Clean Transport

Published on April 17th, 2012 | by Zachary Shahan


High-Speed Rail Killed with Support of Lies in FL, OH, NJ, and WI

April 17th, 2012 by  

I don’t write about it often, but if you’ve ever read any of my posts on high-speed rail, you know that I’m a fan of it. I’ve ridden it in Europe. I’ve seen its rapid growth in countries around the world, such as China, Japan, Turkey, the UK, and many other countries. (China is actually looking to connect its high-speed rail to Europe!) And I’m a big fan of the environmental, economic, jobs, and convenience benefits of high-speed rail. So, to see its future implementation killed off or delayed by Tea Party governors in my home state of Florida, in New Jersey, in Ohio, and in Wisconsin was not a fun thing to watch. Here’s more on that disappointing part of the high-seed rail story:

OH, WI, NJ, & FL Governors Lied to Public to Kill High-Speed Trains

Check out our new 93-page EV report, based on over 2,000 surveys collected from EV drivers in 49 of 50 US states, 26 European countries, and 9 Canadian provinces.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

About the Author

is tryin' to help society help itself (and other species) with the power of the typed word. He spends most of his time here on CleanTechnica as its director and chief editor, but he's also the president of Important Media and the director/founder of EV Obsession, Solar Love, and Bikocity. Zach is recognized globally as a solar energy, electric car, and energy storage expert. Zach has long-term investments in TSLA, FSLR, SPWR, SEDG, & ABB β€” after years of covering solar and EVs, he simply has a lot of faith in these particular companies and feels like they are good cleantech companies to invest in.

  • Obamasucks

    So you are for Big Rail now and are demoniznig cars. That’s great. We’d be in real financial trouble if the government didn’t collect the GAS TAXES from all those “shells on the road”. The government makes 14% profit for each gallon of gas sold vs the 9% per gallon the oil companies get and they do all the work.
    Why are liberals so anti-car now? I thought y’all wanted electric shells? Sheesh, make up your minds already! Libs can’t even figure out that CO2 is NOT a toxin and essential to life! LOL! Gawd, you guys and your “change” – what exactly is that “change”? It was never defined. Maybe shut down all the highways for high speed rail (which we tried in the 60’s) and everyone walk to the train? How do the goods get from the trains to the stores? Amazing .. Big Rail, Big Wind, Big Solar – ALL going bankrupt or subsidized 100% because if they weren’t, they’d fail.

    • Bob_Wallace


      You’ve packed an amazing amount of dumb into two paragraphs.

      Demonizing cars? No. But wanting more efficient and fuel-less cars.

      I’m pretty sure that the government spends more on highway infrastructure than it collects in taxes. You could check that out.

      CO2 not a toxin. Of course if you stick your head in a plastic bag and leave it there long enough CO2 will cause your death. But that’s not the CO2 issue. CO2 is an excellent insulator when pumped into the atmosphere.

      Change? Equal pay for women – done. End of DADT – done. Extension of hate crime laws to gays – done. Health care reform – done. End of the Iraq War – done. (I can go on….)

      No one is calling for shutting down highways for HSR. HSR is a much more efficient solution for moderate length travel than is air. And it can be done with electricity.

      Wind and solar subsidies? Much, much, much, much less than what oil and coal have received – and continue to receive.

      Step away from Fox. Read articles on this site and increase your knowledge base. You’re in danger of falling off the stupid-cliff….

  • RichWilson

    I am a fan of renewable energy and do what I can to save energy. I am also a fan of most of the articles I read on this website but not this one. Here’s why.

    1. The country’s deficit is out of control. We might cite how wonderful the technology is but can we afford it. Typically, the government under rates costs by two to three times the ultimate cost.

    2. I live in Florida. We have some of the best road systems in the country. Who do you think will ride the train from Tampa to Orlando? Oh, you might say this was to be only the first segment. I say, who rides Amtrak now? When will Amtrak prove profitable, if ever. It doesn’t take an Amtrak train very long to go between Jacksonville and Miami. Yet I would doubt that the train is profitable.

    3. Trains make good sense for commuters over relatively short distances. Amtrak is very likely profitable between New York and Washington DC, or New York and Boston because of the concentration of population who live in cities and quite possibly don’t own cars. People will always choose convenience first and in my estimation cars are more convenient than trains.

    As for the comment that tea partiers are bad and Obama is always for the social good, please . . . . Sure, as long as it is someone else’s money.

    • Rich, look into the numbers. if you don’t trust the numbers, i don’t know what to tell you.

      How efficient is it to have everyone driving a relatively large vehicle of their own? How fiscally conservative is that? How cheap is it to keep huge networks of highways in good condition? One of the most illogical, financially, things in the U.S. is having everyone driving around in a large shell of their own. It’s one reason we’re in the financial trouble we’re in today. Looking to the future and planning more efficient public infrastructure is good for the country, even FL. Giving people more than one transportation option improves their freedom. I don’t think it’s something anyone should be against. And, in fact, a large number of conservatives in FL were behind the HSR proposals.


      1) more efficient transportation, and public transportation infrastructure is fiscally intelligent if you don’t want to end up in perpetual deficit.
      2) many people would ride it. and it would help guide development patterns that would make it more logical and improve transportation efficiency in the future.

      3) there are many convenient things about riding trains. 2-3 hours on a
      train is potentially 2-3 hours of productive work (or entertainment if you
      wish). 2-3 hours of driving is 2-3 hours of… driving. the longer the
      distance, the more that freedom to do what you want without having an
      accident is a convenience.

      • RichWilson

        Thank you for replying to my comment.

        If you noticed, small cars and electrics are outselling the larger vehicles compliments of the high gas prices. While the number of electric vehicles are low, the number of hybrids are not. Besides, what are we to do when we take that nice really fast train and get to our interim destination, walk? Or, we should take mass transit locally. I used to do that in New Jersey when I had no other choice. I remember that nice unionized driver doing a slow down in the bus. I watched my connection pull out as he was driving down the last street toward the terminal. I used to get up at 5:30AM to get to work by 8:30AM using that wonderful mass transit. That was really efficient for my time . . .
        What are we supposed to do, just let the roads deteriorate and stop spending all that money to keep them up. What am I going to drive my electric car on?
        Frankly, I do appreciate your reply. I believe in respecting the opinion of others even if I disagree with them. We will just have to leave it at that.
        Thanks again. I will continue to visit you site as I find much worthwhile information.

        Rich Wilson

        • Hey Rich, thanks. I appreciate the cordial tone, as well. A lot of people get in the comments and feel the right to act insanely rude. I understand this is a highly debated issue and respect your opinion on it. The thing I don’t respect is when politicians use false facts to back up their interests… but who’s going to ever change that? πŸ˜›

  • Bill_Woods

    You can probably add another state.

    The state’s top analyst on Tuesday urged lawmakers to slam the brakes on California’s $68 billion bullet train, cautioning that the newly overhauled plan simply isn’t “strong enough” and relies on “highly speculative” funding sources.
    The report from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office is especially significant as the state Senate and Assembly on Wednesday begin a debate on whether to start building the high-speed rail line, a decision officials revealed Tuesday will likely be delayed into the summer. The report could give a divided Legislature the political cover it needs to halt the biggest public works project in California history; otherwise, lawmakers would have to go against the advice of their own experts.

  • Stan

    Hi Zach…..I know this sounds desperate, but we’re getting to our wit’s end over this… company has a new renewable energy technology, and the high speed trains, and mag lev bullet trains….can be fully powered by it.
    But we’re just geeky scientists, and with the world they way it is right now….no one will take us seriously, even thoyugh we have a working model…hell, there were 2 companies without models who just went public to get funds….of course why wouldn’t they be able to? They’re not geeks, they’re con artists (see the concrete cylinder that will power 1M homes by spraying water into it)
    So dude, can you hook us up, or whatever…..?
    Advanced Consulting & Scientific

  • rkt9

    I wonder if you have a theory to the underlying reason these governors are all against HS rail? They claim it is too expensive, but others say it is not. I am of the opinion that money should first be spent on short commuter routes, then connected from city to city with the HS rail. Starting with HS seems to be the wrong order of building a passenger rail infrastructure.

    • Bcs they’re Tea Party governors who are against everything Obama is for and against anything that is about the social good. πŸ˜€

Back to Top ↑