphasis on so many 110 mph routes falls well short of generating those benefits, what is the International definition of HSR delivering those these vast benefits? For that matter, what is the taxonomy of passenger rail speeds and their benefits?
79 mph Routes compose the majority of America’s legacy rail today. Amtrak and freight train companies run diesel-powered trains on these routes. Without complete makeovers, these routes are unsuitable for faster trains due to: uneven track heights, inadequate track bedding, many places where autos cross tracks, less-safe crossing arms, and they are not fenced off from people and animals. In portions of some routes, trains traveling in opposite direction on two tracks have to slow down or stop, then let one train proceed on a single track portion. Since these trains only hit top speed for short stretches, they are suitable for Commuter Rail where stops are 2-4 miles apart.
90 mph Routes also host Amtrak and freight companies running diesel-powered trains on legacy routes, though freight trains are limited to 79 mph. These routes have more level track heights, at least two tracks, better track bedding, safer crossing arms, and longer stretches without autos crossing tracks. Nevertheless, these routes are unsuitable for faster trains because they still have places where autos cross tracks, track heights are not level enough, and tracks are not fenced off from people and animals. The routes are however, suitable for scenic Amtrak routes where stops are 10-15 miles apart and average speeds can be 45-60 mph.
110 mph Routes are significantly upgraded legacy rail routes. Thus far, we have a couple electic-powered 110 mph routes in the Northeast that spin-off New York and Philadelphia hubs. Since it is initially cheaper to run diesel-powered trains on legacy rail routes than stringing overhead catenary wires for electrical power, many states and Amtrak want to upgrade a lot more 79-90 mph routes to diesel-powered 110 mph routes in the near future. These routes have two tracks not shared with freight and commuter trains, very few places where autos cross tracks, better track bedding and leveling. Each year new overpasses separating autos from tracks, plus better track bedding & leveling can be added to the route for more continuous miles of 110 mph service. As clean bio-diesel technology advances, the goal is to replace oil-diesel engines with bio-diesel engines. 110 mph trains typically stop every 15-30 miles, so they average only 55-60 mph over a given route. Provided they run 7-8 times per day each direction, they are a minimal alternative to driving and good collector lines to High Speed Rail hubs in major cities. For these reasons we should think of 110 mph routes as Poor Man’s High Speed Rail.
124-162 mph Routes fit the International definition of HSR (200-260 kmph) on upgraded legacy rail. Indeed, when electric-powered 110 mph routes grow up, they want to become 124-162 mph Routes. To safely permit those speeds, track bedding and leveling are set at much higher standards, and tracks are continuously welded for smoother ride. All tracks are grade-separated from roads and fenced-off for safety. More powerful electric engines and brakes are used for faster starting & stopping. Most travelers want the psychological benefit of knowing they can’t drive between Point A and Point B as fast, so 124 mph top speed sounds inviting to them. Then disappointment hits when they often discover traveleing between Point A and Point B only averaged about 75 mph speed due to many segments where the train can not approach top speed and too many stops. Since it has been proven that dense 100-600 mile population corridors require much higher average speeds to attract significantly higher patronage, nations around the world are upgrading electric-powered legacy rail routes to support higher top speeds over longer stretches to average 100 mph (160 kmph) or more. To reach those higher average speeds, old bridges and tunnels are replaced or upgraded to support faster speeds. Technologically advanced catenary wires are used to transmit more electrical power to engines that generate more horsepower. More advanced signaling systems are required for safer train control throughout the route. Segments of the route get mild curve straightening let trains run faster. The trains also get tilt-wheel suspensions for faster speed around curves. Coupled with fewer stops 40-70 miles apart, those legacy rail upgrades are permitting Express HSR trains to produce top speeds of 162 mph over long stretches and significant boosts to average speeds. When such work completes in the Northeast Corridor, NYC-Washington Acela Express trains will average 105 mph vs. 84 mph today. NYC-Washington Acela Regional trains with 2 more stops will average about 95 mph.
180-236 mph Routes (290-380 kmph) have requirements more stringent than HSR and are best described as Very High Speed Rail (VHSR). New passenger-only tracks, bridges and tunnels are built on straighter routes with a wider gap between tracks to reduce the vibration of VHSR trains passing in opposite directions. VHSR requires more electric power and more advanced aerodynamics, propulsion, signaling, wheels and braking. Even simple things like variance in track levels and grade matter. French VHSR trains require track level discrepancies of no more than 0.16 inches and are restricted to a maximum of 1% grade incline. To produce 125-160 mph average speeds, VHSR trains stop about 75-125 miles apart. They perform as well as planes+rental cars in downtown-to-downtown times for routes under 500 miles.
The future energy source of electric-powered HSR and VHSR trains may come from any combination of hydroelectric, wind, solar, geothermal, bio-fuel and nuclear power. HSR and VHSR lines are less susceptible to weather disturbances and add seating capacity can be added at far lower expense than other transportation modes. Hence, HSR and VHSR have more schedule dependability and traffic scalability than any other transportation mode in 100-600 mile population corridors. The latter capability is a lifesaver, when a city needs to quickly evacuate for emergencies.
A STARTLING, OMINOUS STORY UNFOLDING BY 2025
In 1970, we had little reason to get serious about HSR. American population was 203 million and we had very few 15-30 million person corridors. Unlike Japan and Western Europe and excluding the Northeast Corridor, America lacked population density to sufficiently patronize HSR trains. We also had little motivation since gas cost 30 cents/gallon, we produced nearly 50% of the oil we consumed, plenty of secure oil flowed from the Middle East, and we had trade surpluses. Then signs of change arrived in the 1990s, with lower proven oil reserves in America, fast population growth and increasingly unfriendly OPEC nations increased gas prices, thereby shifting the balance of trade from surplus to deficit. Fortunately, the original map of our Interstate Freeway System completed in 1992, so taxpayers could feel the pride of finishing one huge national transportation system before starting another. In 1993, President Clinton took that opportune moment to send a HSR proof-of-concept proposal to Congress for projects that would have kick-started an Interstate HSR system. Unfortunately, our luddite Congress brushed aside Clinton’s proposal and we live with the consequences today.
Given everything on President Obama’s plate right now, its understandable that the HSR Corridor Designations map lacks punch to spark our national imagination. Nevertheless, we need a bold vision statement like JFK’s, “America will put a man of the moon in 10 years.” JFK had Cold War motivations to put a man on the moon so quickly. What should be Obama’s motivations for a bold HSR vision statement that sparks our national imagination today?
The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that our population has rocketed to 310 million by 2010, mostly clustered in dense 15-40 million person corridors similar to the dense corridors of Western Europe circa 1990. If you think Interstate freeway and airport traffic is bad now, the U.S. Census Bureau forecasts population hitting 341 million by 2020 and 370 million by 2030 producing many more 15-40 million person corridors. If we follow the trend of over-emphasizing more freeway lanes to address increasing traffic, 8-10 lane freeways running 100-600 miles between large metro areas are coming soon. Despite the added lanes, average freeway speed will decrease, just as it has in our metro areas. Since travelers need at least one extra lane to pass autos, the optimum freeway configuration for highest speeds are obtained with 2 lanes per side. The more lanes added, the more speed drops per lane under heavy load conditions. It decreases because autos traveling at different speeds and changing lanes introduce delays to overall traffic flow. Without getting too mathematically precise, a 4 lane per side freeway only carries about 65% more traffic than a 2 lane per side freeway, though mistaken logic suggests 4 lanes should carry 100% more. Today, travelers experience this phenomenon on the Interstate Freeways during holidays. Carpools won’t solve the problem either because a higher percentage of interstate travelers have more than one passenger. Did I mention more trucks too? In the future, travelers will experience Interstate Freeway crowds every day, no matter how many lanes we add. For a glimpse of the future, just look at I-95 Freeway from Washington DC-Richmond-Virginia Beach or I-5 Freeway between Los Angeles and San Diego on a summer holiday weekend attracting beach crowds. Since American interstate travelers want to go faster rather than slower from Point A to Point B, we are in a race against the clock to build a world-class Interstate HSR system.
Also in 1970, imported oil overtook domestic oil production, beginning what experts call the Peak Oil Era. Shortly after hearing the bad news, President Nixon admonished Congress, “We must end our dependence on foreign oil by 1980.” Yet, whenever Congress addressed the subject of HSR, the prevailing counterpoint was that we produce half our own oil, have plenty of oil reserves and good relations in the oil producing Middle East. Those days are over! America now produces only 11% of the oil we consume. Most oil analysts and oilman T. Boone Pickens admit that even with drilling off the coasts and in Alaska, we can not tap enough new cheap oil reserves to significantly alter that percentage in our favor. HSR opponents want us to put our faith in Saudi oil sheiks who claim the world has enough oil for 100+ years. The sheiks are not evil for saying that. They are simply acting like any capitalist. It is in their profit-maximizing interests to keep America over-dependant on oil AND cultivate oil demand from China and India that will exceed America’s oil demand by 2025. So the Saudi oil sheiks neglect to mention independent oil analysts who estimate that today’s “cheap oil” will run out between 2025-30. Even with technology advances, the other “plentiful oil” will be far more expensive to extract and refine. Oil prices will escalate well beyond $200 per barrel. Don’t believe me. Do your own Google search “Will America have enough oil reserves by 2025.” If America wakes up in 2025 with only interstate freeway and aviation networks 85-90% dependent on foreign oil, a world of hurt awaits us. By the way, even Saudi arabia has started construction on a HSR system.
Lastly, auto and jet emissions are two of the biggest carbon pollutants trapping heat in the atmosphere, making them prime contributors to Global Warming. Man’s Global Warming impact is melting glaciers and if unchecked, will significantly increase ocean temperature and alter the direction of ocean currents. Most weather scientists say, if current trends continue to 2025, warming ocean temperatures will feed stronger hurricanes and trigger other unknown weather effects. Here’s something to really be alarmed about — Global Warming is harder to reverse the longer it continues.
Caught in the crosshairs of Huge Population Growth, Peak Oil, and Global Warming, we don’t have the luxury to gradually build HSR and Transit infrastructure. America must accelerate building that infrastructure today or suffer greater consequences. Aside from fearing the stick consequences, there are plenty of carrot reasons to upscale our HSR plan now.
CARROTS TO GET STARTED WITH TRUE HSR NOW
First, there’s an opportunity cost for not building an Interstate HSR Network. We have a robust proof point that HSR lines built in high population corridors save twice their cost expanding freeways and airports. Despite needing further improvements, Northeast Corridor HSR trains prevented building a more expensive parallel I-95 Freeway and reduced airport expansion to handle small commuter flights in the corridor.
Second, a national commitment to upgrade legacy rail bridges, tunnels, fencing, traffic control systems, and placing HSR on 2 separate tracks while freight trains continue running on separate tracks in the same routes. The result for passengers and freight trains is faster speeds and prevented delays. Thus, freight trains will ship goods faster and cheaper. Since nearly all legacy rail routes in America are owned by freight train companies, Amtrak leases the right to share those routes. In return for this bundle of taxpayer-funded improvements for freight trains, the government can negotiate more favorable route lease terms for HSR and/or trade for land ownership & maintenance of HSR routes. Everyone can win.
Third and previously mentioned, additional lanes for Interstate freeways will only encourage more drivers and lengthen traffic jams throughout corridors. And short commuter flights between metro areas in populous corridors are some of the worst greenhouse gas offenders, yet a significant portion of airport construction is built to accommodate such flights. In contrast, electric-powered HSR and Transit reduce greenhouse gases and encourage urban redevelopment at far less total expense to taxpayers who pick up the tab for sprawling roads, sewage and cabling.
Fourth, France proves that a good HSR+VHSR system fed by Transit, Freeways and Airports runs at an operating profit once it reaches critical patronage mass in about 20 years. Now France only spend funds to expand HSR+VHSR service into new regions or R&D for faster, higher capacity trains on the most popular routes.
Fifth, HSR in the Northeast Corridor did not end freeway and airport construction jobs. There is still plenty of money being spent on freeway upkeep and modernizing airports to handle larger planes for longer flights. Look at Western Europe for another example. Due to HSR and VHSR lines, there are fewer flights between city-pairs under 600-miles apart like Paris-London, Amsterdam-Stuttgart, and Madrid-Barcelona, but there are more flights between city pairs over 600+ miles apart like Paris-Madrid, Amsterdam-Naples, and Rome-Berlin.
Sixth, guess who’s building HSR manufacturing and service industries to rival Boeing and AirBus in their job-creating, export capacity to developing nations — Japan, France, Germany and China. America can and should do the same. The new domestic jobs and export capability of HSR alone should convince even the most tax conservative Senator or Representative to get on board.
In summary, an Interstate HSR System is not a national vanity project. There are severe consequences for not building it sooner and strategic advantages for building it faster.
KEY NATIONS BUILDING HSR FOR LONG TERM STRATEGIC ADVANTAGES
Japan fits a population half the size of America in land area the size of California and launched the world’s first 130 mph Shinkansen HSR line in time for the 1964 Tokyo Olympics. With Japan’s dense island topography and early commitment to HSR, Shinkansen trains have since transported over 6 billion passengers in tunnels and over bridges through earthquake and typhoon country at speeds up to 186 mph, with zero operational fatalities and astonishing schedule dependability as low as 6 seconds average annual delay on one line. By 2020, Shinkansen will link all major cities in Japan, as some trains reach 217 mph (350 kmph) top speed, see map. Japan is a marvelous example of HSR+VHSR deployment, but given their ultra-dense population and hilly island topography, America can not model its HSR building solution after Japan.
According to 2008 World Bank figures, China vaulted to the world’s 3rd largest economy and is forecast to pass Japan soon. A large chunk of their GDP growth funded eight HSR lines covering nearly 4,400 miles and a showcase 72-mile 186 mph Beijing-Tianjin line for the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics. China has already built as many miles of HSR lines in the last four years as Europe has in three decades. By 2012, the world’s fastest VHSR train running at 380 kmph (236 mph) will run on 824 miles linking Beijing, Shanghai and other large cities. By 2020, the 16,000-mile China HSR network of 250-380 kmph trains will link all its major cities to transport over 400 million passengers per year, see map. Thus, China is a great model for communist-governed Russia, which can also use powerful imminent domain rights to claim vast amounts of land for a HSR+VHSR network. But China’s HSR building model is not practical for democratically-governed America.
Germans, Italians and the French love their freeways and airports as much as Americans. They have topography conditions and systems of government similar to ours. But higher population density and fuel prices motivated them to make HSR a priority decades ago. By 1978, Italy opened the first European HSR line traveling 155 mph between Rome and Florence. By 1981, France introduced the first electric-powered 186 mph trains between Paris and Lyon. Germany introduced a network of HSR trains in 1991. In 1990, when the population of major Western European nations was about the same as ours today, the rest of Europe got serious building transcontinental HSR. By 2000, United Kingdom, Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Austria, Denmark, Norway and Sweden also had HSR+VHSR lines running or under construction. In 2008, Spain, a nation with under 1/10th the GDP of America, committed $120B to interconnect the Spanish VHSR line with a French VHSR line by 2014 and to rapidly build-out its HSR network by 2020.
Despite the huge challenge of meshing different track gauges, different signal systems, and different power system voltages, new alliances and projects throughout Europe are reducing interconnection hassles. In corridors where they can use imminent domain rights, they do so for VHSR trains. In other corridors, they are improving legacy rail routes to support faster HSR trains. Today, the Trans-European HSR+VHSR Network links 65 major cities. By 2020, the Trans-European HSR+VHSR Network will have built more bridges and carved tunnels through the Alps and other mountain ranges while expanding to 9,600 miles that better connect hundreds of cities in Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Switzerland, Austria, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, UK, Denmark, Sweden, Poland and the Czech Republic. Half the sub-230 kmph (grey & yellow color) routes on the map below will convert to 240-360 kmph routes. Most European countries are converting to French standards for the track gauge, bedding & leveling, power system voltages, and advanced signaling systems to make crashes nearly impossible and meet 99% schedule dependability. America’s build model needs to emulate Europe on steroids.
FINANCIAL MODEL TO BUILD OUR INTERSTATE HSR SYSTEM
America should emulate the funding model of our Interstate Freeway System, but at a faster pace. In 1955, the Eisenhower Administration and the Congress kick-started the world’s best freeway system. Congress passed legislation and construction began in 1956. It took 36 years to complete the original Interstate Freeway Map, at an inflation-adjusted cost of $406B. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, the federal government is still spending $55-60B/year on Highways (most of it Freeways) maintenance, additional freeway lanes and supplemental metro area freeways.
In the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak HSR passenger share has grown from 12% to more than 50% of the air/rail market. It is the largest contributor to Amtrak operating revenue and passengers. Northeast Corridor HSR successes helped convince California voters to pass a $9B bond measure to fund a 217 mph VHSR line that will produce 2 hour 38 minute Los Angeles-San Francisco trip times and extensions to Sacramento, Anaheim and San Diego, see map.
POLITICAL ADROITNESS REQUIRED
Bold national visions are never politically easy or cheap. Large bi-partisan groups of governors and mayors from 32 of the Lower 48 States benefit from the current US HSR Corridors plan, already side with the Obama Administration to make HSR a signature accomplishment of their administrations. When the economy rebounds and like they do for freeways, these political leaders plan to kick in up to 20% of the cost — and in California’s case, a lot more. But to convince 60% of a highly partisan-Congress and their constituents to boldly move forward, a visionary HSR plan from Obama must reach out to all Lower 48 states. Since there is no HSR justification for Alaska or Hawaii, Obama should propose a compensatory percentage of federal funds for other transportation projects in those states.
The U.S. High Speed Rail Association produced a cohesive US HSR Phasing Map listed below, that connects our most populous corridors by 2030 with true HSR Lines. Though the map recognizes the proper scale of system needed, it has two significant flaws.
First, a great number of legacy rail routes can only be upgraded to 155 mph top speed. Thats primarily because 186-236 mph VHSR service requires straiter routes, only possible in some cases, with huge imminent domain land acquisition. Since we live in a law-suit happy country, those large stretches of land will not happen for many routes. So for accuracy that prevents misleading citizens and international visitors, we should communicate in international speed standards of 155-217 mph (250-350 kmph). Second, the color choice of gray lines on a light gray background underemphasizes the importance of 110 mph collector routes glued into 155-217 mph routes.
CLOSING THE SALE WITH AMERICAN CITIZENS
Once Health Care Reform passes, Financial Reform passes, combat troops return from Iraq, and job creation gathers momentum President Obama should issue a bold, comprehensive successor to the US HSR Corridors Map called the Interstate High Speed Rail System by 2025. On the new map, show all 155-217 mph routes as green lines through 44 states and 110-mph routes as gold lines that connect the remaining 4 Lower 48 states and feed 155-217 mph routes. To build on the momentum of creating good infrastructure jobst, Obama should announce this map by September/October 2010. This politically adroit approach borrows a page from President Eisenhower’s Interstate Freeway System map announced in June 1956, that enticed citizens to badger their Governors, Senators and Representatives for faster access to the comprehensive interstate freeway system during an election season. Then as Eisenhower did, let Congress haggle over the order of route funding, not whether a state is included by target completion date. As more projects simultaneously break ground, every state will cheer the new interrelated jobs as we rush to complete this great national calling before the bell tolls in 2025. If today’s malnourished Amtrak network attracts 28 million passengers/year, then a 155-217 mph (250-350 kmph) Interstate HSR System will have no problem attracting 500 million passengers/year by 2025.
For the scale and construction pace we need, President Obama and Congress must reallocate $25B/year to fund HSR. Coupled with $5B/year from other sources in 15 years, that cumulative $450B will connect 98% of our major cities by fast rail. Though 22,000 miles of legacy rail routes and stations lower our cost and we are the richest nation on Earth, Americans are tax averse and $25B/year in federal funds is a lot of tax money. So paying for HSR without raising taxes, is a matter of politicized budget choices, rather than economic capability.
According to the U.S. Department of Defense, China spends $100-150B/year on defense compared to our $710B being spent on defense for 2010. And in stark contrast to America, China, is investing an order of magnitude higher funds on HSR and Transit. As a matter of economic security, America should not let China, Japan or Western Europe invest more than we do in 21st century HSR and Transit infrastructure. Since we waste tens of billions of dollars every year on pork-barrel freeway and military projects, we can certainly reallocate $25B/year towards a comprehensive Interstate HSR System. Lack of confidence is not in our national DNA either. America put a man on the moon while building the world’s greatest freeway and aviation systems through the Vietnam War and Cold War. We can do this too!
Should Amtrak manage the whole system? No, but not for reasons cited by critics who unfairly call Amtrak incompetent. Many of those critics are hypocritical Senators and Representatives that tried to kill Amtrak by denying federal funds to build first class service in any corridor. That’s like funding a road built to 2 lane highway standards then criticizing it for not carrying as many autos as a 6-lane freeway. The real reasons not to let Amtrak run the whole system is Americans are better off with public-private investment to spark innovation in different routes and classes of service and to spur more private investments around train stations. For example, some private HSR lines may want to offer Orient Express-type luxury between Chicago-New Orleans. Another example is some hoteliers may want to invest in lines that have train station hubs incorporating their fancy hotels. That said, Amtrak is probably best suited to continue running most of the Northeast, Midwest and Mid-Atlantic regions; and every HSR train service would be subject to a national Rail Traffic Control system.
President Obama must convince citizens that our investment in freeway, airport and seaport infrastructure helped vault America to Alpha economic superpower in the last half of the 20th century when population was smaller, cheap oil was plentiful and long-term ecosystem damages were less obvious. To maintain our Alpha economic status in a more densely populated world of exhausting cheap oil and global warming in coming decades, we must invest in a bold plan for electric-powered transportation today. Aside from rebuilding America’s train and transit industry, a large construction scale and fast pace leverages our investment in the 21st century, electric-power grid based on secure, clean energy sources at home. Now that’s a two-fer change we can believe in!
Thomas Dorsey, Publisher
SoulOfAmerica.com
