WASHINGTON – President Joe Biden wants Congress to spend $ 80 billion over eight years improving and expanding the service for Amtrak to sustain the country’s aging infrastructure. That might sound steep, but it’s a no-brainer for America’s most famous rail travel enthusiast.
At an April 30th event in Philadelphia to mark Amtrak’s 50th anniversary An anniversary that I will confirm on an overland trip by train from Washington DC to SpokaneBiden advocated keeping the rail network running. Amtrak says it takes $ 38 billion just to get the corridor from Boston to DC back into “good shape” – not just to create jobs, but as an integral part of the White House pledge to cut the country’s greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030.
“This is a bargain of bargains,” said the president, citing the cost of additional highways if the train network continues to deteriorate. “It’s a lifesaver economically and environmentally.”
“I fought for years to cut funding for Amtrak because cutting Amtrak would be a disaster for our environment and our economy,” said Biden, who does almost every 90-minute Amtrak trip from the Capitol to Delaware Nacht performed his 36 years in the Senate.
The Northeast Corridor between DC and Boston – the train Biden would take home to Wilmington, Delaware – emits 83% less greenhouse gas than driving and up to 73% less than flying Amtrak’s 2019 Sustainability Report.
But I don’t ride the partially electric Acela bullet train that runs on the Northeast Corridor – the only significant stretch of line that Amtrak actually owns. (Private freight companies own a few 97% of the 21,400 miles of route Amtrak uses across the country.)
On my 60+ hour trip from the capital to Spokane, I drive a diesel powered Amtrak train with a top speed of about half that of the Acela, which travels a 2,659-mile stretch that is mostly owned by freight railways, and I wanted to know how climate-friendly my choice really was.
As a whole, Amtrak claims The fleet of diesel and electric trains is 46% more energy efficient than traveling by car and 34% more than domestic air travel US Department of Energy data.
I reached out to Seth Wynes, a postdoctoral fellow at Concordia University in Montreal, to understand how the so-called carbon footprint of my trip compares to flying or driving to Spokane. While multiple carbon calculators are available online, a number of variables make it difficult to estimate the environmental impact of a single trip, said Wynes, whose research focuses on how our individual choices affect climate change.
For example, driving with a friend across the country has roughly half the carbon footprint of a trip alone, as the carbon emissions are shared between two people. For the same reason, flying in a half-empty airplane – or taking up more space in a premium seat – results in a greater individual climate impact per passenger.
Wynes helped me calculate the carbon footprint of my trip using information from the US Environmental Protection Agency Emissions data for Amtrak, Car emissions data by the Canadian government for natural resources and UK Government Airline Emissions Data.
We compared the distance my train will travel to the shortest possible travel distance from DC to Spokane and a direct flight from Reagan National Airport outside of DC to Spokane International Airport. Since there are no regular direct flights between any of the three airports in the DC area and Spokane, the actual impact of flying would actually be higher.
Based on my car – a 2014 relatively fuel-efficient Ford Focus – driving it would emit more than twice the greenhouse gas of the train. Even on an imaginary direct flight to Spokane, flying would emit almost 60% more greenhouse gas than my Amtrak trip.
While many trains in Europe and Asia use electricity – often from climate-friendly sources – most passenger trains in the USA and Canada run on diesel. While my Amtrak trip has a smaller impact on CO2 emissions than driving across the country, it could be better.
“Trains are just very efficient ways to move heavy objects,” said Wynes. “There isn’t as much slowdown, stop and start as there is on highways during rush hour. So they can still be a really good alternative, but it’s definitely not that straightforward. “
Another factor, Wynes said, is that while air travel is largely sticking to current CO2 emissions – the few electric aircraft under development could not replace large-volume jumbo jets – the technology to decarbonize trains and cars is already in place . In fact, Biden’s infrastructure proposal also includes promoting the production of electric cars, installing more charging stations and investing in climate-friendly rail travel.
While I’m sure my overland train journey won’t be without its problems – I’ve been told delays are almost inevitable – it will be nice to know that I’ve made a climate-friendly decision while traveling thousands of miles on land watched outside the window.
Work to watch out for
Stone blasting begins Monday near the intersection of Strong and Indian Trail Streets and Wieber Drive and Shawnee Avenues in northwest Spokane.
The Interstate 90 ramp west on Grove Road will reopen Thursday after construction as part of the Washington Department of Transportation improvements to the Geiger Exchange. The eastbound entry and exit in Grove is expected to be closed until the weekend of July 4th.
Orion Donovan-Smith’s coverage for The Spokesman Review is funded in part by Report for America and members of the Spokane community. This story can be republished by other organizations for free under a Creative Commons license. For more information, please refer to our newspaper Editor-in-chief.
