High-speed trains already compete with planes in many parts of the world. They also have far lower carbon emissions.
Ever since the midterm elections, there’s been quite a bit of buzz about the possibility of a Green New Deal, a comprehensive national plan to tackle climate change and inequality all in one. On February 7, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) finally unveiled a resolution on Capitol Hill. Rather than a set of distinct policies, it’s more of a set of goalposts with ambitions for fighting climate change and transitioning the economy in a just way.
Because it’s so vague in its particulars, the resolution has become something of a Rorschach test as observers try to figure out how a Green New Deal would materialize in the real world. Some clues emerged in what looked like a hastily assembled FAQ on Ocasio-Cortez’s website that’s since been taken down.
Specifically, the section of the FAQ on transportation calls to “build out high-speed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary.” The resolution itself doesn’t mention air travel at all but does call for the goal of “investing in… clean, affordable, and accessible transportation; and high-speed rail” as part of a 10-year national mobilization.
Still, the air travel line drew some attention, particularly among conservatives:
For a big, ambitious plan to fight climate change, it would make perfect sense to target transit in general and air travel in particular. Transportation — planes, cars, shipping — is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Surging air travel demand helped fuel the rise in US emissions after years of decline. And aircraft are extremely difficult to decarbonize. While electrification is coming for cars, trucks, and buses, no battery or fuel cell is going to fly anyone across the Pacific anytime soon.
So alternatives to flying tend stand to be better for the environment. The International Energy Association noted this month in its Future of Rail report that trains carry 8 percent of the world’s motorized passengers and 7 percent of freight, yet use just 2 percent of the energy consumed in the transportation sector. That means trains are a very energy-efficient way to get around.
But could high-speed rail really replace a significant amount of air travel? Actually, yes, depending on the distance.
Certainly, no one is going to lay rail across the ocean, but in many countries, we’re already seeing high-speed trains go toe to toe with planes between major cities. The United States does have a what can technically be called a high-speed train, Amtrak’s Acela Express.
