Why is high-speed rail an important topic in OM? The New York Times (June 23,2011) writes of “the very real economic benefits that the world’s most advanced fast rail system is bringing to China–and the competitive challenges it poses for the U.S. and Europe”. Just as the interstate highway system Eisenhower built out 60 years ago made modern, national commerce more feasible in the U.S., China’s ambitious rollout of high-speed rail is integrating that sprawling nation–though on a faster timetable at much higher speeds than anything we envisioned here.
Do we have a problem in the U.S.? After I spent 4 1/2 hours driving 90 miles from Orlando to Tampa on a jammed interstate last week , I think we do. The last Amtrak run between the 2 cities died a decade ago. The high-speed rail proposed by the present administration (offered with a full $2 billion-plus incentive) was turned down by our new governor who feared the trains would draw few riders.
Meanwhile the new Beijing-to-Shanghai line will run at 190 miles per hour (going to 220 mph next year) and take 5 hours –while a comparable trip, say from Atlanta-to-New York– takes 18 hours on Amtrak. The Chinese railroad plans to run 180 trains a day on the route.
Work crews of 100,000 per line have built about half of the 10,000 mile network in China so far, often ahead of schedule. As the 200 mph trains link China’s provinces and cities that were previously 24 trips by road or rail, the country’s “manufacturing might and global export machine are likely to grow more powerful”, writes the Times. This makes it more convenient to base businesses in places like Hunan Province, previously isolated from the economic mainstream, but where land, electricity, and labor are cheaper.The other plus of high-speed passenger travel: older rail lines are freed up for freight. This has allowed coal mines and shippers to switch to rail from trucks.
Discussion questions:
1. Do we need bullet trains in the U.S.?
2. What are the implications of the Chinese rail plan for Europe and the U.S.?