In the last post I suggested that the U.S. learn from Europe in the use of high speed trains as a core component of a national transportation system.  Trains are more energy efficient than cars, give off far less greenhouse emissions than airplanes, rarely get cancelled or delayed due to ‘weather’ or ‘flow control’ and depart and arrive near the central city.  Given that America is much larger than any country currently utilizing high speed trains, it can only be a part of the transportation mix.  What might the composite national transportation profile look like in 2015?

High speed trains could operate in the highly populated corridors mentioned in the last post.  These are mostly on a north-south axis.  Utilization of these trains would alleviate congestion in the air and at airports.  Airlines, using ever more fuel efficient planes, could be the primary transcontinental and east-west transport.  Airports in cities served by high speed trains could have direct local trains connect to the central train station.

By 2015 a significant percentage of cars on the road can be plug-in hybrids or pure plug-in vehicles.  Both GM, with their Chevrolet Volt, and now Toyota have promised mass production of plug-ins by 2010-2011.  Currently Americans keep their cars for an average of 8 years.  Hybrids are already being sold.  This means that by 2015 50% or more of the cars on the road in the country can be either pure electric or hybrids.  The benefits of this are obvious:  much lower consumption …

High speed trains must, and will become an essential component of the U.S. transportation system during the next 20 years. This seems to be obvious, but is something that the (lack of) leadership in Washington D.C. has yet to seriously consider. A combination of lack of vision, deeply entrenched vested interests, a troubled Amtrak system and a ‘not invented here’ mindset has combined to allow the U.S. to be woefully behind the curve when it comes to both rail transport and an intelligent, integrated national transportation system.

Flying has become an extremely unpleasant and unreliable travel experience. In addition it is a large contributor to greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere. Predicated on cheap oil, high prices and customer service, the airline business must now operate in an environment of expensive oil, low prices and a general lack of quality customer service not to mention cancellations and poor on-time performance. At the other end of the transportation spectrum, automobile travel is undergoing change due to increasing price of gasoline. Gasoline prices consistently over $3 means that in addition to looking for a high MPG when buying a new car, people will think twice before making a long road trip and will increasingly find that commuting by car is adversely affecting the household budget.

In Europe and Japan, high speed trains have been a way of life for decades. Comfortable, fast, environmentally sound and connecting the central city centers, high speed trains have become the backbone of convenient transportation. …

There were three reported news stories last week that taken together point to clear trend lines.  In a court ruling, the state of Vermont won the right to set auto emissions and MPG standards that are stricter than those of the Federal government.  The dollar reached an all time low against the Euro and oil crossed over the $80 a barrel price barrier.  

Vermont is one of twelve states where the state government is going to court to gain the right to institute lower emission standards.  Most of these initiatives are patterned after a policy already signed in California. This points to the continued lack of any leadership whatsoever regarding energy in Washington D.C.  The states are where the leadership is to do what is necessary regarding energy.  Neither the Federal government nor the auto makers are leading the way toward lower emissions in any meaningful way.  This case precedent will most likely affect the court battles in the other states.  [Note: since the Vermont decision, there was a court decision in California where a suit blaming automakers over emissions and requesting damages was thrown out.  In that case, the judge ruled that it was not a proper task for the courts to rule in this area, therefore sending it back to the other two branches of state government to institute laws regarding damages due to greenhouse gas emissions].

The long term trend in oil prices is up.  In early 2006 and again at the beginning of 2007 I predicted that …

It is important to realize that the way we power our vehicles today is based on the legacy of energy discoveries of the 1800s.  Oil was first taken out of the ground in Pennsylvania in the 1860s.  When the automobile industry came into being some four decades later, petroleum was the first candidate for the energy source.  Even though the quintessential American inventor Thomas Edison did build an electric car, electricity was not as wide spread as it soon would be, so the power of the Rockefeller oil cartel won the day.

Today we are using the energy source discovered 150 years ago to get us to work and to the grocery store.  Do we use candles to light our homes?  Do we use tubes to power our radios and TVs?  Do we cool our houses with blocks of ice?  No, no and no!  So why do we continue to blindly define transportation energy on an 150 year old discovery that we know is causing climate change, funding terrorism and is in finite supply?

In the last few decades, Western Science has, as it has penetrated ever smaller particles, come to the conclusion that everything is energy.  Taking a look at energy from this point of view it strikes me as incredibly narrow to think of fuel, or energy as fossil fuel. That is just a small slice of what is available. If everything is energy then let’s look elsewhere, everywhere.

There are people around the world who are doing just that.  A …