California's high-speed rail plan is up in the air

[n2doc]

Phillip Matier,Andrew Ross
Monday, April 12, 2010

Is it a high-speed rail ride to the future or a Bay Bridge boondoggle times 10? That's what lawmakers are wondering as more and more questions arise about the plan to build a multibillion-dollar bullet train between San Francisco and Los Angeles.

"I'm all for high-speed rail, but I want it to be high-speed rail done right," says state Sen. Joe Simitian.

Simitian has plenty of reasons to be concerned. Not only will the rail line go right through his Peninsula district, but also he chairs the Senate budget subcommittee that oversees the $9 billion in voter-approved bonds for the project.

In addition to worries about how many backyards will be torn up for the line, he and other key legislators are asking question's about the High Speed Rail Authority's business plan - which remains murky at best.

For example, no sooner had voters approved the bond package than the initial $33.6 billion price estimate jumped to $42.6 billion because the authority had failed to account for inflation. And that cost could climb even higher if the rail goes underground through the Peninsula, as many communities are now requesting.



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/12/BAT41CSF3I.DTL&tsp=1

[hunter]

1. Total FUD.

Stop subsidizing airlines and highways and high speed rail becomes very, very, viable.

[NNadir]

2. Here, here!!!

[wtmusic]

3. High-speed rail is not viable at all

if you don't have the money to pay for it. Another bond, another weight around CA's sinking neck.

I voted for it; I wish I could take my vote back.

[hunter]

5. I see a role for the Federal Government here.

People need jobs. High speed rail would create good jobs.

[wtmusic]

9. Agreed.

The state bond issue is a sore spot. I've rarely voted for the damn things, I think most people who vote for them have no idea what a bond is.

Now that the state's broke, they're learning. :banghead:

[bananas]

14. We're getting a big chunk of federal funding for HSR

Part of the stimulus package for shovel-ready projects.
It includes work on upgrading connecting lines, IIRC.

[bananas]

15. $2.3B in federal stimulus for California HSR

I think there was around $8B for HSR for the whole country (although a lot of those will only go around 110mph for the near future).

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/fact-sheet-high-speed-intercity-passenger-rail-program-california

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
January 27, 2010
Fact Sheet: High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program: California

Click here to download PDF
High-Speed Rail: California

Awardees : California Department of Transportation; California High-Speed Rail Authority

Total Approximate Funding (all corridors) : $2,344,000,000

Benefiting States : California, Nevada

Miles of Track : New - 800 miles, Upgraded - 880 miles, Planned - 275 miles (est.), Total - Appx. 1,955 miles

California has made signicant investments in passenger rail that have led to remarkable ridership growth. Over 5.5 million people per year now ride on California’s three intercity corridors, making these routes the busiest in the U.S. after the Northeast Corridor.

<snip>

[bananas]

13. Yes, it is viable

See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x211807
"SNCF’s response was conditioned on viability: it suggests that high-speed rail investment should only occur where operating and maintenance costs would be covered by rider revenue and that socio-economic benefits offset initial public investments in the system. Based on its conclusions, the corridors it has picked for study would meet those guidelines. This is a wholehearted endorsement of U.S. rail investment from the point of view of a very successful European rail company."

[FBaggins]

4. Up in the air?

Well... that explains quite a bit, doesn't it?

[Statistical]

6. Why would they build the train in the air?

That is likely why it cost so much.

Proposal #1. Try building it on the ground.

[Kolesar]

8. "Bay area woman beats off would-be rapist"

Don't you love headlines?

Man desires to rent a room with kitchen so he can cook himself.

[XemaSab]

10. Shasta County in Second

:P

[bananas]

11. Safety, mainly.

The main reason is safety, to reduce the likelihood of high-speed collisions with cars, people, cows, dogs, etc.
There are additional reasons tracks might be elevated or put in trenches or tunnels, but the main one is safety.
High speed trains need straight flat tracks, in a hilly area its best to put the tracks up on trestles.
In mountainous areas of Europe, they have the tracks elevated above valleys and tunneled through mountains, to keep the track straight and flat.
Another reason for going overhead or underground is to reduce the right-of-way needed, such as the elevated subways in NYC.

[pscot]

7. Germany and Japan have had high-speed rail for years

France has high-speed rail. China is laying track as fast as they can. What is our problem? We used to be able to do shit like this.

[bananas]

12. There's some misinformation in the article

There's some misinformation in the article, for example it says "the initial $33.6 billion price estimate jumped to $42.6 billion because the authority had failed to account for inflation".
That's incorrect, the initial $33.6B was in inflation-adjusted constant dollars, the $42.6B is not adjusted for inflation.
It's explained here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=141x36164

The 2009 Business Plan Is Out
Dec 14th, 2009 | Posted by Robert Cruickshank

<snip>

The 2008 Business Plan assumed a system cost of $33.6 billion. The 2009 Business Plan assumes a system cost of $34.9 billion. So where does the $42.9 billion number come from?

The first two numbers are in 2008 dollars. However, as a condition of receiving federal stimulus money, the CHSRA was told they had to cost it out in “year of expenditure” dollars – the projected cost when the money is actually spent. Assuming inflation, the overall cost rises to $42.9 billion dollars.

<snip>