How California Overcame a Major Barrier to Rail Electrification

A section of new high-speed line showing the catenary.

Guest Post by: Adriana Rizzo, Californians for Electric Rail

Rail electrification with overhead catenary, critical to high speed rail, is an unambiguous positive for the environment. It produces no air pollution at point of source, can be powered entirely by renewable energy, as California High Speed Rail will, and even using California’s current grid emits more than 100x less CO2 per passenger than diesel trains. More importantly, the faster acceleration, higher maximum speeds, and lower maintenance costs compared to other types of trains allow for higher levels of service, creating a demonstrated “Sparks Effect” of higher ridership that reduces emissions from cars. For these reasons and more, mainstream environmentalists have embraced overhead electrification as a climate solution.

Despite the obvious benefits of electric rail, environmental law has been misused to obstruct vital rail electrification projects. While the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), California’s version of NEPA, provide critical protections against many environmentally damaging projects, over time their scope has been expanded by the courts, enabling abuse by wealthy interests. In particular, the inclusion of subjective “Visual Impacts” analysis alongside more objective harms to public health is a recipe for abuse.

One such case happened in Atherton, California in 2015. Caltrain electrification from San Francisco to San Jose was facilitated by California High Speed Rail, with high speed trains planned to operate at 110 mph on the corridor alongside commuter trains. However, wealthy homeowners in Atherton (median household income >$250,000 in 2023 dollars) objected to blended high speed rail service, and filed a CEQA lawsuit on the basis that Caltrain had failed to properly mitigate the visual impact of overhead wires on existing train tracks. The lawsuit was thrown out by a judge, but the 19-month delay created by the process caused serious problems for Caltrain. The delay pushed project funding release into the Trump administration, who withheld federal funds for a year. Meanwhile Caltrain still had to pay contractors, and costs increased due to inflation.

Caltrain electrification was eventually completed nearly 10 years after the lawsuit, in 2024, and has been a smashing success. Ridership is up 54% since last year, and electrification is expected to reduce CO2 emissions by 250,000 MT annually, the equivalent of 55,000 cars. However, delays caused by the CEQA lawsuit, along with other issues with project management, caused the per mile cost of electrification to balloon to $12.5 million/mile. By contrast, other developed countries are able to electrify rail for about $2 million/mile. This has led other transit agencies around the state to dismiss electrification offhand as financially infeasible, in favor of continuing to run diesel trains or investments in unproven zero emissions technologies like hydrogen that do not support high speed rail.

Caltrain recently replaced diesel trains with electric, cutting 25 minutes from the trip time.

Electrification cut 20 minutes of the San Francisco – San Jose trip time.

In response to Caltrain’s challenges, Streets for All and Californians for Electric Rail sponsored AB 2503 in 2024 in the California State Legislature, introduced by Assemblymember Alex Lee (D-Milpitas), to prevent future CEQA lawsuits like this. The bill allows transit agencies to avoid a full environmental impacts analysis for projects that increase service or build infrastructure to power zero emissions passenger trains. AB 2503 builds off SB 922, a previous bill that exempted other forms of transit and active transportation infrastructure from CEQA. To promote the best policy outcomes, the bill still requires agencies to conduct community input and a business case analysis for most projects that would use the exemption. By using the exemption, agencies avoid lawsuit risk and save time and money by bypassing lengthy environmental impact reports on projects that are unambiguously environmentally friendly.

Californians for Electric Rail mobilized a wide coalition of transit organizations around the state to get the bill passed, and built closer relationships with environmental justice organizations, who did not oppose the bill. As a result, AB 2503 passed the California Assembly unanimously and passed the Senate with only 5 votes against, all Republicans concerned the bill would help California High Speed Rail, which they oppose. The only consistent opposition throughout the process was NIMBY group Livable California, stewarded by Stu Flashman, the same attorney behind Atherton’s lawsuit against Caltrain electrification.

After AB 2503 was signed by Governor Newsom, California released the State Rail Plan, an ambitious vision for a coordinated, statewide rail network with 1500 miles of electrified track by 2050, planned around high speed rail. Thanks to AB 2503, environmental review is not needed for the service increases and electrification called for in the plan, as most of it is located on existing right of way (or has already been environmentally cleared, in the case of CA High Speed Rail).

With the state rail plan, AB 2503 is already bearing fruit for California. Other states should follow suit. But federally funded projects must still undergo NEPA review. NEPA is less burdensome than CEQA as it carries considerably less lawsuit risk, but visual impacts criteria still create a barrier for electrification. These criteria have the potential to force costly mitigations with dubious environmental benefit. For example, in Britain under a similar permitting regime, HS2 was forced to build costly tunnels that actually increased the local impacts of construction, in order to mitigate “visual impacts” of overhead wires to rural farmland.

A truly national high speed electrified rail network cannot be completed on a state by state basis– we need national coordination. America’s environmental review process is an important tool to protect the environment, but it is increasingly under attack. To maintain public support for environmental review, we need to make it work for the public with careful, targeted reforms to accelerate green infrastructure like electrified rail.

California map showing a statewide network of rail corridors to electrify by 2050.

California’s long-term railway electrification plan.

A group of friends is talking at a table on a moving train.

It takes an Alliance to make great trains!

Join thousands of members working to transform travel across the U.S.

Become a Member

The Latest from HSRA

Our Latest Blog Posts

Check out the latest news, updates, and high speed rail insights from our blog!

Newsletter 2/14/25: Bills to Expand Illinois Railway Program

Newsletter 2/14/25: Bills to Expand Illinois Railway Program

Bills to Expand Illinois Railway Program Announced Illinois has always been at the heart of America’s rail network, and it is uniquely poised to lead the country towards great trains. Because of its political heft and Chicago’s role as the nation’s rail hub, a growing...

Illinois Needs an Integrated Railway Program

Illinois Needs an Integrated Railway Program

Illinois Needs an Integrated Railway Program Great trains will change the way the world sees Illinois   Help make it happenBuilding on Success, Planning for the Future Traveling by train and bus across Illinois should be convenient, comfortable, and affordable....