Comments on: Can High-Speed Rail Save American Manufacturing?

By: Jonathan M. Feldman

Jonathan M. Feldman — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 19:29:23 +0000

I appreciate Mr. Levy’s comments, but I am really addressing another problem than the one posed. I weighed in on this because it is somewhat related to what I see as the real problem. The real issue here is not the absolute size of mass transit markets for high speed rail. I think we agree there. The idea is mass transit as a launch market. Mass transit production in and of itself is not going to work. Key producers are in mutliple markets (light rail, subways, high speed rail), so discussing high speed rail in a vacuum is kind of a strawman argument. That is not how the firms (nor I) see it. Furthermore, some auto manufacturers are in high speed and subway production or aerospace and rail production. So, even focusing just on mass transit markets is wrong. The South Koreans and Spanish have enough to sustain themselves and gain market share in the U.S. Why can’t the U.S.? This increased share would have saved some now dead auto suppliers. All this does not mitigate the larger auto market which might have to be replaced gradually by mass transit to meet climate change needs, to promote energy efficiencies, to overcome energy supply shortages, etc. As for the political will, that is another story that I will address elsewhere.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 04:07:55 +0000

Those other markets you mention are smaller than subways, and much smaller in the case of HSR. For example: the entire Shinkansen fleet would be worth about $10 billion, new – and trains are only replaced once every 20 years. The TGV fleet would be worth $15 billion, replaced once every 40 years. As a result, the top trainmaker, Bombardier Transportation, has about an order of magnitude fewer workers and less revenue than any of the top automakers.

By: Jonathan M. Feldman

Jonathan M. Feldman — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 23:41:53 +0000

Thanks for the comments. It is not just the subway market. There are multiple markets that include: light rail, commuter rail, high speed rail (domestic and foreign). The global market for rail is multiple billions. Then, there is the question of leveraging into other related markets, beyond transit but related to them.

By: Ocean Railroader

Ocean Railroader — Sat, 04 Sep 2010 19:58:34 +0000

I don’t think these rail car projects are going to make that many jobs do to right now. Such as why should they build them here when they can import them from France or say Japan along with China. If we are copping the high speed rail plans from Europe and China then it is very easy to simply import the parts we need from those places to built a high speed rail copy of the high speed rail systems in China or Europe. It would be easer for them to import these rail cars from existing factories outside of the county then to come in and open up new factories which you have to build.

By: Ocean Railroader

Ocean Railroader — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 14:21:02 +0000

I say yes in that when you look at athe Pennsyvinia Railroad’s steel catenary mast system all that metal was made and refined in the US. If we were to start extending this catenary system but have a law that only US Steel can be used in it then that would most likely need hunderds of people making new catenary masts in US steel mills.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 02:04:00 +0000

By the way, in terms of metro area transit mode shares, Toronto is the second largest city in North America. Washington, which is second in the US, ranks seventh, behind New York, Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver, and Calgary. I’m not sure whether Chicago has a larger overall ridership than Toronto or not – Chicago has nearly twice the population of Toronto whereas Toronto has nearly twice the mode share.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 02:02:00 +0000

Jonathan, your article is a good overview of the problems of the US rolling stock industry, but it also contains the main argument for why Detroit can’t retool itself to make trains. The global subway industry, according to your article, produces $9.3 billion’s worth of subway trains per year. By the standards of the auto industry, it’s nothing. Toyota alone has annual revenues of $263 billion. The problem is that with subways, most of the cost is in infrastructure, construction, and operations, which are done locally, rather than in vehicle production.

By: Jonathan M. Feldman

Jonathan M. Feldman — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:48:43 +0000

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=from_mass_transit_to_new_manufacturing

It is possible for Michigan to contribute to making its own trains. I am working on research on this area. To see
some preliminary results, see the above article.

By: Diego Méndez

Diego Méndez — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:41:40 +0000

Adrian,

Has he ever heard of Chicago?

yes. I’d add Washington and Chicago are almost tied up.

Anyway, North America has nothing to be proud of when compared to much smaller European cities: Berlin or Madrid’s rapid transit networks put any North American network to shame.

(NYC Subway would be a bit larger, but for a much bigger population and with crime and rat problems, unheard of in Europe).

By: Adrian

Adrian — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 02:52:09 +0000

Corey Berger is quite wrong about Toronto having the second biggest transit system in North America. Perhaps he is thinking about Canada alone. He doesn’t get around or read much, it would appear. Has he ever heard of Chicago? That’s what I love about the theoretical democracy about the internet and its blogs: so much
wrong data given as “fact” from “experts.”