Time to get real on the bullet train: California is building it, so let’s make it work (msn.com)
You don’t spend $11 billion on a project, as California already has, then abandon it.
I think the Feds should spend billions on a 56 mile circular Super Conducting Super Collidor in Texas, wait for it to be partially constructed and then abandon it…oh wait a minute…[:D][}:)]
I really do hope this project succeeds, it would be great for California if it does. The state itself in my view has made some serious mistakes in the past with mismanagement in various areas and this seems like another example. Hope I am wrong and time will tell.
I’m getting New York - Chicago Electric Airlines vibes about this project.
The term “cutting your losses” could come to mind. Perhaps not to government agencies, though.
Ed
True high speed rail hasn’t been built or tried in this country before, so I’m not surprised at the cost overruns. Still, as I recall, the Transcontinental railroad of 1867 didn’t exactly come in at or under budget, either.
As Ira Gershwin wrote, “They all laughed at Rockefeller Center, now they’re fighting to get in.” “They all laughed at Wilbur and his brother when they said that man could fly.”
My opinion is that the project scope was grossly underestimated by the promoters, had it been a prospectus as opposed to a ballot initiative, the promoters would probably would have been investigated by the SEC. The project is technically feasible, but not with the time and budget constraints imposed by the initiative.
The other issue was a conflict between providing the fastest service between L.A. and S.F. (i.e. following I-5) and providing service to the major cities in the Central Valley (i.e. following US-99). The other aspect of providing service to Bakersfield et. al. is that construction will be much more expensive and slower than through the relatively unpopulated I-5 corridor due to land acquisition costs and dealing with utilities.
Keep in mind that the required radius for horizontal and vertical curves goes up with the square of the speed, so a 220MPH track alignment needs twice the radius of a 155MPH track alignment. A line that would have made use of the Acela’s 160MPH top speed wpuld have been quicker and less expensive than the 220MPH line.
The article has a snarky tone to it. “Train set,” “Poky chug-chug” and wonder of wonders, there are those that think widening the freeways is worth spending money on.
Yeah, that’s ridiculous. Once everyone’s riding bicycles and taking HSR and transit, the freeways will be practically empty.
No need to expand freeways when everyone stops using them!
Ed
I could care less what CAL does with it’s money but I don’t care at all for CAL continuing to receive Federal funds for what has has now turned into their version of Boston’s “Big Dig” nightmare.
And in a recent article from N.P.R. is another ;take; oin the California Project’s story: See linked @
https://www.npr.org/2023/12/08/1218260520/california-budget-deficit-analysis
“California faces record $68 billion budget deficit, analyst says”
by Associated Press Dec. 8,2023
Not to mention other stories that tellk the tales of Businesses leaving California along with a loit of its popukatioin (?)
Ed. Said it best, “…The term “cutting your losses” could come to mind. Perhaps not to government agencies, though…”
I imagine the LA Times now has bigger worries than the state finishing the HSR project.
Beat me to it! I was going to say the same thing!
Please tell us what state you live in. Does it receiuve more federal funds than it pays in federal taxes? California pays way more fedeeral taxes than it receives in federal funds.
I live in one of the 11 states that sends more to the U.S. government than it gets back.
Per capita, my state is less than California’s per capita amount, but then our pay scales here are far less than California’s, also.
Based on recent events, my opinion of the Cal HSR project has gone from “wondering if this is a good idea” to “the money would have been much better spent on other rail projects such as LOSSAN”.
The estimate cost for the tunnel solution for the Del Mar bluffs problem is 3 to 4 billion $. Fixing the San Clemente problem is going to be even more expensive. The state budget deficit is partially self-inflicted due to the significant fraction of tax revenues coming from capital gains and exercising of stock options, neither of which are anywhere near steady and reliable.
Yeah, thats driven more by emotion than common sense. I like the Texas approach which relies entirely on sales tax / property tax because it is broad based across the population. Get rid of the state income tax entirely and all it’s ridiculous hoops and special clauses and exemptions. Also gets rid of the bloated state revenue collection department.
We do just fine with using the sales tax to fund transit and rail systems in Texas.
At this point, I am all for the Feds picking up part of the California HSR system with the caveat that the next time the state attempts a project this size they adhere to the original project boundries instead of letting it run away like this. I believe one of the original boundries was this was to originally be a joint public/private system. The private part was quickly jettisoned and it was the part that would have prevented the runaway project that we have now.
An additional caveat should be strict Federal oversight of the Federal loan so the money’s spent exactly where it’s supposed to be spent, and nowhere else, or the deal’s off. Given that “Fiscally Responsible” isn’t California’s state motto it’s the only way I’d send more money to this project, if any is sent at all.
Thats a good point and here is a true story. The $800 million they offered Wisconsin for HSR a while back. As soon as it hit the press we had Alderpersons in the City of Milwaukee expressing locally to the press how they could redirect the money once they got it to fix streets and highways…until they were told the conditions of the money were such that could not be done.
So by extrapolation, California might have that same issue in part.
A lot of the HSR and Amtrak sphere of financing is unfortunately political. I don’t have a clue myself how to move it more away from that area and just have a National Policy of some sort perhaps. Something needs to be done though to keep the politicians at bay…otherwise you end up with lots of wasted money or big project fiascos.
Of course it doesn’t hurt that Texas gets a bucketload of revenue from oil royalties.
California could get more revenues from oil if the state would permit more development of petroleum reserves. To be fair, the geology of oil reservoirs in CA are not as easy to develop as in Texas, so there wouldn’t be any equivalent to the Permian Basin.