RosenbergOilAlternativesResearchAnnotation2

Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor. "Frequently Asked Questions." Feb. 2010. Web. 12 Apr. 2011.   2. Where does the author work, what else has s/he written about, and what are her/his credentials? ** Specific authors are not clearly listed for the text. Additionally, not much information is available regarding the organization itself, other than that it involves various collaborative efforts between the NCDOT Rail Division, the Virginia DRPT, and the Federal Railroad Administration, in addition to similar organizations in Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida. However, there are individual contacts listed at the end of the article who perhaps may have been involved in its writing: Marc Hamel, a Rail Project Development Engineer with the NCDOT Rail Division, and Christine Fix, a Manager of Strategic Planning with the VA DRPT. According to the LinkedIn page of the latter ([]), she has a Masters of Urban and Environmental Planning from the University of Virginia, with which she has gained extensive experience in infrastructure planning and managing Environmental Impact Statements. Little information can be found concerning the former of these potential authors. 3. What is the main topic or argument of the text? ** The text argues that investment in upgrading existing rail tracks in the Southeast Corridor to permit higher speeds of transportation will bring various economic, lifestyle, and other benefits to local consumers and workers. 4. Describe at least three ways that the main topic or argument is fleshed out. ** Through citing various estimates of environmental, pricing, and other impacts, the piece attempts to convince residents that the benefits of such a project will outweigh the proposed price tag of between $2.6 billion and $7.5 billion for the Washington-Charlotte portion of the undertaking. In one sense, it is suggested that growing volumes of traffic on highways and at airports necessitate the generation of alternative forms of transportation which will alleviate these burdens. Additionally, it is argued that through rigorous environmental analyses by the Federal Railroad Administration and other agencies, the project can proceed with the fewest environmental impacts. Last, economic impacts are expected to be extensive under the proposed rail network. For instance, ticket prices are estimated to be 20-22 cents per mile, which is less than air or auto travel, and a US Department of Transportation estimate is cited which suggests that there will be $2.54 in public benefits for each dollar spent on the project. In terms of local economies, it has been estimated that there will be a $700 million increase in tax revenues, 31,400 one-year construction jobs, and over 19,000 permanent jobs from economic expansion within the corridor. 5. What three quotes capture the critical import of the text? **  1)   “It was estimated to generate $2.54 in public benefits for each dollar spent to build and operate the corridor, and SEHSR was the only proposed corridor projected to cover its total operational costs from the fare box.”      2)   “The SEHSR is being designed to allow passenger trains and freights to operate on the same track, and with 5 mile-long passing sidings every 10 miles on average to allow the faster passenger trains and the slower freights to meet and pass with minimal conflict. The operating efficiency for both passenger and freight service will increase dramatically as a result of SEHSR corridor improvements.” 3)  “The SEHSR project now includes the evaluation of a parallel multipurpose trail concept, a unique opportunity to provide additional economic and quality-of-life value for most all the towns and communities along the corridor.”    6. Explain how the argument and evidence in the text supports your research focus.   **  In the case of the proposed Southeast Corridor high-speed rail network, it is interesting to note that it is existing rail-lines which are being upgraded, rather than replaced entirely. In this sense, the costs of such operations are found to be an order of magnitude lower than those of California, while still providing a great degree of public benefits. While the article does not make an especially clear argument regarding larger-scale environmental impacts, it does suggest a less tangible set of benefits in reduced congestion for existing transportation structures, as well as a general economic expansion in the surrounding region. Especially worth nothing is the estimate provided which suggests that the project was the only one proposed which could break even without additional support. Perhaps this indicates that high-speed rail is in fact economically feasible, but only if more carefully allocated in profitable regions. 7. List at least two details or references from the text that will be useful to other members of your research group  ** 1) The Southeast Corridor was initially proposed in 1992 by the US Department of Transportation, and was designated as extending from Washington, D.C. through Charlotte, North Carolina. It was extended further in 1995 and 1998 to Atlanta and Jacksonville, as well as to Birmingham, Alabama.  2) The estimates of travel times between cities which are listed in the article include: · Charlotte, NC to Raleigh, NC- 2 hr to 2 hr 50 min · Richmond, VA to Washington, D.C.- 1 hr 55 min to 2 hr  · Raleigh, NC to Richmond VA- 1 hr 55 min to 2 hr   · Charlotte, NC to Washington, DC- 6 hr 10 min to 6 hr 50 min Estimated minimal travel times by automobile for these same destinations according to Google Maps are: · 2 hr 43 min · 2 hr 4 min · 2 hr 57 min · 6 hr 39 min From these results, it may be worth questioning whether high speed rail will indeed attract significant ridership in the region other than on the Raleigh to Richmond portion of the network.
 * 1. Full citation. **
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 