Two years ago, nearly 90 percent of the six million people traveling between Madrid and Barcelona went by air. But early this year the number of train travelers on the route surpassed fliers. The trajectory is ever upward.

The shift has political and economic benefits for Spain, which like other European Union countries has set out to lower its carbon dioxide emissions by 20 percent over 10 years. Analysts say that such emissions per passenger on a high-speed train are about one-fourth of those generated by flying or driving.

But AVE’s passengers are not necessarily thinking green. Like high-speed railroads in France and China, Renfe — Spain’s national train operator — also has performed the ultimate green sleight of hand simply by making the low-emissions option more comfortable and convenient.

“Since the day this train opened, I have never, never set foot on the plane again,” said Mr. Martínez, 31, a lawyer who travels between Madrid and Barcelona twice a week. “Why would anyone fly?”

In other words, people in Spain really like taking the train even over other previously popular options. That’s even though Spain chose a different approach than France when setting its HSR fares:

But unlike the French, who sought to maintain a low-cost image as their trains gained speed, Renfe decided to go upscale, said Josep Valls, a professor of marketing at the Esade Business School in Barcelona.

AVE tickets cost as much as plane tickets — from about €120 to €200 one way, or $160 to $300, though cheaper advance fares can be found. The train offers assigned reclining seats, computer outlets, movies, headsets, good food, even gloved attendants…

Spain’s high-speed train sector seems well positioned to expand. All AVE lines turn a profit and have easily survived price wars waged by airlines, Mr. Valls said. What is more, trains require fewer employees and far less costly infrastructure than do planes.

What’s even more remarkable about this is that the AVE is maintaining these ridership levels, and generating operating surpluses as a result (something I really wish the NYT article had mentioned), despite Spain being one of the hardest-hit countries in the Eurozone by the recession. Only Greece and Ireland appear to have taken a bigger hit than Spain, which had a big property bubble that burst, leaving nearly 20% of the country unemployed. The fact that the AVE maintains its ridership and profitability during the recession is testament to the resilience and popularity of high speed passenger rail.

Of course, it’s not the only way to price HSR service. As DoDo’s Puente AVE post from a year ago today showed us, France’s decision to emphasize ridership over revenue in the first years of the TGV 30 years ago paid off both in terms of generating riders and long-term financial support for the system. We’re nearly 10 years away from making final decisions about fares for California HSR, but both France and Spain offer different, compelling models to study.

I’m sure that the NYT article about the success of the AVE will bring out those who claim that Europe is more suited to passenger rail, that it has different attitudes about travel – in short, that Spain isn’t California. This is as good a time as any to recall Matt Melzer’s excellent post comparing Spain and California from July 2008, and showing just where demand for the initial, wildly successful AVE line from Madrid to Sevilla came from. Melzer offered the following charts:

Notice the population density: almost exactly the same. What’s not noted here: distance between Madrid and Barcelona (386 mi/621 km) is similar to the distance between SF and LA (432 mi/695 km). The geography is very similar as well.

Notice the traffic coming from automobiles and induced demand. HSR deniers like to argue such “induced demand” does not exist, but the AVE indicates it does, both in 1992 when the first line opened and more recently, in 2008 when the Madrid-Barcelona line was finished.

This not only shows that HSR quickly became the dominant mode of transportation on the Madrid-Sevilla route, but that it happened on a route where conventional passenger trains had only a small fraction of the share before the opening of the HSR line.

Now that I think about it, there are a few members of the state legislature who could stand to read both the NYT article and Melzer’s original post, charts included…

I wish I could embed the videos, but you’ll have to go to WFTV’s page to see them. One of their reports, on cost and ridership, led the anchors to report – accurately – that Spanish HSR is a financial success, generating high ridership and covering its operating costs. The reporters explained why:

Just like Central Florida, Spain’s number one industry is tourism and the Spanish railway authority has agreements with airlines, cruise lines and travel agents to include high-speed train tickets at a discount.

“Any idea how many extra tourists Spain draws because of its investment in rail?” Rasmussen asked Sanchez.

“So the people, for instance, arriving from Mexico City in Madrid for a one week tour in Spain, they can get, directly, the tickets for the train, Madrid, Seville, for a cheaper price,” he said.

By 2020, Spain will spend half of its transportation budget, more than $160 billion, on rail, but managers say yearly operating costs are not subsidized by the government, because the system makes a small profit overall.

Another showed in detail what riding a high speed train is like:

Eyewitness News noticed that passengers had a lot of space and plenty of legroom. The crew was welcomed on-board. Once inside the cockpit, Eyewitness News crews set up two ‘point of view’ cameras so you can experience 160 miles per hour from a front row seat.

Trains like it being considered by Florida are powered by 25,000-volt electric lines overhead. In Spain, they have a spotless safety record and are known for being on-time down to the minute; on the line between Madrid and Seville, passengers who arrive more than five minutes late get a full refund.

Eyewitness News compared going from Ciudad Real to Cordoba, which is the closest example of Orlando to Tampa, to see how long it takes. It took just 54 minutes, with one stop in between.

And a report on the jobs HSR will bring:

Now, leaders say it has created tens of thousands of jobs. Florida has been promised 23,000 jobs for the 90-mile line planned between Orlando and Tampa.

Executives with Spanish train maker Talgo say it’s possible. The idea is to have something like Talgo’s smaller factories in Florida, with local workers building the trains. Four-hundred-eight-five people work at the smaller Talgo factory, but experts say the jobs that come with high-speed rail aren’t limited to construction.

“It goes from blue collars to white collars. It’s a lot of engineering,” said Jose Uriarte, Bombardier Inc. “This requires a lot of safety equipment and technology, which comes close to military-safety standards.”

Obviously these aren’t in-depth reports. It is TV news, after all. But it’s refreshing to see a US news outlet going past all the bullshit spun by HSR critics here in the US and actually looking into real-life, operating high speed rail systems and look at the evidence to see how well it works.

It would be fantastic if KTVU or KABC would send a camera crew over to Spain or France or China to cover their HSR systems and show Californians just how well this system works. Put an official from RENFE on TV to explain that Spanish HSR covers its costs and doesn’t require subsidies. Find an American tourist on the TGV and get them to say “this is awesome, I can’t wait to have one back home!” Go to China and show people at work building tracks and trainsets.

The LA Times has gone down this path to some degree, publishing an article by freelance journalist Bruce Selcraig about the AVE trains in Spain. Unfortunately too many other journalists repeat the frames from HSR critics that the system will be too costly, that nobody will ride it, etc, without questioning these claims or even demanding any evidence.

Let’s hope that other California news outlets follow the LA Times’ and WFTV’s lead and start reporting on HSR as it actually exists, instead of giving more space to evidence-free and speculative criticisms.

I actually like the sound of barking sea lions at night, which I can hear from my apartment a few blocks away. I’m used to it (as I am also used to the VERY loud bugle calls played over the PA system at the Presidio of Monterey just a block from where I live). I can see how it might be a bit surprising to someone, but they might as well complain about the sound of crashing waves or foghorns.

In short, experience matters. Most of us here on the blog have some personal experience on high speed trains. I’ve been a convert to HSR ever since a 2001 trip on Spain’s AVE system. So when we talk about HSR, we have some sort of experience in mind. We know what the trains look and sound like, we know how the grade separations look, we know that the routes integrate pretty well with the urban landscape.

Your average Californians, on the other hand, doesn’t have that experience. When they think of trains they think of loud and long freight trains or commuter trains. Those things are clearly an annoyance to people living nearby, and often pose a genuine safety risk, as Palo Alto understands well.

So when people hear about “high speed trains” they may not have any experience with actual bullet trains, and start flipping out, assuming that the CHSRA is planning to destroy neighborhoods with intrusive rail infrastructure that serves loud trains blowing horns and rumbling by at all hours of the night.

We can see this at work in the debate over using the Taylor Yard in LA:

One committee member, who asked to remain anonymous, said she generally supports the project so long as it does not increase the noise pollution in the area.

“Is there going to be noise?” she asked. “I’m right next door and I hear the horns of [Union Pacific Corporation] trains all night long.”

As a homeowner, she has fruitlessly tried for years to persuade Union Pacific to alter its operations to reduce the noise during late hours. As a private company protected by federal law, Authority representatives acknowledged that the Authority has no oversight on the rail companies that currently utilize Taylor Yard.

“Yes, there will be noise,” Ortman answered bluntly.

Ortman said the high-speed line does not utilize horns. Ortman said the amount of noise the line will create would not be known until the EIR is completed sometime in the middle of 2011. He said a “noise analysis” is included in the report.

A big issue for residents, especially after several high-profile rail accidents, is train safety for a system that is proposed to boast speeds of over 200-miles-per-hour. Ortman, assured committee members that by design, the project will be safe because it requires as little interference as possible. For example, although one proposal requires the line to share a right-of-way with Union Pacific freight trains, the line itself will have separate tracks and will be barricaded to prevent collisions.

A lot of that seems common-sense to us, but it’s not to a lot of the public. We also know that there are ways to build this train in a way that complements the park – the CHSRA has its own simulation showing how that can work and I hope they showed this at the meeting in LA.

More of that needs to happen. CHSRA simulations are very useful, especially for contentious sites. But it’s also worth using the magic of technology to bring the world of HSR to California. We can and should continuously show people some of the key details about how HSR works, how it looks, and how it sounds – that it’s very different from Metrolink and Union Pacific.

For example, this image from Sweden appeared in a recent article on CNN about “green trains”:

Obviously HSR on, say, the Peninsula would be wider. But we’ve also shown other examples of above-grade rail that work elegantly with their surroundings. From Italy:

Two from Berlin:

And from Lambeth Road in London:

None of these look like a Berlin Wall. All of them have become accepted parts of the urban landscape, in parts of the world where aesthetics matter every bit as much as in California, if not moreso (you can be sure that the Italian beach town shown above cares very much about how the rails look).

As the CHSRA works to build and rebuild support across the state for its designs, they would do well to show people as much as possible more than just lines on a map, and even more than the very good simulations from NC3D – they need to show examples and, ideally, video of actual, operating HSR. This one from Spain is still one of my favorites, not the least of which is because the landscape resembles California so well:

The more we can show things like this to Californians, the more successfully we can push back against the NIMBYs. Their opposition to HSR is rooted in their desire to preserve the economic and political arrangements in this state which benefit them immensely, even at the expense of others. We’ll never overcome that by showing images of how HSR actually works. But the more we can do to make HSR seem less strange and more familiar, the more success we’ll have at getting through the planning process with a minimum of fuss.

What should be striking is that traffic seems to reach its full potential in at least five years. (Air/rail market share data would have been more appropriate for this purpose, but it’s harder to come by, and you get the picture.)…

The lesson from this: high-speed rail (and not just high-speed) is a long-term investment. Do not insist on instant success — but do expect a permanent change in travel patterns.

In short, if the LA-SF route is fully opened around 2018, then we will not see the “full potential” reached until 2023. However, we WILL see a permanent long-term shift in how Californians get around this state, which is of course the core goal here.

DoDo uses as his model the AVE line from Madrid to Barcelona, which was finally completed about a year ago. It replaced the “Puente Aéreo” – the “air bridge” between Madrid-Barajas and Barcelona-El Prat that was the world’s busiest air route by flights. The “Puente AVE” as DoDo calls it has eaten heavily into the Puente Aéreo, to the point where the AVE trains now take about 50% of the market share of Madrid-Barcelona travelers.

But as DoDo also notes, the Madrid-Barcelona AVE, despite those impressive gains in modal share, has yet to meet ridership expectations:

RENFE missed its own expectation for the entire line by almost 250,000 — and that for the Madrid-Barcelona relation alone by 300,000. Only the last few months of Spanish intercity traffic were affected by the economic crisis, so there is something else at play here. I criticised high ticket prices a year ago, and I find that this has indeed become a theme in the Spanish media over the past year. Even at the anniversary press conference, where new airline-style last-minute discounts were announced.

What explains this? To DoDo the answer is obvious: “all potential customers won’t try out a new offer instantly – you have to wait for people to discover that the new alternative is better.”

This leads to DoDo’s second key conclusion – that there are certain bad decisions that typically get made by HSR builders and governments in response to the slow start (though some of these bad decisions are made in the design and construction phase):

It happens actually quite often that a major new rail project gets off to a really bad start, generating bad publicity — and then turns into a solid mainstay of the transport system a few years later (with less media coverage). To sum up the reasons:

1. an expectation that people will change travel patterns instantly;
2. financing (e.g. interest rates and period of maturity) and rosy projections themselves are tailored for short-term expectations on profitability;
3. after diverse construction delays, (especially high-speed) lines are often opened half-finished (missing sections, stations, local transit connections, trains, signalling), and thus can’t realise their full potential instantly
4. when the builders become nervous about their ridership projections (be it due to cost overruns or ‘half-finished’ openings as per above), they tend to bet on passengers accepting higher ticket prices — which usually doesn’t work out.

I can all too easily envision some or all of these coming true in California. And though DoDo explains how SNCF successfully handled some of these issues in the early 1980s, under the Socialist leadership of François Mitterand (bringing down ticket prices to encourage long-term ridership growth), I think that at this stage in the process we have the opportunity to avoid some of these problems.

First, we cannot expect ridership goals to be met immediately. DoDo’s analysis shows they will be met but not until around five years have passed. This will produce hackles from the usual HSR deniers (who will still be with us in ten years’ time) – the Wendell Coxes and Martin Engels who will say that “omg you haven’t met ridership – the HSR train is a boondoggle! kill all remaining extension plans!” We must resist them patiently but firmly and let the project steadily attract riders.

Second, we need to oversee the financing process to ensure that the project’s finances are not going to be imperiled by expectations of high ridership out the gate. This is a long-term project; its financing should be long-term as well. This is one reason I am skeptical of some of the more broad public-private proposals for how to fund the train. Government has the luxury of waiting for the system to mature and work properly; the private sector instead demands immediate profits at the expense of long-term planning (and we see how well THAT worked out).

Third, construction delays. I have always said that we are likely to see both delays and cost overruns, but that we can and should work to ensure the are minimal. Sometimes the two are linked – Peninsula NIMBYs are inherently arguing that it is OK to both make the HSR project more delayed and more expensive to suit their demands. We may well see similar problems on other sections of the route. We cannot let these delays compromise the overall system. The route has always been intended to be opened in stages, as was BART, but the finances, operation, and political support for the project cannot be made dependent on that staging. Further, the stages should be opened for practical reasons, and not in an effort to cut corners or costs. Again the long-term vision for the system must be kept in mind at all times.

Fourth, fares. Whether the $55 fare from SF-LA is possible even in 2018 dollars is an open question. But the system cannot raise ticket prices to try and cover financial shortfalls or cost overruns if they are to build a long-term ridership base.

It is entirely possible that ten years from now the short-sighted short-term political and economic worldview that helped create the present economic mess will have been replaced with a renewed emphasis on long-term planning and infrastructure, and that Californians will be willing to wait a few years for HSR ridership to rise to expectations.

But I wouldn’t bet on it. Instead we are going to have to continue to fight to ensure that HSR is built the right way, the proper way, without compromising for people who put all sorts of petty and small concerns above the HSR project itself.

EARLY morning at Barcelona’s railway station and the platform crowd looks smarter than it would have done a year ago. But these are not ordinary weekday commuters. They are besuited businessmen heading for Madrid, almost 500km (310 miles) away. A sleek new high-speed AVE train will whisk them to the capital at speeds of up to 300kmph in plenty of time for their morning meetings.

The new passengers reflect a revolution in Spanish travel. Domestic airlines have lost a fifth of their passengers in the space of a year. And long-distance trains have gained almost a third.

It is not difficult to imagine that scene unfolding at LA Union Station or SF Transbay Terminal in ten years’ time. The distances are about the same, and the traveler profile similar – there’s plenty of business travel between LA and SF.

This shift is the consequence of an ambitious programme for high-speed rail. The streamlined AVE trains, with their sleek corridors, work tables and spectacular views, are stealing the show. Those used to the tedious taxi rides, security checks and crowded shuttle flights traditionally endured by Spanish businessmen will not be surprised. The opening of the Barcelona-Madrid line a year ago marked the beginning of the end of airlines’ dominance. In its first ten months it carried 2m passengers; in 2008 its share of the total market rose from 28% to 38%. Josep Valls, of the ESADE business school, predicts that trains will carry most long-distance travellers within two years.

This paragraph alone shows the huge advantage HSR has over other forms of transit between two major cities, and why the AVE is experiencing such success on the all-important Madrid to Barcelona route. The trains are fast, convenient, and efficient. Like the AVE lines, California’s HSR system will serve the city centers; no need for a taxi to LAX or SFO. The shift in travel habits described here is both dramatic and immediate.

Critics still complain that politics has loomed too large. The first AVE line did not connect Madrid to busy Barcelona but to sleepy Seville, the home town of the then prime minister, Felipe González. Even now, whereas small provincial cities like Valladolid and Segovia are connected to a new line, it will still take several years to link up with France’s network.

In retrospect this actually looks to have been a smart move. Madrid-Sevilla was a much easier engineering job than Madrid-Barcelona. When the first AVE line opened in 1992, its success showed that Spain was ready for more high speed trains. And while towns like Valladolid and Segovia may not have the same utility for a continental traveler as the planned link with the TGV, it makes political sense to show Spain that HSR is a solution for the whole country, and not just a few lucky areas. The result is the building and sustaining of political support for HSR that, in Spain, remains strong in both of the two major parties (PP and PSOE).

And as frequently predicted here on the blog, HSR is having a significant impact on the environmentally-damaging short-haul airline industry:

Prices vary and can be hard to compare. Budget airlines tend still to be the cheapest on the Madrid-Barcelona route. Fernando Conte, chairman of Iberia, Spain’s biggest airline, also insists that “point to point we are quicker.” Yet that assumes aircraft take off on time and there are no traffic jams. Savings on taxi fares plus a 99% punctuality rate are usually enough to push people on to the train. Tellingly enough, Iberia is planning to cut domestic flights by 7% this year.

Given SFO’s frequent fog and rain delays, and LAX’s overcrowding, 99% punctuality rates on California shuttle airlines is next to impossible to achieve. But the HSR trains can operate in that weather, and maintain their punctual schedules alongside their convenient city center to city center route.

California’s plans aren’t yet as ambitious as Spain’s. But both California and the United States would do well to learn from the Spanish model – especially as we debate economic recovery and the future of our transportation network.

Alstom’s ambitions in particular were long hampered by SNCF’s unwillingness to order the AGV: they preferred the lower price and reliability of the TGV (and the higher capacity of the double-deck Duplex) over (relatively minor) improvements in performance.

The AGV, you’ll recall, was the trainset that Fiona Ma rode in 2007, a trip that did much to raise the profile of HSR here in California. Had SNCF been willing to order the AGV it could have made that technology a more readily available option to us in California. True, that option is still there, but it’s my belief that the CHSRA will – rightly, in my view – prefer to go with a more commonplace trainset than something untested and new.

Perhaps it will be Spain that pushes the envelope most effectively:

Finally, there is the above mentioned announced threat to everyone from Spain, the Talgo AVRIL. To cut Madrid-Barcelona times to 1h45m(!), the targeted service top speed is 380 km/h. With Talgo’s expertise, this should be considered with more seriousness than China’s ambition — but not without doubts. Talgo named its current top product Talgo 350, but it is certified for only 330 km/h (with insufficient power and ride quality among the likely reasons).

380 km/h is about 236 mph, which would achieve the CHSRA’s stated goal of 220 mph top speeds on the line. If Talgo can deliver that service to RENFE then it becomes much more likely California can get that as well.

It’s likely that all of these will be evaluated when the Central Valley test track is built. But I have to believe that past performance will be a factor as well – if, say, the Talgo AVRIL can reliably accomplish its intended speeds in Spain then it would augment a successful test here in California.

Ultimately this decision has political ramifications, and the state of the global HSR market will play a major role. So go have a look at DoDo’s post to get better acquainted with that market.

Spain’s sleek new high-speed trains have stolen hundreds of thousands of passengers from airlines over the last year, slashing carbon emissions and marking a radical change in the way Spaniards travel.

Passenger numbers on fuel-guzzling domestic flights fell 20% in the year to November as commuters and tourists swapped cramped airline seats for the space and convenience of the train, according to figures released yesterday.

High-speed rail travel – boosted by the opening of a line that slashed the journey time from Madrid to Barcelona to 2 hours 35 minutes in February – grew 28% over the same period. About 400,000 travellers shunned airports and opted for the 220mph AVE trains.

Last year’s drop in air travel, which was also helped by new high-speed lines from Madrid to Valladolid, Segovia and Malaga, marks the beginning of what experts say is a revolution in Spanish travel habits.

lydik is right, I have a huge soft spot for the AVE trains, which were my first HSR experience – and also because I love Iberia (my wife and I are going to Portugal later this spring). It’s also because while many Americans have a stereotype that Europeans are all a bunch of train-riding sophisticates, in fact air and auto travel in Europe is still a major form of transportation.

That was particularly true of Spain – but no longer:

In a country where big cities are often more than 500km (300 miles) apart, air travel has ruled supreme for more than 10 years. A year ago aircraft carried 72% of the 4.8 million long-distance passengers who travelled by air or rail. The figure is now down to 60%.

“The numbers will be equal within two years,” said Josep Valls, a professor at the ESADE business school in Barcelona.

This is worth noting since Spain and California are very comparable in terms of travel habits and population densities. As with Spain, California’s big cities are often more than 300 miles apart (379 miles from downtown SF to downtown LA). Like California, Spain experienced a property-fueled economic boom during this decade. But unlike California, Spain has devoted a significant portion of the tax proceeds from that boom to building sustainable high speed rail, particularly under the PSOE government of José Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. Lines to Barcelona and Málaga have opened within the last year, along with a Madrid bypass enabling faster travel from Barcelona to destinations in Andalusia. Connections from Madrid to Valencia, Galicia, and the Basque Y are also under construction.

Spain has also had success at lowering carbon emissions via HSR:

The high-speed train network is also helping Spain control carbon emissions.Straight tracks and few stops mean AVE trains use 19% less energy than conventional trains. Alberto García, of the Spanish Railways Foundation, has calculated that a passenger on the Madrid-Barcelona line accounts for one-sixth of the carbon emissions of an aeroplane passenger.

All of this is something we can look forward to here in California – and further reason to ensure that the state gets its act together, passes a budget, and gets back to economic stimulus via infrastructure projects like HSR.

PS: On that note, the Obama Transition Team has a “Citizens Briefing Book” where users rate up projects and ideas they feel are most important. “Bullet Trains and Light Rail” are currently the #1 most popular idea. Login and be sure to vote for this to further communicate to the Obama Administration our conviction that HSR is a vital part of this nation’s future.

RENFE also has a great YouTube channel with more excellent AVE videos.

I also like this because I have a soft spot for the AVE trains, which were the first HSR trains I ever rode. Seven years ago on a trip to Spain, we took the AVE from Madrid to Sevilla. I remember turning to my then-girlfriend as we pulled into Sevilla Santa Justa and saying “we have GOT to get one of these back in California.” My own advocacy for HSR trains began that afternoon in December 2001. It also doesn’t hurt that the video includes shots of Barcelona, which currently holds the title of “my favorite city in the world.” If only I spoke Catalan…

Here in 2008, we have taken the most important step to making that dream a reality. So I dunno about you all, but this video gets me *really* excited about what our own HSR line will look like when it is finally built. Compare the above video to this one put out by the CHSRA, which you’ve seen before – I can’t wait to see this computer simulation become as real as the video shown above.

As you can see in the comparison below, the population profiles of the two are similar, yet California has a much more robust economy, again shattering the myth that we can’t afford HSR. Further, California’s population is heavily concentrated in the metro areas that HSR will serve (and California is actually smaller than Spain). Along with the millions from more rural areas who will be able to access HSR through feeder trains and buses, the critical mass of a customer base is there (and will only increase along with airfares, oil prices, and the state’s population).

By 2010, Spain will have the largest HSR network in the world. Even if China one day surpasses the figure, this puts California’s wrangling over whether to build any HSR to shame.

As you can see, very few of the early adopters of the Madrid-Seville AVE route were previous train passengers (and the 34% induced demand represents a stimulated economy):

Overnight, the Madrid-Seville line positively transformed the travel landscape as the modal market share for trains went from 14% to 54%:

The rest of the world is leading, and Spain is truly visionary. It is high time for California to show the rest of the United States that HSR is as viable here as it is elsewhere, including less affluent economies.