Interstate Travel by Maglev

Out of Michigan comes the newest proposal for a nationwide Maglev system:

[A] local company is proposing to combine magnetic levitation - a mass transportation mode using electromagnets to propel elevated trains riding on a cushion of air - with solar panels that would power hydrogen-generating substations for fuel to run both the trains and personal vehicles that could run on hydrogen. The use of solar and hydrogen fuel cell technology cold move people and cargo quickly without the air pollution generated by vehicles that burn traditional fuels.

The system, according to the proposal, would utilize the nation's 54,000 miles of interstate highway, with maglev rails and steel support structure built on one side, or in some cases down the median of the freeway. The infrastructure would be built in 60-foot sections, using construction equipment that rides the rail itself, so as to not disrupt traffic. Each section would be self-contained, in a "plug-and-play" approach.

The cost to implement such a system nationwide would be huge - an estimated $6 million per mile, or $328 billion if implemented following the U.S. interstate highway system. But the approach Chrysler and others are pushing would be far less expensive than the few existing or already proposed maglev systems, because it would use existing freeways' right-of-way.

As a comparison, one proposed system that would connect Baltimore with Washington, D.C., planned for the year 2012, has a price tag of $3.5 billion for the 36-mile route, which comes to $92 million per mile.

The idea builds on one of the more popular science fiction approaches to tranportation -- use rail to tranport both people and cars at high speed:

The elevated maglev system is much like a monorail except that the cabs that carry people and vehicles would be suspended on a cushion of air, using electromagnets.

Vehicles would drive onto a "ferry," stationed at interchanges much the same as they do presently with car ferries that cross water. Both driver and passengers would enjoy a safe ride at speeds up to 300 mph. Riders would enter their personalized destinations into a computer, using the Internet.

And on the ever-present concern over funding, the company thinks it has it all figured out:

Although the project's cost would be significant, Chrysler says the system would pay for itself through user fees. Each state would bond for its portion of the system and pay off the bonds in a maximum of 20 years.

Under the proposal, 32 percent of the revenue generated would go to various governments, on a formula of 8 percent each to the federal, state, county and city-township governments. While the system would be operated by the private sector, the government would own the system itself.

"The beauty of the ITC is it will produce revenue for the various governments without raising taxes," Chrysler says. "It is truly a public-private partnership in the real sense of the word."

I've got a couple of things to say about the proposal.

First, I think it's a fantastic idea, in theory. High speed rail transit that allows people to keep their cars for local use is an excellent idea. It removes many of the concerns with using personal rapid transit, it reduces automobile transit on the highways, and speeds up transit time. Maglev's high speeds are an excellent way to enact this.

Second, there is no way it's only going to cost $6 million a mile. And there's no way it's going to be entirely funded by user fees. This is the larger problem with all of these proposals. While I understand the need to push it through Congress with the idea that it will be "self-funding," we know that transportation is never self-funding in the United States. Just as roads require subsidies - because they are infrastructure - train transportation now qualifies as infrastructure as well, and will always require a subsidy. If they can approach this through another direction and argue that it's simply the "next generation" of interstate travel, then maybe they'll be able to push it through. Argue that it be included under DOT and not Amtrak, so that it's viewed as a right of travel, not as a luxury. Then maybe we'll see the funding needed to push this through Congress.