California has ambitious rail plans.

California is No. 1 with a bullet … train that is.

When the federal government recently awarded $8 billion for the development of high speed railway projects, the Golden State took the big prize — $2.3 billion. California High-Speed Rail Authority chairman Curt Pringle called the award “fantastic news for California and for our state’s high-speed rail project.”

“It is an award that will lead to the creation of tens of thousands of quality jobs in the near-term and to continued economic strength and enhance our transportation network in the longterm,” Pringle said in a statement.

California, he noted, is closer than any other state or region to building the first true high-speed rail system in the United States.” The federal money recognizes California’s work in partnering with local governments and state legislators and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to put the plan into action, he said.

Here’s a look at the states that were winners, the amount of funding, and a brief description of the projects being funded:

California ($2.344 billion) — Work will include purchasing right-of-way, constructing track, signaling systems, and stations, and completing environmental reviews and engineering documents; other work that ultimately will allow for top speeds of 110 mph from Los Angeles to San Diego; four new station tracks at San Jose Diridon Station to almost double capacity and a universal crossover between Davis and Sacramento, which will reduce trip times and improve on-time performance; fund upgrades of the trains’ emissions control equipment, which will reduce pollution.

Illinois|Missouri ($1.133 billion) — Improvements that allow passenger rail service from Chicago to St. Louis at speeds up to 110 mph – a plan advocated by the Midwest High Speed Rail Association; overhaul of track, signal systems, and existing stations; implementation of positive train control technology; planning studies for additional service enhancements; expansion of existing railroad bridges and universal crossovers, as well as improved grade crossings.

Florida ($1.250 billion) — Construct 84 miles of track, build and enhance stations, and purchase equipment to serve the Tampa-Orlando corridor.

Minnesota|Wisconsin|Illinois ($823 million) — A planning study for extension of high-speed rail service to the Twin Cities; new and refurbished stations; implementation of positive train control technology along 80 miles of track; infrastructure enhancements, and signal and track improvements to enhance time performance and reliability.

North Carolina|Virginia|Washington D.C. ($620 million) — Nearly 30 interrelated projects will increase top train speeds to 90 mph and double the number of round trips along this corridor; purchase and rehabilitation of locomotives and cars, track upgrades, and station security improvements; add a third track from Arkendale to Powell’s Creek; cut congestion.

Washington|Oregon ($568 million) — Building bypass tracks to allow for increased train frequency and multiple upgrades to existing track and signal systems; safety-related projects; upgrading Portland’s Union Station; engineering and environmental work for track and signaling projects that will increase service reliability and reduce congestion.

Ohio ($400 million) — Track upgrades, grade crossings, new stations, and maintenance facilities.

Michigan|Illinois ($200 million) — Renovate stations in Troy and Battle Creek, MI; construct new station in downtown Dearborn; other station renovations, a new station, a flyover, approach bridges, and embankment and retaining walls; crossovers and signal system improvements to cut travel times improve on-time performance.

New York|Montreal ($151 million) — Construction of new track, signaling and interlocking improvements, upgrades to warning devices at grade crossings, and enhancements to stations in Rochester and Buffalo; three miles of new track to relieve congestion and improve on-time performance.

Massachusetts|New York|Washington, D.C. ($112 million) — Completion of engineering and environmental work for a new tunnel in Baltimore and a new station at BWI Airport. Projects also will span Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maryland and Washington, D.C.

Maine ($35 million) — Restore more than 30 miles of track, including 36 grade crossings, to extend new passenger rail service from Portland to Brunswick, ME.

Pennsylvania ($27 million) — Eliminate three remaining grade crossings on the corridor to improve the 110 mph service; study an extension of the service to Pittsburgh.

Connecticut|Massachusetts|Vermont ($160 million) — Implement track, passenger stations and signal upgrades to relocate the Amtrak Vermonter service to a more direct route; Vermonter New England Central Railroad route improvements; construct new segment of second main track to increase reliability and improve service quality, and reduce trip times.

Iowa ($17 million) — Install four remotely controlled powered crossovers on the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Ottumwa subdivision, which will reduce travel times and improve on-time performance.

Texas ($4 million) — Implement the final design and construction of signal timing improvements at grade crossings between Austin and Fort Worth to increase the operating speed of Amtrak’s Texas Eagle and improve on-time performance.

The concept drawings here, provided by the CHSR Authority and graphic animators Newlands & Company, Inc., illustrate how the system would work and be meshed with existing infrastructure.

Building the rail lines would cost less than adding highways, according to the CHSR Authority — as suggested by this picture where the train could carry as many passengers as are riding in four lanes of highway traffic.

Despite the derailing economy, California voters got on board for reviving train service in their state November 4th by passing state proposition 1A — a $10 million bond to begin construction of a fully electric rail system running 220-mph trains between San Francisco’s Transbay Terminal and Union Station in Los Angeles.

The bond is a vote of confidence from the public and a down payment on the $40 billion-plus project that plans to run high-speed trains from Sacramento to San Diego. The plan’s boosters say it will create jobs, relieve air and highway congestion, and help the state meet its legislative mandate to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 30 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

Slideshow: California’s High-Speed Railway Plan

While detractors like the San Diego Union-Tribune’s editorial board said California’s budget woes make spending billions of dollars on a massive transportation project not only ill-advised, but “potentially the biggest boondoggle in California history”, proponents called the victory a landmark for high-speed rail nationwide.

Amtrak spokesperson Vernae Graham said Amtrak, which supports the plan, is likely to benefit from the high-speed rail project’s test track, which she said could increase Amtrak’s track speed through California’s Central Valley. In the past year, Amtrak has seen ridership grow more than 30 percent over the Capitol Corridor – one of its Northern California routes – and achieve double-digit growth on two other California routes that stand to connect up with the high-speed trains. Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner from Los Angeles to San Diego, the second most popular train in the entire Amtrak system, carries more than 2.5 million people a year.

According to the California High Speed Rail Authority’s business plan, the $33 billion cost of that San Francisco to Los Angeles backbone link will be shared among the State of California, the federal government, local and regional governments and private sector investors. The $10 billion down payment passed by voters to develop the system cannot be spent until matching federal, local and private funding is also secured.

It’s no surprise this plan could give fiscal conservatives, and even fiscal realists, pause in a state that just completed the longest state budget impasse in history. But on this one, former Massachusetts governor, presidential candidate and Amtrak board member Michael Dukakis told Wired Magazine, “people are way ahead of the government. They want a rail system that works.”

There’s no doubt electric rail is greener than just about any transportation alternative for the routes in question. “I don’t know of any transportation system which matches high-speed rail for reducing tainted emissions, improving air quality, and reducing dependence on foreign oil,” said Judge Quentin Kopp, chair of the California High Speed Rail Authority and chief spokesman of the campaign to pass the transportation bill.

But how quantifiably green is the project? Kopp said by the time the entire 800-mile system is completed, it will reduce the state’s reliance on fossil fuel by 12.7 million barrels of oil per year and reduce the state’s CO2 emissions by about 12 million pounds annually. And energy consultant Navigant Consulting Inc. said the train system could run with zero emissions if renewable-energy sources are used to power it. The system is expected to use 3,380 Gigawatt hours a year of energy to transport 94 million passengers by 2030. According to Navigant’s findings, generating this amount of energy from renewable sources is “well within the capabilities of the state.” This amount represents one percent of the state’s electrical load, or about three and a half days worth of electricity consumed throughout the state.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority’s business plan calculates high-speed trains will “alleviate the need to spend nearly $100 billion to build about 3,000 miles of new freeway plus five airport runways and 90 departure gates over the next two decades,” Quentin Kopp said.

High-speed rail could not only take a few polluting airliners’ out of California’s skies. It could also help airlines focus on what they do best: long-distance flights. That’s according to Robert Crandall, the Former Chairman, President and CEO of AMR Corp., the parent company of American Airlines. Crandall said in a speech to the Wings Club in June 2008 that short-haul flights of less than 300 miles, which are not generally profitable for airlines, could be readily replaced by high-speed rail. Crandall said high-speed rail and aviation could work together. “We could increase long-haul aviation capacity to and from our major cities by linking nearby airports to those cities with high-speed rail links,” Crandall said.