By Francisco Peyret
With the cost of energy an ever-present issue, it seems unwise for countries on the American continent to continue building highways; rather, the focus should be on conserving and developing railway systems. All of Europe has a well-connected rail system that’s complemented by low-cost road and air networks. In Spain, the Ave train travels 600 km in 2½ hours, more or less the distance from Barcelona to Madrid. The question that comes to mind is why an expansive railway network wasn’t built in America.
Latin American countries stopped investing in the railway system in the mid-1950s. The lack was felt in the 1980s and even more so in the 1990s. The arguments for cutting investments were based on geography, frequency, distance, construction, and maintenance costs. A new term was added in the 1990s—economic profitability.
In Europe, social and environmental profitability can be justified by subsidies. In America, however, the deficit was considered a financial sin. Oil prices and environmental pollution crises (especially in cities) have been increasing since the 1970s, and it would seem logical that many countries should be making different political decisions.
In the United States, a fast train called the Transcontinental Express arrived in San Francisco from New York City on June 4, 1876. A trip on “the first transcontinental railroad” took just 83 hours and 39 minutes. In that year, covering that distance would normally have taken several months. The train consolidated the process of colonizing the Western states, as well as aiding agricultural development. It also helped unify the North and the South—after all, the U.S. was coming out of its Civil War, which lasted from 1861 to 1865. I’m not that familiar with the rail system in the U.S., but everything indicates that the government’s policy has been to promote developing its highway and airport infrastructure over the last 60 years.
In Mexico, as in all of Latin America, a railway system was developed, with concessions going to private companies. That remains the case. The first important project was inaugurated in 1873; it connected the Port of Veracruz with Mexico City, a span of 670 km. By the presidency of Porfirio Díaz, in 1910, the railway network had grown to almost 20,000 kilometers. Today, in Mexico and Latin America, these rail systems work only to transport cargo. Many governments are currently thinking about how to update that infrastructure because connectivity, energy efficiency, and technology seem to be pointing in that direction. The idea isn’t to exchange planes and cars with trains but to combine services to transport people and goods.
According to Expansión magazine, the Mexican federal government and private investors are planning 15 railway projects in 17 states. It will require a joint investment of 672 billion pesos and will add 4,413 km to the national rail network, which currently consists of 23,731 km: Mexico-Toluca Interurban Train 57.7 km; Branch Lechería-AIFA 23 km; Mayan train 1,500 km; Media Aguas-Salina Cruz 212 km; bypass to Celaya 46 km; bypass to Monterrey 21 km; Dos Bocas Branch 93 km; Via FA (Mayab)/Via K (Chiapas) 326 km/459 km; Tlajomulco-Guadalajara (L4) 21 km; Suburban García-Airport of Nuevo León 62 km, Ramos Arizpe-Derramadero 54 km; Monterey-San Antonio 480 km; Mexico-Querétaro-León 420 km; Durango-Mazatlan 360 km; and Guadalajara-Aguascalientes 260 km.
In a few years, the country’s rail network could grow by almost 20%. All these projects bring with them great benefits, but also serious economic, financial, social, and environmental impacts. This is especially true in the south and southeast of Mexico, where water and natural resources are a major issue; it’s also where there are more indigenous communities.
It seems that in Mexico there are two realities: Those of the foreign and national businesspeople and those in federal and state power who are investing and betting on the future. The rest of Mexico is fighting to the death on electronic media and social networks over Section Five of the Mayan Train and ahead of the 2024 change of government. I say this last with all due respect to the activists and communities fighting for an honest and real cause outside of political and media manipulation.
I also find it necessary to tap into novels, movies, and even poems to delve into the subject of trains. They memorialize trains with sad and long farewells and also brief, loving encounters:
“Tell me, the rose is bare”
—Pablo Neruda
Tell me, is the rose naked or is that her only dress?
Why do trees conceal the splendor of their roots?
Who hears the regrets of the thieving automobile?
Is there anything in the world sadder than a train standing in the rain?
I conclude my thoughts on trains with a quote from former basketball player Charles Barkley who said, “Sometimes that light at the end of the tunnel is a train.”
