<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><channel><title>thsrtc</title><description>thsrtc</description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/news</link><item><title>July 2019 North American Transborder Freight Numbers</title><description><![CDATA[Transborder freight between the U.S. and other North American countries (Canada and Mexico) in July 2019: Total Transborder Freight: $102.4 billion of transborder freight moved by all modes of transportation, up 1.2% compared to July 2018 Most-used mode: Trucks moved $63.8 billion of freight, up 1.8% compared to July 2018 Second mode: Railways moved $14.8 billion of freight, up 3.0% compared to July 2018 Truck Freight: $63.8 billion (62.3% of all transborder freight) By border: U.S.-Canada:<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_986ec4f670eb4c009528c669d3974c1f%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_180/4cd688_986ec4f670eb4c009528c669d3974c1f%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Dave Smallen</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/24/July-2019-North-American-Transborder-Freight-Numbers</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/24/July-2019-North-American-Transborder-Freight-Numbers</guid><pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2019 20:15:50 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_986ec4f670eb4c009528c669d3974c1f~mv2.jpg"/><div>Transborder freight between the U.S. and other North American countries (Canada and Mexico) in July 2019:</div><div>Total Transborder Freight: $102.4 billion of transborder freight moved by all modes of transportation, up 1.2% compared to July 2018Most-used mode: Trucks moved $63.8 billion of freight, up 1.8% compared to July 2018Second mode: Railways moved $14.8 billion of freight, up 3.0% compared to July 2018 </div><div>Truck Freight: $63.8 billion (62.3% of all transborder freight)</div><div>By border:</div><div>U.S.-Canada: $27.5 billion (54.7% of all northern border freight)</div><div>U.S.-Mexico: $36.4 billion (69.6% of all southern border freight)</div><div>Compared to July 2018:</div><div>U.S.-Canada down 1.2%</div><div>U.S.-Mexico up 4.2%</div><div>Three busiest truck border ports (45.8% of total transborder truck freight)<div>Laredo, TX $15.8 billionDetroit, MI $7.9 billionEl Paso, TX $5.5 billion</div></div><div>Top three truck commodities (50.9% of total transborder truck freight)<div>Computers and parts $13.1 billionElectrical machinery $10.0 billionMotor vehicles and parts $9.4 billion</div></div><div>Rail Freight: $14.8 billion (14.5% of all transborder freight)</div><div>By border:</div><div>U.S.-Canada: $7.7 billion (15.4% of all northern border freight)</div><div>U.S.-Mexico: $7.1 billion (13.6 % of all southern border freight)</div><div>Compared to July 2018:</div><div>U.S.-Canada down 0.3%</div><div>U.S.-Mexico up 6.9%</div><div>Three busiest rail border ports (53.1% of total transborder rail freight)<div>Laredo, TX $3.8 billionDetroit, MI $2.1 billionEagle Pass, TX $2.0 billion</div></div><div>Top three rail commodities (60.9% of total transborder rail freight)<div>Motor vehicles and parts $6.9 billionMineral fuels $1.3 billionPlastics $0.8 billion</div></div><div>Total Transborder Freight by Mode: </div><div>U.S.-Canada (both directions)</div><div>(Dollars in Billions)</div><div>Truck: $27.5</div><div>Rail: $7.7</div><div>Pipeline: $6.5 </div><div>Air: $2.7</div><div>Vessel: $2.5 </div><div>U.S.-Mexico (both directions)</div><div>(Dollars in Billions)</div><div>Truck: $36.4</div><div>Rail: $7.1</div><div>Vessel: $5.5 </div><div>Air: $1.5</div><div>Pipeline: $0.5</div><div>https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOT/bulletins/2617f08</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>State DOTs Gearing Up For Annual Rail Safety Week Campaign</title><description><![CDATA[National rail safety education nonprofit Operation Lifesaver, Inc. and Operation Lifesaver Canada are holding the annual Rail Safety Week public outreach event September 22-28 this year with the support of the U.S. Department of Transportation, state departments of transportation, and other organizations.[Above photo by the National Transportation Safety Board.]The organization noted in a statement that the goal of Rail Safety Week is to raise awareness about the importance of rail safety and<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_f864d1fbdb7b41b2bc21f349b52a3413%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_500%2Ch_333/4cd688_f864d1fbdb7b41b2bc21f349b52a3413%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/23/State-DOTs-Gearing-Up-For-Annual-Rail-Safety-Week-Campaign</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/23/State-DOTs-Gearing-Up-For-Annual-Rail-Safety-Week-Campaign</guid><pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2019 19:43:10 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_f864d1fbdb7b41b2bc21f349b52a3413~mv2.jpg"/><div>National rail safety education nonprofit Operation Lifesaver, Inc. and Operation Lifesaver Canada are holding the annual Rail Safety Week public outreach event September 22-28 this year with the support of the U.S. Department of Transportation, state departments of transportation, and other organizations.</div><div>[Above photo by the National Transportation Safety Board.]</div><div>The organization noted in a statement that the goal of Rail Safety Week is to raise awareness about the importance of rail safety and empower the general public to keep themselves safe near railroad crossings and along railroad rights-of-way. And state DOTs plan to deploy a number of initiatives next week in support of that effort.</div><div>[Here’s an example from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, crafted for the 2017 Rail Safety Week campaign.]</div><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sM-ChKT6Ubo"/><div>For example, the Georgia Department of Transportation plans to help host a one-day event on September 24 called “Operation Clear Track” to raise awareness with the general public regarding pedestrian rail safety and rail trespassing laws.</div><div>During that event, Georgia law enforcement personnel will be stationed at targeted railroad grade crossing incident locations to hand out railroad safety cards to motorists and pedestrians, while issuing warnings and citations to violators.</div><div>https://aashtojournal.org/2019/09/20/state-dots-gearing-up-for-annual-rail-safety-week-campaign/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>High Speed Rail Continues its Slow Speed Move Toward Construction</title><description><![CDATA[HOUSTON/DALLAS (Covering Katy News) - Developers of a proposed high speed train from Houston to Dallas are reporting two recent accomplishments that they believe puts them on a path to beginning construction as early as next year. The project has been in the planning stages for years and if constructed will zip passengers from the two major cities in 90 minutes at speeds of up to 240 miles-per-hour. "On the heels of the recent regulatory announcement on the RPA, we’re excited to announce another<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_79db9a9f7da44b7e9fb726dc597310f0%7Emv2.png/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_366/4cd688_79db9a9f7da44b7e9fb726dc597310f0%7Emv2.png"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Dennis Spellman</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/16/High-Speed-Rail-Continues-its-Slow-Speed-Move-Toward-Construction</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/16/High-Speed-Rail-Continues-its-Slow-Speed-Move-Toward-Construction</guid><pubDate>Mon, 16 Sep 2019 15:07:10 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_79db9a9f7da44b7e9fb726dc597310f0~mv2.png"/><div>HOUSTON/DALLAS (Covering Katy News) - Developers of a proposed high speed train from Houston to Dallas are reporting two recent accomplishments that they believe puts them on a path to beginning construction as early as next year. The project has been in the planning stages for years and if constructed will zip passengers from the two major cities in 90 minutes at speeds of up to 240 miles-per-hour. </div><div>&quot;On the heels of the recent regulatory announcement on the RPA, we’re excited to announce another major accomplishment,&quot; said a press release from Texas Central Railway. &quot;We’re pleased to share that we have signed a design-build contract with the joint venture of Salini Impregilo, one of the largest civil engineering contractors in the world, and its U.S. subsidiary Lane Construction Company. Salini Impregilo is active in more than 50 countries on five continents, with experience building more than 4,000 miles of railway infrastructure around the world – in Australia, Europe, Asia and the Americas,&quot; the press release said.</div><div>&quot;This agreement brings us one step closer to beginning construction of the civil infrastructure segments of the project,&quot; said Carlos F. Aguilar, CEO, Texas Central. Salini-Lane’s unmatched track record with rail infrastructure, and very specifically its world class high-speed rail expertise across the globe, will be central to the completion of America’s first end to end high-speed rail system.”</div><div>Salini Impregilo has built many high-speed train projects in Europe and iconic, complex projects around the world within the wider transportation sector, including the expansion of the Panama Canal.</div><div>“We are thrilled and honored to bring our large-scale railway expertise to this unique opportunity, said Pietro Salini, CEO Salini Impregilo Group. This inclusion in bringing high-speed train service to Texas and America, through leading the project’s design and construction, is an invaluable experience.”</div><div>Texas Central hoped to break ground in 2017 and then again in 2018. Now they believe construction will start in 2020. Opponents of the project say this most recent announcement is more of the same and means nothing.</div><div>“I don’t see it being anything new; it is the same thing they announced last year,” Kyle Workman, president of Texans Against High-Speed Rail told the Houston Chronicle.</div><div>Texas Central says the project will create an estimated $36 billion in economic benefits statewide over the next 25 years, including the creation of 10,000 jobs per year during construction and 1,500 permanent jobs when fully operational. </div><div>If construction starts next year, the project is still years away from carrying passengers. The earliest that trains would begin zipping between Houston and Dallas would be 2026. Tickets will be comparable to airline prices for a ride between the two Texas cities.</div><div>https://www.coveringkaty.com/fort_bend/mobility/high-speed-rail-continues-its-slow-speed-move-toward-construction/article_43869152-d6db-11e9-9db7-07517625dd23.html</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Federal action pushes Texas bullet train project toward fruition</title><description><![CDATA[A proposed high-speed railway would transport passengers from Northwest Houston to downtown Dallas in about 90 minutes.Taking the United States’ first bullet train from the idea phase to actuality is proving to be a slow, drawn-out process.But the groundbreaking project continues to progress and passed a significant marker last week when Texas Central, the Dallas-based company developing the high-speed train, announced that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) had granted its petition to<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_e96e01dbffd0479285a4e4751c6c2014%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_308/4cd688_e96e01dbffd0479285a4e4751c6c2014%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Adam Zuvanich</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/12/Federal-action-pushes-Texas-bullet-train-project-toward-fruition</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/12/Federal-action-pushes-Texas-bullet-train-project-toward-fruition</guid><pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:01:49 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_e96e01dbffd0479285a4e4751c6c2014~mv2.jpg"/><div>A proposed high-speed railway would transport passengers from Northwest Houston to downtown Dallas in about 90 minutes.</div><div>Taking the United States’ first bullet train from the idea phase to actuality is proving to be a slow, drawn-out process.</div><div>But the groundbreaking project continues to progress and passed a significant marker last week when Texas Central, the Dallas-based company developing the high-speed train, announced that the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) had granted its petition to have a custom set of rules created for the railway that would be used to ensure its safety and govern its system and operations. Texas Central filed the petition for the Rule of Particular Applicability in April 2016.</div><div>“This is a huge milestone in the history of the high-speed train,” said Holly Reed, Texas Central’s managing director of external affairs. “There’s still a lot of work to do.”</div><div>Reed said the company hopes the federal rules are in place during the first half of next year.</div><div>The FRA, which is an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation, released a Draft Environmental Impact Statement in December 2017 that outlined environmental concerns and a preferred route for Texas Central’s 240-mile track. Reed said Texas Central is in the process of tailoring its project to those specifications and hopes to have a Final Environmental Impact Statement from the FRA during the first half of next year as well.</div><div>If and when both federal hurdles are cleared, Reed said construction of the railway and its three stations – one of which is slated for the former Northwest Mall site at the intersection of U.S. 290 and Loop 610 – would begin.</div><div>“With the movement of both federal actions underway, if those come out early to mid-next year, we’ll start constructing next year, which means you would be riding the train in 2026,” Reed said.</div><div>There are other potential hurdles to what Reed called a “mega-project” that is being privately funded and is expected to cost in excess of $15 billion. She said Texas Central has secured about 30 percent of the land it would need to build an elevated railway between Houston and Dallas, with one stop in the Brazos Valley between College Station and Huntsville.</div><div>There have been legal questions about Texas Central’s authority to use eminent domain, an option afforded to private entities such as railroads as well as telecommunications and utility companies, in the event landowners along the proposed route are unwilling to sell.</div><div>A state district court judge in rural Leon County ruled in February that Texas Central is not a railroad because it has yet to lay any track or run any trains. A Harris County judge previously ruled that Texas Central is a railroad and could utilize eminent domain.</div><div>Reed said the company hopes to reach agreements with every landowner along its proposed route and sidestep the issue of eminent domain.</div><div>“But ultimately, if that is necessary and we’re forced to do that, will have to go down that path,” Reed said.</div><div>Texas Central’s ultimate objective is to revolutionize intrastate travel with a mode of transportation it claims is safe, economical and friendly to the environment. Reed said the company is purchasing high-speed technology from Central Japan Railway, which Texas Central said has transported more than 10 billion passengers since 1964 without an accident or an operational passenger fatality.</div><div>Reed said Texas’ bullet train, which aims to compete with automobile and air travel, would be powered solely by electricity, carry about 400 passengers, top 200 mph in speed and cost less than $100 to ride during non-peak times. She also said it would create jobs for Texans and boost commerce in both of the state’s largest cities.</div><div>The FRA’s action regarding the Rule of Particular Applicability took that plan a little closer to its final destination, which drew praise from Fort Worth-area congresswoman Kay Granger as well as Drayton McLane, Jr., the former Houston Astros owner who is Texas Central’s chairman of the board.</div><div>“It marks a major achievement to make this project a reality for all Texans,” McLane said in a statement posted on Granger’s website. “This is a bold move … to ensure we implement the safest passenger rail system in the world.”</div><div>https://theleadernews.com/federal-action-pushes-texas-bullet-train-project-toward-fruition/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Is Intermodal Rail Stalling?</title><description><![CDATA[Intermodal rail—a transportation mode choice that was to take trucks off the road—is slowing down. Where is it heading? Over several decades, the premise was that railroad intermodal trailer on flat cars (TOFC) and containers mostly on double-stacked well cars (COFC) would grow in volume and therefore reduce highway truck congestion.This is not a financial analysis to help determine whether to buy or sell railroad stock. This is about the evolving role of rail intermodal service in a market that]]></description><dc:creator>Jim Blaze</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/12/Is-Intermodal-Rail-Stalling</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/12/Is-Intermodal-Rail-Stalling</guid><pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2019 20:46:41 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>Intermodal rail—a transportation mode choice that was to take trucks off the road—is slowing down. Where is it heading? Over several decades, the premise was that railroad intermodal trailer on flat cars (TOFC) and containers mostly on double-stacked well cars (COFC) would grow in volume and therefore reduce highway truck congestion.</div><div>This is not a financial analysis to help determine whether to buy or sell railroad stock. This is about the evolving role of rail intermodal service in a market that is dominated by trucks, whose share of volume dwarfs rail.</div><div>Data courtesy of IANA and TTX, from materials presented in August 2019.</div><div>Yes, rail intermodal has grown, and at a pace mostly above the growth rate of the nation’s gross domestic product. But the commercial message sent by the railroads has largely focused upon the financial earnings and the success of railroad company yield management using their so-called Precision Scheduled Railroading (PSR) business model.</div><div>As one example, CSX proudly states that “CSX has more pricing power [now] … particularly in intermodal truck-rail business …” according to Wall Street Journal business editor Paul Page (October 2018). However, on a volume and market share basis, changes in CSX’s origin-destination intermodal services have resulted in weakness in CSX’s second-quarter intermodal volume. The company reported a 10% drop year-over-year in intermodal volume. CSX also reported an 11% drop in intermodal revenue for the quarter.</div><div>Beyond this one eastern railroad, mid-August 2019 U.S. rail total carload and intermodal volumes were down 3.5% year-to-date to 16.6 million units. Of that, U.S. carloads fell 3.2% to 8.1 million, while U.S. intermodal units dropped 3.7% to 8.5 million.</div><div>Not everyone is negative about rail intermodal. In the eastern states, Norfolk Southern executives remain optimistic. They stated in mid-July that Norfolk Southern’s rail intermodal could see demand grow in certain service lanes during the second half of this year. “We’ve got the most powerful intermodal franchise in the East, which is married to the consumption part of the U.S. economy, and the economy continues to move in the direction of the consumer. The consumer-related economic indicators are still relatively strong. We’ve got a diverse merchandise franchise, which offers many opportunities for growth in the second half of the year,” NS Chief Marketing Officer Alan Shaw said during his company’s second quarter earnings call on July 24.</div><div>The NS logic is that some of the railroad’s intermodal customers (channel partners) support that second-half intermodal market outlook.</div><div>Financially, as Wall Street Journal reporter Lauren Silva Laughlin wrote on August 23, PSR execution so far has been good for shareholders of North America’s freight railroads, including CN, Canadian Pacific, CSX, Kansas City Southern, NS and Union Pacific.</div><div>Yet, here is the market share and growth “rub”: Financials aside, unit volume is not growing at the rate once expected in intermodal trailers/containers. The U.S. rail freight sector remains at about 10% or less of total surface freight by mode by shipper payments billed vs. trucking and other freight modes.</div><div>Data courtesy of IANA and TTX, from materials presented in August 2019.</div><div>The rail industry position is that rail pricing and rail freight dependability have improved greatly since the passage of the 1980 Staggers Act (which partially deregulated the U.S. railroad industry). There is no question of that improvement based upon the statistical evidence. But as the old saying goes, “What have you done lately?”</div><div>The Association of American Railroads is correct that “intermodal rail has benefited rail customers with competitive rates and unmatched efficiency of scale.” True, average rail rates have fallen 46% since 1981, allowing most rail shippers to move nearly twice as much freight for the same price paid more than 30 years ago. However, recently, railroad rates have been increasing. Some rates are increasing much faster than nominal inflation.</div><div>Meanwhile, the hope of diverting millions of trucks annually from the congested eastern interstates and primary U.S. highways isn’t quite playing out as once expected. Why? In large part because the average distance that most of the trucks moving between markets in the eastern states are in the 250- to 500-mile range—and are not ripe for rail conversion.</div><div>No American railroad has achieved a sustainable high-margin profit intermodal service over such short distances. Moreover, the PSR model with its long trains doesn’t match that geographic opportunity. Further, the railroads still lack a rapid load-on/load-off railcar platform to capture the dominant roadway traffic we call semi-trailers. Flats, tankers and similar big rig semis just don’t fit onto the very-low-cost-per-operated-mile double-stacked well railcars.</div><div>Statistically, the movement of trailers on rail flat cars is a disappearing market segment. A recent conference sponsored by the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA) and TTX Company gave the industry an interesting profile of where intermodal is this year. The patterns they revealed were these:</div><div>Trailer on Flat Car Continues to Decline as a Rail Intermodal Service:</div><div>Four of the past 11 years back to 2009 saw declines in TOFC volume.Two of those years saw volume drops of more than 20%.Only two years provided a relatively high 10% to 11% increase in year-over-year growth.The period 2011 to 2015 witnessed a low 1.6% to 2.9% increase, spaced between 5.3%t and 9.7% declines.What used to be ~3 million TOFC units more than a decade ago is now trending to ~ 1.2 million annually.</div><div>No one disputes this trailer pattern. Yet most of the traffic units out on the highways remain the semis. Rail management doesn’t have a mechanical engineering solution to grab this market. Does anyone dispute this? In contrast, stackable containers are the dominant domestic intermodal service.</div><div>The cost per mile to move a 53-footer on a stack container car is about 40% to just 60% per mile moved of a similar trailer or container chassis moved on the road. That’s the internal railroading business cost—not the price charged.</div><div>The railroads have been clearly documenting in their periodic investor reports that they are using pricing leverage to increase their intermodal margin. They are getting greater earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) by not growing volume under the PSR model. Instead, they are increasing their prices against trucking prices in strategic lanes.</div><div>What Happened to the Railroads’ Plan to Grow by Taking Domestic Share? </div><div>Domestic rail container units used to grow at a respectable 9.6% to as much as 14.7% year-over-year pace between 2009 and 2013.After 2013, this growth rate dropped to about a 4.5% average.2017 was up by only 2.7% over 2016.So far in 2019, the rate is down about 6%.</div><div>Because of the huge trucking base share, rail intermodal must gain at a near-double-digit pace to take highway share.</div><div>International Intermodal Container Movement Patterns Are a Bit Different:</div><div>International intermodal units have been growing year-over-year at a more stable range of about 4.5% to nearly 7% year-over-year until the trade dispute started. Now it’s dropped to a mere 1.4% pace to-date in 2019.</div><div>The future is at best unclear. This railroader’s interpretation is that, based upon the current evidence, far less intermodal highway to railway shifting will occur than was formerly expected unless something in the railroad intermodal business model changes. Or truck capacity drops.</div><div>Driver shortages for trucking will likely continue. This will include shortages of drivers in the short-haul lanes and the drayage markets. Railroads don’t have a solution to combat either the short-haul or the drayage shortages.</div><div>The following are credited with interesting facts and observations. However, they might disagree with some of my data interpretation:</div><div>Melissa Peralta, Senior Economist, TTX Company.Peter Wolf and John Woodcock as recent IANA speakers.<div>Technical observations shared by experts like Larry Gross and FTR’s Eric Starks.https://www.railwayage.com/intermodal/is-intermodal-rail-stalling/?utm_source=&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=6085</div></div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>U.S. Cities Play Catch-Up on High-Speed Rail</title><description><![CDATA[“THIS IS THE reinvention of train travel in America,” Patrick Goddard, a dapper Irishman and the president of Virgin Trains USA, declared in late June. The path to reinvention traveled through a nondescript platform outside Orlando International Airport, where Goddard and area luminaries had gathered for the groundbreaking of the company’s new Orlando-to-Miami route. It was made possible by 67 wealthy investors, who had collectively financed the project with $1.75 billion in private bonds.“We<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_3c837c7cae65432190990caf4cb0c7be%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_3c837c7cae65432190990caf4cb0c7be%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Trevor Bach</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/12/US-Cities-Play-Catch-Up-on-High-Speed-Rail</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/12/US-Cities-Play-Catch-Up-on-High-Speed-Rail</guid><pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2019 15:02:52 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_3c837c7cae65432190990caf4cb0c7be~mv2.jpg"/><div>“THIS IS THE reinvention of train travel in America,” Patrick Goddard, a dapper Irishman and the president of Virgin Trains USA, declared in late June. The path to reinvention traveled through a nondescript platform outside Orlando International Airport, where Goddard and area luminaries had gathered for the groundbreaking of the company’s new Orlando-to-Miami route. It was made possible by 67 wealthy investors, who had collectively financed the project with $1.75 billion in private bonds.</div><div>“We decided, ‘Everyone in America uses cars because the rail network is run by the government – and they have nothing like what we have in Europe,’” Virgin founder and British magnate Richard Branson told the Miami Herald in April.</div><div>For decades, countries such as China, Spain and Turkey have connected distant cities with rail links of 200 mph or faster while American infrastructure has languished. The country’s only moderately high-speed train, Amtrak’s Acela Express, which spans from Boston to Washington, briefly reaches a top speed of 150 mph. But now that several new private sector efforts are underway, will American cities finally catch up?</div><div>In 1964, the world’s first high-speed train network, known as yume no chotokkyu – the “super express of dreams” – cut travel time between Tokyo and Osaka by more than half and established Japan, still reeling from World War II, as a global technology leader. Since then some two dozen countries have added their own high-speed routes, including Russia and Uzbekistan. Their impact on whole regions is often dramatic: Destination cities become accessible even for day trips, while secondary cities are pulled into the cultural and commercial orbit of major centers.</div><div>“Europe really has been transformed by the implementation of these new high-speed rail lines,” says Deike Peters, an assistant professor of environmental planning at California’s Soka University. New or upgraded stations, if planned well, can jump-start an “urban renaissance effect,” she says.</div><div>A century before Japanese riders ever saw a bullet train, it was the U.S. that led the world in railroad infrastructure. In the 1860s, the completion of the Transcontinental Railroad facilitated the growth of California and the West. A few decades later, a locomotive in New York became the first train in the world to surpass 100 miles per hour; at its peak, in 1916, the country’s network extended more than 250,000 route-miles.</div><div>But while other nations continued investing in train travel, including in multibillion-dollar high-speed projects, American passenger rail atrophied. The fall was dictated both by the rise of the interstate system and the free market: While tracks and other infrastructure are typically nationalized elsewhere, American railroads – unlike American freeways or American airports – are privately owned. (The passenger service Amtrak, which began in 1971, is government owned.) The short-term accountability to shareholders, says Rick Harnish, executive director of the Midwest High Speed Rail Association, has often precluded American rail companies from making transformative long-term investments.</div><div>“As a country,” says Harnish, “we’ve been letting that network decline now for over a century.”</div><div>In 2009, as part of the broad stimulus package, President Barack Obama allotted $8 billion toward a new national high-speed rail network; the administration pledged $53 billion more in state grants two years later. Fierce Republican opposition – ostensibly because of fiscal responsibility concerns – killed several initiatives on arrival, including projects in Florida, Wisconsin and Ohio.</div><div>“We’re talking about nothing short of transforming transportation much the same way the interstate highway system did under President Eisenhower,” an exasperated then-Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood wrote in 2010. “Can you imagine if Ohio or Wisconsin or any other state had said, ‘No thanks – we don’t think that highway thing is going anywhere?’”</div><div>Federal funding ultimately was granted to California and to Illinois, where crews in 2010 began work on a decades-planned upgrade between Chicago and St. Louis. The proposal called for an increase from a current maximum speed of 79 mph to 110 mph. In 2013, the state also studied a possible 220 mph link from O’Hare airport to St. Louis and Indianapolis, a speed that would reduce the more than five-hour trips to about two. In December, after years of construction and complications implementing a new safety technology, Illinois officials projected the majority of the Chicago-St. Louis line would reach 90 mph by the end of this year, and declined to give a timetable for 110 mph.</div><div>“It’s got brand-new signals, all the track is just in beautiful shape … all the stations are either brand-new or almost-new rehab, and we got new locomotives that are running and new coach cars that are on the way, so it’s been a fantastic investment,” says Harnish. But the project was originally promoted as high-speed rail, he notes, “and having that not happen makes it very difficult to talk about the huge advances.”</div><div>The California project has fared far worse. In February, incoming Gov. Gavin Newsom admitted the state’s highly ambitious, $100 billion Los Angeles-San Francisco bullet train network remained a pipe dream: After countless delays, cost increases, and municipal battles, only a small amount of track has been built, in the state’s Central Valley, and the project’s future remains uncertain.</div><div>“It is a catastrophe,” says Jim Patterson, a Republican state assemblyman and prominent project critic. “This is a multibillion-dollar collapse.”</div><div>But private sector projects are advancing. In the densely populated Northeast Corridor a company called Northeast Maglev is in the early stages of a project that could eventually connect Washington and New York City in one hour. Virgin’s Orlando-to-Miami network, which will top out at 125 mph, is projected to start running in 2022. The company’s 70 mph Miami-to-West Palm Beach trains began operating early last year. Branson has said he’s “100% confident” the high-speed route will soon extend to Tampa; the company is also seeking funding for a high-speed line between Las Vegas and greater Los Angeles.</div><div>In Texas – a state with large and growing cities spread over vast distances – a company called Texas Central, backed by Citigroup and Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, is promising to accept no taxpayer subsidies and has competed with SNCF, France’s state-owned railway company, to open the region’s first network.</div><div>SNCF has previously pitched the Federal Railroad Administration on a “T-Bone” route connecting most of the state’s major cities at 125 mph; Texas Central, using Japanese Shinkansen trains and partnering with the Spanish operator Renfe, is developing a new high speed-only line between Houston and Dallas. Its Texas Bullet Train would run at an initial 186 mph, connecting two of the country’s largest metro regions in under 90 minutes.</div><div>The Texas Bullet Train – which has pulled ahead of the SNCF project – has faced a swell of opposition: Earlier this year, Republican lawmakers proposed 11 separate opposition bills, since failed, that sought to kill the network over concerns about property rights. But most Texans do want better mass transit: A majority of respondents in one 2011 University of Texas survey said they’d even commit tax dollars toward new intercity passenger rail.</div><div>The Texas Central project, says Peter LeCody, president of the nonprofit Texas Rail Advocates, represents the state’s best chance for high-speed rail. And after a favorable Department of Transportation ruling last week, the company could begin construction as soon as next year.</div><div>Passengers, adds LeCody, don’t care how the operation is funded. “We just want to get the doggone thing going.”</div><div>https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/articles/2019-09-10/us-cities-play-catch-up-on-high-speed-rail</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Maglev Technology: The Force Is (Very) Strong With This One</title><description><![CDATA[Maglevs: How Do They Work?As noted by Railway Technology, maglev got its start in the 1940s with British electrical engineer Eric Laithwaite — sometimes called the “father of maglev” — who envisioned mechanically simple trains operating with no rail contact, high efficiency and very low noise.The first patent for a maglev train was issued in the 1960s to James Powell and Gordon Danby. According to Energy.gov, the basic concept is simple: Magnets on the bottom of train cars interact with magnetic]]></description><dc:creator>DOUG BONDERUD</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Maglev-Technology-The-Force-Is-Very-Strong-With-This-One</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Maglev-Technology-The-Force-Is-Very-Strong-With-This-One</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 19:30:10 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>Maglevs: How Do They Work?</div><div>As noted by Railway Technology, maglev got its start in the 1940s with British electrical engineer Eric Laithwaite — sometimes called the “father of maglev” — who envisioned mechanically simple trains operating with no rail contact, high efficiency and very low noise.</div><div>The first patent for a maglev train was issued in the 1960s to James Powell and Gordon Danby. According to Energy.gov, the basic concept is simple: Magnets on the bottom of train cars interact with magnetic “guideways” on the track to both keep the train car stable and propel it forward.</div><div>In practice, things are more complicated: Superconducting magnets cooled to -450 degrees Fahrenheit are required to generate powerful magnetic fields. The magnets push off “like” poles to levitate the train five inches off the track and also keep it stable horizontally, while AC-powered magnetic loops set in the walls of the track use both opposite and like poles to push and pull the train forward.</div><div>When stopped, the trains rest on rubber wheels and must reach speeds of 93 miles per hour before the magnetic force is strong enough to produce lift. At top speed, maglev trains can reach 375 miles per hour.</div><div>An Attractive Option</div><div>Maglev technology offers a number of benefits over traditional steel-track trains, including:</div><div>Improved Speed:In Japan, the Linimo commmuter line runs at 100 km/hr and can accelerate 1.5 times faster than a bullet train. As noted by Japan Rail Pass, a new maglev train being developed for the Chuo Shinkansen line reached the 375 miles per hour mark in 2015 — this 177-mile link between Tokyo and Nagoya is slated to open in 2027 and carry up to 1,000 passengers.Reduced Maintenance: Maglev vehicles touch guideways only briefly and with rubber wheels. No engines are required to drive magnetic trains and the concrete guideways are largely unaffected by weather. The result? Minimal maintenance is required to keep magnetic vehicles up-and-running. While care is required to maintain the superconducting magnets’ liquid helium cooling system and their nitrogen-cooled radiation shields, the lack of physical track contact significantly extends their lifespan.Enhanced Safety: Derailing is virtually impossible since the magnetic “push” generated like poles rapidly increases if trains shift away from guideway centers. Controlling speed is also more precise since no drivers are required — magnetic field intensity directly translates to forward momentum. History bears out this potential: In 60 years of operation, Japan’s maglev service has reported zero fatal accidents.Minimal Noise and Vibration: Without metal-on-metal contact, maglev vehicles are extremely quiet and smooth. There are no screeching breaks, no grinding turns and no unexpected bumps due to strong winds, rainstorms or debris on the tracks.</div><div>Triple Threat</div><div>If maglev technology is so magnificent, why aren’t superconducting high-speed rail lines standard? What keeps magnets from making progress?</div><div>Cost is the biggest challenge: As noted by the Japan Times, the Tokaido Shinkansne Bypass (expected to open in 2047) will cost $83 billion to build. According to the Baltimore Sun, work on a smaller-scale line in the United States is currently under review. While the potential here is a trip from Washington to Baltimore in 15 minutes, just the section that runs through Maryland could cost between $12 and $15 billion — if everything goes according to plan.</div><div>The other problem? As noted by Lawrence Blow, founder of consulting group MaglevTransport and quoted in the Railway Technology piece, “Maglev is a competitor to automobiles, trains and airplanes, as well as buses and metro-systems. It has many natural enemies but no natural friends.” To make a maglev line viable, professor Roger Goodall of Loughborough University says three criteria must be met:</div><div>There must be a large “megacity” at both ends. This ensures enough people ride the line to offset the cost.The distance between these cites must be approximately 500 miles. Any closer and the speed of magnetic trains isn’t necessary. Any farther and air travel becomes preferable.There must be no existing railway line.If a traditional line exists, upgrading and maintaining it is far more cost-effective than building a new maglev system.</div><div>Levitation Innovation</div><div>From bullet trains to supersonic air travel, flying cars and autonomous vehicles, transportation innovation is picking up speed. The result? A renewed interest in maglev technology — and not just for trains.</div><div>As noted by Popular Mechanics, potential maglev options include StarTram, a mountainside space launch system that could allow vehicles to reach 18,000 miles per hour and SkyTran, which posits private pods suspended from an elevated guideway that whisks passengers along (safely) at up to 150 miles per hour. Magnetically-driven wind turbines could reduce friction and allow energy capture from winds of just five feet per second, bringing the price of wind power on par with coal.</div><div>More ambitious ideas include the “Heaven and Earth” concept for floating cities — using massive superconducting magnetic and Earth’s own magnetic field, these supercities would hover in air miles above the ground. Realistic? Probably not. Innovative? Absolutely.</div><div>The Future Is Frictionless</div><div>Maglev technology remains an innovation outlier but as materials improve and costs come down the benefits of speedy, safe and silent transportation may outweigh the natural repulsion of billion-dollar price tags to replace or augment existing rails — and help spur new growth across both vehicular automation and space transportation.</div><div>https://now.northropgrumman.com/maglev-technology-the-force-is-very-strong-with-this-one/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Texas Lawmakers Trying to Resurrect the Push for San Antonio-Austin Passenger Rail</title><description><![CDATA[Some Texas lawmakers are looking to resurrect the decades-old idea of a passenger rail line connecting San Antonio and Austin. In late August, 20 state reps sent a letter to the chairman of the House Transportation Committee requesting a feasibility study ahead of the 2021 legislative session on a rail link between the cities. In the letter, legislators including Reps. Diego Bernal, Ray Lopez and Barbara Gervin-Hawkins pointed to projected population growth in both cities and suggested a rail<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_4cc64de8af4640e191bb2271bf981221%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_4cc64de8af4640e191bb2271bf981221%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Sanford Nowlin</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Texas-Lawmakers-Trying-to-Resurrect-the-Push-for-San-Antonio-Austin-Passenger-Rail</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Texas-Lawmakers-Trying-to-Resurrect-the-Push-for-San-Antonio-Austin-Passenger-Rail</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 19:26:02 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_4cc64de8af4640e191bb2271bf981221~mv2.jpg"/><div>Some Texas lawmakers are looking to resurrect the decades-old idea of a passenger rail line connecting San Antonio and Austin.  In late August, 20 state reps sent a letter to the chairman of the House Transportation Committee requesting a feasibility study ahead of the 2021 legislative session on a rail link between the cities.  In the letter, legislators including Reps. Diego Bernal, Ray Lopez and Barbara Gervin-Hawkins pointed to projected population growth in both cities and suggested a rail might relieve highway congestion. Projections from the Texas Demographic Center show that suburban Williamson, Hays and Comal counties also stand to gain 2 million more residents by 2050.  &quot;As we look toward this future, congestion will only become more severe,&quot; the lawmakers wrote.  The idea of an Austin-San Antonio commuter rail isn't new. Officials in both cities have been floating such proposals for decades.  The last attempt fizzled in 2016 after the Union Pacific withdrew from a rail district seeking to link the two cities. The railroad company worried development of a passenger line would hurt its ability to move freight.  The state reps' renewed interest in SA-Austin rail comes as the Alamo City grapples with remaking its transit options to deal with rapid population growth.  ConnectSA, a committee established by Ron Nirenberg to address growing road congestion, has proposed $2.7 billion in new transportation projects, many hinging on voter approval. Those proposals don't include a light rail, which Alamo City voters have rejected twice since the year 2000. </div><div>https://www.sacurrent.com/the-daily/archives/2019/09/03/texas-lawmakers-trying-to-resurrect-the-push-for-san-antonio-austin-passenger-rail</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Has Amtrak placed itself in jeopardy?</title><description><![CDATA[AMTRAK was set up in 1971 as a quasi-public corporation to save the US inter-city passenger industry from extinction following two decades of accelerating decline. Many of the surviving medium and long-distance passenger services were incorporated into a new national network which largely survives today.From the outset, Amtrak has been a political football at the mercy of battles in Congress over its annual funding budget which has brought it close to the brink on a few occasions. Despite its]]></description><dc:creator>David Briginshaw</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Has-Amtrak-placed-itself-in-jeopardy</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Has-Amtrak-placed-itself-in-jeopardy</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 19:21:10 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>AMTRAK was set up in 1971 as a quasi-public corporation to save the US inter-city passenger industry from extinction following two decades of accelerating decline. Many of the surviving medium and long-distance passenger services were incorporated into a new national network which largely survives today.</div><div>From the outset, Amtrak has been a political football at the mercy of battles in Congress over its annual funding budget which has brought it close to the brink on a few occasions. Despite its roller-coaster hand-to-mouth existence, Amtrak has survived and nearly 50 years later is on course to breakeven next year.</div><div>Amtrak’s survival is due to the strong support it receives from pro-rail Congressmen and women and their voters across the country who benefit from Amtrak services. The fact that Amtrak trains operate in nearly every state of the contiguous United States is vital to its continued existence. Unfortunately, Amtrak’s CEO Mr Richard Anderson does not appear to realise this. He appears determined to eliminate many of the long-distance trains which serve the communities of Amtrak supporters as he believes these trains are too costly to operate.</div><div>Shorter distances</div><div>Anderson’s objective is to develop shorter services linking city pairs at the expense of the long-distance network. His view, rightly, is that the USA is a very different country today compared with the situation in 1971, and that people want fast and frequent trains running relatively short distances.</div><div>While this may be so, the message does not appear to have filtered down from the Amtrak boardroom and is not backed up by Amtrak’s own statistics. In July, the Hoosier State service linking Indianapolis, the university city of Lafayette, and Chicago, which operated on the four days of the week when the long-distance Cardinal train does not run, was axed because neither the state of Indiana nor Amtrak were willing to continue funding it. The 314km route is just the sort of service which Anderson says he wants to develop, and yet it has been allowed to die.</div><div>The fact that Amtrak trains operate in nearly every state of the contiguous United States is vital to its continued existence.</div><div>Clearly Amtrak does not have the funds or the determination to operate a service like the Hoosier State, let alone maintain the Northeast Corridor – Amtrak’s cash cow – in a state of good repair, or fund the replacement of much of its fleet which is now an average of 33 years old, and yet Anderson says he wants to invest billions in developing short-distance inter-city services.</div><div>As four-time Class 1 freight railway CEO Hunter Harrison once said (p24): “Railroads only make money when cars are moving.” This also applies to passenger trains. The longer the trip, the greater the efficiency. Unfortunately for Amtrak, the punctuality of long-distance passenger trains is woeful as they are at the mercy of the increasingly busy freight railways which own most of the tracks over which Amtrak trains run. In theory, the gradual expansion of Precision Scheduled Railroading by the Class 1 freight railways, should be helping to improve passenger train punctuality, although there is little evidence of this so far.</div><div>Nevertheless, long-distance trains are often over subscribed while the load factor on shorter distance trains is a lot lower.</div><div>Cost cutting</div><div>Anderson has been engaged in a cost cutting exercise in his quest to achieve breakeven next year. While laudable, as all businesses should endeavour to minimise their costs, this is sometimes being done at the expense of providing good passenger service, for example by cutting back onboard catering.</div><div>Amtrak would do well to concentrate on improving the quality of its services to maximise the yield per passenger. There are plenty of Americans who would be willing to pay a high price for superior service to travel on one of Amtrak’s services crossing the spectacular Rockies for example. Other initiatives could include adding extra coaches to over-subscribed trains to meet demand and increasing frequency where possible.</div><div>Asset utilisation is often poor. For example, the morning train from Seattle to Vancouver, BC, sits in Vancouver for six hours before heading south again. The same train could be used for three or even four trips per day instead of two without any additional capital cost.</div><div>The development of new services is falling to the private sector rather than Amtrak. Virgin Trains USA is now operating an almost hourly-interval service between Miami, Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach, a frequency almost unknown outside of the Northeast Corridor. The company will extend the service north to Orlando and eventually west to Tampa and has taken over the project to build a high-speed line from Victorville, California, to Las Vegas, Nevada.</div><div>Meanwhile, Texas Central Railway is pushing ahead with its plans to build a high-speed line connecting Houston and Dallas, a corridor which Amtrak withdrew from a few years ago. Indeed, Houston is the fourth biggest US city but is only served by the thrice-weekly New Orleans – Los Angeles Sunset Limited.</div><div>While Amtrak’s ambition to develop inter-city services maybe laudable, it simply does not have access to the sort of funds needed to do so. There is no sign that Congress or president Trump are willing to change the annual funding battle needed simply to keep Amtrak going let alone expand its services. Amtrak must maintain a national network to maintain the political support it needs for its survival.</div><div>https://www.railjournal.com/opinion/has-amtrak-placed-itself-in-jeopardy</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Rail Between San Antonio, Austin Could Be Back on the Table</title><description><![CDATA[A coalition of San Antonio and Austin state representatives has asked the House Transportation Committee chair to study the possibility of passenger rail between the two cities ahead of the 2021 legislative session.Congestion between the two cities will only increase, the legislators wrote, costing drivers time and money. “Improved transportation connectivity is critical for the Austin-San Antonio corridor,” 20 legislators said in an Aug. 16 letter. “We must not only look at how to utilize our<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_32d83d174926455d9bcb6cd122d75a18%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_410/4cd688_32d83d174926455d9bcb6cd122d75a18%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>VALÉRIE EISELER</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Rail-Between-San-Antonio-Austin-Could-Be-Back-on-the-Table</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Rail-Between-San-Antonio-Austin-Could-Be-Back-on-the-Table</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 19:10:24 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_32d83d174926455d9bcb6cd122d75a18~mv2.jpg"/><div>A coalition of San Antonio and Austin state representatives has asked the House Transportation Committee chair to study the possibility of passenger rail between the two cities ahead of the 2021 legislative session.</div><div>Congestion between the two cities will only increase, the legislators wrote, costing drivers time and money. </div><div>“Improved transportation connectivity is critical for the Austin-San Antonio corridor,” 20 legislators said in an Aug. 16 letter. “We must not only look at how to utilize our current assets most effectively, but also find new and creative solutions for this corridor. As members of this region, we believe that it is imperative for the House Transportation Committee to explore new opportunities for our constituents to have frequent, safe, and dependable transportation.”</div><div>Officials from the Austin and San Antonio areas have been trying to connect the two cities by passenger rail for years. The Lone Star Rail District proposal stalled after Union Pacific pulled out of the project in 2016 over concerns about how passenger rail using its tracks would impact its freight operations. The Capitol Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) pulled its funding for the project later that year, leaving the Alamo Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) few options for keeping the project alive.</div><div>The rail line proposed by the Lone Star Rail District would have had multiple stops, starting at the University of Texas A&amp;M-San Antonio and ending in the north-of-Austin suburb Georgetown.</div><div>Rep. Ray Lopez (D-San Antonio) served on AAMPO’s board and as the city councilman for District 6 during passenger rail discussions. He said the corridor rail project took many blows but could be revived with proper action from the State.</div><div>“Texans have engaged in overviews and reviews, but what we need to do is have a strong directive from the state … and request or require or demand, indeed, that some action plan be created and presented to the Legislature for consideration and ultimately funding,” Lopez said.</div><div>Rep. Terry Canales (D-Edinburg), chair of the Transportation Committee, said Friday that he had received multiple requests – known as interim charge requests – to study passenger rail between Austin and San Antonio before the next legislative session. During that time, committee chairs read through the requests submitted to them, then submit their own requests to House Speaker Dennis Bonnen. Bonnen asked for all requests to be submitted to him last Saturday.</div><div>“I believe that passenger rail between two of our biggest cities in Texas is an issue that the House Transportation Committee should look at this interim,” Canales said in a prepared statement. “As our state continues to experience explosive growth, we must consider all options to get Texans from point ‘A’ to point ‘B.’ That being said, it is absolutely imperative that the state examine multimodal systems for future implementation. Increasingly, Texans are looking for transportation options that do not involve them sitting behind the wheel of a vehicle stuck in traffic.”</div><div>Like others who signed the letter, Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins (D-San Antonio) pointed to the importance of connecting San Antonio and Austin for businesses along the Interstate 35 corridor.</div><div>“It provides another transportation option and encourages economic development including job creation, connects rural counties to their neighboring urban cities, and helps reduce roadway congestion in major metropolitan regions,” Gervin-Hawkins said in an email. “Investments in an alternative transportation solution, like passenger rail trains, will foster real estate development around rail stations.”</div><div>Related: TxDOT Rolls Out I-35 Expansion Plan for Northeast Side and Beyond</div><div>Rep. Ina Minjarez (D-San Antonio) said she gave her support to the interim charge request because gridlock on I-35 is growing unmanageable.</div><div>“What’s really important is it gives data,” Minjarez said of studying the issue. “It gives the good and the bad. It gives a deep analysis of this particular issue for the entire legislative body to see and look at.”</div><div>She and other legislators who signed the letter were rallied by Rep. Celia Israel (D-Austin), who was able to gain some bipartisan support for her interim charge request – of the 20 signatures, three came from Republican representatives.</div><div>“If you look at that letter, that’s a ton of legislators that understand the important role that passenger rail could play, and it’s also a ton of legislators that have cities and counties and school districts within that area,” Israel said.</div><div>Rep. Steve Allison (R-San Antonio) emphasized that he signed the interim study request letter with the understanding that rail is simply one potential solution.</div><div>“The inclusion of possible use of existing rail line and service for enhanced passenger service as a possible option towards reducing congestion is simply that – a possible available option for study along with other options or approaches,” Allison said in an email.</div><div>Minjarez said the success of rail relies on political will.</div><div>“I think seeing the signatures on that letter from San Antonio and Austin area, we have that political will,” she said. “Now it’s up to leadership to see if they want to embrace talking about this subject.”</div><div>San Antonians have rejected rail before, but as a local means of public transportation. Voters shot down light rail in 2000 and in 2015 approved a charter amendment requiring light rail proposals go to voters.</div><div>But if an intercity rail project starts up again, Mayor Ron Nirenberg said San Antonio would support it “if the state worked with us and we found a path forward for rail between Austin and San Antonio.”</div><div>“It has been a priority for this community for almost three decades,” he said. “And I’ve always said it will happen once the governor’s office makes it a priority.”</div><div>https://therivardreport.com/rail-between-san-antonio-austin-could-be-back-on-the-table/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Phoenix voters substantially back light rail expansion</title><description><![CDATA[Phoenix voters rejected a plan that aimed to stop further development of the city's light rail system in a special election on Tuesday. Proposition 105 was defeated with 62.33% of the vote (112,056 votes), with 37.67% (67,735) voting in favor, according to provisional results. Around 15,000 early ballots still need to be counted. The Proposition asked voters if they wanted to stop expansion of the city's Valley Metro system into communities in the south, and other subsequent extensions, and<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_9b8d5d28e2814343afb7fa7ce8f24456%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_258/4cd688_9b8d5d28e2814343afb7fa7ce8f24456%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Chris Teale</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Phoenix-voters-substantially-back-light-rail-expansion</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Phoenix-voters-substantially-back-light-rail-expansion</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 18:55:30 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_9b8d5d28e2814343afb7fa7ce8f24456~mv2.jpg"/><div>Phoenix voters rejected a plan that aimed to stop further development of the city's light rail system in a special election on Tuesday. Proposition 105 was defeated with 62.33% of the vote (112,056 votes), with 37.67% (67,735) voting in favor, according to provisional results. Around 15,000 early ballots still need to be counted. The Proposition asked voters if they wanted to stop expansion of the city's Valley Metro system into communities in the south, and other subsequent extensions, and instead invest in infrastructure improvements for cars. Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego said the defeat of that Proposition — as well as another that aimed to limit the city’s spending until it cut its pension debt — was a positive step forward.</div><div>Mayor Kate Gallego</div><div>✔@MayorGallego</div><div> · Aug 27, 2019</div><div>Phoenicians-we did it. From the outset, it was clear that Props 105 and 106 were about more than a difference in opinion--it was more fundamental than that. This election was about what we want our city to be.</div><div>Mayor Kate Gallego</div><div>✔@MayorGallego</div><div>Residents broke records when they showed up in mass &amp; declared they want robust transportation options &amp; investment in our parks, libraries, &amp; city services. Light rail expansion is not stopping--not today, not tomorrow.</div><div>111</div><div>10:29 PM - Aug 27, 2019 · Phoenix, AZ</div><div>The Proposition had received the backing of many business owners along the planned extension route in south Phoenix, as well as City Council members Sal DiCiccio and Jim Waring. It also received heavy support from Building a Better Phoenix, which transit proponents allege received heavy backing from the Koch brothers. On Twitter, DiCiccio said he was &quot;disappointed&quot; in the results.</div><div>Dive Insight:</div><div>While the defeated groups appear not to have conceded yet, public transit advocates said this represents a major victory in their efforts to give city dwellers more mobility options.</div><div>Paul Skoutelas, president and CEO of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), said in a statement that residents &quot;voted to ensure that their light rail system can expand to better serve the transit needs of a rapidly growing city looking to the future. Phoenix made it resoundingly clear to the naysayers that light rail is essential to their economy and their community.&quot; </div><div>The push for more transit options takes on renewed urgency given how much the Phoenix area is expected to warm in the coming years due to climate change. As with many cities, the transportation sector is one of the worst offenders when it comes to carbon emissions, so finding ways to get cars off the road could help make the city more environmentally friendly.</div><div>Like other major cities, Phoenix is expected to experience a major warming in the coming years if climate action isn't taken. According to a map produced by CarbonBrief, the city is expected to warm between 1.9 and 5.8 degrees Celsius by 2100.</div><div>Further investment in transit should help connect other parts of the city to job opportunities. The Associated Press noted that the areas of south Phoenix in line for a light rail extension are in working-class majority-minority neighborhoods, while further expansions could link to the Arizona State Capitol and suburbs in the far west, which would provide another commuting connection to jobs and education. Indeed, reports from APTA and Chicago's Metropolitan Planning Commission found that more transit investment helps attract and retain jobs.</div><div>Funding for light rail extensions remains a headache, especially with the federal government accused of slow-walking grant awards, with opponents seizing on the fact that Valley Metro has an estimated weekly ridership of nearly 48,000.</div><div>But voting for transit improvements appears to be gaining popularity at the ballot box, albeit after a stinging defeat for a major transportation revamp in Nashville, TN last year that left city leaders scratching their heads and seeking a new way forward. Gallego now has further impetus to do what she pledged in an interview with Smart Cities Dive last year before her election, and &quot;push what kind of city Phoenix will become.&quot;</div><div>https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/phoenix-voters-substantially-back-light-rail-expansion/561856/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Tech companies ignore pleas on rail safety</title><description><![CDATA[In late 2016, federal investigators probing a fatal crash between a confused truck driver and a California commuter train made a plea to Google, Apple and Microsoft: Add information on the nation’s hundreds of thousands of railroad crossings to your navigation apps.Nearly three years later, none of them has.The inaction by giant tech companies remains a frustration for safety advocates, at a time when hundreds of people die every year in collisions at U.S. railroad crossings, even as drivers<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_25ce2bb540d944de9348caf2e63e68a0%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_25ce2bb540d944de9348caf2e63e68a0%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Tech-companies-ignore-pleas-on-rail-safety</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Tech-companies-ignore-pleas-on-rail-safety</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 18:04:31 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_25ce2bb540d944de9348caf2e63e68a0~mv2.jpg"/><div>In late 2016, federal investigators probing a fatal crash between a confused truck driver and a California commuter train made a plea to Google, Apple and Microsoft: Add information on the nation’s hundreds of thousands of railroad crossings to your navigation apps.</div><div>Nearly three years later, none of them has.</div><div>The inaction by giant tech companies remains a frustration for safety advocates, at a time when hundreds of people die every year in collisions at U.S. railroad crossings, even as drivers increasingly rely on their smartphones’ GPS applications to tell them where to go. And it comes in an era when the tech industry is under fire in Washington for a litany of perceived anti-social behavior — from ruthless squelching of competitors to cavalier handling of users’ private data.</div><div>The companies’ failure to act is &quot;tantamount to gross negligence,&quot; said Sarah Feinberg, who led the Federal Railroad Administration at the time of the February 2015 crash in Oxnard, Calif., that prompted the request from the National Transportation Safety Board.</div><div>It's “indisputable that they could save lives by acting,&quot; said Feinberg, who spearheaded high-visibility campaigns to combat deaths at railroad crossings.</div><div>Google told POLITICO in a statement that it remains “aware&quot; of the &quot;recommendation and will continue to look for new ways to bring drivers useful features that help them get around safely.” But the company also told the NTSB in2017 that it faces “a balancing act” in designing its navigation apps — adding information without causing “overcrowding” that distracts drivers.</div><div>Apple and Microsoft did not respond to requests for comment. And they also haven’t yet responded to the NTSB, according to the agency, which says it is still awaiting responses from 11 of the 14 tech companies, GPS manufacturers and other organizations it reached out to in December 2016.</div><div>The NTSB, which investigates accidents but has no regulatory power, requested the safety improvements as part of a probe into the Oxnard crash. In that accident, a truck driver following directions from his Google Maps app mistakenly turned onto the railroad tracks and became stuck, leading to a collision that killed a train engineer and injured 32 passengers and crew members.</div><div>Adding information on railroad crossings to mobile apps would “provide road users with additional safety cues and ... reduce the likelihood of crashes,” the NTSB wrote to the leaders of the 14 organizations, including Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple CEO Tim Cook and Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella. Last year, 270 people died in accidents at railroad crossings in the U.S., just one fewer than in 2017, which itself was the deadliest year at crossings in more than a decade.</div><div>After falling for some time, the numbers of collisions and fatalities have remained flat over the past few years, which federal officials and the railroad industry say is probably due in part to there being more drivers on the road and trains on the rails.</div><div>According to the FRA, the U.S. has more than 200,000 railroad “grade” crossings, where the rails and the roads they intersect are on the same level.</div><div>Daniel Stevens, the head of the watchdog group Campaign for Accountability, who has been monitoring Google closely for his organization’s Google Transparency Project, said the failure to act fits a pattern at the company.</div><div>“Tech companies like Google are often cavalier in how they respond to regulators seeking to uphold safety standards,” Stevens said. He added, “What we've learned in tracking Google for several years is that Google generally makes decisions based on what will make the company the most money.”</div><div>A few months after the NTSB made the recommendation, Google responded by saying it was working with FRA but did not commit to adding any features to Google Maps.</div><div>“Our product teams carefully consider new safety features in the context of the holistic product experience and, in that way, seek to avoid evaluating individual features in isolation that could lead to overcrowding and create a sub-optimal experience for users,&quot; wrote the then-head of Google’s D.C. office, former Republican Rep. Susan Molinari.</div><div>A commuter train derailed near Los Angeles after hitting a truck at a railroad crossing in 2015. | David McNew/Getty Images</div><div>She added that the company aimed to improve safety through all its products, including Google Maps, Waze app and Android Auto, including by providing information on speed limits and “difficult intersections.”</div><div>“Highlighting necessary information on the map and in our navigation services without overcrowding it and distracting users is a balancing act,” Molinari wrote.</div><div>During Feinberg's tenure, the FRA said it had received initial agreements from some tech companies, including Google and Apple, to integrate the agency’s data on crossings into their products, according to the NTSB report on the Oxnard crash. That led to a flurry of headlines that made it sound as though the improvement were a done deal, including “Google adds federal railroad information to mobile maps.”</div><div>But one former FRA official said Google started dragging its feet, in part prompting the NTSB recommendation.</div><div>“This comes at an interesting moment when tech is under the gun in Congress and in the public,” said the former official, who requested anonymity because he still deals with the agency. &quot;These companies are missing easy points to improve safety and their standing with the public.&quot;</div><div>While Google has yet to roll out the broad crossings data requested by the NTSB, it has offered a much more limited subset covering Long Island on the Waze navigation app, in a partnership with New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority.</div><div>The NTSB listed Google’s response as “acceptable” but said only two navigation-focused companies responded in ways that were satisfactory enough for the agency to close the recommendation: GPS maker Garmin, which said it incorporated railroad crossing data into its navigation products in 2016, and TomTom, which said its maps include full coverage of crossings.</div><div>The United Parcel Service is also on the NTSB’s list of companies that haven’t responded, but a UPS spokesperson told POLITICO that the company’s proprietary navigation system for its drivers includes railroad crossings. A representative of the U.S. group behind the collaborative mapping platform OpenStreetMap also said its system includes crossing data, though not from the FRA's comprehensive set. None of the other companies listed in the NTSB's recommendations responded to requests for comment for this article.</div><div>A FRA spokesperson would not comment on conversations with individual businesses but said the agency is continuing to explore potential safety enhancements and has had discussions with tech companies.</div><div>“FRA is always willing to continue exploring the integration of grade crossing GIS data into navigation systems,” the spokesperson said.</div><div>Meanwhile, drivers continue to drive onto railroad tracks, with news reports indicating that GPS confusion is at least part of the reason.</div><div>Those reported in the past year and a half include accidents that left cars totaled, such as one on Long Island in March 2018 and Florida in December. In other cases, drivers have been left with just embarrassment and a police citation, such as those involved in incidents in November in Duquesne, Pa., or again in February in Ayer, Mass.</div><div>https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/10/tech-rail-safety-1412324</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Houston METRO advances light-rail expansion plan</title><description><![CDATA[The Metropolitan Transportation Authority of Harris County's (METRO) board yesterday approved the METRONext Moving Forward plan, which includes 16 additional miles of light rail.Now, a referendum will be placed on the Nov. 5 ballot for voters to consider $3.5 billion in bonding authority for METRO to finance the plan, agency officials said in a press release. The $7.5 billion plan would be funded through local dollars and federal funding grants. No new tax increases would be implemented as part<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_c222388fe6874a98b8dd74458e7342e5%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_303/4cd688_c222388fe6874a98b8dd74458e7342e5%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Houston-METRO-advances-light-rail-expansion-plan</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Houston-METRO-advances-light-rail-expansion-plan</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:56:38 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_c222388fe6874a98b8dd74458e7342e5~mv2.jpg"/><div>The Metropolitan Transportation Authority of Harris County's (METRO) board yesterday approved the METRONext Moving Forward plan, which includes 16 additional miles of light rail.</div><div>Now, a referendum will be placed on the Nov. 5 ballot for voters to consider $3.5 billion in bonding authority for METRO to finance the plan, agency officials said in a press release. </div><div>The $7.5 billion plan would be funded through local dollars and federal funding grants. No new tax increases would be implemented as part of the plan, METRO officials said. </div><div>About $2.1 billion of the plan's cost is allocated for light-rail expansion, including extending the Red Line to a new multimodal center at the North Shepherd Park and Ride and extending the combined Green and Purple lines to William P. Hobby Airport and the Houston Municipal Courthouse.</div><div>In all, METRONext includes about 40 transit projects, from light rail to bus service.</div><div>https://www.progressiverailroading.com/passenger_rail/news/Houston-METRO-advances-light-rail-expansion-plan--58316?email=lhbrown@dean.net&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=prdailynews&amp;utm_campaign=prdailynews8/14/2019</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>FRA announces rail safety, infrastructure grant opportunity</title><description><![CDATA[The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) yesterday issued a notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) for more than $244 million in grant funding under the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) program. The program fiscal-year 2019 NOFO will fund projects that increase rail transportation safety, efficiency and reliability, FRA officials said in a press release. The CRISI grant program "is an important resource for railroads to upgrade infrastructure and for communities to<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_23a8d1d285cc45f8a3f22908d2e1e22c%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_303/4cd688_23a8d1d285cc45f8a3f22908d2e1e22c%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/FRA-announces-rail-safety-infrastructure-grant-opportunity</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/FRA-announces-rail-safety-infrastructure-grant-opportunity</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:54:06 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_23a8d1d285cc45f8a3f22908d2e1e22c~mv2.jpg"/><div>The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) yesterday issued a notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) for more than $244 million in grant funding under the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) program. The program fiscal-year 2019 NOFO will fund projects that increase rail transportation safety, efficiency and reliability, FRA officials said in a press release. The CRISI grant program &quot;is an important resource for railroads to upgrade infrastructure and for communities to enhance safety on tracks and at railroad crossings,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao. Eligible applications will include projects that address congestion challenges, highway-rail grade crossings, upgrade short-line railroad infrastructure, relocate rail lines, improve intercity passenger rail capital assets, and deploy railroad safety technology. Freight- and passenger-rail infrastructure projects are eligible to apply. At least 25 percent of the available funds will be reserved for projects in rural areas. In evaluating grant applications, the FRA will consider how projects support key objectives including enhancing economic vitality; leveraging federal funding; adopting life-cycle cost accounting; using innovative approaches to improve safety and expediting project delivery; and holding grant recipients accountable for achieving specific, measurable outcomes.  Preference will be given to projects where the proposed federal share of total costs does not exceed 50 percent. &quot;These CRISI grants support safe rail systems around the country, and I encourage eligible parties with creative and innovative projects to apply by the deadline,&quot; FRA Administrator Ronald Batory said. Grant applications under the FY19 CRISI NOFO are due 60 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register. On Sept. 4, the FRA is scheduled to offer web-based training and technical assistance for eligible applicants.</div><div>https://www.progressiverailroading.com/federal_legislation_regulation/news/FRA-announces-rail-safety-infrastructure-grant-opportunity--58335?email=lhbrown@dean.net&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=prdailynews&amp;utm_campaign=prdailynews8/15/2019</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>BV Economic Development Corporation votes to support high-speed rail project</title><description><![CDATA[BRAZOS COUNTY, Tex. (KBTX) - Another local organization is backing a high-speed rail project that would cut through a portion of the Brazos Valley.Wednesday the Brazos Valley Economic Development Corporation board unanimously approved a letter of support for Texas Central.The company wants to build a high-speed rail line between Houston and Dallas. The proposed route takes it through the eastern portion of the Brazos Valley with a stop in Grimes County. Bryan and College Station city councils<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_92144e4de3354048a1e547d59abc59bb%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_307/4cd688_92144e4de3354048a1e547d59abc59bb%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Karla Castillo</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/BV-Economic-Development-Corporation-votes-to-support-high-speed-rail-project</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/BV-Economic-Development-Corporation-votes-to-support-high-speed-rail-project</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:45:21 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_92144e4de3354048a1e547d59abc59bb~mv2.jpg"/><div>BRAZOS COUNTY, Tex. (KBTX) - Another local organization is backing a high-speed rail project that would cut through a portion of the Brazos Valley.</div><div>Wednesday the Brazos Valley Economic Development Corporation board unanimously approved a letter of support for Texas Central.</div><div>The company wants to build a high-speed rail line between Houston and Dallas. The proposed route takes it through the eastern portion of the Brazos Valley with a stop in Grimes County. Bryan and College Station city councils and Brazos County commissioners have also approved similar measures backing the project.</div><div>&quot;We believe the rail would provide our community another significant connection between Houston, Dallas and our area, and additional access for us to and from other parts of the world. Since our mission is to help companies launch, grow and locate in Brazos County, the rail would provide movement of business leaders, employees, residents, students and tourists to and from our area, hopefully making us more attractive to companies who would create jobs,&quot; said Steve Fullhart,  Communications &amp; Engagement Manager for BVEDC.</div><div>https://www.kbtx.com/content/news/Brazos-Valley-Economic-Development-Corporation--557808411.html</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>6 Transportation Goals Congress Should Be Thinking About</title><description><![CDATA[Too often, the debate over transportation funding in Congress revolves around dollars and cents. But many advocates say we should agree on big goals first, so we know what we’re getting for the money we spend.Congress spends a lot of time trying to figure out how it should allocate money for infrastructure, but its members rarely articulate why they want to spend that money. There seems to be more discussion in Washington about the size of an infrastructure package—whether it should be $500<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_457b13973ddb4b698379fcd2e2a56153%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_457b13973ddb4b698379fcd2e2a56153%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>DANIEL C. VOCK</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/6-Transportation-Goals-Congress-Should-Be-Thinking-About</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/6-Transportation-Goals-Congress-Should-Be-Thinking-About</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:39:10 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_457b13973ddb4b698379fcd2e2a56153~mv2.jpg"/><div>Too often, the debate over transportation funding in Congress revolves around dollars and cents. But many advocates say we should agree on big goals first, so we know what we’re getting for the money we spend.</div><div>Congress spends a lot of time trying to figure out how it should allocate money for infrastructure, but its members rarely articulate why they want to spend that money. There seems to be more discussion in Washington about the size of an infrastructure package—whether it should be $500 billion, $1 trillion or even $2 trillion—than what the public would actually see as a result.</div><div>The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, for example, earned plenty of praise last month for drafting a bipartisan bill that calls for spending $287 billion on highways and related infrastructure. That would be a 27 percent increase over current levels, which should please road builders and perhaps frustrated commuters. The bill also maintains the current methods for doling out that federal money, a victory for state highway departments, which would receive 90 percent of the funds. (The bill does not include spending for rail, transit or certain safety programs, and it does not identify a funding source, because, in Congress’ typical piecemeal fashion, those concerns are the responsibilities of other committees.)</div><div>But without clear goals, it’s hard to measure how well the legislation would achieve them. The package includes $10 billion to address climate change, a first for a highway bill. But is that enough to curb carbon dioxide emissions that heat the atmosphere? Or to make roads that can better withstand the increased flooding and extreme weather that climate change brings? How do we know if the highway bill is boosting the economy, as its authors promise, or reducing congestion? Is the current funding scheme the best way to achieve those goals?</div><div>These are questions that are all too familiar to state and local leaders.</div><div>“When it becomes a conversation [on Capitol Hill] about billions of dollars and engineering projects, we lose what this is about: Infrastructure is what improves the quality of our lives,” says Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. “Bad infrastructure keeps us from our happiness, keeps us from our families, keeps us from jobs and, in the worst-case scenarios, threatens our health in our lives. Who cares how many miles of roads I can pave in L.A., if Venice Beach is underwater?”</div><div>As Congress considers such big-picture considerations this year, though, Governing will not be around to cover the debate. After three decades, both the magazine and the website will cease publication next month.</div><div>So, as we sign off, Governing asked prominent transportation leaders to offer their perspectives on what transportation goals the country ought to set. We asked them what obstacles stood in their way, and what Congress or other policymakers could do to help achieve those goals.</div><div>Fix Existing Roads and Bridges</div><div>Beth Osborne, the director of Transportation for America and a former Obama administration official, says Congress should try to cut the maintenance backlog of America’s roads in half. “Despite the rhetoric we’re sure to hear,” she says of the Senate committee’s proposal, “this bill has zero new binding requirements to ensure that states use their core formula programs to actually bring their roads and bridges into good condition.&quot; Instead, she says, it's a continuation of the status quo, &quot;providing them with more than $32 billion more for existing road building policy.”</div><div>Congress, she says, could specify that highway funds must first be used to repair roads until a state has reached a certain milestone such as, say, lowering the proportion of roads that are in poor condition to 10 percent.</div><div>Road projects that add new capacity could be managed the same way that new transit projects are, she adds. That would mean that the state (or other project sponsor) would have to show how the new project addresses federal priorities, Osborne says. They would also have to show that they have a plan to operate and maintain the infrastructure throughout its useful life, and that they can maintain the rest of their system while adding the new project to their liabilities.</div><div>Some transportation directors think, however, think the fix-it-first mentality is unworkable. “The idea that we should take care of what we have and not build anything new is a great strategy if you are not growing,” says Maryland Transportation Secretary Pete Rahn. “The problem is, so much of our country is growing. The idea that a Texas or a Florida is not going to build anything [new] until their system is properly maintained is, frankly, unrealistic.”</div><div>Reduce Congestion</div><div>Rahn works for Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican who is emphasizing infrastructure development during his yearlong stint as chair of the National Governors Association. In his home state, Hogan is pushing a plan to widen the Beltway and other major interstates in the Washington, D.C., suburbs using toll lanes and public-private partnerships.</div><div>Rahn says one of the top priorities for policymakers ought to be reducing traffic, both to improve the daily lives of drivers and to improve the country’s economy. “We can’t allow our systems to continually choke on congestion,” he says.</div><div>The American Road and Transportation Builders Association emphasizes the movement of freight. “Of all the transportation infrastructure needs we have as a nation,” the group wrote in a recent report, “improving the safe and efficient movement of goods is the key to increasing U.S. productivity, lowering the costs of things we produce and purchase, improving our environment and giving us the competitive edge in world markets.”</div><div>Federal funding, the group says, should prioritize the 68,000-mile network of freight corridors that Congress designated in 2015. Those roads include interstate highways and other key arteries that connect the country’s major ports, inland waterways, rail hubs, airports and pipelines.</div><div>Rahn says one way to speed freight delivery and improve highway safety is to add truck-only lanes on interstates where more than a third of the vehicles are trucks. “Not only would the truckers love that, but a lot of just individuals who drive their family places would love the idea that they’re not sandwiched between a couple of semis,” he says.</div><div>Address Climate Change</div><div>“For me,” says Yonah Freemark, an influential urbanist and journalist, “the most important goal in transportation is reducing—and, if possible, eliminating—the carbon emissions that are produced by our mobility system, as quickly as possible. We only have so much time to address climate change, and transportation is the biggest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions.”</div><div>There are many ways to go about that goal. Some are included in the Senate’s latest plan, but many are not. Congress could discourage gas-guzzling automobiles by raising fuel taxes or imposing taxes on carbon dioxide pollution. It could add incentives to build out electric infrastructure and renewable power sources to make using a zero-emission or low-emission electric vehicle less of a hassle. It could add incentives for transit, cycling and pedestrian infrastructure to keep vehicles off the road altogether. It could invest in research for alternative sources for aviation fuel or build out passenger rail services as an alternative to flying short distances.</div><div>Freemark argues that even more drastic steps are necessary, although he admits changing Americans’ dependence on cars would be “no easy feat.”</div><div>“Congress can take the first step by stopping funding for highway projects,” he says. “We invest billions of dollars each year in new road infrastructure, which increases transportation emissions directly and then produces more auto-dependent neighborhoods, which further increase transportation emissions. We must simply put a stop to this cycle by putting a halt to transportation expenditures that go to expanding or extending road systems.”</div><div>In the meantime, states and localities still must wrestle with the current effects of climate change, and that means making infrastructure more resilient.</div><div>“Call it a Green New Deal or call it saving the Earth,” says Garcetti, the L.A. mayor. “Any infrastructure ambitions we have are about to be swamped by climate change. We see it in the fires, we see it in the floods, we see it in the rising tides. We know that this is real.”</div><div>Garcetti says building disaster-resistant infrastructure and green energy projects could also be a “big boon” for struggling workers that feel left out of the country’s economic prosperity, whether they’re in the Midwest or in Los Angeles.</div><div>But the investment needs to be much bigger than the $10 billion in the Senate plan, he says. The $10 billion, Garcetti says, is “the turning of the handle on the door. It’s not even yet opening the door, let alone what we will need to walk through that door. But you can’t get through the door without turning the handle, and we can’t begin to move resources in without the door being opened.”</div><div>Improve Transit</div><div>Corinne Kisner, the executive director of the National Association of City Transportation Officials, says Congress’ top goal should be increasing the number of people “who have access to reliable, frequent transit that goes where they need to go.”</div><div>Congress could help states and cities achieve that goal by adding more transit funding and expanding the types of projects that the money could be spent on, like, for example, letting cities or transit agencies build sidewalks to transit stops, Kisner says. Congress should reward cities and states that increase transit use through good network design, street design and transit planning by tying increases in funding to increases in transit use.</div><div>But Jarrett Walker, a transit consultant and author of the book and website Human Transit, cautions against “fixations on specific technologies and infrastructures.” The goal should be even broader, he says: “Freedom without harm.”</div><div>“Maximize the number of jobs and opportunities that people can reach, so that they have the greatest possible freedom in their lives, using methods that scale so as not to destroy the world or other people,” he says. “This principle leads to reasonable rural road investments but retooling investments toward transit, bike and pedestrian infrastructure as density rises.”</div><div>Walker says federal funding should be reconfigured so that road money is directed to rural and exurban areas, while urban areas get more transit money. The guiding principle would be outcomes, not specific kinds of infrastructure. “We talk about infrastructure, which evokes the heroism of builders, rather than operations or outcomes,” he says. “In my field, transit, we frequently build infrastructure that is inoperable—or that would fail utterly [in giving people freedom of movement]—simply because building becomes the goal in itself.” </div><div>Decrease Road Deaths</div><div>More than 40,000 people died every year on U.S. roads for each of the last three years, according to the National Safety Council, the first time that has happened since the Great Recession. One of the biggest frustrations for safety advocates is that speeding continues to be a major factor, even as the country has made progress over recent decades in reducing deaths from drunk driving and people not wearing their seatbelts.</div><div>Beth Osborne, from Transportation for America, says Congress should make greater efforts to curtail speed-related deaths. Congress could give localities—and not just states—the power to lower speed limits in developed areas. It could rescind federal recommendations to set speed limits based on the “85th percentile” rule, which specifies that the limits should be high enough that 85 percent of drivers travel under the speed even when no speed limit signs are posted.</div><div>Federal lawmakers could require states to gather data on crashes and injuries that are “speed related, not speeding related,” she adds. “A speeding related crash is one where the driver was exceeding the speed limit. A speed related fatality is a fatality made more likely by the speed of travel, even if it was in compliance with the posted speed.”</div><div>And overall, Osborne says, Congress should set safety targets for states that require them to show improvement over existing injury and fatality levels, or else they would have to dedicate more of their federal money to safety.</div><div>Ironically, greater vehicle speeds are often seen as the goal of transportation projects, Osborne says, even though fast-moving vehicles don’t guarantee quick trips, because of things like cross streets and congestion. Fast traffic can also harm businesses, because potential customers don’t see stores as they whiz by at 45 mph.</div><div>There are other potential ways to reduce speed that Osborne didn’t mention. Congress, for example, could reduce funding for states that ban speed cameras or add money for those that use them. It could require the federal Department of Transportation to coordinate a national education campaign on speeding, akin to “Click It or Ticket” for seat belt use, something the National Transportation Safety Board has advocated . It could allow State Highway Safety Offices to spend federal grants on promoting safe road designs, not just public education and enforcement measures.</div><div>Better Roads on Native American Reservations</div><div>Too often, the debate over infrastructure and Native American lands centers on what infrastructure should be built through those lands—whether that's oil pipelines or border walls—rather than for those lands. As Governing and others have reported, resources to maintain reservation roads or upgrade them from dirt to gravel, much less pavement, are scarce. The jurisdiction over those roads can be confusing and even contentious. But it’s hard to imagine the situation improving without a serious influx of money from the federal government, which often forced tribes onto reservations in the first place.</div><div>https://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/Whats-the-Big-Idea-Transportation-Advocates-Share-Goals-for-Federal-Funding.html</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Boeing’s Woes Are Helping High-Speed Rail Get On Track</title><description><![CDATA[The global aviation industry has lost $4.1 billion since the Boeing 737 MAX was grounded after two crashes that left over 300 dead. But rail services in the U.S. have spotted the silver lining, OZY reports, with train companies racing to grab some of that market. Flight anxiety is a boon for emerging high-speed rail firms, particularly in the densely populated Northeast corridor and in California.Is rail here to stay? Amtrak says demand has never been higher, in part thanks to passengers’<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_2a450d7f5b9b414dae2e67e21bb720fd%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_440%2Ch_440/4cd688_2a450d7f5b9b414dae2e67e21bb720fd%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>OZY</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Boeing%E2%80%99s-Woes-Are-Helping-High-Speed-Rail-Get-On-Track</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/09/06/Boeing%E2%80%99s-Woes-Are-Helping-High-Speed-Rail-Get-On-Track</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 2019 17:36:31 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_2a450d7f5b9b414dae2e67e21bb720fd~mv2.jpg"/><div>The global aviation industry has lost $4.1 billion since the Boeing 737 MAX was grounded after two crashes that left over 300 dead. But rail services in the U.S. have spotted the silver lining, OZY reports, with train companies racing to grab some of that market. Flight anxiety is a boon for emerging high-speed rail firms, particularly in the densely populated Northeast corridor and in California.</div><div>Is rail here to stay? Amtrak says demand has never been higher, in part thanks to passengers’ concerns over their carbon footprints, while investors are happy to jump on board.</div><div>https://www.ozy.com/presidential-daily-brief/pdb-96395/hot-ticket-96415</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>This last-mile delivery startup wants to put robots in bike lanes</title><description><![CDATA[A whole host of startups have launched in recent years with the aim of making last-mile deliveries using robots. But a company from Michigan has a new spin on this familiar enterprise: it wants to put those bots in bike lanes, at least part of the time.Refraction AI came out of stealth last week, unveiling its autonomous delivery robot REV-1 onstage at a TechCrunch event. The company’s co-founder and CEO Matthew Johnson-Roberson, a University of Michigan professor, described the three-wheeled<img src="http://img.youtube.com/vi/47WNq9u4QsY/mqdefault.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>James Vincent</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/16/This-last-mile-delivery-startup-wants-to-put-robots-in-bike-lanes</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/16/This-last-mile-delivery-startup-wants-to-put-robots-in-bike-lanes</guid><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2019 20:28:06 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>A whole host of startups have launched in recent years with the aim of making last-mile deliveries using robots. But a company from Michigan has a new spin on this familiar enterprise: it wants to put those bots in bike lanes, at least part of the time.</div><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/47WNq9u4QsY"/><div>Refraction AI came out of stealth last week, unveiling its autonomous delivery robot REV-1 onstage at a TechCrunch event. The company’s co-founder and CEO Matthew Johnson-Roberson, a University of Michigan professor, described the three-wheeled vehicle as a “Goldilocks” solution to last-mile delivery robots — neither too big nor too small.</div><div>REV-1 is larger than most delivery robots, which are about the size of coolers and drive on sidewalks. But it’s smaller and less expensive than autonomous delivery vans or shuttles. The robot is lightweight and low-power enough to “qualify under e-bike regulations,” says Refraction’s website, and at 32 inches wide it slots neatly into a bike lane.</div><div>“Our platform is lightweight, nimble and fast enough to operate in the bike lane and on the roadway,” Johnson-Roberson told Trucks.com. With a unit cost of around $5,000, the REV-1 will also be more affordable than bigger rivals, while still offering enough space to carry four packed grocery bags of shopping.</div><div>But while Refraction’s robot might be the right size for commercial customers, it could end up annoying the public. There have already been protests about the intrusion of delivery robots onto sidewalks, with some cities even banning the bots. Placing them in bike lanes could be even more disruptive, as well as potentially hazardous for cyclists.</div><div>“It’s a bit presumptuous for Refraction to claim they can operate in bike lanes. They would face a pretty big debate and permit process if they tried to operate in Portland,” Jonathan Maus, publisher of BikePortland.org, told Trucks.com.</div><div>Before that becomes an issue, though, Refraction has to deal with a much bigger challenge: the weather. The company is trialing its robots in Ann Arbor, Michigan, where it says it’s learning to navigate in rain and snow — something that most East Coast-based robot delivery startups avoid altogether. The firm hopes its hardy robots will set it apart.</div><div>“Other companies are not trying to run in the winter here,” Johnson-Roberson told TechCrunch. “It’s a different problem than the one that others are trying to solve, so we hope that gives us some space to breathe and some chance to carve out some opportunity.”</div><div>https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/15/20694433/last-mile-autonomous-robot-delivery-startup-bike-lanes-refraction-ai?silverid=%25%25RECIPIENT_ID%25%25</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Congressional hearing to focus on FTA's capital investment grants</title><description><![CDATA[Tomorrow morning, the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit will hold a hearing on the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) implementation of the Capital Investments Grant Program (CIG). The hearing's purpose is to examine how the agency is implementing the CIG program. Scheduled to speak are FTA officials and representatives of the American Public Transportation Association, the American Road & Transportation Builders Association, and the Kansas City Streetcar Authority, according to a<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_5dd80b27a55e413c87f958c42c381eb8%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_303/4cd688_5dd80b27a55e413c87f958c42c381eb8%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Progressive Railroading</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/16/Congressional-hearing-to-focus-on-FTAs-capital-investment-grants</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/16/Congressional-hearing-to-focus-on-FTAs-capital-investment-grants</guid><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2019 19:02:50 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_5dd80b27a55e413c87f958c42c381eb8~mv2.jpg"/><div>Tomorrow morning, the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit will hold a hearing on the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) implementation of the Capital Investments Grant Program (CIG). The hearing's purpose is to examine how the agency is implementing the CIG program. Scheduled to speak are FTA officials and representatives of the American Public Transportation Association, the American Road &amp; Transportation Builders Association, and the Kansas City Streetcar Authority, according to a press release issued by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. The CIG is a discretionary program that funds transit capital investments, including heavy rail, commuter rail, light rail, streetcars and bus rapid transit. Federal transit law requires transit agencies seeking CIG funding to complete a series of steps over several years. Last week, the FTA announced a total of $300 million in CIG funds for transit-rail projects in California, Washington and Arizona. Los Angeles Metro, Sound Transit and Valley Metro each received $100 million in CIG funds for projects at their agencies.</div><div>https://www.progressiverailroading.com/federal_legislation_regulation/news/Congressional-hearing-to-focus-on-FTAs-capital-investment-grants--58044?email=lhbrown@dean.net&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=prdailynews&amp;utm_campaign=prdailynews7/15/2019</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Will the U.S. Ever Catch a High-Speed Train?</title><description><![CDATA[Over 20 countries have high-speed train travel, carrying 1.6 billion passengers a year. The United States is lagging behind.Mark Tully, former Bureau Chief of the BBC, New Delhi, once wrote that flying always feels the same. “The same airports, the same boring boarding procedures, the same in-flight regime, from the first identical safety announcements to the last fasten your seat-belts sign.” According to Tully, air travel doesn’t really allow travelers to experience the journey or witness the<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_6b6280e5a17b42e2871fe624f506662a%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_6b6280e5a17b42e2871fe624f506662a%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Lina Zeldovich</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/16/Will-the-US-Ever-Catch-a-High-Speed-Train</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/16/Will-the-US-Ever-Catch-a-High-Speed-Train</guid><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2019 18:58:19 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>Over 20 countries have high-speed train travel, carrying 1.6 billion passengers a year. The United States is lagging behind.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_6b6280e5a17b42e2871fe624f506662a~mv2.jpg"/><div>Mark Tully, former Bureau Chief of the BBC, New Delhi, once wrote that flying always feels the same. “The same airports, the same boring boarding procedures, the same in-flight regime, from the first identical safety announcements to the last fasten your seat-belts sign.” According to Tully, air travel doesn’t really allow travelers to experience the journey or witness the culture. “A journey by air leaves the traveller as deflated as a punctured tyre,” he writes, lamenting the fact that today so many destinations aren’t reachable by other forms of travel—such as rail, for example. “The problem today is that aeroplanes and their partners in crime, automobiles, are putting other forms of travel out of business.”</div><div>Of course, before air travel became commonplace, trains were the favorite transportation method. In the United States, railroading began when the first steam trains entered service in 1830. In the mid-1890s, the train share of intercity passenger traffic reached 95%. By the second decade of the twentieth century, the country’s number of railroad tracks was at its peak. Trains were considered modern and fashionable. But when the automobiles arrived in the 1920s, they began to compete with trains—and by 1929, rail travel fell by one-third.</div><div>Airplane travel strained the railroad operations further. By the late 1950s, when the Interstate Highway System was being built and jet airplanes arrived, the railroad operations were losing money and going out of business. To prevent the extinction of passenger rail transportation, the United States government created the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, a quasi-public enterprise more commonly referred to as Amtrak. Although initially created as a for-profit company, Amtrak always relied on government subsidies to defray its operating and capital expenses—which in the past had prompted outcries to shut it down altogether.</div><div>Powered by electricity, these high-speed trains run faster than diesel locomotives while also reducing air pollution—an important sustainability factor.</div><div>However, for over a decade now railroad transportation has been enjoying a revival—particularly when it comes to high-speed trains that can reach about 200 miles an hour. The Chinese high-speed rail system alone carries over 4 million people daily, with its 16,000 miles of track. On that system travelling between Beijing to Shanghai—about the same distance that separates New York and Chicago—takes less than five hours. Via Amtrak, that distance would take about eighteen hours. Travelling over 1,000 miles between Beijing and Guangzhou takes eight. Powered by electricity, these high-speed trains run faster than diesel locomotives while also reducing air pollution—an important sustainability factor.</div><div>China did not invent high-speed railroad. These engineers perfected the Japanese method, invented by engineer Hideo Shima who showed that a lightweight carriage could travel at 200 miles per hour by channeling power through a motor to each of its wheels. Using that approach, Japan built its sleek, graceful trains—and debuted the first one just in time for the 1964 Summer Olympics in Tokyo. Later, France developed its own high-speed rail, TGV, according to the same principles.</div><div>In late-1990s, the Chinese Ministry of Railways ran a “Speed Up” campaign to improve its aging train system and laid a pilot set of high-speed tracks. In 2008, the government announced a giant stimulus package and upped rail investments from $49 billion to $88 billion next year, aiming to open forty-two high-speed lines within the next three years. Not since Tsar Alexander III built the Trans-Siberian Railroad had a central authority taken on such an ambitious rail project.</div><div>Today, the Chinese high speed system is the largest in the world, carrying about 800 million travelers a year, although not always smoothly—some lines are already aging and corroding, and equipment malfunctions, causing accidents. Other countries—from Russia to Brazil and from Turkey to Taiwan—built or are building similar systems.</div><div>The United States was on its way to join that list. In 2015, California governor Edmund G. Brown Jr., together with about 1,000 supporters from across the state, gathered in Fresno for the official ground-breaking for the nation’s first high-speed railroad track. The system would replace diesel trains with electric ones, reducing pollution and fossil fuel dependency. The California High-Speed Rail Authority committed to using 100% renewable sources including wind, solar, and hydroelectric power. These sleek and modern trains would carry passengers between Los Angeles and San Francisco in less than three hours, eventually zooming as far as Sacramento and San Diego. But in February 2019, the U.S. Department of Transportation cancelled its $929 million grant for California’s high-speed train travel. Governor Gavin Newsom announced that the project was cancelled—although the state later sued over the money revocation.</div><div>https://daily.jstor.org/will-the-u-s-ever-catch-a-high-speed-train/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>House-passed NDAA includes amendment blocking federal funds from being used to purchase Chinese state manufactured transit vehicles</title><description><![CDATA[The United States House of Representatives passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on the afternoon of July 12 that included an amendment prohibiting the use of federal transit funds to purchase vehicles manufactured by Chinese State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) and other state-supported companies. “China’s ‘Made in China 2025’ initiative is an unmistakable effort to harm American manufacturers by subsidizing Chinese rail and bus industries,” said Rep. Harley Rouda (D-CA-48), who<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_d210ac86f582462184490db3ec85584a%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Mischa Wanek-Libman</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/15/House-passed-NDAA-includes-amendment-blocking-federal-funds-from-being-used-to-purchase-Chinese-state-manufactured-transit-vehicles</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/15/House-passed-NDAA-includes-amendment-blocking-federal-funds-from-being-used-to-purchase-Chinese-state-manufactured-transit-vehicles</guid><pubDate>Mon, 15 Jul 2019 20:20:06 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_d210ac86f582462184490db3ec85584a~mv2.jpg"/><div>The United States House of Representatives passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on the afternoon of July 12 that included an amendment prohibiting the use of federal transit funds to purchase vehicles manufactured by Chinese State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) and other state-supported companies. </div><div>“China’s ‘Made in China 2025’ initiative is an unmistakable effort to harm American manufacturers by subsidizing Chinese rail and bus industries,” said Rep. Harley Rouda (D-CA-48), who sponsored the amendment in the House bill“Chinese companies misrepresent themselves as benevolent actors, but let’s be clear: this is an attack on our economy and national security. I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for coming together to stop the flow of Americans’ taxpayer dollars to Chinese state-owned or state-supported companies.”</div><div>Rouda and the amendment’s co-sponsors charge the Chinese government’s use of “predatory practices” to support its ascension in certain sectors of the U.S. economy, such as rail car and bus manufacturing, which are included in China’s “Made in China 2025” initiative.</div><div>Rouda says Chinese state-owned and state-supported enterprises have used subsidized “bargain prices” well-below competitive market price to win contracts throughout the United States.</div><div>While not named in the bill specifically, CRRC Corporation Limited has seen growing success in the North American transit market and reported in April that it has been awarded more than 1,600 subway car and commuter train car orders in Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles and Philadelphia since entering the U.S. market in 2014. CRRC Corporation Limited’s parent company, CRRC Corp., is a Chinese SOE.</div><div>Rouda believes Chinese SOEs and state-supported enterprises have increased security vulnerabilities and create new risks for rolling stock procurements. To counteract these risks, the amendment included in the NDAA would specifically prohibit financial assistance to be used in awarding a contract or subcontract to an entity for the procurement of rail rolling stock for use in public transportation if the manufacturer is owned, controlled by or legally or financially related to corporations under certain conditions identified in the bill that designate the corporation to be a state-sponsored or owned enterprise located in adversarial non-market economies such as China.</div><div>The U.S. Senate passed its version of the NDAA on June 27, which also included an amendment with the same provision.</div><div>https://www.masstransitmag.com/management/article/21088495/housepassed-ndaa-includes-amendment-blocking-federal-funds-from-being-used-to-purchase-chinese-state-manufactured-transit-vehicles?utm_source=MASS+NewsViews+Newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=MASS190508005&amp;o_eid=7666C7138645J6B&amp;rdx.ident%5Bpull%5D=omeda%7C7666C7138645J6B</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>The Longest Driverless Test-Track Opens in Ohio</title><description><![CDATA[A new state-funded facility for testing driverless cars and other “smart” vehicles has opened in the latest expansion of Ohio’s Transportation Research Center.The new Smart Mobility Advanced Research Test, or SMART, Center, in Logan County about 40 miles northwest of Columbus, includes a six-lane, high-speed “smart” intersection, complete with a traffic light, that companies and researchers can use to test new vehicle technology.The new center cost $45 million, of which $25 million came from<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_5c41ddb0ce4c4df4bbefe46d38ecca43%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_5c41ddb0ce4c4df4bbefe46d38ecca43%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Andrew J. Tobias</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/15/The-Longest-Driverless-Test-Track-Opens-in-Ohio</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/15/The-Longest-Driverless-Test-Track-Opens-in-Ohio</guid><pubDate>Mon, 15 Jul 2019 19:52:23 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_5c41ddb0ce4c4df4bbefe46d38ecca43~mv2.jpg"/><div>A new state-funded facility for testing driverless cars and other “smart” vehicles has opened in the latest expansion of Ohio’s Transportation Research Center.</div><div>The new Smart Mobility Advanced Research Test, or SMART, Center, in Logan County about 40 miles northwest of Columbus, includes a six-lane, high-speed “smart” intersection, complete with a traffic light, that companies and researchers can use to test new vehicle technology.</div><div>The new center cost $45 million, of which $25 million came from Ohio State University, with the rest coming from the state, through JobsOhio and the Ohio Department of Transportation. Former Gov. John Kasich announced the new facility two years ago, and officials held a ribbon-cutting ceremony on Wednesday, complete with a demonstration of a foam-plated car outfitted with an automatic braking feature that allowed it to avoid crashing with another car.</div><div>Lt. Gov. Jon Husted told reporters the center is a key component of Central Ohio’s efforts to attract new manufacturing companies and build a high-tech economy. But he said the advances developed there can benefit areas like Cleveland by supporting suppliers as far as 200 miles away.</div><div>“This is a world-class facility. and it’s a tremendous asset, and what happens here literally will save people’s lives,” said Husted, who is overseeing various state initiatives meant to tout and foster technological innovation. “It will affect everybody in the world because the driving technologies that will be on the showroom floor in the form of an automobile are going to be tested right here.”</div><div>Kristi Tanner, senior managing director for JobsOhio, the state’s economic development nonprofit, said the facility is her organization’s “best hook” when they try to attract companies interested in driverless cars and smart vehicles.</div><div>“This is the hook that brings them here, and gets them interested in seeing what we’re doing,” she said.</div><div>The TRC was opened in 1974, and is the brainchild of former Gov. Jim Rhodes. It helped attract the Honda manufacturing plant in Marysville, which is just down the road and today employs more than 4,000 workers. The state bought the thousands of acres of farmland upon which the facility was built and later turned it over to OSU, which now runs it through a private affiliate.</div><div>The new SMART facility measures 540 acres, two-thirds the size of Central Park. The north-south leg of the six-lane intersection measures 1.2 miles, which officials tout as the longest in the industry.</div><div>https://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/tns-driveless-testing-track-ohio.html</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>A Texas clash of public safety and property rights</title><description><![CDATA[Before Election Day 2020, the Trump White House, working through the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Surface Transportation Board will make one of its most consequential decisions regarding the future of public safety and private property rights in America, beginning in Texas.The FRA is currently reviewing the draft Environmental Impact Statement to assess the human environmental impact of a proposal to construct and operate a high-speed rail<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_5918dfb67e614c21baf22bc4398498a4%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/10/A-Texas-clash-of-public-safety-and-property-rights</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/10/A-Texas-clash-of-public-safety-and-property-rights</guid><pubDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2019 18:40:17 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>Before Election Day 2020, the Trump White House, working through the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Surface Transportation Board will make one of its most consequential decisions regarding the future of public safety and private property rights in America, beginning in Texas.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_5918dfb67e614c21baf22bc4398498a4~mv2.jpg"/><div>The FRA is currently reviewing the draft Environmental Impact Statement to assess the human environmental impact of a proposal to construct and operate a high-speed rail system between Houstonand Dallas. After hearing Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao’s speech on federal infrastructure policy at a June 26 Heritage Foundation event, it is clear the high-speed rail developer, Texas Central, has many hurdles to overcome.</div><div>Ms. Chao stressed that the Transportation Department’s overarching priority is ensuring public and passenger safety — “when nothing falls from the sky or off the tracks,” to paraphrase. In just the past six years, several major U.S. train derailments have killed more than 18 Americans and injured hundreds more — many very seriously — across the nation.</div><div>In July 2018, R.L. Banks, a Virginia rail engineering firm, released its study of the proposed Texas high-speed rail alignment, concluding that Texas Central had selected the cheapest but most dangerous of several route options connecting Dallas to Houston. The engineering firm concluded that the proposed route’s multiple mini-curved track design would increase the potential for train derailments, a public peril compounded by the steel-rail “heat buckling” that can occur under Houston’s prolonged intensive summer climate.</div><div>Texas Central also proposes to build this new corridor next to a natural gas compressor facility that releases gas periodically for testing purposes, as well as accidentally. Like an old-fashioned trolley, the 55-year old Shinkansen system runs on overheard catenary wires, which emit electrical sparks — a significant combustible danger not only to passengers but also to everyone and everything in the immediate vicinity of the natural gas facility.</div><div>Union Pacific warned at an April 16 Texas House hearing that the proposed route further endangers public safety due to its “potentially fatal flaw:” High-speed rail’s electromagnetic system can interfere with the freight line’s low-voltage current. Freight railroad’s signaling and traffic control systems for gates at railroad crossings depend on the absolute integrity of Union Pacific’s low-voltage current. Union Pacific engineers and safety experts also warned of massive high-speed rail structures along the proposed route that reduce drivers’ ability to see and react to oncoming trains.</div><div>Ms. Chao also emphasized President Trump’s vision for infrastructure projects: “under budget and ahead of schedule.” The proposed Texas high-speed rail project is neither.</div><div>Texas Central, the promoter, sponsor and developer of high-speed rail, originally announced in 2015 that the project would be completed in 2021 at a cost of $10 billion. The cost has now ballooned to as much as $18 billion and the Federal Railroad Administration doesn’t even plan to conclude the draft Environmental Impact Statement review on the proposed 240-mile long construction project until March 2020 at the earliest.</div><div>Ms. Chao underscored the importance of traditional private U.S. infrastructure investors, such as U.S. pension funds and endowments, in projects such as this.</div><div>Texas Central has raised only $450 million (2.5 percent of the current $18 billion estimate) in the past four years, of which only $110 million is from U.S. investors. The remaining $340 million (more than 75 percent of funds raised) has come from sovereign Japanese entities trying to promote the sale of the Shinkansen technology to export markets such as the United States before 21st century technology renders it obsolete. (Notably, Ms. Chao on March 12 announced the creation of the Non-Traditional and Emerging Transportation Technology Council to help fast-track Hyperloop and other innovative transportation advancements). Most of those sovereign funds were deposited in August 2018 as an interest-bearing loan to an offshore Special Purpose Vehicle in the Cayman Islands, to be used to hire an Italian firm to design and construct the system and a Spanish firm to operate it.</div><div>Texas Central intends to make up the multi-billion-dollar shortfall by seeking federal loans or credit assistance under two federal programs, the Registered Retirement Income Fund (RRIF) and the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA), neither of which, according to the Reason Foundation, provides adequate safeguards for federal taxpayers against rail project defaults.</div><div>To qualify for federal taxpayer assistance and federal pre-emption, Texas Central asked the Surface Transportation Board in 2016 to exercise federal jurisdiction over the project. The board ruled in July 2016 that it did not have jurisdiction because the proposed wholly intra-state project would not be part of the national interstate rail network.</div><div>In 2018, Texas Central asked the board to reconsider that decision based on what Texas Central claims is a “through-ticketing agreement with Amtrak.” Last month, the board asked for additional highly detailed information from Texas Central to justify its request, including producing independently verifiable data supporting ridership projections and explaining numerous logistical considerations.</div><div>A decision by the board to accept jurisdiction over the project would also mean that Texas state law could not be used to prevent or unreasonably hinder Texas Central’s hotly-contested and robustly-litigated attempts to use eminent domain to gain control of thousands of privately-owned properties between Houston and Dallas. Such a result could have far-ranging negative effects on every American’s private property rights.</div><div>As the board’s action continues to unfold, the Federal Railroad Administration must decide whether to approve the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, which includes safety standards for Texas Central’s proposed rail system. The Trump administration, through the Federal Railroad Administration and the Surface Transportation Board, must prudently consider whether the many public and passenger safety problems can be addressed and resolved, as it determines how best to safeguard American lives and protect Americans’ private property rights from this ill-conceived high-speed rail project.</div><div>https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jul/9/trump-administration-faces-a-countdown-on-the-texa/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>China's high-speed rail offers model for other countries: World Bank</title><description><![CDATA[China's high-speed railway (HSR) has registered rapid growth and offered many viable practices for other countries considering HSR investment, according to a World Bank report released Monday. Key factors enabling the growth include the development of a comprehensive long-term plan and the standardization of designs and procedures, said the report, which summarizes China's HSR development. China's Medium- and Long-Term Railway Plan, which looks up to 15 years ahead, provides a clear framework]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/10/Chinas-high-speed-rail-offers-model-for-other-countries-World-Bank</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/10/Chinas-high-speed-rail-offers-model-for-other-countries-World-Bank</guid><pubDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2019 18:37:13 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>China's high-speed railway (HSR) has registered rapid growth and offered many viable practices for other countries considering HSR investment, according to a World Bank report released Monday.  Key factors enabling the growth include the development of a comprehensive long-term plan and the standardization of designs and procedures, said the report, which summarizes China's HSR development.  China's Medium- and Long-Term Railway Plan, which looks up to 15 years ahead, provides a clear framework for the development of the system, according to the World Bank.  Meanwhile, the construction cost of the Chinese HSR network stood at about two-thirds of the cost in other countries, the report said, citing an average of 17 million U. S. dollars to 21 million U. S. dollars per km.  &quot;China has built the largest high-speed rail network in the world. The impacts go well beyond the railway sector and include changed patterns of urban development, increases in tourism, and promotion of regional economic growth,&quot; said Martin Raiser, World Bank director of China.  By the end of 2018, the total railway operation mileage reached 131,000 km, five times higher than 1949, while the high-speed railway exceeded 29,000 km, accounting for more than 60 percent of the world's total, according to a recent report by the National Bureau of Statistics.  In China, high-speed rail service is competitive with road and air transport for distances of up to about 1,200 km, while fares are about one-fourth the base fares in other countries, which allows HSR trains to attract passengers from all income groups, the report said.  &quot;Large numbers of people are now able to travel more easily and reliably than ever before, and the network has laid the groundwork for future reductions in greenhouse gas emissions,&quot; Raiser said. </div><div>http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1157264.shtml</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Former CSX exec Kendall joins FRA as deputy administrator</title><description><![CDATA[Quintin Kendall is the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) new deputy administrator, the agency confirmed this week. At the FRA, Kendall is responsible for providing executive leadership and guidance on policy, budget, administration, regulation implementation, communications, and stakeholder and government relations, according to his biography on the FRA’s website. His prior experience includes a stint at the U.S. Department of Transportation, where he served as deputy assistant secretary<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_6601d4ac834a4813b876b7b0a25cbdfe%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_303/4cd688_6601d4ac834a4813b876b7b0a25cbdfe%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Former-CSX-exec-Kendall-joins-FRA-as-deputy-administrator</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Former-CSX-exec-Kendall-joins-FRA-as-deputy-administrator</guid><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 20:04:32 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>Quintin Kendall is the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) new deputy administrator, the agency confirmed this week.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_6601d4ac834a4813b876b7b0a25cbdfe~mv2.jpg"/><div> At the FRA, Kendall is responsible for providing executive leadership and guidance on policy, budget, administration, regulation implementation, communications, and stakeholder and government relations, according to his biography on the FRA’s website. His prior experience includes a stint at the U.S. Department of Transportation, where he served as deputy assistant secretary for management and budget form 2005 to 2008 under Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, and as chief of staff to Secretary Mary Peters from 2008 to 2009. Most recently, Kendall was CSX's vice president of state government and community affairs from 2013 to 2018. He led the Class I's systemwide grade crossing safety team and managed the &quot;Play It Safe&quot; rail safety public awareness campaign. Kendall also managed the TellCSX Service Center, a consumer &quot;hotline&quot; open to the general public to report railroad issues such as blocked crossings.  In addition, he regularly engaged with state and local governments to improve passenger-rail service and develop rail-served economic development projects.</div><div>https://www.progressiverailroading.com/people/news/Former-CSX-exec-Kendall-joins-FRA-as-deputy-administrator--57922</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Congress Considers Jones Act Changes Affecting Oil and Gas, Renewables</title><description><![CDATA[On June 26, 2019, the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported favorably the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2019 (H.R. 3409) including several Jones Act-related provisions affecting the offshore oil and gas and offshore wind industries.The Jones Act is the popular name for a set of U.S. federal laws that restrict U.S. domestic maritime commerce to qualified U.S.-flag vessels. The Jones Act restricts “any part of the transportation of merchandise” between two “points<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_d4d0266c5d024bbeb6a8b9760c7763dd%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_307/4cd688_d4d0266c5d024bbeb6a8b9760c7763dd%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Charlie Papavizas</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Congress-Considers-Jones-Act-Changes-Affecting-Oil-and-Gas-Renewables</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Congress-Considers-Jones-Act-Changes-Affecting-Oil-and-Gas-Renewables</guid><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 20:00:46 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>On June 26, 2019, the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure reported favorably the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2019 (H.R. 3409) including several Jones Act-related provisions affecting the offshore oil and gas and offshore wind industries.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_d4d0266c5d024bbeb6a8b9760c7763dd~mv2.jpg"/><div>The Jones Act is the popular name for a set of U.S. federal laws that restrict U.S. domestic maritime commerce to qualified U.S.-flag vessels. The Jones Act restricts “any part of the transportation of merchandise” between two “points in the United States” to such vessels. The Jones Act is extended offshore beyond the territorial limits of the United States by virtue of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act as amended which applies to any device, structure or installation permanently or temporarily attached to the seabed for certain purposes. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is the federal agency charged with interpreting the application of the Jones Act to particular offshore activities.</div><div>Vessel Equipment. One area of controversy regarding the Jones Act in the offshore oil and gas industry has been its application to “vessel equipment” which CBP has long exempted from the concept of “merchandise.” Commencing in 2009, CBP has proposed the revocation and modification of a number of CBP-issued rulings going back as far as 1976 interpreting “vessel equipment” in the offshore context. The matter is also the subject of ongoing federal litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.</div><div>One of the provisions in H.R. 3409 – section 305(b)(5) – lists those CBP targeted rulings and would command CBP to “issue a notice, including an opportunity for public comment, on the modification or revocation” of those rulings within 30 days of enactment.</div><div>Heavy Lift. Another area of controversy in the offshore oil and gas industry has been short movements by foreign heavy lift vessels. CBP issued several rulings in 2012 interpreting the “any part of the transportation” portion of the Jones Act to prohibit foreign heavy lift vessels from undertaking short movements laden with cargo even if done so for safety reasons as mandated by other federal agencies.</div><div>H.R. 3409, in section 305(a), also addresses the heavy lift issue by creating a waiver process similar to the existing process for launch barges whereby a foreign heavy lift vessel can be utilized but only after a finding by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation that there are no available qualified U.S.-flag vessels. The provision is limited to “installation vessels” which must, among other things, be used “to install platform jackets.” “Platform jackets” are in turn defined in existing law with a focus on oil and gas installations which would make the application of the law to offshore renewables unclear.</div><div>Waivers. Current law permits waivers of the Jones Act when “in the interest of national defense” but does not require such waivers, when issued upon request of the Secretary of Defense, to include a finding that there are no qualified U.S.-flag vessels available to meet the need. H.R. 3409 would amend existing law to require inclusion of a “confirmation that there are insufficient qualified vessels to meet the needs of national defense without such a waiver” when a DoD-requested waiver is issued.</div><div>Vessel Inventory. Finally, H.R. 3409 would amend an existing provision of law which requires the Secretary of Transportation to maintain an inventory of U.S.-flag cable lay vessels to revise the definition of covered vessels and to add “installation vessels” to that inventory.</div><div>In order for the Coast Guard Authorization Act to become law, it must still be passed by the U.S. House of Representatives as well as the U.S. Senate and then be signed by the President. Generally, Coast Guard authorization bills are enacted in the fall of each year.</div><div>https://www.maritime-executive.com/editorials/congress-considers-jones-act-changes-affecting-oil-and-gas-renewables</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Secretary Elaine Chao Touts Positive Train Control Installment at Summit</title><description><![CDATA[The U.S. Department of Transportation has recorded progress with the implementation of positive train control technology, the country’s top transportation official indicated recently.At a summit in Washington on June 20 to reflect on the department’s safety objectives, Secretary Elaine Chao said, “In the last two years, locomotives equipped with positive train control increased from 42% to 100% for freight and from 41% to 91% for passenger rail.”“Once it’s fully implemented, positive train<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_7db9792a2ad744a28323d6bf77b6ac29%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_303/4cd688_7db9792a2ad744a28323d6bf77b6ac29%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Eugene Mulero</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Secretary-Elaine-Chao-Touts-Positive-Train-Control-Installment-at-Summit</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Secretary-Elaine-Chao-Touts-Positive-Train-Control-Installment-at-Summit</guid><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:57:31 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>The U.S. Department of Transportation has recorded progress with the implementation of positive train control technology, the country’s top transportation official indicated recently.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_7db9792a2ad744a28323d6bf77b6ac29~mv2.jpg"/><div>At a summit in Washington on June 20 to reflect on the department’s safety objectives, Secretary Elaine Chao said, “In the last two years, locomotives equipped with positive train control increased from 42% to 100% for freight and from 41% to 91% for passenger rail.”</div><div>“Once it’s fully implemented, positive train control systems will govern rail operations on approximately 58,000 railroad route miles to help prevent train-to-train collisions and overspeed derailments,” she added.</div><div>According to the Federal Railroad Administration, as of March 31, the automatic braking technology was in operation on about 48,050 of the nearly 58,000 route miles required by law. That amounted to a 3% increase from the previous quarter.</div><div>Forty-one railroads falling under the mandate either implemented the technology by the end of last year or qualified for a deadline extension to Dec. 31, 2020. The agency stated it is proceeding with comprehensive oversight to ensure next year’s deadline is met.</div><div>Also at the summit, the secretary said “rebuilding and refurbishing” the country’s infrastructure network was a high priority for boosting the economy.</div><div>During President Donald Trump’s tenure, congressional leaders have not agreed on a national infrastructure funding plan.</div><div>https://www.ttnews.com/articles/secretary-elaine-chao-touts-positive-train-control-installment-summit</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>AAA Survey: Drivers Perceive Impaired Driving As Dangerous, Percentage Do It Anyway</title><description><![CDATA[According to a new AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety survey released this month, most drivers (95.1 percent) perceive driving after drinking as very or extremely dangerous. However, almost 11 percent admitted to having done so in the past 30 days.Meanwhile, the survey found that 70 percent of respondents consider driving within an hour after using marijuana to be very or extremely dangerous. But more than 7 percent of respondents personally approve of driving shortly after using marijuana.The<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_dc2275bff8b94a2ea6ef171fdd94d3f8%7Emv2.png/v1/fill/w_500%2Ch_333/4cd688_dc2275bff8b94a2ea6ef171fdd94d3f8%7Emv2.png"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/AAA-Survey-Drivers-Perceive-Impaired-Driving-As-Dangerous-Percentage-Do-It-Anyway</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/AAA-Survey-Drivers-Perceive-Impaired-Driving-As-Dangerous-Percentage-Do-It-Anyway</guid><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:55:03 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>According to a new AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety survey released this month, most drivers (95.1 percent) perceive driving after drinking as very or extremely dangerous. However, almost 11 percent admitted to having done so in the past 30 days.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_dc2275bff8b94a2ea6ef171fdd94d3f8~mv2.png"/><div>Meanwhile, the survey found that 70 percent of respondents consider driving within an hour after using marijuana to be very or extremely dangerous. But more than 7 percent of respondents personally approve of driving shortly after using marijuana.</div><div>The survey found that Millennial (ages 25-39) respondents were the most likely generational cohort to report driving within one hour after using marijuana in the past month (13.7 percent), followed by Generation Z at 10 percent.</div><div>Dr. David Yang, the AAA Foundation’s executive director, noted in a statement that the impairing effects of marijuana are usually experienced within the first one to four hours after using the drug. Additionally, marijuana users who drive high are up to twice as likely to be involved in a crash, he explained.</div><div>“Marijuana can significantly alter reaction times and impair a driver’s judgment. Yet, many drivers don’t consider marijuana-impaired driving as risky as other behaviors like driving drunk or talking on the phone while driving,” Yang noted, pointing out that the survey found 7 percent of the licensed drivers it polled “approved” of driving after recently using marijuana – more than other dangerous behaviors such as alcohol-impaired driving at 1.6 percent, drowsy driving at 1.7 percent, and prescription drug-impaired driving at 3 percent.</div><div>“It is important for everyone to understand that driving after recently using marijuana can put themselves and others at risk,” he added.</div><div>AAA also noted that law enforcement officers categorized as Drug Recognition Experts report that marijuana is now the most frequently identified drug category and that since 2015 the number of drivers arrested by DREs for using marijuana has increased 20 percent.</div><div>AAA’s survey follows on the heels of two other studies released last year that showed that motor vehicle crashes were up by as much as 6 percent in Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington, which have all legalized marijuana for recreational use, compared to neighboring states that have not.</div><div>The new survey results are part of the AAA Foundation’s annual Traffic Safety Culture Index, which identifies attitudes and behaviors related to traffic safety. The survey data are from a sample of 2,582 licensed drivers ages 16 and older who reported driving in the past 30 days.</div><div>https://aashtojournal.org/2019/06/28/aaa-survey-drivers-perceive-impaired-driving-as-dangerous-percentage-do-it-anyway/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Which Technology Will Most Impact The Future of Transportation? 15 Experts Share Their Insights</title><description><![CDATA[We've been promised self-driving cars, and we've seen driverless Teslas and other experiments pop up in our news feeds. But how soon can we expect autonomous vehicles and other transportation-centric tech developments to arrive on a mass scale?These industry insiders shared with us a realistic barometer for the future of transportation through a tech lens. Here's what they said:1. Susan Shaheen, Ph.D., Co-Director of the Transportation Sustainability Resource Center at UC-Berkeley“Vehicle]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Which-Technology-Will-Most-Impact-The-Future-of-Transportation-15-Experts-Share-Their-Insights</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Which-Technology-Will-Most-Impact-The-Future-of-Transportation-15-Experts-Share-Their-Insights</guid><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:50:59 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>We've been promised self-driving cars, and we've seen driverless Teslas and other experiments pop up in our news feeds. But how soon can we expect autonomous vehicles and other transportation-centric tech developments to arrive on a mass scale?</div><div>These industry insiders shared with us a realistic barometer for the future of transportation through a tech lens. Here's what they said:</div><div>1. Susan Shaheen, Ph.D., Co-Director of the Transportation Sustainability Resource Center at UC-Berkeley</div><div>“Vehicle automation has the potential to re-imagine public transportation as we know it today. Right-sized, automated public transit vehicles have the opportunity to reduce the operating costs of public transportation. These savings could be passed onto riders in the form ofincreased service (more routes and reduced service headways) as well as lower and more equitable fares. Increased service and lower fares could make public transit more competitive than other modes and result in increased ridership.”</div><div>2. Jeff Tumlin, Principal at Nelson/Nygaard and Author of Sustainable Transportation Planning </div><div>“Cellphones + Open APIs + Mobility Wallets. Just as the FCC manages the airwaves to promote innovation, competition, profit, and the public good, so must cities manage their streets. Cities and transit agencies must become mobility managers, helping us get the most from our limited street rights-of-way. This means open APIs for payment and trip routing, public mobility wallets, space-efficiency fees for wasteful use of streets, and equity rebates to correct for those left behind by technology changes. Why should it cost me $5 a day for six square feet on the bus, when I can drive my 2500 square foot AV RV downtown for free?”</div><div>3. Tom Berkovits, Head of Operations at RideOn</div><div>“The technology that will have the biggest impact is the 5G and edge computing network. This technology will allow small platforms to perform more safety, more efficient, and smarter than ever.”</div><div>4. Alex Nesic, co-founder &amp; CBO at CLEVR Mobility</div><div>“While everyone is distracted by the shiny object that is Autonomous Vehicle technology, I believe that intelligent LEVs are positioned to be much more impactful. The most important element is a more accurate GPS asset tracking module that can be used on LEVs. Once greater reliable accuracy is achieved, then a variety of things can follow – intelligent control, finite geofencing, interactive speed caps, autonomous rebalancing &amp; parking, proactive regulatory compliance, and more. The LEV industry will, in my view, have to be regulated much more like the consumer drone industry is by the FAA for example and the only way that becomes possible is with accurate positioning and network control. Lastly, LEVs are primarily seen as mobility, but they also have tremendous potential to host and disperse additional technology. As connected batteries on wheels, they can be outfitted with any number of data collection sensors or bluetooth and near field technologies that can fit nicely into the larger smart city eco-system.”</div><div>5. Matt Caywood, CEO of TransitScreen</div><div>“TransitScreen's technology is having a major impact in the transportation space — TransitScreen wants to make getting around cities easier and more sustainable. Our software shows all nearby transportation options for a given location: traditional public transit such as bus and subway, plus newer mobility options such as Uber and Lyft, electric scooters, and more. We work with corporate workplaces and multifamily apartment buildings across the country to provide a comprehensive solution.”</div><div>6. Sara Schaer, founder and CEO of Kango, ridesharing for kids</div><div>“Autonomous vehicles. Ridesharing will definitely be affected by the spread of autonomous/self-driving vehicles, and by new types of mobility networks that connect vehicles and services with people who need them, when they need them.”</div><div>7. Eric Simone, CEO of Clearblade</div><div>“Driverless vehicles will mean roadways that are designed differently, with a reduced footprint, narrower right of way and no need for visual cues like road striping or traffic lights. The biggest impediment to driverless vehicles is government. They’re not ready for this. The technology’s there, but then you’ve got to get all these different constituencies working together, and that’s what I think is a bigger barrier.</div><div>You’re going to have government. You’re going to have interested parties, like insurance companies, that are going to be against moving so fast. It’s going to take some time. The technology could happen within the next 10 years. But I highly doubt it because of bureaucracy.”</div><div>8. Bernie Wagenblast, Owner of Transportation Radio</div><div>“It's difficult to pick one technology as having the biggest impact but I would say communication technology is the one I would select. Nearly all of the technological improvements that are happening and that are planned require communication between vehicles and between vehicles and infrastructure. The 5G technology being rolled out will allow vehicles to more quickly communicate between each other and the surrounding infrastructure. One major challenge is allocating spectrum for all of the potential communications technology. There are competing uses, particularly the expansion of broadband coverage to rural areas, and a strong case can be made for allocating the limited spectrum to each.</div><div>Without this communication technology in place, many of the benefits of intelligent transportation systems won't be realized. Not only will safety be improved, but these communication technologies will also allow increased capacity. For example transit trains can travel closer to each other.</div><div>These issues transcend national borders since vehicles often do. Therefore international cooperation is required to achieve the full potential of these communication technologies.”</div><div>9. Mark Cann, CEO of Cryo Energy</div><div>“Any long term technology based solution for transportation needs to meet two key requirements: the solution needs to be rapidly scalable without requiring the physical extraction of materials and its needs to be a full closed cycle relative to emissions. The use of Cryogens (Liquid Air/Nitrogen) and Synthetic derived fuels meets these key criteria. Cryogens are perfect for local and regional ground transportation while synfuels are able to power flight, sea, rail, and long haul trucking. You can't have a functioning society without the use case that were just listed. No other know solutions are able to quickly transition all our transportation needs over to zero emissions while also not requiring ANY raw materials to be extracted.”</div><div>10. Etienne Deffarges, Author of Untangling the USA: The Cost of Complexity</div><div>“Maglev technology: Electric Maglev trains “glide” electromagnetically, with no contact between track and vehicles, and are very energy efficient; they already reach 267 mph in commercial service to Shanghai airport; Japan is building a new 180 miles Tokyo to Nagoya line, with a projected 40 minutes transit time at 315mph by 2027. Maglev rights of way are easier to get than for conventional rail—Maglev tracks can easily fit above an existing freeway. Elon Musk, today's most impactful entrepreneur, is betting on Maglev technology with his new Boring Company, which aims to offer an alternative to congested urban transit.”</div><div>11. Juan Rodriguez, co-founder and CEO of FlashParking</div><div>“The influx of electric vehicles—not just cars but also micro-mobility—has been and will continue to be a driving force in the industry. In the last few years, advancements in battery efficiency and affordability have grown the popularity of vehicles and made low-cost micro-mobility a reality. The challenge we’re facing now is charging capacity; most garages today don’t have the electrical infrastructures to support the growing demand for charging. That’s why when someone building a structure, like a mobility hub, asks me “what’s the one thing I should do?”, I say load it up with much electrical power as possible.”</div><div>12. Madhav Durbha, Ph.D., Group Vice President, Industry  Strategy at LLamasoft</div><div>“As omnichannel shipments increase in volume and stops, and the Uberization of trucking continues, supply chain design will hold a key impact– and routes need to be more dynamically optimized in light of multiple pickups and drop-offs. The placement of production and warehouse facilities and sourcing strategies will have significant implications on both shipping costs and service levers– and Cost to Serve based optimization, or trading off transportation costs against other supply chain costs with the goal of meeting overall business objectives, will take hold.”</div><div>13. Richard Reina, Product Training Director at CARiD</div><div>“The technology available in our cars has advanced by leaps and bounds in recent years. While entertainment and navigation features are cool and fun, the most important are semi-autonomous safety technologies. Some of the most important include collision/blind spot warning systems and automatic braking. These features come standard in many new cars today and, based on consumer demand and widespread adoption, it’s safe to say that they’ll continue to impact how cars are designed and how drivers get around.”</div><div>14. Eugene Tsyrklevich, Founder &amp; CEO, Parkopedia</div><div>“Environments such as retirement villages and car parks have seen the most success in autonomous (self-driving) cars. Recent research by Parkopedia shows that as of today, a quarter of drivers would be prepared to pay extra for their car to be able to park autonomously, allowing the driver to exit the vehicle at their final destination or car park entrance. As the number of autonomous vehicles on the road increases, road, curb and parking management will have to evolve to facilitate high levels of autonomous interactions. Will we see a time when the driving test is obsolete?”</div><div>15. Gunnar Rhone, EIT, Engineer II, Highway/ITS at HNTB</div><div>“The most promising emerging technology for the transportation industry right now is 5G. Currently, connected vehicle communications is done through DSRC, but 5G could change the way that vehicles communicate with their surroundings by creating a lower latency C-V2X.”</div><div>https://www.disruptordaily.com/transportation-technology-trends/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Support Remains For Bipartisan Infrastructure Effort</title><description><![CDATA[A coalition of transportation construction industry and the business community this week announced the start of a new advertising campaign targeting Congressional members and touting the urgent need for investment in modern infrastructure.The Transportation Construction Coalition and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce-led Americans for Transportation Mobility issued a joint news release that said the campaign would lean heavily on social media to generate grassroots support and to keep pressure on<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_2e24813d54254bb3a2d389b8a384783e%7Emv2.png/v1/fill/w_500%2Ch_512/4cd688_2e24813d54254bb3a2d389b8a384783e%7Emv2.png"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Support-Remains-For-Bipartisan-Infrastructure-Effort</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Support-Remains-For-Bipartisan-Infrastructure-Effort</guid><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 19:39:21 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>A coalition of transportation construction industry and the business community this week announced the start of a new advertising campaign targeting Congressional members and touting the urgent need for investment in modern infrastructure.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_2e24813d54254bb3a2d389b8a384783e~mv2.png"/><div>The Transportation Construction Coalition and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce-led Americans for Transportation Mobility issued a joint news release that said the campaign would lean heavily on social media to generate grassroots support and to keep pressure on Congress and the Trump administration to collaborate on a permanent fix to the federal Highway Trust Fund, as well as a new transportation infrastructure package.</div><div>Meanwhile, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chair Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) said Tuesday during a subcommittee roundtable that he had met earlier in the Speaker Pelosi’s Office with Ways and Means Committee Chair Richard Neal (D-Mass). “We’re making one more run on the White House on funding transportation infrastructure,” DeFazio said.</div><div>https://aashtojournal.org/2019/06/28/support-remains-for-bipartisan-infrastructure-effort/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Senate Commerce Subcommittee Focuses On Transportation Technology</title><description><![CDATA[The Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Transportation and Safety this week held a hearing exploring the adoption of technology by transportation agencies and the private sector, and the effects those technologies have on the surface transportation network.Subcommittee Chair Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) opened the hearing explaining that “Technology is already changing how we move people and goods across this country. And there is potential for new technology to improve safety, efficiency, and mobility<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_6c0f512bbb3f4ed988c197805355bb4e%7Emv2.png/v1/fill/w_500%2Ch_333/4cd688_6c0f512bbb3f4ed988c197805355bb4e%7Emv2.png"/>]]></description><dc:creator>AASHTO Journal</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Senate-Commerce-Subcommittee-Focuses-On-Transportation-Technology</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/07/01/Senate-Commerce-Subcommittee-Focuses-On-Transportation-Technology</guid><pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2019 13:58:44 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_6c0f512bbb3f4ed988c197805355bb4e~mv2.png"/><div>The Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Transportation and Safety this week held a hearing exploring the adoption of technology by transportation agencies and the private sector, and the effects those technologies have on the surface transportation network.</div><div>Subcommittee Chair Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) opened the hearing explaining that “Technology is already changing how we move people and goods across this country. And there is potential for new technology to improve safety, efficiency, and mobility across our surface transportation system. But with great potential comes challenges.”</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_21d5f2ca8f284f139e5963cc69a0b7cc~mv2.png"/><div>Steve Ingracia, Nebraska DOT’s deputy director of Technology and Strategic Planning, told the subcommittee about the work going on in his state, in partnership with the DOTs from Wyoming and Utah, to improve mobility and safety across the I-80 corridor. The states are implementing a project funded by a $2.75 million federal Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deploymentgrant that builds upon Wyoming’s connected vehicle pilot program, which is expected “to increase the flow of information to freight haulers and will ultimately improve safety along I-80,” Ingracia said.</div><div>“In the transportation field, I believe we are at an inflection point, with multiple technologies advancing quickly and simultaneously. It is only through partnership between the federal government and the states that we will be able to keep pace with these changes,” Ingracia said.</div><div>Other hearing witnesses included Shailen Bhatt, president, and chief executive officer at the Intelligent Transportation Society of America; Patrick Duffy, president of Blockchain in Transport Alliance; Brent Hutto, chief relationship officer at Truckstop Alliance; and Ann Schlenker, director of the Center for Transportation Research at the Argonne National Laboratory.</div><div>Bhatt used his testimony to outline ITS America’s FAST Act reauthorization platform, titled “Moving People, Data and Freight: Safer. Greener. Smarter.”</div><div>According to Bhatt’s written testimony, the federal commitment to investment is a key aspect to effectively implementing new technology.</div><div>“Only with investment certainty will the nation finally see and benefit from the research and the large-scale transformational deployments of intelligent transportation technologies that will define the way people, goods, services, and information move in the 21st century – and most importantly, finally help begin to reduce the epidemic of fatalities on our roadways,” Bhatt said.</div><div>https://aashtojournal.org/2019/06/28/senate-commerce-subcommittee-focuses-on-transportation-technology/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Ground broken on Virgin Trains USA's expansion linking Miami to Orlando.</title><description><![CDATA[Virgin Trains USA has broken ground on the project to expand passenger rail service from Miami to Orlando. Virgin Trains USA, formerly Brightline, is reinventing rail service in America by providing a fast, efficient rail service that will be a pleasure to travel on.There is a great opportunity to connect cities that are too close to fly and too long to drive. Passenger service is expected to begin in 2022. Orlando is the nation’s most-visited city and there is huge demand, with Virgin Trains<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_b00a3c1e7a0841a6bbe3ccb21a56534b%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_307/4cd688_b00a3c1e7a0841a6bbe3ccb21a56534b%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Virgin Trains USA</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/28/Ground-broken-on-Virgin-Trains-USAs-expansion-linking-Miami-to-Orlando</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/28/Ground-broken-on-Virgin-Trains-USAs-expansion-linking-Miami-to-Orlando</guid><pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:56:24 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_b00a3c1e7a0841a6bbe3ccb21a56534b~mv2.jpg"/><div>Virgin Trains USA has broken ground on the project to expand passenger rail service from Miami to Orlando. Virgin Trains USA, formerly Brightline, is reinventing rail service in America by providing a fast, efficient rail service that will be a pleasure to travel on.</div><div>There is a great opportunity to connect cities that are too close to fly and too long to drive. Passenger service is expected to begin in 2022. Orlando is the nation’s most-visited city and there is huge demand, with Virgin Trains USA expecting to transport six million passengers a year, generate around $6.4 billion in direct economic impact to Florida and bring more than 10,000 jobs.</div><div>“This is a historic milestone on the path to reinvent passenger rail in America and clearly demonstrates the leadership role that the private sector can play in revitalising our nation’s infrastructure,” said Virgin Trains USA Chairman and co-founder of Fortress Investment Group Wes Edens.</div><div>“Virgin Trains service between Orlando and Miami will launch an American passenger rail renaissance. We expect that this will be the first of many passenger lines in the US that follow this model for connecting city pairs that are too close to fly and too far to drive.”</div><div>It is a huge undertaking – laying 170 miles of new track, using 225 million pounds of American steel and hammering around two million spikes and bolts into place over the next 36 months.</div><div>“Officially launching construction to Orlando marks a huge milestone for Virgin Trains and the realisation of our vision to reinvent passenger rail in America,” said Virgin Trains President Patrick Goddard. “Connecting Orlando and Miami, two of our nation’s greatest cities, will provide tremendous economic and environmental benefits that will be an asset to Florida for generations.”</div><div>It’s an exciting time for Virgin Trains USA. In September 2018, Virgin Trains USA also announced that it will construct and operate a new service connecting Las Vegas and Southern California. </div><div>https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infrastructure/press-release/21086176/brightline-ground-broken-on-virgin-trains-usas-expansion-linking-miami-to-orlando?utm_source=MASS+NewsViews+Newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=MASS190627002&amp;o_eid=7666C7138645J6B&amp;rdx.ident%5Bpull%5D=omeda%7C7666C7138645J6B</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>DART receives $60 million federal grant for platform project</title><description><![CDATA[Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have entered into a Full Funding Grant Agreement for $60.76 million that will help DART complete its Red and Blue Line Platform Extensions project. The project will allow DART to accomodate more riders and longer trains by lengthening platforms at 28 stations along the extigin Red and Blue light-rail lines. The platforms at these stations currently accommodate two-car trains, but the $128.74-million project will allow<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_6f87e1e0df6045e6b9c1bd38fdd5f9d5%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_307/4cd688_6f87e1e0df6045e6b9c1bd38fdd5f9d5%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>MISCHA WANEK-LIBMAN</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/28/DART-receives-60-million-federal-grant-for-platform-project</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/28/DART-receives-60-million-federal-grant-for-platform-project</guid><pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:53:10 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_6f87e1e0df6045e6b9c1bd38fdd5f9d5~mv2.jpg"/><div>Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have entered into a Full Funding Grant Agreement for $60.76 million that will help DART complete its Red and Blue Line Platform Extensions project. </div><div>The project will allow DART to accomodate more riders and longer trains by lengthening platforms at 28 stations along the extigin Red and Blue light-rail lines. The platforms at these stations currently accommodate two-car trains, but the $128.74-million project will allow the lines to accommodate three-car trains. </div><div>&quot;This federal investment will improve mobility for thousands of people who travel throughout the Dallas Metropolitan area,&quot; said U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine L. Chao. </div><div>FTA Acting Administrator K. Jane Williams joined Dallas officials June 27 at the Downtown Plano DART station to announce the grant. FTA notes that the station, surrounded by homes, restaurants, retail establishments and a revitalized downtown, is an example of value capture and public transit’s ability to create economic benefits in communities. FTA also explains the DART Red and Blue Line Platform Extensions project will strengthen and support existing and planned developments in Plano and elsewhere along the Red and Blue Lines. </div><div>&quot;Commuters in Dallas can now look forward to longer trains and a better commute,&quot; said Acting Administrator Williams. &quot;We are proud to partner with the Texas Department of Transportation and DART to accommodate growing transit ridership and promote economic development as jobs and population in the Dallas area continue to increase.&quot; </div><div>Funding for the project is provided through FTA’s Capital Investment Grants (CIG) Program, which provides funding for major transit projects nationwide. Projects accepted into the program must go through a multi-year, multi-step process according to requirements in law to be eligible for consideration to receive program funds.</div><div>In March 2018, DART selected civil engineering firm Lockwood, Andrews &amp; Newnam Inc.to manage the project.</div><div>https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/infrastructure/article/21086628/dart-receives-60-million-federal-grant-for-platform-project?utm_source=MASS+NewsViews+Newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=MASS190627002&amp;o_eid=7666C7138645J6B&amp;rdx.ident%5Bpull%5D=omeda%7C7666C7138645J6B</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>METRO Board Welcomes New Member</title><description><![CDATA[Robert "Bob" Fry is the newest member of the METRO Board of Directors. He was sworn in at today's Board meeting. The former mayor of West University Place was appointed to represent a group of 14 smaller cities on the Board that are within METRO's service area. Fry is a Houston native who graduated from Milby High School, attended the University of Texas at Austin and served in the U.S. Army during the Vietnam War. After returning from duty, he started a maritime industry company from which he<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_7fc7a8d47a834f62ad5b22890cd61056%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_7fc7a8d47a834f62ad5b22890cd61056%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Metro Transit Authority, Harris County</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/28/METRO-Board-Welcomes-New-Member</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/28/METRO-Board-Welcomes-New-Member</guid><pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2019 13:48:30 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_7fc7a8d47a834f62ad5b22890cd61056~mv2.jpg"/><div>Robert &quot;Bob&quot; Fry is the newest member of the METRO Board of Directors. He was sworn in at today's Board meeting. The former mayor of West University Place was appointed to represent a group of 14 smaller cities on the Board that are within METRO's service area. Fry is a Houston native who graduated from Milby High School, attended the University of Texas at Austin and served in the U.S. Army during the Vietnam War. After returning from duty, he started a maritime industry company from which he retired after its sale in 2011.</div><div>&quot;I'm thankful to mayors of the 14 smaller cities and to the METRO Board for their confidence in me. I look forward to working closely with fellow Board members and staff as METRO meets the transportation needs of our growing region,&quot; said Fry.</div><div>Fry currently serves as chairman of the Texas A &amp; M Galveston Board of Visitors, Chairman of the Houston Maritime Museum and was the founding chairman of the San Jacinto College Maritime Advisory Committee. </div><div>His term at METRO will last two years. Members can serve up to eight years on the Board.</div><div>METRO Board Member Don Elder, who also represents the smaller cities, was sworn in for a second term at today's meeting.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_253a5d09af2a48358a100881a62144b3~mv2.jpg"/><div>Fry's predecessor, Cindy Siegel, was honored with a proclamation by the Board. Her former colleagues shared their appreciation for her service.</div><div>https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/TXMETRO/bulletins/24e0559</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Mayors Appear Increasingly Concerned About Infrastructure</title><description><![CDATA[More than half of mayors discussed it during their annual State of the City addresses this year -- double the number four years ago.SPEED READ: Infrastructure was the second-most popular topic in mayors' annual addresses this year. Twice as many talked about infrastructure than in 2016. On the federal level, prospects for an infrastructure package have dimmed. As the prospects for a federal infrastructure package this year become vanishingly thin, mayors are becoming more concerned about<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_fdf9296bfa8344e886ea902f047bd587%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_fdf9296bfa8344e886ea902f047bd587%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Daniel Vock</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/25/Mayors-Appear-Increasingly-Concerned-About-Infrastructure</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/25/Mayors-Appear-Increasingly-Concerned-About-Infrastructure</guid><pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2019 15:03:05 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>More than half of mayors discussed it during their annual State of the City addresses this year -- double the number four years ago.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_fdf9296bfa8344e886ea902f047bd587~mv2.jpg"/><div>SPEED READ:</div><div>Infrastructure was the second-most popular topic in mayors' annual addresses this year.Twice as many talked about infrastructure than in 2016.On the federal level, prospects for an infrastructure package have dimmed. </div><div>As the prospects for a federal infrastructure package this year become vanishingly thin, mayors are becoming more concerned about infrastructure in their own cities.</div><div>More than half of mayors (57 percent) discussed infrastructure at length during their annual State of the City addresses this year, according to a new report by the National League of Cities (NLC). That made it the second-most popular topic for the second year in a row, trailing only economic development.</div><div>It’s no surprise that infrastructure ranks high among mayors' concerns. After all, there aren’t many problems more commonly associated with local government than potholes and leaky pipes. But mayors are talking about it more often than in recent years. Only 31 percent of mayors discussed infrastructure in their annual speeches in 2016, climbing to 48 percent in 2017 and reaching roughly 60 percent in the last two years, the NLC noted.</div><div>“Infrastructure improvements are often not all that visible to the general public. They don’t typically garner a great deal of attention -- though their failure certainly does,” Mayor Patrick Madden of Troy, N.Y., told residents. “Nonetheless, they are essential to preserve our assets and ensure the continued reliability of services and quality of life to our residents.”</div><div>More Than Roads</div><div>The most popular infrastructure topics in the mayoral addresses were roads, streets and signs. But mayors also highlighted their work in other areas.</div><div>Roughly a third of them mentioned water infrastructure, pedestrian facilities or infrastructure spending. Nearly a quarter mentioned public transit.</div><div>Topics that are closely related to infrastructure were popular, too: 63 percent of mayors mentioned parks and recreation, while 41 percent discussed energy and the environment, according to the report.</div><div>In Niagara Falls, N.Y., for example, Mayor Paul Dyster pushed for streetscapes that accommodate all kinds of users -- not just auto traffic.</div><div>“Having a Complete Streets plan recognizes that our streets belong to everyone -- pedestrians and cyclists as well as motorists -- and so [it] enhances safety and improves aesthetic appeal and the quality of life in our neighborhoods,” he said in his annual address.</div><div>Infrastructure Problems</div><div>Mayors gathered in Washington, D.C., last week to discuss the report and how they're handling infrastructure in their cities.</div><div>Mayor Lily Mei of Fremont, Calif., said her town is trying to prepare for the arrival of a new Facebook campus and the strain it will put on local roads. At the same time, the city is working with the school district to encourage students to walk and take alternative modes of transportation to school.</div><div>“If you want the students to be able to take public transportation, it requires conscientious programs, such as giving them bus passes [and] teaching them how to ride,” she said.</div><div>For Mayor Karen Freeman-Wilson of Gary, Ind., one of the biggest infrastructure challenges is the “transformation of public housing.” The housing authority there tore down 500 units in the last six months, as demand for them waned and the apartments fell into disrepair. But the condition of the remaining units is still a concern, she says. When she gets complaints, she not only visits the units herself, she insists that the director of the housing authority join her.</div><div>“I want him to see -- I want his managers to understand -- that it’s important that people not only have a roof over their heads, but they have a place that they can call home,” she said.</div><div>In the suburban Florida community of Miramar, near Miami, Mayor Wayne Messam said he is concerned about the impacts of climate change and sea level rise.</div><div>“Many South Florida communities have to elevate the streets. We have to fortify our utility systems. Currently right now in Miramar, we’re spending over a hundred million dollars in our infrastructure to improve our water distribution systems,” he said.</div><div>That White House Meeting</div><div>The mayors shared their infrastructure concerns a day after a White House meeting on infrastructure ended abruptly. President Donald Trump left the room after just a few minutes of meeting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, both Democrats.</div><div>The trio had planned to talk about how to pay for a $2 trillion infrastructure plan, but the prospects of that happening during Trump’s first term have now all but evaporated.</div><div>The mayors said their work would have to continue, despite the federal inaction.</div><div>“While some people are taking a pause,” said Mei, the Fremont mayor, “we can’t just sit there and wait for the action to happen.”</div><div>https://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/gov-nlc-report-mayors-infrastructure.html</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>China-made carbon fiber train finishes trial run</title><description><![CDATA[China's carbon fiber subway train, which is lighter, faster and more energy efficient, recently completed a test run in Qingdao, East China's Shandong Province, signaling the coming of new subway technology. The carbon fiber vehicle is expected to conduct tests on subway lines in various Chinese cities, according to a statement sent by the CRRC Qingdao Sifang Co. to the Global Times on Thursday. The statement said that the train has a top speed of 140 kilometers per hour and can be operated<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_ea58ddc2c8794b9aae063be31ca99c0e%7Emv2.jpeg/v1/fill/w_500%2Ch_275/4cd688_ea58ddc2c8794b9aae063be31ca99c0e%7Emv2.jpeg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Liu Caiyu</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/25/China-made-carbon-fiber-train-finishes-trial-run</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/25/China-made-carbon-fiber-train-finishes-trial-run</guid><pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:23:04 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>China's carbon fiber subway train, which is lighter, faster and more energy efficient, recently completed a test run in Qingdao, East China's Shandong Province, signaling the coming of new subway technology.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_ea58ddc2c8794b9aae063be31ca99c0e~mv2.jpeg"/><div> The carbon fiber vehicle is expected to conduct tests on subway lines in various Chinese cities, according to a statement sent by the CRRC Qingdao Sifang Co. to the Global Times on Thursday. The statement said that the train has a top speed of 140 kilometers per hour and can be operated automatically.  Normal subway train only reach speeds of 80 kilometers per hour.  The vehicle can operate in harsh environments, including high temperatures and altitude. It can maneuver around curved and steep tracks. Ding Sansan, CRRC's vice chief engineer, said the carbon fiber being used for the body, frame, driver's and equipment rooms reduce the weight of a traditional train by 13 percent. The special locomotive traction system also reduces energy consumption by 15 percent, Ding said.  Sound insulation materials also reduce the noise in the car by more than 5 decibel, the statement said.  Windows of the new subway are touch screen. By touching the windows, passengers can read news, videos and TV shows. The statement said the carbon fiber subway train can detect malfunctions and send alerts through the intelligent monitoring and warning system installed on the vehicle.  An active suspension and control technique enables the system to detect the vibration of the car and ensure the rate of vibration remains within tolerance range. When reached by the Global Times on Thursday, an employee of the CRRC surnamed Dou from the publicity department said that the carbon fiber subway is open to potential buyers, declining to reveal the vehicle's potential market. Sun Zhang, a railway expert and professor at Shanghai Tongji University, told the Global Times on Thursday that the future market for high-tech subway would be huge since many developing countries are in urgent need of subways due to insufficient new traffic technology, and the US as well, where subway systems are obsolete. The CRRC won its first US contract in 2014 to supply subway trains to Boston. The Boston subway is the US' first subway, which began services in 1897.  But according to Sun, the carbon fiber-made subway would be expensive in the beginning and take some time before its price drops. CRRC, the leading Chinese railway equipment maker, has exported its subways cars and trains to more than 100 countries and regions, including the US, Saudi Arabia and India, the Xinhua News Agency reported.</div><div>http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1155102.shtml</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Support for raising the federal gas tax has risen steadily since 2010</title><description><![CDATA[Results released from the Mineta Transportation Institute’s 10th annual national transportation tax survey.The Mineta Transportation Institute has released its tenth annual survey exploring public support for raising federal transportation revenues through gas taxes of mileage fees: What Do Americans Think about Federal Tax Options to Support Transportation? Results from Year Ten of a National Survey.“Support for raising the gas tax is largely dependent on how the revenue will be spent,” says<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_412f3eec12e54ca3b786014ca0f5486a%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_438/4cd688_412f3eec12e54ca3b786014ca0f5486a%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/24/Support-for-raising-the-federal-gas-tax-has-risen-steadily-since-2010</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/24/Support-for-raising-the-federal-gas-tax-has-risen-steadily-since-2010</guid><pubDate>Mon, 24 Jun 2019 20:08:54 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_412f3eec12e54ca3b786014ca0f5486a~mv2.jpg"/><div>Results released from the Mineta Transportation Institute’s 10th annual national transportation tax survey.</div><div>The Mineta Transportation Institute has released its tenth annual survey exploring public support for raising federal transportation revenues through gas taxes of mileage fees: What Do Americans Think about Federal Tax Options to Support Transportation? Results from Year Ten of a National Survey.</div><div>“Support for raising the gas tax is largely dependent on how the revenue will be spent,” says Dr. Asha Weinstein Agrawal, one of the study’s authors and Director of MTI’s National Transportation Finance Center. “Seventy-five percent of respondents supported a 10¢ increase in the gas tax if the revenue raised is dedicated to maintenance projects, but only 40% support the same increase if the money is used more generally to maintain and improve the transportation system.” (See Figure.) </div><div>Five of the same gas tax options have been tested each year to assess trends. Study co-author Dr. Hilary Nixon notes that in every case support has risen since 2010, with an increase for each of 13 percentage points or more. </div><div>Other key 2019 findings include: </div><div>Large majorities value transportation improvements across transportation modes, including spending gas tax revenue for road and public-transit-related projects. People do not have an accurate understanding of how much they pay in federal gas taxes. For example, 19% of respondents thought the federal gas tax rate is at least 76¢ per gallon, far higher than the current rate of 18.4¢ per gallon.People would prefer to pay a mileage fee each time they buy fuel or charge an electric vehicle, rather than being billed monthly or annually.People hold nuanced views on mileage fees with respect to equity and privacyLinking transportation taxes to environmental objectives can increase support.</div><div>“We face growing needs across our transportation system, but funding hasn’t kept pace,” says Dr. Agrawal. “To solve this dilemma, we must either lower our goals for system maintenance and improvements, or raise new revenues.”</div><div>https://www.masstransitmag.com/technology/miscellaneous/press-release/21085917/mineta-transportation-institute-mti-support-for-raising-the-federal-gas-tax-has-risen-steadily-since-2010?utm_source=MASS+NewsViews+Newsletter&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=MASS190623002&amp;o_eid=7666C7138645J6B&amp;rdx.ident%5Bpull%5D=omeda%7C7666C7138645J6B</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Texas Developer Sees Testing Facility Shifting to Innovation Zone</title><description><![CDATA[Hillwood, a Dallas-based company said it will collaborate with companies, regulators, entrepreneurs and academics at AllianceTexas to deploy and commercialize new kinds of mobility, from drones to autonomous cars.(TNS) — When Uber announced it would develop and test an urban air taxi service in Dallas, the Perot family’s Hillwood was one of the first companies to sign on as one of the ride-hailing company’s business partners.Now the real estate developer wants to turn its giant master-planned<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_977938a658a1400ea511db672a1b52d3%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_393/4cd688_977938a658a1400ea511db672a1b52d3%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Melissa Repko</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/20/Texas-Developer-Sees-Testing-Facility-Shifting-to-Innovation-Zone</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/20/Texas-Developer-Sees-Testing-Facility-Shifting-to-Innovation-Zone</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2019 17:34:36 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>Hillwood, a Dallas-based company said it will collaborate with companies, regulators, entrepreneurs and academics at AllianceTexas to deploy and commercialize new kinds of mobility, from drones to autonomous cars.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_977938a658a1400ea511db672a1b52d3~mv2.jpg"/><div>(TNS) — When Uber announced it would develop and test an urban air taxi service in Dallas, the Perot family’s Hillwood was one of the first companies to sign on as one of the ride-hailing company’s business partners.</div><div>Now the real estate developer wants to turn its giant master-planned development north of Fort Worth into a test bed for futuristic transportation.</div><div>The Dallas-based company said today that it will collaborate with companies, regulators, entrepreneurs and academics at AllianceTexas to deploy and commercialize new kinds of mobility, from drones to autonomous cars. Hillwood is working with consulting firm Deloitte to develop a business model for the mobility innovation zone.</div><div>AllianceTexas is about 26,000 acres. That's larger than the island of Manhattan. It is already home to many transportation and supply chain-related hubs. It's anchored by Fort Worth Alliance Airport, an industrial airport that opened 30 years ago. It includes over 162 miles of major arterial roads and state and federal highways. The Federal Aviation Administration’s southwest regional headquarters is based there.</div><div>More than 500 global and regional companies have a presence at AllianceTexas, from Fidelity Investments to J.C. Penney. BNSF Railway, which transports new cars and other large cargo across the country, has an intermodal facility there. It’s home to a Facebook data center and a new regional hub for Amazon Air, which is under construction. FedEx and UPS have large sort hubs there, too.</div><div>The large development includes neighborhoods of thousands of single-family homes and apartments, along with shopping centers, restaurants and a hospital.</div><div>Hillwood president Mike Berry said the idea for the mobility innovation zone was born out of conversations with some of the developer's big industrial customers and Uber. He said AllianceTexas is an ideal place for testing because of its massive size and mix of commercial and residential development.</div><div>The effort will initially focus on two use cases, he said: Moving freight with autonomous trucks and testing drone and vertical take-off and landing aircraft, such as Uber's urban air taxis, in controlled airspace.</div><div>In the future, though, he imagines a wider range of experimentation. For example, he said, Amazon, UPS or FedEx could test robots that deliver packages to nearby houses and apartments.</div><div>Hillwood is working with Uber to build skyports — stations where urban air taxis can take off and land in North Texas. The Dallas area’s first skyport is under construction at Frisco Station. The mixed-use development by Hillwood is near The Star, the Dallas Cowboys’ practice facility and headquarters.</div><div>Uber is hosting a two-day summit this week in Washington, D.C., to update policymakers and business partners about the development of the urban air taxi service.</div><div>https://www.govtech.com/news/Texas-Developerr-Sees-Testing-Facility-Shifting-to-Innovation-Zone.html</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Can P3s Jumpstart Smart Cities?</title><description><![CDATA[While the intricacies of public-private partnerships can be tough to navigate, they have been successful in helping cities build the kind of digital infrastructure that’s necessary for today’s urban economy and society.Reinventing a city is a challenge and a feat of such immense proportion that it can rival building a new city from the ground up. It requires no less than rethinking and rearchitecting everything that worked decades or centuries ago, for both present and future needs.That’s why<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_76262deb4b134182b708a50eda47be63%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_76262deb4b134182b708a50eda47be63%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Itai Dadon, Dan Pfieffer</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/20/Can-P3s-Jumpstart-Smart-Cities</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/20/Can-P3s-Jumpstart-Smart-Cities</guid><pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2019 17:27:13 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>While the intricacies of public-private partnerships can be tough to navigate, they have been successful in helping cities build the kind of digital infrastructure that’s necessary for today’s urban economy and society.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_76262deb4b134182b708a50eda47be63~mv2.jpg"/><div>Reinventing a city is a challenge and a feat of such immense proportion that it can rival building a new city from the ground up. It requires no less than rethinking and rearchitecting everything that worked decades or centuries ago, for both present and future needs.</div><div>That’s why public-private partnerships, or P3s, are enjoying a renaissance. They provide a real, practical solution to cities’ most pressing problems. P3s are nothing new: Two of the most successful and most celebrated developments in U.S. history — the Erie Canal and the Transcontinental Railroad — date back to pioneering P3s of the 19th century. In one assessment, the Erie Canal was said to provide “a model of public-private partnerships that endure to this day.”</div><div>Today’s model for P3s is much the same as it was back then, but now is the engine behind the development and emergence of smart cities. At its heart, it’s a simple alliance between government and private entities to achieve a common purpose, and a purpose that neither entity could be expected to achieve alone. In fact, P3s are being tested for their resilience as cities address their toughest challenges. </div><div>One successful project, led by the Dallas Innovation Alliance, was built by “a network of three dozen partners across the public, private, civic and academic sectors and over 20 city departments.” The effort is now paying off. In the month of July 2018, the alliance’s Smart Cities Living Lab reported energy savings on 4,611.28 kilowatt-hours from improvements in street lighting — a benefit of the city’s partnership with Philips Lighting.</div><div>ADDRESSING THE LIMITS OF GOVERNMENT FUNDING</div><div>Today, the challenges of the P3 model are driven by several converging forces: </div><div>Approximately 3 million people worldwide move to cities every week.This influx has resulted in severe pressure on cities’ infrastructure, reduced quality of life, and negative effects on health and personal safety.Global economic momentum and renewed interest in the industrial market by large technical and communication companies are driving an emergence of many new technologies and solutions for smart cities.Many of these solutions have not yet been deployed widely enough to accurately demonstrate their viability or ROI.</div><div>P3s address the issue of the limited government-sponsored funding most cities must achieve for a major transformation of their infrastructure. In fact, Deloitte estimated that just 16 percent of cities can self-fund required infrastructure projects. </div><div>The goal of P3s is a lofty one: to create sweeping infrastructure transformation by taking the technical, financial and operational risks and distributing them optimally between public- and private-sector partners. This not only ensures the viability of the transformation, but also that each entity is doing its part and all risks (design, construction, availability, demand, operational/maintenance, residual value and financing) are addressed upfront and minimized along the way.</div><div>OVERCOMING CHALLENGES</div><div>While successful P3 initiatives have been those that solve a breadth of challenges, reaching an agreement on funding and cost recovery is often the make-or-break decision, especially when the roles of the partners remain fluid. It’s easy to say the role of the public partner (the city) is to articulate the problem and challenges the city faces, and the private partner takes the role of defining and developing the technology, as well as accelerating its deployment. </div><div>But it goes much deeper: Private and public partners must work as a team to address social and environmental challenges. Those are often harder to address because they are harder to quantify and therefore measure. </div><div>Ultimately, the sheer scope of many P3-based transformations is the greatest challenge. In Cleveland’s P3-based Waterfront Initiative, the partners in the initiative included “the city of Cleveland; the Port Authority; the Ohio Department of Transportation; the business community, represented by the regional chamber of commerce; and the neighborhoods, represented by the non-profit association Cleveland Neighborhood Development Corporation.” </div><div>Defining the roles of multiple partners and forging agreements among them can stall progress and inject delays into schedules, but those setbacks are never inevitable. The five partners in the Cleveland Waterfront Initiative report their relationship “was formalized through a memorandum of understanding that identified each partner’s roles and established consensus on the redevelopment framework principles and strategies.” </div><div>ROI ABOVE ALL</div><div>While funding is a significant challenge, it has already proven to be the linchpin in helping many technologies — which is a driver of dramatic change — take root in cities. And P3s can’t afford to underestimate the challenge of developing a revenue model that will meet the expectations and requirements of the collaborating P3 entities. Nor can they predict how much time can be lost in reaching accord between the parties. Lost time and lost productivity play a big role in determining ROI.</div><div>Still, a murky business case or unwarranted assumptions about the potential ROI of an infrastructure transformation initiative can doom the P3 before it breaks ground. Just as problematical, says Ryan Citron, senior research analyst at Navigant Research, is that many use cases for infrastructure transformation are still untested, or that they “offer only a ‘soft’ ROI.” </div><div>That’s why P3s often pursue their goal of transformation in stages, focusing first on deploying proven applications, such as high-ROI smart streetlights and smart meters, in the first stage, which allows the market more time to mature the business case of the next wave of solutions. </div><div>It is the responsibility of vendors from the private sector to understand this focus and deliver not just technology, but also a well-defined business case and ROI projection customized for every project. </div><div>And how do new P3s identify and prioritize applications that will bring the greatest ROI, while protecting both ratepayer and taxpayer interests? They look to the successes of pioneers, knowing simulations are just that: they exist in plans and spreadsheets, but not in real life. Clearly, P3s face myriad challenges. But consider, in many successful P3s across industries, no other model could have achieved the same immense transformation and improvements as a P3.</div><div>https://www.govtech.com/budget-finance/Can-P3s-Jumpstart-Smart-Cities-Contributed.html</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>PROPOSED TEXAS HIGH-SPEED RAIL PROJECT FACES LEGISLATIVE OPPOSITION</title><description><![CDATA[Plans for a privately financed, high-speed rail line between Houston and Dallas are being challenged by members of the Texas State Legislature, landowners along the proposed route, and some transportation researchers.Modeled on Japan’s Shinkansen high-speed rail system, the Texas bullet train is variously projected to cost between $12 billion and $20 billion and to be in operation in 2025. It would reach a top speed of 200 mph and have its own dedicated track, meaning it wouldn’t have to share<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_2b53ea4c356a409f935077780ecca7ac%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_262%2Ch_237/4cd688_2b53ea4c356a409f935077780ecca7ac%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Bonner R. Cohen</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/17/PROPOSED-TEXAS-HIGH-SPEED-RAIL-PROJECT-FACES-LEGISLATIVE-OPPOSITION</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/17/PROPOSED-TEXAS-HIGH-SPEED-RAIL-PROJECT-FACES-LEGISLATIVE-OPPOSITION</guid><pubDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2019 15:09:14 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_2b53ea4c356a409f935077780ecca7ac~mv2.jpg"/><div>Plans for a privately financed, high-speed rail line between Houston and Dallas are being challenged by members of the Texas State Legislature, landowners along the proposed route, and some transportation researchers.</div><div>Modeled on Japan’s Shinkansen high-speed rail system, the Texas bullet train is variously projected to cost between $12 billion and $20 billion and to be in operation in 2025. It would reach a top speed of 200 mph and have its own dedicated track, meaning it wouldn’t have to share track with freight lines, and it would cover the 240 miles separating the two cities in less than 90 minutes.</div><div>The company behind the project is Texas Central Partners (TCP), which would be responsible for the development, construction, financing, and operation of the bullet train. The company has tentatively scheduled construction to begin in late 2019.</div><div>The Texas House of Representatives is considering bills that would prohibit the state Department of Transportation from cooperating in utilizing highway easements for the project, ban the use of state taxpayers’ funds, and deny the railroad the use of eminent domain to acquire right-of-ways. A special subcommittee of the House Transportation Committee, including both supporters and opponents of the project, was appointed on April 5 to consider legislation related to the project.</div><div>‘Taxpayer Funds Are at Risk’</div><div>Though TCP says the rail line will be largely privately financed, TCS has said it would seek loans from the U.S. Department of Transportation, wrote Baruch Feigenbaum, assistant director of transportation policy at the Reason Foundation and a policy advisor to The Heartland Institute, which publishes Budget &amp; Tax News, in a March 15 report.</div><div>“There are significant concerns regarding the project’s feasibility that must not be overlooked, since taxpayer funds are at risk (through RRIF [Railroad and Rehabilitation Improvement Financing] loans),” wrote Feigenbaum.</div><div>Transportation experts are “skeptical that a high-speed rail line connecting the two low-density, car-friendly metro areas of Dallas and Houston could be profitable without substantial public subsidies for capital and operations,” wrote Feigenbaum.</div><div>Rail ‘Expensive and Underutilized’</div><div>Cost overruns and inflated ridership estimates for high speed rail are common, says Matthew Glans, a senior policy analyst at The Heartland Institute.</div><div>“Almost all HSR projects in the United States have been expensive and underutilized,” said Glans.</div><div>Ridership estimates from TCS are probably inflated, because they exceed the number of people using Acela, which links cities in the Northeast, including Washington, D.C. and New York City, says Glans.</div><div>“Texas Central estimates a ridership of five million people annually by 2025, but those numbers are unreasonable,” said Glans. “Even the Acela, located in a dense rail corridor, only carried 3.5 million passengers in 2014.”</div><div>Revenues from tickets on Acela do not cover its operating costs, says Glans.</div><div>“Even the one seemingly successful HSR service, the Acela high-speed line serving the Northeast Corridor, is heavily subsidized, like all Amtrak rail services,” said Glans.</div><div>Feds Finance ‘All Private Railroads’</div><div>At this point, taxpayers aren’t more liable to be on the hook if the project fails than with any other business, says Tom Giovanetti, president of the Texas-based Institute for Policy Innovation.</div><div>“Reason’s argument, essentially, is that if the project doesn’t work out, the company will be in trouble and taxpayers will have to bail it out,” said Giovanetti. “Burger King will be in trouble if their business plan doesn’t work out, too, but I don’t see any public policy organizations writing articles critical of Burger King.”</div><div>Federal loans or loan guarantees do not make the Texas project different from others in the industry, says Giovanetti.</div><div>“All private railroads, including freight railroads like Burlington Northern, use the federal loan financing program,” said Giovanetti, “I don’t see anyone criticizing Burlington Northern for using the program.”</div><div>‘Let Companies Try Things’</div><div>Government shouldn’t stand in the way of innovation, says Giovanetti.</div><div>“In a free-market economy, we let companies try things,” said Giovanetti.</div><div>Existing transportation infrastructure should be policymakers’ top priority in this area, says Glans.</div><div>“Instead of subsidizing the construction of new and unnecessary HSR lines, states should focus on maintaining and improving their current highways and air travel infrastructure, which are well-established, still in demand, and in dire need of repair and upgrades,” said Glans.</div><div>https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/proposed-texas-high-speed-rail-project-faces-legislative-opposition</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>FRA doles out more than $326 million in grants</title><description><![CDATA[The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) recently announced that 45 projects in 29 states will benefit from $326-plus million in grant money under the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program and the Special Transportation Circumstances (STC) Program.The funds, FRA noted, will go toward “a wide variety of state and local railroad infrastructure projects,” and over one-third of the funds—more than $118 million—were awarded to rural projects.As part of the]]></description><dc:creator>Andrew Corselli</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/14/FRA-doles-out-more-than-326-million-in-grants</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/14/FRA-doles-out-more-than-326-million-in-grants</guid><pubDate>Fri, 14 Jun 2019 16:53:06 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><div>The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) recently announced that 45 projects in 29 states will benefit from $326-plus million in grant money under the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program and the Special Transportation Circumstances (STC) Program.</div><div>The funds, FRA noted, will go toward “a wide variety of state and local railroad infrastructure projects,” and over one-third of the funds—more than $118 million—were awarded to rural projects.</div><div>As part of the $326-plus million, the FRA announced more than $2 million in STC funds to the state of Alaska. Another recipient is the Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis (TRRA), which revealed a $28.8 million CRISI grant to replace the main span girders on the MacArthur Bridge. The current girder system in place was constructed in 1912 and “needs to be replaced.” The $57.3 million project will see the FRA providing approximately 50% of the funding with the TRRA providing the other 50%.</div><div>“This grant shows the ongoing commitment of the Federal Railroad Administration to providing critical public investments in the St. Louis area and U.S. economy,” said TRRA President Mike McCarthy. “The awarded funds are critical to maintaining the current level of service to cargoes shipped by rail and passengers on Amtrak, which in turn reduces congestion and wear and tear on the region’s highways.”</div><div>The Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency (CREATE) Program‘s Dolton Junction Interlocking project in Dolton and Riverdale, Ill., also said it is receiving a CRISI grant worth $19,206,398 to “help ease rail congestion in the south suburbs and far south side of Chicago.”</div><div>“This important investment will not only improve rail speed and service reliability, it will help keep passengers, drivers and pedestrians safe. It also creates good-paying jobs for the people of Dolton and the Southside of Chicago,” said U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL). “Senator [Tammy] Duckworth (D-IL) and I are proud to support this improvement project, and will continue advocating for strong investments in Illinois’ transportation infrastructure.”</div><div>“Over a hundred freight trains and several passenger trains use the Dolton Interlocking System each day, creating significant congestion and causing delays and aggravation for Illinoisans and rail users,” said Duckworth. “This critical funding will modernize the interlocking and relieve this bottleneck to improve reliability and boost our economic development. I am committed to working with Senator Durbin and other members of the Illinois congressional delegation to promote infrastructure improvements across Chicagoland and the state of Illinois and bring back as much investment as possible.”</div><div>“The AAR commends all stakeholders involved in this grant process for moving the ball forward on yet another aspect of the CREATE program, an exemplary public-private partnership increasing fluidity throughout the Chicago region for both freight customers and rail passengers,” said Ian Jefferies, President, CEO, Association of American Railroads (AAR). “This includes the USDOT, the Illinois Congressional delegation, IDOT, other local partners and Amtrak, as well as privately owned freight railroads for continuing to deliver the private capital needed to move CREATE projects like this forward. By updating the interlocking system at this busy rail corridor, railroads will be able to move more efficiently through the area, which will bolster safety and lessen driver and pedestrian disruptions.”</div><div>A full list of the recipients and their projects can be found below. And many in the industry were understandably ecstatic about the news.</div><div>“These investments in intercity passenger and freight rail will benefit surrounding communities, make grade crossings safer and improve service reliability,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Elaine L. Chao.</div><div>“These are the partnerships that help rural and urban communities thrive economically,” said FRA Administrator Ronald Batory. “The participation of multiple partners demonstrates the importance of these funds and tells us they will be a key asset in improving safety for communities and railroads around the country.”</div><div>“ASLRRA is pleased that 21 short line and regional railroads have been awarded FY2018 Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) grants in the latest round of funding,” said Chuck Baker, President, American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA). “The FRA has once again recognized the significant part that our small business railroads play in connecting more than 10,000 shippers to the domestic and international marketplaces. The availability of programs that allow railroads to leverage their significant private investment to upgrade rails and bridges to modern standards leads to safer, more fuel- and cost-efficient rail service. Federal policies such as CRISI, balanced regulatory policy across freight modes and the Short Line Tax Credit (45G) are proven solutions that keep freight rail service to small town and rural America viable, enhance safety and grow the American economy.”</div><div>“At Amtrak, we believe services such as our Amtrak Midwest network are what the future of passenger rail service looks like: safe, relevant and reliable, connecting major markets such as St. Louis with Chicago and Kansas City,” said Joe McHugh, Amtrak VP, State Supported Services. “We are proud to partner with the States of Illinois and Missouri, and are looking forward to working with the TRRA to accomplish the next steps.”</div><div>https://www.railwayage.com/regulatory/fra-doles-out-more-than-326-million-in-grants/?utm_source=&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=4520</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>FRA pulls rule for two-person crew in locomotive</title><description><![CDATA[The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) does not believe removing one live body from the locomotive will create a higher risk for casualties.The Administration has decided to withdrawal a rule that would require two-member crews, and the White House has banned states from requiring such a standard. Currently at least nine states require a two-man crew.In pulling the rule, the FRA said “no regulation of train crew staffing is necessary or appropriate for railroad operations to be conducted<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_611945c3c9c84f45befc1cff4d2f5095%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Bill Wilson</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/14/FRA-pulls-rule-for-two-person-crew-in-locomotive</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/14/FRA-pulls-rule-for-two-person-crew-in-locomotive</guid><pubDate>Fri, 14 Jun 2019 16:45:50 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_611945c3c9c84f45befc1cff4d2f5095~mv2.jpg"/><div>The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) does not believe removing one live body from the locomotive will create a higher risk for casualties.</div><div>The Administration has decided to withdrawal a rule that would require two-member crews, and the White House has banned states from requiring such a standard. Currently at least nine states require a two-man crew.</div><div>In pulling the rule, the FRA said “no regulation of train crew staffing is necessary or appropriate for railroad operations to be conducted safely.”</div><div>The two-person requirement was first proposed by then-FRA Administrator Joseph Szabo in 2013 following one of the worst train accidents in recent memory. Forty-nine people were killed when an unattended 74-car freight train loaded with crude oil crashed into the Canadian town of Lac-Megantic. The explosion leveled the town. Later in 2013 two trains collided in Casselton, N.D., causing 476,000 gallons of crude oil to go up in smoke.</div><div>Officials believe technology, like positive train control, is making trains safer and will eliminate human error when it is fully implemented at the end of 2020.</div><div>Labor unions disagree and believe corporate profit is being chosen over safety.</div><div>“If the ongoing grounding of the Boeing Max aircraft has taught us nothing else, FRA and the Department of Transportation should be mindful of the danger of transferring the risk of a human-factors accident from [crew members] to [a computer] programmer when autonomous technology is implemented,” two unions said in a joint statement.</div><div>https://www.rtands.com/safety-training/fra-pulls-rule-for-two-person-crew-in-locomotive/?utm_source=&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=4520</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Indiana Sen. Mike Braun Envisions Infrastructure Plan Bigger Than Trump’s</title><description><![CDATA[INDIANAPOLIS — The nation needs an even larger infrastructure bill than the one proposed by President Donald Trump, an Indiana senator told an audience at the National Accounting and Finance Council’s 2019 annual conference.U.S. Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.), a former trucking company founder and CEO, said he envisions an infrastructure bill of between $3 trillion to $4 trillion, spent over 10 to 15 years. Trump has championed a $2 trillion proposal to fix U.S. infrastructure.It was a surprising<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_d6c527efce9a40bda2f8aa68566998f1%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_364/4cd688_d6c527efce9a40bda2f8aa68566998f1%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/Indiana-Sen-Mike-Braun-Envisions-Infrastructure-Plan-Bigger-Than-Trump%E2%80%99s</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/Indiana-Sen-Mike-Braun-Envisions-Infrastructure-Plan-Bigger-Than-Trump%E2%80%99s</guid><pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2019 17:45:13 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_d6c527efce9a40bda2f8aa68566998f1~mv2.jpg"/><div>INDIANAPOLIS — The nation needs an even larger infrastructure bill than the one proposed by President Donald Trump, an Indiana senator told an audience at the National Accounting and Finance Council’s 2019 annual conference.</div><div>U.S. Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.), a former trucking company founder and CEO, said he envisions an infrastructure bill of between $3 trillion to $4 trillion, spent over 10 to 15 years. Trump has championed a $2 trillion proposal to fix U.S. infrastructure.</div><div>It was a surprising stance for Braun to take, as he defeated an incumbent Indiana Democrat and was elected in 2018 in part because of two things: his conservative positions and his support of Trump.</div><div>But Braun said fixing infrastructure faces a big hurdle, not because of the price tag but because of how Washington works — or how slowly it works.</div><div>Braun brought up some potential issues with an infrastructure plan. “Will the other side, especially the House, allow anything to go forward if it’s a feather in President Trump’s cap,” he said.</div><div>Braun said another concern is how Congress pays for things. He said the federal government has been taking a “20% loss” annually for a decade and has been financing the gap “on a credit card.”</div><div>Braun often derided the federal government for being $22 trillion in debt and said it will take the nation coming to the edge of financial calamity before Congress acts.</div><div>Braun sits on the Senate Budget Committee and the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, two key infrastructure panels. But Washington politics has infected the work those committees should be doing, he said.</div><div>“A lot of people don’t show up for the [committee] meetings,” Braun said. “It kind of represents the tenor of what is going on in our government. I don’t want to thoroughly depress you, because that is a true depiction with what’s happening with the biggest business in the world.”</div><div>Braun responded to a question from a trucking firm official about his ideas for infrastructure, explaining he learned from his experience as a state representative from Jasper. Braun served in the Indiana House of Representatives from 2014 to 2017. He resigned halfway through his second term to run for U.S. Senate, running in a state that rarely elects candidates with little public office experience.</div><div>Braun said Indiana’s roads and bridges were hurting for repair and expansion, but he was discouraged by advisers to mention a GOP plan to raise gasoline and diesel taxes.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_46a3003013614dfd85a9dcc389e3aafb~mv2.jpg"/><div>“Seven to eight percent of roads and bridges were in need of repair,” he said. “Seventy percent of Hoosiers … wanted better highways and bridges. Seventy percent of Hoosiers did not want to pay for it.”</div><div>But Braun signed on to a state gas tax increase — a “user fee,” he said — of 10 more cents on a gallon of gasoline and 20 more cents on a gallon of diesel, after GOP leadership in the Indiana House and Senate came out with a state infrastructure plan. Braun said he felt assured about a gas tax increase because Indiana’s fiscal health was good and the state had excelled at being a low tax success story in the Midwest.</div><div>Braun said a vehicle-miles-traveled tax “would not have gotten to first base” in the 2017 Indiana gas tax legislation, and a fuel tax likely is the way to go at the federal level. Fuel taxes have not been raised by the federal government since 1993, and the revenue used to repair roads and bridges is shrinking.</div><div>Braun said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told him that he thinks a higher gas tax is regressive, hurting the poor most of all. But Braun said the Indiana gas tax hike only cost the average Hoosier who drives 15,000 miles a year about $60.</div><div>Braun was the founder of Meyer Logistics, a trucking company based in Jasper, and of Meyer Distributing, an auto parts distribution business. His opponents dragged his companies through the mud, he said.</div><div>“I never heard an ill word about my company until I ran for Senate,” Braun told the audience.</div><div>Still, Braun said Indiana’s bruising 2018 GOP primary and then his victory over Democratic incumbent Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) were all worth it.</div><div>“What a time to be a U.S. senator,” he said.</div><div>https://www.ttnews.com/articles/indiana-sen-mike-braun-envisions-infrastructure-plan-bigger-trumps</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Institutions piling into infrastructure across North America</title><description><![CDATA[Julio Garcia said most investors are using commingled funds.Relatively new as an institutional asset class in the U.S., infrastructure is one of the fastest growing real asset classes in North America, albeit from a small base, industry insiders say.Infrastructure, along with energy, exhibited the most growth of any private asset class among the largest 200 U.S. defined benefit plans in the year ended Sept. 30, according to Pensions & Investments' annual survey.This trend is expected to continue<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_1deca95badfe48fb8ba44cf7fb16a713%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_307/4cd688_1deca95badfe48fb8ba44cf7fb16a713%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>ARLEEN JACOBIUS</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/Institutions-piling-into-infrastructure-across-North-America</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/Institutions-piling-into-infrastructure-across-North-America</guid><pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:20:09 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_1deca95badfe48fb8ba44cf7fb16a713~mv2.jpg"/><div>Julio Garcia said most investors are using commingled funds.</div><div>Relatively new as an institutional asset class in the U.S., infrastructure is one of the fastest growing real asset classes in North America, albeit from a small base, industry insiders say.</div><div>Infrastructure, along with energy, exhibited the most growth of any private asset class among the largest 200 U.S. defined benefit plans in the year ended Sept. 30, according to Pensions &amp; Investments' annual survey.</div><div>This trend is expected to continue as investors look for consistent income. Further underscoring the asset class, the Trump administration unveiled a plan as part of its 2019 budget proposal that it said would generate $1.5 trillion in public and private infrastructure investment during the next decade, according to the administration's Rebuilding America's Infrastructure fact sheet. However, the proposal does not include a funding source. In April, President Donald Trump and the Democratic leadership in Congress agreed to a $2 trillion infrastructure plan, but no bill is yet before Congress. And since much of the transportation-related infrastructure in the U.S. is owned by states and local municipalities, industry insiders do not think a federal infrastructure bill will expand the investment opportunity in a major way.</div><div>The U.S. sector at the center of the administration's plan is transportation infrastructure — including airports, ports, bridges and logistics — and &quot;much of it is in the hands of local municipalities,&quot; said Dylan Foo, San Francisco-based global head of direct investments for the infrastructure team of AMP Capital Investors Ltd., which manages $14.3 billion in infrastructure assets.</div><div>Infrastructure funds worldwide have had no trouble attracting a steady stream of capital. Seventy-four infrastructure funds raised $93 billion worldwide in 2018, up from 82 funds that closed on $47 billion in 2014, Preqin data show. In the first quarter, $15 billion was raised by seven funds.</div><div>And the funds are getting larger. The average size in the first quarter was $2.14 billion, up from $1.07 billion in the year-ago quarter and $786 million in the first quarter of 2014, according to Preqin. Global infrastructure assets under management totaled $491 billion as of June 2018, up 9.8% from the prior year.</div><div>Varying returns</div><div>Returns of North American investors vary. For the $358.6 billion California Public Employees' Retirement System, Sacramento, infrastructure was the second-best performing asset class for the one year and the best performing asset class for the 10 years ended Dec. 31, earning 11.3% and 15.2% respectively. CalPERS had $4.6 billion invested in infrastructure as of Dec. 31. The C$111.9 billion ($83.7 billion) Ontario Municipal Employees' Retirement System, Toronto, has a C$20.3 billion infrastructure portfolio that earned a 10.6% net return in 2018, according to its annual report.</div><div>But competition for infrastructure deals by domestic and international investors and the advent of mega infrastructure funds with massive amounts of capital are expected to compress returns, said Andrew Deihl, Charlotte, N.C.-based head of energy and infrastructure at Nuveen. For example, Brookfield Asset Management and Global Infrastructure Partners are both raising new funds with $20 billion targets, according to Preqin. IFM Investor Pty Ltd.'s last infrastructure fund closed in 2017 with a then=record $15.8 billion. Brookfield's earlier infrastructure fund closed in 2016 with $15 billion.</div><div>About half of the current deal flow in the real assets market is power infrastructure, with 40% in energy and 10% in natural resources such as timberland and agriculture, said Kevin Warn-Schindel, Boston-based managing director and head of real assets at funds-of-funds and secondary market alternatives manager HarbourVest Partners LLC.</div><div>Of the deals HarbourVest assessed in 2018, there were $29 billion in real asset secondary transactions, up from $17 billion in 2017 and less than $5 billion per year in 2013 and 2014.</div><div>Natural resources is the smallest component of the investible real asset universe, Mr. Warn-Schindel said. Investors in timber and agriculture, both part of natural resources, tend to be more income-oriented, while investments in upstream mining, another natural resources strategy, tend to have more development risk ,placing it at the riskier end of the efficient frontier, he said.</div><div>When it comes to infrastructure transactions, North America is in catch-up mode. Europe has seen the most infrastructure deals each quarter since 2014 except for a few quarters when North America topped the transaction list, Preqin data show. In the first quarter of 2019, for instance, there were 188 infrastructure transactions in North America, compared to 180 in Europe, 54 in Asia and 86 in the rest of the world.</div><div>Even so, four of the largest infrastructure funds in the market, including the two largest each targeting $20 billion — Global Infrastructure Partners IV and Brookfield Infrastructure Fund IV — aim to invest in the U.S.</div><div>And more infrastructure investors are based in the U.S. (43%) than Europe (33%) or the Asia-Pacific region (18%) in 2018, Preqin data show.</div><div>Most go with managers</div><div>While many North American investors are investing directly either outright or in co-investments, Julio Garcia, New York-based head of infrastructure-North America for IFM Investors, said the &quot;majority of the investment in the asset class by (North American) investors is still fulfilled by investing in infrastructure funds managed by third-party managers. Although there is an increasing interest in other arrangements, most of the transactions in the market continue to be executed by the specialized managers of commingled funds.&quot;</div><div>And even with several megafunds in the market, some large direct deals have been announced this year.</div><div>In March, the C$392 billion Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, Toronto, and Tulsa, Okla.-based infrastructure operator The Williams Cos. Inc. formed a $3.8 billion joint venture that will include Williams' Ohio Valley Midstream system and its Utica East Ohio Midstream system. CPPIB invested about C$1.34 billion for a 35% stake in the joint venture. Williams will own the remainder.</div><div>CPPIB had C$33.3 billion in infrastructure assets as of March 31.</div><div>Institutional investors, especially Canadian asset owners, are beginning to compete with infrastructure managers for some deals, said Alina Osorio,</div><div>Toronto-based president of Fiera Infrastructure Inc. The C$309.5 billion Caisse de Depot et Placement du Quebec, Montreal; C$97 billion Ontario Municipal Employees' Retirement System, Toronto; and C$153 billion Public Sector Pension Investment Board, Ottawa; are joining sovereign wealth funds worldwide and superannuation plans in Australia in the market, she said.</div><div>&quot;There's a lot of money chasing opportunities at the top end of the market,&quot; Ms. Osorio said. Fiera invests in the middle market, focusing on projects capped at $1 billion in enterprise value, where there is less competition, she added. Fiera Infrastructure had C$1.7 billion in AUM as of April 30.</div><div>North American asset owners are not the only institutional investors interested in direct investment on the continent. In May, GIC Pte. Ltd., Singapore's sovereign wealth fund with assets estimated at more than $350 billion, took a minority stake in $2.8 billion WaterBridge Resources LLC, a water management network and a portfolio company of Five Point Energy LLC, a Houston private equity firm focused exclusively on the midstream energy sector. WaterBridge's network gathers and treats water produced from shale wells to be recycled and reused by oil and gas producers.</div><div>&quot;GIC has an extraordinary long-term view and is investing in assets that are long term, cash-flowing and stable,&quot; said David Capobianco, CEO and managing partner of Five Point Energy. &quot;We approached them with the idea of becoming partners in (WaterBridge).&quot;</div><div>WaterBridge was the result of two investments Five Point made in 2017, he said. In mid-2017, it bought water-gathering assets with the purchases of EnWater Solutions and Arkoma Water Resources in the Delaware Basin, located in southeast New Mexico and southwest Texas. &quot;We ultimately pioneered a new midstream industry that did not exist before,&quot; Mr. Capobianco said.</div><div>Energy dominates</div><div>In North America, infrastructure assets are mostly in energy. In May, IFM acquired a publicly traded master limited partnership, Houston-based Buckeye Partners LP, which owns and operates a network of integrated midstream energy assets in the U.S., including 6,000 miles of pipeline to transport oil and gas.</div><div>Overall, there has been a lot of investment in energy and midstream energy infrastructure projects over the past couple of years, said Stacey Morris, Dallas-based director of research at Alerian, a provider of energy infrastructure and MLP indexes.</div><div>There's been a pickup over the last 12 months mainly because energy infrastructure companies are fee-based businesses with cash flow for investors, Ms. Morris said. &quot;It's a way to play oil and gas and natural gas with less commodity exposure than investments in oil and gas exploration and production,&quot; she said.</div><div>Oil price fluctuations from more than $100 a barrel in 2011 to the bottom of $26 a barrel in 2016 hurt the energy infrastructure sector, resulting in underinvestment, Ms. Morris said.</div><div>But for IFM, infrastructure is more than just energy. &quot;In the last 12 months, IFM has committed over $1.6 billion to transportation-sector opportunities in the U.S. and Canada while also being active in the midstream energy space,&quot; IFM's Mr. Garcia said. The firm has $39.1 billion in infrastructure AUM.</div><div>While investment in utilities is also a focus for IFM, Mr. Garcia said utility valuations are too high to provide an appropriate risk-adjusted return at this point in the cycle.</div><div>In the U.S. in particular, transportation infrastructure investment opportunities are large, scarce and highly competitive because most of the roads, bridges and airports are government-owned and had been traditionally funded by municipal bond proceeds, industry insiders say. In Canada, a smaller market, public-private partnerships are more prevalent in transportation as well as water, wastewater, hospitals and data centers.</div><div>&quot;Public-private partnerships have been a big part of our investible market (in Canada) for a while,&quot; Fiera's Ms. Osorio said. &quot;A lot ... are at the provincial level. That's where we've seen international players,&quot; she added.</div><div>https://www.pionline.com/article/20190610/PRINT/190619990/institutions-piling-into-infrastructure-across-north-america</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>EXCLUSIVE: Crucial subjects explored at the ITS America Annual Meeting roundtable</title><description><![CDATA[At the ITS America Annual Meeting (June 4-7), leaders convened to share their knowledge at the State Department of Transportation (DOT) roundtable.The first half of the discussion focused on mobility-on-demand and how it can successfully be implemented into towns and cities.“For the past 100 years, transportation has traditionally revolved around roads and bridges, and how vehicles interact with them,” said Shailen Bhatt, president of ITS America. “The Mobility On Demand Alliance is our attempt<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_53817d7b0ff74935ac2f4961ae3ab272%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_262/4cd688_53817d7b0ff74935ac2f4961ae3ab272%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Rachelle Harry</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/EXCLUSIVE-Crucial-subjects-explored-at-the-ITS-America-Annual-Meeting-roundtable</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/EXCLUSIVE-Crucial-subjects-explored-at-the-ITS-America-Annual-Meeting-roundtable</guid><pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2019 15:06:37 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_53817d7b0ff74935ac2f4961ae3ab272~mv2.jpg"/><div>At the ITS America Annual Meeting (June 4-7), leaders convened to share their knowledge at the State Department of Transportation (DOT) roundtable.</div><div>The first half of the discussion focused on mobility-on-demand and how it can successfully be implemented into towns and cities.</div><div>“For the past 100 years, transportation has traditionally revolved around roads and bridges, and how vehicles interact with them,” said Shailen Bhatt, president of ITS America. “The Mobility On Demand Alliance is our attempt to say that there are a lot of different layers in mobility and that now, there are many different players around the table.”</div><div>“There’s a sense of urgency and it needs to be responded to quickly,” said Jennifer Cohan, secretary at the Delaware Department of Transportation (DOT). “Mobility-on-demand is a leap of faith, but we shouldn’t be afraid to take it.”</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_224bb52b2252493585b677867e6fa21e~mv2.jpg"/><div>“In order to facilitate mobility-on-demand and Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) in any city or state, we need to re-imagine our infrastructure and how it functions,” said Jeff Marootian (above), director of the District [of Columbia]DOT. “In my state, we’re currently testing autonomous vehicles, experimenting with scooter- and bike-share schemes; and we’ve converted some parking spots to pick-up/drop-off lanes in order to set up the landscape for mobility-on-demand in the future.”</div><div>Laurie Berman (below), director of the California DOT (Caltrans) agreed. “Part of the mobility-on-demand challenge is trying to make people try something different and making these new travel modes more attractive,” she said.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_96e0b33f7d6f496b9be2d1127aacb519~mv2.jpg"/><div>Jim Tymon added: “Sate DOTs are trying to fight the misconception that they just want to build new roads. They have become a lot more multimodal. We need to be able to share how and why they’re more multimodal.”</div><div>“The disruption is refreshing,” said James Barbaresso, senior vice president of construction engineering giant HNBT, the sponsor of the roundtable. “It’s user-driven and user-focused. Moving forward, we must figure out how the right sized fleet of different vehicles can be developed to serve different types of users across a certain area in order to ensure accessibility at all times.”</div><div>The second part of the of the roundtable meeting was centered around technology and DOTs’ success stories of its implementation.</div><div>“Technology is a fundamental tool in terms of how we manage congestion and other transportation issues,” said Bhatt.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_5b29c6e12ffd473b823fb4d99b114f5b~mv2.jpg"/><div>“It took us two years to get legislation for drone use,” said Pete Rahn (above), secretary at Maryland DOT. “Now, thanks to drones, we are able to clear crashes on the I-95 in just 15 minutes, and we can restore traffic in 45mins. That is a phenomenal achievement for this road, which used to take hours to clear. The technologies that are available are so exciting, but we sometimes have a hard time keeping up with the knowledge of it, as well as deploying it.”</div><div>“We found that asking for full passing in autonomous vehicle legislation was too much,” said Leslie Richards, secretary at the Pennsylvania DOT. “So now we’re focusing on testing autonomous vehicles around workzones and platooning, and getting that legislation passed.”</div><div>The subject of trust was also explored.</div><div>“It’s a challenge to gain the public’s acceptance,” said Diane Gutierrez-Scaccetti, commissioner at the New Jersey DOT. “How can we educate the nay-sayers? How do we communicate why we’re making changes and what the benefits are?”</div><div>“It’s a neat time to be working in transportation. We’ve entered a time where the ‘i’ in ITS needs to reach its full potential,” said Russell McMurry, commissioner at Georgia DOT. “We’re getting more data than ever that can be coupled with connected and autonomous vehicles. And this data can be merged with artificial intelligence.</div><div>“So, how can we make our transit services more efficient using this data? The technology is approaching us very quickly, but how soon people will accept it is a different matter.”</div><div>https://www.traffictechnologytoday.com/news/event-news/dots-discuss-facilitating-mobility-on-demand-and-technology-in-roundtable.html</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Disaster Bill Provides $1.6B To FHWA Emergency Relief Program</title><description><![CDATA[President Donald Trump signed into law H.R. 2157 – the “Additional Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Act of 2019” – on June 6 that provides $19.1 billion to cover recovery and other costsassociated with a series of catastrophic disasters that have struck the United States over the past three years.[Official White House photo above by Shealah Craighead.]That money includes $3.3 billion in funds for the Army Corps of Engineers to repair damages caused by natural disasters, to invest<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_8082e645c3494a248f8f88e99d5be60f%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>AASHTO Journal</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/Disaster-Bill-Provides-16B-To-FHWA-Emergency-Relief-Program</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/Disaster-Bill-Provides-16B-To-FHWA-Emergency-Relief-Program</guid><pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:46:25 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_8082e645c3494a248f8f88e99d5be60f~mv2.jpg"/><div>President Donald Trump signed into law H.R. 2157 – the “Additional Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Act of 2019” – on June 6 that provides $19.1 billion to cover recovery and other costsassociated with a series of catastrophic disasters that have struck the United States over the past three years.</div><div>[Official White House photo above by Shealah Craighead.]</div><div>That money includes $3.3 billion in funds for the Army Corps of Engineers to repair damages caused by natural disasters, to invest in new flood and storm damage reduction projects, and to make the U.S. infrastructure “more resilient” to future natural disasters.</div><div>The Federal Highway Administration receives $1.6 billion from H.R. 2157 to help bolster its Emergency Relief “quick release” funding program, which state departments of transportation are tapping to help them repair roads and bridges damaged by a range of disasters, including the recent Midwest flooding.</div><div>Additionally, the Federal Transit Administration gets $10.5 million for its emergency relief program from this additional appropriations funding as well.</div><div>Finally, the Disaster Relief Act also makes certain “language changes” to existing law to allow the Federal Aviation Administration to access unused 2017 emergency funds to help defray 2018 disaster recovery costs.</div><div>https://aashtojournal.org/2019/06/07/disaster-bill-provides-1-6b-to-fhwa-emergency-relief-program/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>House Appropriations Committee Approves FY 2020 Transportation Funding</title><description><![CDATA[By a vote of 29 to 21, the House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations formally approved a fiscal year 2020 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies or THUD funding bill that would provide the U.S. Department of Transportation with a total budget of $86.6 billion; roughly $167 million above the amount enacted for fiscal year 2019 and $3.7 billion above the amount request in President Trump’s budget proposal issued back in March.“This year’s [THUD] funding bill<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_a5e85e648aad495486be55046ddb24ee%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_410/4cd688_a5e85e648aad495486be55046ddb24ee%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>AASHTO</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/House-Appropriations-Committee-Approves-FY-2020-Transportation-Funding</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/13/House-Appropriations-Committee-Approves-FY-2020-Transportation-Funding</guid><pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2019 14:42:33 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_a5e85e648aad495486be55046ddb24ee~mv2.jpg"/><div>By a vote of 29 to 21, the House of Representatives Committee on Appropriations formally approved a fiscal year 2020 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies or THUD funding bill that would provide the U.S. Department of Transportation with a total budget of $86.6 billion; roughly $167 million above the amount enacted for fiscal year 2019 and $3.7 billion above the amount request in President Trump’s budget proposal issued back in March.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_367f6596efe841e79bd62cb75c09a8c0~mv2.jpg"/><div>“This year’s [THUD] funding bill represents a positive, inclusive vision for our country,” noted Rep. David Price, D-N.C., chairman of the THUD subcommittee, in a statement. “It makes forward-looking investments in our housing and transportation infrastructure, while ensuring concerted attention to safety, the needs of the most vulnerable, and resilience. It will benefit all American communities – urban and rural – and lays the foundation for economic growth and opportunity.”</div><div>Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., chairwoman of the full Appropriations Committee, noted that the current version of the THUD funding bill would “equip” the USDOT to “fund safety upgrades on our roads and rails as well as [conduct] safety research.”</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_f89672684eb34ae78de95d7d6a119408~mv2.jpg"/><div>She added that “this bill also would provide adequate funding for the federal share of one of the most important transportation projects in our country to advance commuter safety and the economy – the Gateway tunnel between New Jersey and New York. </div><div>With this bill, we have the opportunity to invest in our infrastructure and fundamentally improve the lives of our constituents.”</div><div>The bill also includes:</div><div>1 billion for national infrastructure investments via the Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development or BUILD grant program.$10 million to fund a new program, the Highly Automated Systems Safety Center of Excellence.$48.9 billion for the Federal Highway Administration, which is $404 million below FY 2019 but $1.7 billion above the president’s budget request.$1.75 billion for discretionary Highway Infrastructure Programs, which is $1.5 billion below FY 2019 but $1.45 billion above the president’s budget request.$13.5 billion for the Federal Transit Administration, which is $60 million above FY 2019 and $1.1 billion above the president’s budget request.</div><div>However, one potential snag that could jeopardize passage of the FY 2020 THUD bill by the House is a “policy rider” adopted by voice vote that would prevent the Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration from completing work on revised fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars and light trucks contained within the Safer Affordable Fuel Efficient Vehiclesrulemaking initiated in August last year.</div><div>Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, ranking member on the Appropriations Committee, said in a statement that policy rider “hamstrings the U.S. Department of Transportation from common-sense rulemaking.”</div><div>She added that the overall THUD bill is also “drafted at a funding level that does not have broad consensus needed to be signed into law”</div><div>https://aashtojournal.org/2019/06/07/house-appropriations-committee-approves-fy-2020-transportation-funding/</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Q&amp;A: Ryan Kelly, Virgin Hyperloop One</title><description><![CDATA[Hyperloop is one of the most exciting innovations in recent years and has the potential to revolutionize world trade and logistics. It can travel at approximately 700 miles per hour and a recent Hyperloop project between the Indian cities of Mumbai and Pune could cut a three-hour journey to 30 minutes. With this promise arises many questions, such as how much energy will it use, what can it carry and is it a truly viable alternative to traditional modes of cargo transport? In an exclusive<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_5f32783fc1184a978558bad47cee3bbc%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_267/4cd688_5f32783fc1184a978558bad47cee3bbc%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Port Technology</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/05/QA-Ryan-Kelly-Virgin-Hyperloop-One</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/06/05/QA-Ryan-Kelly-Virgin-Hyperloop-One</guid><pubDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2019 18:37:50 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_5f32783fc1184a978558bad47cee3bbc~mv2.jpg"/><div>Hyperloop is one of the most exciting innovations in recent years and has the potential to revolutionize world trade and logistics. It can travel at approximately 700 miles per hour and a recent Hyperloop project between the Indian cities of Mumbai and Pune could cut a three-hour journey to 30 minutes. </div><div>With this promise arises many questions, such as how much energy will it use, what can it carry and is it a truly viable alternative to traditional modes of cargo transport? In an exclusive interview with Port Technology, Virgin Hyperloop One's Head of Marketing and Communications Ryan Kelly explains the benefits and what the future holds.</div><div>PTI (Port Technology): What are the main economic benefits of using Hyperloop to transport cargo? </div><div>RK: We are not poised to meet the demand of the coming decades. Today, on-demand deliveries are novel. Tomorrow, they will be the expectation. E-commerce, set to grow to $4 trillion globally by 2020, is driving a dramatic shift in both consumer and business behavior. The market for express and parcel freight is set to grow to $516 Billion by 2025-- this expanding market is currently limited by airline/airport capacity challenges.</div><div>DP World Cargospeed can deliver freight at the speed of flight and closer to the cost of trucking. Hyperloop can serve as an integrated logistics backbone, supporting the fast, sustainable and efficient delivery of palletized cargo. Deliveries can be completed in hours versus days with unprecedented reliability. </div><div>It will expand freight transportation capacity by connecting with existing modes of road, rail, ports, and air transport, and will provide greater connectivity with manufacturing parks, economic zones, distribution centers, and regional urban centers. DP World Cargospeed won’t just get goods from A to B faster and cheaper, it will revolutionize supply chain-manufacturing.</div><div>A hyperloop-enabled supply chain can help reduce finished goods inventory by 25%, cut required warehouse space by 25%, and shrink inventory lead times. This can add up to far more than the savings in transportation costs, especially for high value and time-sensitive products.</div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_d9d1fc18a84f4547af4004026124e6b2~mv2.jpg"/><div>PTI: Is it a truly viable alternative to more traditional trade models and can it one day be a wealth creator in developing economies?</div><div>RK: DP World Cargospeed systems powered by Virgin Hyperloop One technology will support on-demand shipments by enabling ultra-fast, on-demand deliveries of high-priority goods. The system will revolutionize logistics, support economic zones, and create thriving economic megaregions.</div><div>PTI: What is the estimated cost of a hyperloop route between two cities relatively close in proximity?</div><div>RK: A recent study in Missouri, conducted by an independent engineering consulting firm, found that Virgin Hyperloop One’s linear infrastructure costs are around 30% lower than those seen in high-speed rail projects around the world, while the system delivers speeds that are two to three times faster. It also found that the cost to take a hyperloop from St. Louis to Kansas City could be lower than the cost to drive (based on gas alone), while still cutting down the time by three hours.</div><div>PTI: How much will do you anticipate it will cost to transport a TEU’s worth of cargo through hyperloop?</div><div>RK: DP World Cargospeed is designed to provide exceptional service for high-priority, on-demand goods at the freight at the speed of flight and closer to the cost of trucking. Our focus is on supporting fast, on-demand, direct delivery of palletized cargo, not TEUs. </div><div>PTI: Is there a type of cargo that is particularly well suited to being transported by hyperloop? For example, is it feasible that commodities such as oil, gold and gas will one day be transported via hyperloop?</div><div>RK: We’re focused high-priority, on-demand goods -- fresh food, medical supplies, electronics -- the same goods often delivered via air. Hyperloop doesn’t make sense for carrying things like coal and other bulk goods which can be on the back of a truck/train for weeks with little impact. Air cargo currently accounts for less than 1% of world trade tonnage, yet 35% of world trade value is carried by air. This is an expanding market that is currently limited by capacity challenges.</div><div>PTI: What challenges have you faced in building hyperloop infrastructure, particularly on routes that cross borders?</div><div>RK: With Hyperloop, the benefits grow exponentially as the network expands. The VHO system supports demand-responsive, direct to destination travel no matter the number of stops.</div><div>PTI: Which regions of the world would you say are optimistic or pessimistic about the technology’s viability?</div><div>RK: We are seeing enormous interest around the world – in the U.S., India, Europe, and the GCC. Governments understand that the value of a hyperloop system extends beyond passenger journeys to include an efficient backbone for cargo and goods, as well as a solution to expand airport capacity.</div><div>PTI: A big question in the maritime industry at the moment is the viability of the Arctic as a shipping route. With its high-speed capability and limited emissions output, is it possible to imagine hyperloop being used in that region?</div><div>RK: It is certainly possible. DP World Cargospeed systems are 100% electric, with zero direct emissions. The system can be built above or below ground, and even underwater.</div><div>PTI: Terminal operator DP World is now Virgin Hyperloop One’s largest investor and its CEO Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem was recently elected Chairman. Has there been interest from any other areas of the maritime industry, such as container lines?</div><div>RK: Sultan Bin Sulayem has over three decades of experience across a wide range of industries, bringing a wealth of leadership experience to the Boardroom. As Virgin Hyperloop One’s largest investor, DP World recognizes the value of hyperloop to distribute not only passengers but time-sensitive cargo at the speed of flight and the cost of trucking. </div><div>PTI: In regards to DP World Cargospeed, what made DP World such an ideal partner for Virgin Hyperloop One?</div><div>RK: DP world is a global trade enabler in locations that manage over 50% of world trade, and is a leader in the transport and logistics industry. Sultan bin Sulayem and DP World were early supporters of the vision of Hyperloop. He has been a Virgin Hyperloop One investor since early days and brought it to the UAE. DP World Cargospeed supports DP World’s vision for innovating global commerce and trade networks for the future—so they become faster, more efficient, sustainable, and cost-effective.</div><div>PTI: Where do you anticipate hyperloop technology will be in 10 years’ time? Could we see it become a standard mode of cargo and passenger transportation within a generation?</div><div>RK: Earlier. Leaders, at the local and national level, are committed to solving the transportation challenges of the 21st century. We already working with the highest level of governments – in the U.S., India, Europe, and the GCC, to build a safe, viable, regulated mass transportation system in years, not decades.</div><div>https://www.porttechnology.org/news/qa_ryan_kelly_virgin_hyperloop_one?utm_source=GatorMail&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=Newsletter+daily+05-06-2019&amp;utm_term=%5bPTI+Daily%5d+QA+Virgin+Hyperloop+One...Navis+Leads+Chinese+Terminal+Optimization...Rotterdam%27s+New+Logistics+Partnership&amp;utm_content=34588&amp;gator_td=ytO0V29Nyty0qO8aC9vn1Wix3Xsq9WWHMLRSw1d4YXjQ164S2N8WOV3ULVBHqJdDAmhwojrSTYdJZu%2bafQgPwQe0LleR4Rq7GX0O%2bQtQgJiFmLiq69YFGQ7YvyFCKuC7E2l%2fqXY6x1g0GrjdV4Javg%3d%3d</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>Texas Central touts economic impact of proposed bullet train project, amid court skirmishes</title><description><![CDATA[BRYAN, Texas — Texas Central Railway, the company building the proposed high speed rail connecting Houston to Dallas and stopping in Grimes County, say the project is what Texans want. "The data shows that people will ride the train," said Holly Reed, Managing Director External Affairs for Texas Central in an interview with KAGS. "The numbers prove this is an exciting thing and Texans will ride this train." The company touts the train's potential economic impact, saying it will connect Houston<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_9c326abaff57405fb8ee31694e1115af%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_307/4cd688_9c326abaff57405fb8ee31694e1115af%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Jay O&amp;#39;Brien</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/05/17/Texas-Central-touts-economic-impact-of-proposed-bullet-train-project-amid-court-skirmishes</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/05/17/Texas-Central-touts-economic-impact-of-proposed-bullet-train-project-amid-court-skirmishes</guid><pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2019 21:54:53 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_9c326abaff57405fb8ee31694e1115af~mv2.jpg"/><div>BRYAN, Texas — Texas Central Railway, the company building the proposed high speed rail connecting Houston to Dallas and stopping in Grimes County, say the project is what Texans want. </div><div>&quot;The data shows that people will ride the train,&quot; said Holly Reed, Managing Director External Affairs for Texas Central in an interview with KAGS. &quot;The numbers prove this is an exciting thing and Texans will ride this train.&quot; </div><div>The company touts the train's potential economic impact, saying it will connect Houston and Dallas, building a &quot;super-economy.&quot; The Brazos Valley, Texas Central says, will be a much needed midpoint, allowing for commuting between cities and opening up the state to Texas A&amp;M students in College Station. </div><div>&quot;Your rider experience will be exceptional because we will use technology to get you from your desk to your desk, or your couch to your couch, seamlessly,&quot; said Reed, adding that the train offers more elegant travel. </div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_affc23785e7741e19a278fea74e86c4a~mv2.jpg"/><div>Some landowners, particularly in Grimes County, have come out against the project. Court skirmishes have ensued with landowners suing over planned surveying. At least one case has declared that Texas Central is not a &quot;railroad,&quot; something that could impact the firm's use of eminent domain. A judge in Harris County ruled differently. </div><div>&quot;To us, it's not a question to call ourselves a railroad. We're doing everything a railroad does,&quot; Reed said, referring to potential rider data collection and infrastructure building. &quot;We have been purchasing land voluntarily with landowners. There are no eminent domain cases out there.&quot; </div><div>“If they’re not a railroad they can’t use the power of eminent domain underneath the statutes,” said Grimes County State Representative Ben Leman, a vocal critique of Texas Central, in a March interview with KAGS. </div><div>The company is moving forward on the project, partnering with Citi Group and Mitsubishi UFG to help secure financing. </div><div>https://www.kagstv.com/article/news/texas-central-touts-economic-impact-of-proposed-bullet-train-project-amid-court-skirmishes/499-b93edee0-cab1-42b3-ba08-7f510bbcffad</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item><item><title>BCS in DC: The fight for I-14 and high-speed rail</title><description><![CDATA[WASHINGTON, D.C. (KBTX) - Bryan and College Station are becoming bigger and bigger, attracting more and more people, not to mention industry.The Chamber of Commerce delegates this week are concerned that B/CS, as a locale, isn’t accessible enough. That’s why they’re asking federal lawmakers to support big transportation projects that would help connect B/CS to the rest of Texas—and beyond.College Station Mayor Karl Mooney wears an I-14 pin during the delegation trip to D.C. He uses that, and his<img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_59be0c8050db427880bf4b1851ae00b8%7Emv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_546%2Ch_307/4cd688_59be0c8050db427880bf4b1851ae00b8%7Emv2.jpg"/>]]></description><dc:creator>Kathleen Witte</dc:creator><link>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/05/17/BCS-in-DC-The-fight-for-I-14-and-high-speed-rail</link><guid>https://www.thsrtc.com/single-post/2019/05/17/BCS-in-DC-The-fight-for-I-14-and-high-speed-rail</guid><pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2019 21:50:47 +0000</pubDate><content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><img src="http://static.wixstatic.com/media/4cd688_59be0c8050db427880bf4b1851ae00b8~mv2.jpg"/><div>WASHINGTON, D.C. (KBTX) - Bryan and College Station are becoming bigger and bigger, attracting more and more people, not to mention industry.</div><div>The Chamber of Commerce delegates this week are concerned that B/CS, as a locale, isn’t accessible enough. That’s why they’re asking federal lawmakers to support big transportation projects that would help connect B/CS to the rest of Texas—and beyond.</div><div>College Station Mayor Karl Mooney wears an I-14 pin during the delegation trip to D.C. He uses that, and his words, to voice his support for the proposed interstate that could run through Bryan and College Station.</div><div>“You have Interstate 10 and you have Interstate 20,” said Mooney, “but going to east to west, there’s nothing in the middle.”</div><div>Mooney and Bryan Mayor Andrew Nelson are unified on this front, saying it would bring business to the growing B/CS area.</div><div>“There are so many companies that look at your distances from an interstate,” said Nelson.</div><div>Chamber president Glen Brewer, who also wears an I-14 pin, says that’s just one part of the plan to better connect the Brazos Valley.</div><div>“Chamber of Commerce, we love highways. We love rail. We love high-speed rail,” said Brewer.</div><div>And yes, that includes the Texas Central project that’s seen push back from rural landowners outside of B/CS.</div><div>“Our Chamber is definitely supportive of high-speed rail, and right now, Texas Central is the company that’s doing it,” said Brewer, “so we’re going to support their efforts to get that done.”</div><div>In fact, David Hagy of Texas Central is part of this week’s chamber delegation.</div><div>“Our station in the Brazos Valley is going to better connect the whole Brazos Valley to all the medical centers, businesses, universities in Dallas and Houston,” said Hagy. </div><div>“Really enhancing that economic development message.”</div><div>As for I-14, Rep. Bill Flores (R-District 17) says Congress is working on the infrastructure bill that would fund the project. But first, a step rather important to Bryan-College Station.</div><div>“We need to get Bryan-College Station to have a particular designation as part of the I-14 project,” said Flores. “We’re going to get that done, and we should get that done in the next couple of weeks.”</div><div>https://www.kbtx.com/content/news/BCS-in-DC-The-fight-for-I-14-and-high-speed-rail-509756601.html</div></div>]]></content:encoded></item></channel></rss>