High speed rail in the US.

[theprestige]

Proper infrastructure is essential to a State's tax revenues.

When you have trouble making a living as a State with the infrastructure that is already not serving the number of moving people, it is about as stupid as it gets to decide that infrastructure needs no change.

"We must do something. This is something. Therefore we must do this."

I'm 100% in favor of proper infrastructure. What do you think is the impact of improper infrastructure on a state's budget?

Why high-speed rail? What engine of commerce and industry is being jump-started with this project? Why not a canal system for irrigating the central valley? Why not upgrades to the energy generation and distribution infrastructure? Why not more investment in intra-regional mass transit networks? Why not more investment in trade schools and vo-tec programs? Hell, why not spend that money to shore up the current education system, instead of cutting education funding to advance HSR?

 

[BOATGOD]

How about just not going more into debt...

 

[BenBurch]

...

Why high-speed rail? What engine of commerce and industry is being jump-started with this project?

Because high speed rail serves not only the end points, but points intermediate, it allows business to site in cheaper places outside of major metros. If my commute from SF to Sunnyvale takes me 90 minutes, but I can get on a train in SF and be at a less-expensive office in Merced, that would be more attractive.

Why not a canal system for irrigating the central valley?

Where would the water come from?

Why not upgrades to the energy generation and distribution infrastructure?

Being done! There are several local and national initiatives addressing just that. But you probably don't like them as they are "stimulus."

Why not more investment in intra-regional mass transit networks?

There already are major public transit initiatives in every major California metro.

Why not more investment in trade schools and vo-tec programs? Hell, why not spend that money to shore up the current education system, instead of cutting education funding to advance HSR?

So we should full-fund teacher pensions first? I can live with that, but I thought you Republicans didn't like teachers?

 

[BenBurch]

How about just not going more into debt...

So my company shouldn't be selling any bonds to build that new factory?

 

[BOATGOD]

If your company is selling bonds, good for them! But the last thing CA should be spending money on is boondoggles like this.

 

[BenBurch]

If your company is selling bonds, good for them! But the last thing CA should be spending money on is boondoggles like this.

Prove it. Numerically. (I know you can't.)

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Average airline revenue per occupied seat is somewhere between what the tourist who picks up a deal on Expedia pays and the business traveler who needs to fly on short notice pays. A businessman who decides to hop on the 6:30 pm flight from LAX to SFO today and return later in the week would pay about $500 for a round trip ticket.

One of the more popular SFO to LAX flights is showing a $662 fare for later today. I would suspect air service saturates at times in those markets. If so, then train rates higher than airfare might not be out of the question.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

So my company shouldn't be selling any bonds to build that new factory?

I was about to to make the same response.

The "run government like a business" crowd also seems to be the "no more debt under any circumstances" crowd. What kind of business wouldn't enter in to a new, good, deal just because an old, bad, one was in debt? (One that's going out of business real soon).

And, of course, there are no free options to addressing CA's growing transporation needs.

 

[Dymanic]

Why not upgrades to the energy generation and distribution infrastructure?

Being done! There are several local and national initiatives addressing just that.

Let's talk about those initiatives, and whether they really qualify as "upgrades" rather than something more along the lines of "frantic stopgap measures". With the extended San Onofre outages and below-normal snowpack, the state will be significantly short on generating capacity this summer (the SoCal region in particular), and we're already looking at importing about 23% of peak system load from sources outside the CAISO.

The proffered solutions to our future transportation needs invariably involve much greater reliance on electricity as an energy source, and I find it perfectly reasonable to ask where the electricity is going to come from.

 

[BenBurch]

Rail lines that are electrified are themselves (or can be) major links in the electrical infrastructure.

 

[Ziggurat]

Rail lines that are electrified are themselves (or can be) major links in the electrical infrastructure.

What on earth are you talking about?

Electrified rail lines don't run the current along the entire length of the rail. That wouldn't work, resistive losses would be too high since the voltages aren't that high. They use feeder stations along the length of the rail, so that the current only draws through the rail over relatively short lengths of track. That means that electric rail lines install transmission lines between the feeder stations in addition to the electrified rails. But those transmission lines are generally set up to only meet the needs of the rail itself. If you want it to carry a lot more power, you have to build much higher capacity transmission lines, but there's no reason to think that running such transmission lines along the path of the rail lines, rather than somewhere else, is an efficient way to do it.

 

[tyr_13]

What on earth are you talking about?

Electrified rail lines don't run the current along the entire length of the rail. That wouldn't work, resistive losses would be too high since the voltages aren't that high. They use feeder stations along the length of the rail, so that the current only draws through the rail over relatively short lengths of track. That means that electric rail lines install transmission lines between the feeder stations in addition to the electrified rails. But those transmission lines are generally set up to only meet the needs of the rail itself. If you want it to carry a lot more power, you have to build much higher capacity transmission lines, but there's no reason to think that running such transmission lines along the path of the rail lines, rather than somewhere else, is an efficient way to do it.

In California. There actually are several situations where that would be a good layout. If we're talking hypothetical (I know 'we' aren't but now I am), I've been a long time fan of subsurface high speed train lines combined with other utility lines connecting major power networks (nuclear, solar ranches, natural gas) and super cities with lots of wilds and countryside in between.

I guess what I'm saying is this; make me king of Alaska and all this could by yours, along with snazzy outfits for my storm-troopers!

 

[varwoche]

Average airline revenue per occupied seat is somewhere between what the tourist who picks up a deal on Expedia pays and the business traveler who needs to fly on short notice pays. A businessman who decides to hop on the 6:30 pm flight from LAX to SFO today and return later in the week would pay about $500 for a round trip ticket.

True. Plus business travel often must be flexible, which you don't get with cheap tickets.

SF-LA is expected to be in service in 17 years. Maybe by that time, business travel will be an extravagant exception due to technology advances/adoption. Almost like you're all sitting at the same table.

I'm not opposed to it. Just saying.

 

[BenBurch]

What on earth are you talking about?

...

Reversible substations, for one thing. When an electric train is coming downgrade, or coming to a planned halt, it typically uses regenerative braking. When there is enough traffic, as in the now-abandoned Milwaukee Road Cascades crossing, the train going down grade on one side of the pass supplied energy to the train following it on the up grade. When you cannot ensure there is traffic to use the energy, however, you use reversible substations to pump that energy back into the public grid.

This works best with a DC electrification, however, with an AC system, the locomotive cannot match the phase of the line well enough not to cause issues so regenerative braking energy is dumped into resistor banks and thence to the environment.

Typically also, in addition to substations, electrified rail lines will build their own power stations, and these in turn can contribute to the grid when in off-peak hours.

Once upon a time, in fact, an interurban line in the Chicago area was considering its own nuclear power station. This was back in the heady days of the tame atom, before NIMBYs decided that only they matter.

 

[TjW]

Whew. Good thing its not planning for them to be there, then!

They moved Fresno from the central valley? Well, I'll be darned.

Because the central valley sure seems to be where they're putting the track.

 

[TjW]

One of the more popular SFO to LAX flights is showing a $662 fare for later today. I would suspect air service saturates at times in those markets. If so, then train rates higher than airfare might not be out of the question.

Or people might choose just to wait a couple of hours before leaving. It's not like they'll arrive much later.

 

[BenBurch]

They moved Fresno from the central valley? Well, I'll be darned.

Because the central valley sure seems to be where they're putting the track.

OK, go to Google Earth and find me a high-speed alignment from Chatsworth to San Jose, please, that does not involve valleys and which does not involve ~ $100 billion worth of tunneling and blasting?

The Coastal Range makes that impossible.

 

[jdp]

And finally, name a HSR project in the entire world that doens't require an operational subsidy to cover costs - ie the users of the service do not bear thefull costs of the service.

Drivers - no subsidy - fuel taxes cover expenses related to raod maintainance.Airlines - $5 per thousand miles traveled
Mass transit - $118 per thousand
Passenger rail - $186.

And the final reason rail sucks is that if people decide they no longer want to travel between SF and LA then the planes, buses, and cars move to where the people want to go - the rails and trains can't.

Actually, the fuel taxes don't cover road maintainence, it has been common especially in recent years to draw substantial amounts from US general funds to cover the shortfall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund

During 2008 the fund required support of $8 billion from general revenue funds to cover a shortage in the fund. This shortage was due to lower gas consumption as a result of the recession and higher gas prices.[4] Further transfers of $7 billion and $19.5 billion were made in 2009 and 2010 respectively. [5]

 

[TjW]

I didn't lose anything in either Chatsworth or San Jose. If you feel the need to go there, have at it.

But I fail to see why a mere hundred billion would discourage you. The purpose of this project is not to transport people, it's to transport money -- out of the pockets of taxpayers and into the pockets of consultants and construction firms.

If they were serious about moving people, they would have started at major population centers, and worked toward the middle. Then the finished parts could, at least theoretically, benefit the largest number of people.

The transcontinental railroad didn't start in Utah and work toward the coasts.

 

[BenBurch]

See, now you are off in the meadow of ridiculousness, chasing buttercups.

A rail system is built along an alignment that is always a compromise between the desire to be straight, flat, and level and the reality of the terrain. You build such a system where the costs are lowest while still having the ability to have a line capable of high speed running.

When faced with the choice of going through (literally) a mountain range and going around it, nobody is going to choose to go through it.

Are you suggesting that would be a better idea?????????

And, because a rail line passing through a valley usually passes near communities that could be served, serving them is an added benefit of also choosing the most efficient route.