• Update
• National News
• World News

A proposed high-speed intercity passenger rail service that could provide potential relief to the I-70 and I-25 corridors is “bad for taxpayers,” according to a new report.

Supporters of the high-speed rail service, however, say the project would be cost effective in the long term and would provide a valuable service to Colorado.

“Why Colorado Should Not Build High-Speed Rail” claims the high-speed rail service being considered by the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority would not “relieve congestion, save energy, or reduce greenhouse gasses” and would cost around $9,000 for every Colorado resident. The report from the Independence Institute, a Golden-based libertarian think tank, said the project could end up costing more than $45 billion without producing much of a positive impact.

“High-speed rail is an idea whose time has gone,” said a statement from Randal O’Toole, the report’s author. “It is bad for taxpayers and bad for the environment.”

Harry Dale of the Rocky Mountain Rail of Authority (RMRA) called O’Toole’s claims “fairly ignorant.” For starters, nobody is ready to spend billions of dollars on anything anytime soon, he said. The RMRA is conducting a one-year study on the feasibility of implementing high-speed rail — with a possible line going from Fort Collins to Pueblo and another from going Denver International Airport to the Eagle County Airport — to see if it makes sense to do a more extensive study.

Additionally, Dale said that the high-speed rail would not need to be subsidized after it was built. He said because the rail would provide a faster alternative to driving — the proposed rail line would have average speeds of around 90 mile-per-hour — it would be able to financially sustain itself.

“What you wind up with is a system that goes faster than you can drive, so ridership numbers are much, much higher than they would be for a typical rail system that goes slower than you drive,” he said. “As a result, ridership and fares wind up being enough to pay for operating systems so you don’t pay subsidies.”

O’Toole expressed his doubts that the high-speed rail would be as successful.

“High speed rail would be subsidized by general taxpayers, but only a small number of people would use it,” he said. “A few people would get the subsidies, everybody else would be paying the costs. That’s not fair.”

No stimulus for construction

Because Colorado’s proposed high-speed rail project is only in the research phase, it is not eligible to get any construction costs covered by the $8 billion in stimulus funds dedicated towards such projects. However, Dale said he hoped the Rocky Mountain Rail Authority could get some of the stimulus money to help the financing of further studies on the proposed project.

Meanwhile, the Independence Institute said any federal stimulus money should only be used for safety improvements to existing rail lines, not for anything related to a new high-speed line.

“Colorado can do many things to cost-effectively improve transportation networks in ways that save energy, reduce accidents, and cut toxic and greenhouse gas emissions,” the report said. “High-speed rail is not one of those things.”

The RMRA is expected to complete its feasibility study in late August. If it’s determined the high-speed rail project makes financial sense and its benefits outweigh construction costs, the project will undergo a more detailed and extensive federal study that could take anywhere between three-10 years to complete, according to Dale.

Add a new comment... Spammers: links do not work and our site gets monitored for spam daily and your comments will be removed -- please do not spam our site!

Your Name:

Your Email:

Title:

Comments:

Please copy the characters from this image into the box below. All characters are either numbers 1-9 (not zero) or letters (upper and lowercase). If you cannot read this image, you can click it to try a different image (most browsers). Otherwise, submit the page anyway and try again.

Image Text: