High Speed Rail Across New Mexico Proposed

[jis]

This idea floating up in the New Mexico legislature for what it may or may not be worth.

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-...sibility-study-of-high-speed-train-across-nm/

 

[Willbridge]

This idea floating up in the New Mexico legislature for what it may or may not be worth.

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-...sibility-study-of-high-speed-train-across-nm/

It doesn't say if they are aware of previous studies of that route. Colorado has a commission completing studies, focused on higher-speed rail, but not high-speed rail. It has non-voting participation by NM and WY and UP and BNSF and Amtrak. It is focused on [Pueblo] - Colorado Springs - Denver - Fort Collins - [Cheyenne], with the assumption that it might be extended eventually.

A streamlined study (heh, heh) was done in the mid-1990's of an El Paso to Denver conventional long-distance train service with some ideas of how to work around the coal traffic. It includes connecting passenger traffic with the Pioneer and Desert Wind -- between that and the coal traffic it's rather out of date.

In the meantime, traffic growth and interstate highway construction continue. A friend of mine drove for Denver's Metro Taxi and likes to remind me of the young woman from the East Coast who told her that Denver rents were too high, so she was going to commute from Colorado Springs on "the Amtrak." My friend broke the news to her that this was not the NEC. More recently, as the much-whined about "bottleneck" of the last four-lane segment of I-25 was competed as six lanes, rents have begun a steep climb in the Colorado Springs area. Even more recently, rents in Pueblo have begun to climb.

 

[BlackDiamond]

Not much detail in the article. I assume this would follow the I-25 corridor more or less. Sounds like it would make more sense as an LD train with some higher speed commuter type segments Denver - Pueblo and Santa Fe - Albuquerque, the latter basically an enhancement of the existing Rail Runner service.

 

[user 1215]

It would take a lot more money than the state has population to support it. Last I heard, even the Railrunner (which runs in the I-25 median from about 1/2 way between ABQ and SF up to SF) is hemorrhaging cash.

There is already track the whole way. To make it "High Speed" would be very difficult North of ABQ. Existing ROW between El Paso and ABQ could add a high speed segment with relative ease. Then, if you follow the current ROW that Amtrak follows from ABQ to Trinidad, I can't see improving speeds that much as the terrain is very curvy. Another option would be to go to Santa Fe then up the state to serve Taos and then cut through the mountains in Colorado between Fort Garland and Walsenburg. But that new ROW would most likely cut through a lot of Puebo land and I don't think they'd be real keen on giving up that land. I don't think they could make that stretch relatively inexpensive "High Speed" either.

OK - where do I get my $500k?

 

[Devil's Advocate]

It would take a lot more money than the state has population to support it.

Which seems to be why this is being studied as a potential TX-NM-CO project. New Mexico's population and tax base does not create a compelling case for HSR but a modern ROW linking Texas and Colorado might. This study should help to make (or quash) the case for such a route.

Last I heard, even the Railrunner (which runs in the I-25 median from about 1/2 way between ABQ and SF up to SF) is hemorrhaging cash.

Last I heard, even Interstate 25 (which runs along the Rail Runner route from 1/2 way between ABQ and SF up to SF) is hemorrhaged cash.

 

[Tlcooper44]

Last I heard, even Interstate 25 (which runs along the Rail Runner route from 1/2 way between ABQ and SF up to SF) is hemorrhaged cash.

Good point.
HSR is extremely expensive, and likely doesn't have the population base to support it.
But so are interstates, but nobody ever asked the states to pay for those entirely.

Much like induced demand with highway lanes, I wonder if the same principal could not be brought to a HSR line in unlikely places. If it existed, passengers may be found.

 

[jis]

Good point.
HSR is extremely expensive, and likely doesn't have the population base to support it.
But so are interstates, but nobody ever asked the states to pay for those entirely.

Much like induced demand with highway lanes, I wonder if the same principal could not be brought to a HSR line in unlikely places. If it existed, passengers may be found.

The capital cost is usually partly covered by the feds even for rail, though usually a lower proportion than is for highways. The problem arises with operating subsidies.

Typically highway operating subsidies are covered by fuel taxes and local taxes (for some highways) and from general funds (both state and/or federal depending on the highway in question). Rail operating subsidies are handled wildly differently in different states, and for Amtrak it is what we read about in the Amtrak Appropriations. And that is where states sometimes baulk to accept federal capital grants to build something that the state thinks will be more expensive to operate than they are willing to budget for. It is almost a chicken and egg problem.

 

[Tlcooper44]

The capital cost is usually partly covered by the feds even for rail, though usually a lower proportion than is for highways. The problem arises with operating subsidies.

Typically highway operating subsidies are covered by fuel taxes and local taxes (for some highways) and from general funds (both state and/or federal depending on the highway in question). Rail operating subsidies are handled wildly differently in different states, and for Amtrak it is what we read about in the Amtrak Appropriations. And that is where states sometimes baulk to accept federal capital grants to build something that the state thinks will be more expensive to operate than they are willing to budget for. It is almost a chicken and egg problem.

Right, but the taxes don't even come close to covering the costs of Interstate maintenance (which is covered through other ways; one such is tolls). IFRC, taxes covered somewhere in the ballpark of around 27% of the cost. Officially speaking, the highways run at a deficit, but everyone accepts, as they should, the enormous economic benefit they bring to the country that is not considered independent of what they "officially" cost (unlike rail).

Of course, I guess my overall point is that this same courtesy is not extended to rail.

 

[TheCrescent]

This idea floating up in the New Mexico legislature for what it may or may not be worth.

https://www.krqe.com/news/politics-...sibility-study-of-high-speed-train-across-nm/

I would be happy to perform that study and I can do it more quickly and cheaply than the paid consultants can:

New Mexico doesn’t have the population density for HSR and there is no realistic funding source, so the idea should be dropped.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I would be happy to perform that study and I can do it more quickly and cheaply than the paid consultants can: New Mexico doesn’t have the population density for HSR and there is no realistic funding source, so the idea should be dropped.

If you lived in the 1800's would you have said nothing should be built West of Iowa? While New Mexico alone does not have the population or tax base to support a project of this scope positioning it as a link between Texas and Colorado might work. There is an enormous amount of traffic between these states and if Texas allows (or is prevented from stopping) their own HSR network this could end up being an important connection some day. Such a project could also help improve passenger rail access throughout the Western half of the country by linking the Sunset Limited, Southwest Chief, and California Zephyr.

 

[Tlcooper44]

I would be happy to perform that study and I can do it more quickly and cheaply than the paid consultants can:

New Mexico doesn’t have the population density for HSR and there is no realistic funding source, so the idea should be dropped.

If you lived in the 1800's would you have said nothing should be built West of Iowa? While New Mexico alone does not have the population or tax base to support a project of this scope positioning it as a link between Texas and Colorado might work. There is an enormous amount of traffic between these states and if Texas allows (or is prevented from stopping) their own HSR network this could end up being an important connection some day. Such a project could also help improve passenger rail access throughout the Western half of the country by linking the Sunset Limited, Southwest Chief, and California Zephyr.

Would you have said the same thing for the interstate proposal? There were even fewer people in that area when those were put on the table.

 

[tgstubbs1]

If there was a regular speed train in place and it was extremely popular it might make more sense. A LD train from El Paso to Casper makes sense to me. But what about ABQ? A train from OKC to ABQ?

 

[NES28]

Has anyone ever looked into re-routing the SW Chief via Santa Fe? Presumably, this would involve upgrading the short line to/from Lamy. A turning loop might also be required to allow the train to go into Santa Fe itself.

 

[jis]

Has anyone ever looked into re-routing the SW Chief via Santa Fe? Presumably, this would involve upgrading the short line to/from Lamy. A turning loop might also be required to allow the train to go into Santa Fe itself.

No. For the obvious reason that additional ridership from such a time wasting detour does not justify it. If it did SantaFe Railroad would have already done so many decades back, before Amtrak happened.

 

[MARC Rider]

The capital cost is usually partly covered by the feds even for rail, though usually a lower proportion than is for highways. The problem arises with operating subsidies.

Typically highway operating subsidies are covered by fuel taxes and local taxes (for some highways) and from general funds (both state and/or federal depending on the highway in question). Rail operating subsidies are handled wildly differently in different states, and for Amtrak it is what we read about in the Amtrak Appropriations. And that is where states sometimes baulk to accept federal capital grants to build something that the state thinks will be more expensive to operate than they are willing to budget for. It is almost a chicken and egg problem.

Another thing to consider is that nearly everybody has a car, so the vast majority of voters don't care that their taxes are supporting highways (either capital or operating costs) that don't "make money." There might be some reluctance to pay for roads that aren't near you, but, then again, you never know to where you're going to have to travel in the future. In general, the political calculus is similar to the Amtrak appropriation re: NEC vs long distance: The urban legislators support gold-plated highways in the rural areas so that the rural legislators will support highways in the cities.

 

[NES28]

Also, people should be aware that FRA completed a SW Regional Rail Plan a few years ago which included the concept of a conventional (not HS) Denver-Pueblo-Santa Fe-Albuquerque-Flagstaff-Williams Jct. (Grand Canyon)-Phoenix route with multiple daily frequencies. SW Study Summary Report | FRA

 

[NES28]

No. For the obvious reason that additional ridership from such a time wasting detour does not justify it. If it did SantaFe Railroad would have already done so many decades back, before Amtrak happened.

The distance is not much different; there might not be a noticeable time penalty and it could add a lot of riders.

 

[MARC Rider]

No. For the obvious reason that additional ridership from such a time wasting detour does not justify it. If it did SantaFe Railroad would have already done so many decades back, before Amtrak happened.

Yeah, I've always wondered why, back in the day, the Santa Fe (AT&SF) didn't build their railroad line through, um, Santa Fe. Sure, there's a bit of a topographic escarpment between Lamy and Santa Fe, but it's not that much of an impediment, even to late 19th century construction technology. The tracks could have easliy followed what's now the current route of I-25 from Canoncito right into Santa Fe, and then followed more or less the current route of the RailRunner down to Albuquerqe.

 

[jis]

The distance is not much different; there might not be a noticeable time penalty and it could add a lot of riders.

But all that money needed to build it today is much better utilized somewhere else with much greater bang for the buck. Unless of course residents of Santa Fe want to start a Go Fund Me and see if they can collect enough to build it

 

[TheCrescent]

Would you have said the same thing for the interstate proposal? There were even fewer people in that area when those were put on the table.

If railfans and passenger rail advocates push for high-speed rail in places such as New Mexico, we’ll lose credibility and will be viewed as irrational.

 

[MARC Rider]

Yeah, I've always wondered why, back in the day, the Santa Fe (AT&SF) didn't build their railroad line through, um, Santa Fe. Sure, there's a bit of a topographic escarpment between Lamy and Santa Fe, but it's not that much of an impediment, even to late 19th century construction technology. The tracks could have easily followed what's now the current route of I-25 from Canoncito right into Santa Fe, and then followed more or less the current route of the RailRunner down to Albuquerqe.

I decided to check with Google maps. This distance from where the BNSF line diverges from I-25 at Cañoncito to where the RailRunner tracks from downtown Santa Fe diverge on to the median of I-25 is about 13 miles. The topography is not particularly challenging. How expensive could a 13 mile connector railway be? They could put the Santa Fe Amtrak Station somewhere near the interchange between I-25 and South St. Francis Drive. They could contract with RailRunner to run a Thruway Service shuttle train from there to the downtown Santa Fe station, or they could just use buses. Also, this location is in Santa Fe, so there should be taxis and Ubers and such, too.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Has anyone ever looked into re-routing the SW Chief via Santa Fe? Presumably, this would involve upgrading the short line to/from Lamy. A turning loop might also be required to allow the train to go into Santa Fe itself.

1. Santa Fe is already served by Rail Runner Shuttle Bus
2. Some of the rails in question are privately owned and operated
3. The curves and grades are unsuitable for Superliners
4. Traffic between Lamy and Santa Fe is relatively minimal
5. Chance for creating new traffic demand seems slim

That is not to say there is zero demand for such a service but spending big money for a daily detour is not the way I would go about it.

If railfans and passenger rail advocates push for high-speed rail in places such as New Mexico, we’ll lose credibility and will be viewed as irrational.

We're talking about a proposed feasibility study rather than spearheading a grassroots movement.

 

[TheCrescent]

1. Santa Fe is already served by Rail Runner and Shuttle Bus.
2. The rails are privately owned and operated
3. The curves and grades are unsuitable for the SWC
4. Traffic from Lamy to Santa Fe is minimal
5. Chances for creating new traffic seem slim

That is not to say there is zero demand for such a service but spending big money for a twice-a-day detour is not the way I would go about it.


We're talking about a proposed feasibility study rather than spearheading a grassroots movement.

But we already know that HSR is not viable in New Mexico. Wasting time and money to study something that we already have an answer for is not a good use of time or money.

 

[user 1215]

All this has been discussed for decades in various formats from Railrunner discussion to rerouting the SWC to BNSF/NM ownership of the line between ABQ and Trinidad... Millions spent on studies and recommendations, and all that's shown for it is an underutilized NM Railrunner and no change (except having no freight competition) to Amtrak's SWC.

I-25 is a very sufficient transportation corridor for the majority of people, freight and commerce between El Paso and Denver. It's rarely overly congested due to traffic unless there is an accident.

 

[dwebarts]

Routes other than the one the Railrunner uses could run into some historical preservation issues in addition to any geographical ones.

Extending the Railrunner south of Belen down to Las Cruces and even El Paso would make some sense. Both Las Cruces and Socorro are college towns and Las Cruces is home to many retirees that would love to have an alternative to driving.