In the world of high-speed rail, imitation can be an appealing form of flattery. While the Obama administration is literally tying the railway supply industry in knots by insisting on trainsets built solely of U.S. content, China opened its arms to foreign train manufacturers during the early stages of its high-speed rail program.
Now within the space of six years, China has become the fastest-growing exporter of rail equipment in the world. On Wednesday, Argentina signed a $12 billion deal to purchase locomotives, cars and infrastructure from state-owned Chinese railways. This triumph follows the country’s success in exporting its technology to Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Venezuela.
China’s ability to create a booming rail sector is a case study of how to leapfrog over established builders and stimulate domestic employment at the same time.
In 2004, China sealed a contract with a consortium led by Kawasaki Heavy Industries to build “bullet trains.” Local equipment makers soon mastered the know-how for their manufacture and licensed other design features from companies in Canada, France, Germany and Sweden.
Today, China operates the world’s fastest trains, with about 15 percent of the parts coming from overseas.
Cutting a Deal in California
On the global stage, China was a non-factor in high-speed-rail (HSR) manufacturing until about 20 months ago when it started bidding on projects overseas. With its cheap cost basis, China quickly made inroads against Siemens of Germany and Alstom of France – together with its former partner, Kawasaki, which reportedly could not imagine that the catch-up would be so fast.
The Chinese government recently signed a preliminary agreement to cooperate with California to help finance and build a HSR line between San Diego and Sacramento. China’s rail ministry has a framework agreement to license its technology to General Electric.
GE describes the agreement as requiring at least 80 percent of the components to come from American suppliers and final assembly in the U.S. GE itself would supply 200-mph electric locomotives using technology licensed from China.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is scheduled to lead a trade mission to Beijing in September to discuss China’s offer.
Insisting on All-American Content
The example of China provides an alternative model to the “do-it-yourself” approach of the Obama administration. Propelled by a desire to create jobs quickly, the administration says it will only fund rail projects where all manufactured parts – plus the underlining iron and steel – are produced in the U.S.
The 100-percent American rule was contained in Congressional legislation that authorized the spending of $8 billion in stimulus funds for HSR. The administration has told suppliers that it does not plan to use the law’s waiver to exempt some components, even though subway and light-rail trainsets funded with federal money may use up to 30 percent non-U.S. content.
America’s supremacy in railway carbuilding has long past. The last builder, Pullman-Standard Co., went out of business 25 years ago. A century before, George Pullman built the largest passenger railcar business in the world through his innovative Pullman sleeping car.
Without any current base to produce such equipment domestically, attempts to build a homegrown business are fraught with problems, according to many experts.
Last month, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) noted that it could take as many as nine years to build high-speed trainsets domestically. This included up to 21 months for testing the equipment and 42 months for production.
Easing Safety Rules
Complicating the situation are rules established by the Federal Railroad Administration that bar foreign trainsets on American rails because they do not meet the agency’s safety standards.
FRA requires massive amounts of steel in passenger cars so they can withstand a crash with a freight train on shared track. Foreign standards focus more on crash avoidance rather than crash survival, the GAO pointed out, making for lighter trains that nevertheless have stellar safety records.
The agency has shown some relaxation of its heavy-metal mindset by allowing California to operate European-style trains on a dedicated passenger line being planned between San Francisco and San Jose.
Opening the door to foreign suppliers of cars and locomotives, at least until American companies can digest the technology required for their manufacture, could speed up rail service and potentially re-position the U.S. in markets once ruled by George Pullman.
Photo credit: jiadoldol


We all want the infrastructure market to pick up dramatically and generate jobs, build productivity, and create competitiveness. But there is a yawning gap between public expressions of optimism and what infrastructure executives have been telling me about the state of their business. We continue to hear good news about the infrastructure industry in the media and from the administration, yet head counts at infrastructure firms are still down by as much as 25 percent, and executives say that the U.S. market is still essentially flat.
It’s a curious truth, though not yet widely understood, that we pay for high-speed rail whether we have it or not. We pay not only in congested highways, delayed air flights and disastrous oil spills, but also in a cumulative national slowdown that might be called arrested development.
A report released yesterday concludes that high-speed trains would significantly boost economic activity and job creation over sped-up conventional Amtrak service. Released by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the report examines how the introduction of different types of train service would impact business activity and jobs in two midsized cities – Albany, N.Y., and Orlando, Fla. – and a regional hub, Chicago.
The first high-speed rail service on the African continent kicked off this morning, just in time to zip World Cup fans between Johannesburg’s airport and the suburb hosting the tournament.
Unless the White House acts forcefully and decisively to advance its transportation agenda in Congress, the president’s vision for high-speed rail may get sidetracked by the looming federal deficit.
This places the Florida system in line with the speed performance of most European trains, such as France’s famous TGV network. The accelerated trip represents a significant time savings over highway travel, which typically takes 80-90 minutes between Tampa and Orlando.
A year ago, when laying out his vision of fast trains zipping between major cities like they do in Europe and Asia, President Obama invoked the words of Chicago architect Daniel Burnham: “Make no little plans.”
The media’s blanket coverage of the travel chaos gripping Europe has overlooked just one thing — fast and frequent trains have gotten hundreds of thousands of travelers to their destinations safely and on time while airplanes sat on the tarmac.
If you want to submit your thoughts about Washington’s strategy to develop high-speed passenger trains, you better act fast.
How did America get to where it is today, a country with the slowest and most threadbare intercity passenger rail service of any advanced nation?