Posted on 10/30/2009 6:26:47 AM PDT by Willie Green
Eight billion dollars isn’t enough — not nearly enough.
It’s not often you’ll hear this newspaper make a statement like that. Usually we are urging fiscal restraint.
But if this country truly wants high-speed rail, we’re going to have to get serious about the effort. Eight billion dollars won’t get us there.
That’s the amount of federal stimulus money promised by the Obama administration for high-speed rail.
Already the administration has received requests from 24 states for projects amounting to $50 billion in high-speed projects.
It also has received $7 billion in requests from states wanting to improve rail travel at less than bullet-train speeds. Virginia is among them, seeking money for faster passenger service from Petersburg to Washington.
Projects such as this to increase train speeds to 90 mph may be useful. But they do not catapult this country into achieving high-speed rail. Bullet trains can achieve 220 mph.
A dedicated, never-say-die effort to build a high-speed rail network would revolutionize this nation. It would bring distant portions of this sprawling land closer together. It would knit communities and commerce.
Rail service on this scale would achieve the goals that many mass-transit advocates say they want: Saving money and reducing pollution.
Rail service at the efficiency and speed of bullet trains would indeed lure people away from automobiles and onto trains. Many mass-transit proposals of the current age fail to do that because the traveler’s savings in time or money aren’t sufficient to overcome the flexibility and freedom offered by the auto.
In fact, there is a plan for true high-speed rail.
The U.S. High Speed Rail Association envisions a vast network of 17,000 miles of track accommodating 220 mph bullet trains. Full buildout would occur by 2030. By 2020, Virginia would have its high-speed link from Raleigh, N.C., to Washington, D.C., via Richmond. (Our tweak to the plan: Add a corridor from Richmond to St. Louis paralleling Interstate 64.)
Could we do it?
To paraphrase the Obama campaign, yes we could.
We could have done it with federal stimulus money already approved, if we had dedicated the funding.
Total approved federal stimulus funding: $787 billion.
Total estimate for the high-speed network: $600 billion.
And, remember, the $600 billion is a 20-year cost. The rail association thinks only $150 billion would be needed to start the project.
Imagine if President Obama had used his political capital upon taking office to declare that this nation would embark on the greatest public works project since the interstate highway system was built.
Suppose he had persuaded Congress to put its muscle behind this vision. Suppose he had inspired American citizens and won the support of businesses with the dream of true high-speed rail.
Suppose he had channeled stimulus money toward one, great, job-generating program, instead of many smaller ones. We might already be on our way.
No, $8 billion isn’t nearly enough. But commit enough money, and we will position ourselves at the start of a grand new national venture … and adventure.
The worst part of deals like this isn’t the initial capital it needs. It’s that you are adding tens-hundreds of millions in government spending to subsidize it every year from now on forever.
As far as I’m concerned, the can have the $8 Billion after this country is fixed. Until then, stop all unnecessary spending.
Utter nonsense
OH geez, not this sh*t again. Do you want to guess why this country doesn’t have bullet trains like Japan and Europe? Its because we are freaking continental country - size and population density matters. Imagine if we don’t spends billions upon billions playing Thomas the Tank Engine and instead lowered and flatened our tax rates and invested in knowable energy sources (Coal, Oil, and Nuclear)where would we be in 20 years? Running the credit card up for a new train set for dems to play urban designer is rediculous.
Oh, but Arnold's buddies (a bunch of Democrats) in the real estate racketeering business wouldn't make as much money.
No. For the most part, widening I5 is only a matter of adding concrete. The bridges are already wide enough. Freeway lanes are far less subject to union extortion and terrorism. We will NEVER see the cost recovery in energy for construction of high speed rail.
Besides, a bullet train on unstable marine alluvium is an engineering nightmare. I'd bet that after only five years they'll have to start backing off on the speed, just like they did with BART.
If it is so good, why is everyone seeking money, collected by government force, from OTHER citizens?
Hey, if it is good, then have a high speed train tax on high speed trains. Just like cars and trucks pay highway taxes on the gas they consume.
While were at it, how about a low speed, sail powered national barge systems with locks and such? Eh, why that would be even ‘cheaper’ to the economy than just paying for highways, regular rail, high speed rail and with sail powered barges we would save even more!
(donkey cartways next.)
That's been the history of EVERY public mass transit system.
Here in Houston, our boondoggle Metro wastes enough that we could buy every user a brand new Mercedes every three years.
Our downtown Metro toy train, besides its 80 plus wrecks, has INCREASED downtown congestion, not improved it.
So what do our politicians want ? To piss away more of Metro's 1% sales tax money expanding the toy train system, in order to make Houston "a world class city".
Houston's become America's 3rd largest city in SPITE of this crap, not because of it.
"Just say no" to this further wasteful boondoggle.
“Utter nonsense”
No kidding. I guess he’ll have to tell FedEx and UPS they ain’t been going fast enough.
One could accomplish nearly as much with a high-speed bus lane on I5 with greater flexibility, far superior reliability, and at less than 5% of the cost.
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is Not as Productive as Light Rail Transit
A study by the General Accounting Office (GAO) revealed that light rail vehicle was 15.5 percent less costly to operate than bus, all other factors being equal. Low floor light rail cars have a larger capacity than low floor buses of comparable length. The average capacity of a 40-foot low floor bus is only 37 seated passengers due to space that is taken up by the wheel wells which intrude on interior space that otherwise could be used for fare paying riders. While an articulated two-section low floor bus contains more seats, it will still have less capacity than a low floor light rail car. Unlike BRT, a light rail line can increase line capacity by adding more cars to a train, resulting in an increase in operator productivity. The only way to increase the capacity of BRT is to add more buses, each of which will require another driver resulting in higher operating costs.
IOW, every bus requires a driver on the union payroll.
Trains/light rail carry far more passengers and require fewer drivers.
In fact, some sophisticated and highly automated rail systems need no union drivers at all!
No kidding. I guess he’ll have to tell FedEx and UPS they ain’t been going fast enough.
They'll never go fast enough.
There will always be people who order something today and want it delivered yesterday.
Willie, in every Cost Benefit Analysis an assumption of demand has to be made. If your demand assumption is off on rail you cannot cut your cost model down to fit the actualized (real versus assumed) demand. Rail systems are extremely costly to install and bring with them a very high annualized fixed cost versus variable cost with them. If you don’t need to run 10 buses, but can satisfy demand with 5, your savings is in variable costs is on the order of 50%. Try this math model with a rail system and see how inflexible and costly your system is. Great fortunes have been lost on incorrect assumptions. If you assumed wrong on buses, you can easily sell the excess buses, but with trains, your biggest asset is you roadway, rails, and stations. Selling those aren’t so easy. Just ask the railroads that closed there lines and stations.
Has anyone been on the high speed train in Japan?
I have.
This whole $600 Billion idea will end up just like Houston, just like LA -— ever seen ridership on those? Ever seen a huge long empty train ? I have.
Did everyone read how each rider in Houston could own a new Mercedes every 3 years for what one train line costs ???
All part of the “You ride a bike while we ride in Limos” thinking of Washington DC, Hollywood, etc.
We are the slaves
They are the masters
And don’t you forget it.
Oh yeah ... and in Japan they use human Pushers to jam more workers inside the morning trains -— you have never seen anything like it, and would wish you had not seen it even once, or ever been it. Take it from me, it is a truly horrifying experience.
Thoughts of Soylent Green.
All other factors are NOT equal. A bus can take you closer to your point of destination. A bus can change routes with time of day. Multiple sized vehicles, including jitneys, can share the line.
The rest of your garbage presumes a full train or bus. They rarely are. In San Jose California, for example, the light rail system is the LEAST cost effective transportation mode in the nation with the highest cost per passenger mile.
You're full of crap, as usual.
“Could we do it?
To paraphrase the Obama campaign, yes we could.”
Gee...I wonder if this guy Willie Green is a Democrat.8 Billion here, 8 Billion there. So then we need to expand Homeland Security with all of this new transportation right? There’s another 1 Billion or so... I’ll ask my children if they want to support this because they are already in debt about 40k with the present debt we are running up.
I've stood on the platforms in the highest industrial traffic density areas in the region (such as Tasman Drive), photographing the passengers entering and debarking the trains at peak rush hour. I've never seen more than twenty people on a platform. Usually, it's about three. Considering the cost for the construction of the system, to argue that it represents an efficiency is preposterous.
Spending begets spending. That is an indisputable fact about the nature of government.
Question: Which is more efficient:
3 guys driving private cars directly to to work by the shortest route,....
Or...a bus with 3 passengers riding to the bus station where they eat donuts for 20 minutes and then board a second bus with 3 passengers on it to the final destination?
If the trains or busses are not full, you are LESS efficient, and in our geographically spread-out population, the demographics just don't work, except in the Boston-Washington corridor, and even there, it isn't all that effective.
Gee...I wonder if this guy Willie Green is a Democrat.8 Billion here, 8 Billion there. So then we need to expand Homeland Security with all of this new transportation right? There’s another 1 Billion or so..
No noobie, I am not a Democrat.
But a few more billion to complete the Fence along our Southern Border sure sounds like a "shovel ready" Homeland Security enhancement to me!
We could pay for it by slapping those NAFTA trucks with a 99% tariff and improve highway safety at the same time!
I’ll ask my children if they want to support this because they are already in debt about 40k with the present debt we are running up.
That's Jorge Arbusto's fault.
He's the one who plundered the Treasury to bail out the bankers who are "too rich to fail".
If the trains or busses are not full, you are LESS efficient, and in our geographically spread-out population, the demographics just don't work, except in the Boston-Washington corridor, and even there, it isn't all that effective.
Yes, there must be sufficient population density to justify construction of rail transit systems.
But I doubt that anybody would agree with your contention that the Boston-Washington corridor is the only region in our nation where there's enough population.
Heck, that region only contains 2 of our 10 largest US cities (NY & Philly)
Kalifornia has 3 of the Top 10 (LA, San Diego and San Jose)
And Texas also has 3 of the Top 10 (Houston, San Antonio and Dallas)
You shouldn't base your opinion on 1950's assumptions about our population.
Willie - Kalifornia is broke and currently has several failing rail mass transit systems eating tax revenue. Texas didn’t fall for this sh*t before and is less likely to believe they can spend their way to prosperity. The Baltimore-Washington corridor is already a reality (after muliple decades of subsidies)and is marginally competitive to air between NY and WASH. Marginally, when you compute the commuter costs (Time and money) from airport to city center. If you are not headed to the NYC center, then air is more competitive. So where is this huge demand for heavy or light rail coming from? Who will ride it, and how will it be managed to contain future costs to remain competitive? Governments are not too good on the managing of operating costs.
Kalifornia is broke and currently has several failing rail mass transit systems eating tax revenue. Texas didn’t fall for this sh*t before and is less likely to believe they can spend their way to prosperity.
Kalifornia is going broke because of all the welfare services it provide to its illegal alien community that Texas does not.
And since Jorge Arbusto and Governor Goodhair screwed up so badly, the odds of providing Texans with the quality mass transit systems they deserve have improved dramatically.
Good transportation infrastructure always enhances commerce and the local economy.
True.. It provides jobs to brain dead slobs..
‘pre-1950’s population estimates’
Here’s why it doesn’t make economic sense.
The only Shinkansen that makes money in Japan is the Tokyo-Yokohama, and it makes a fist load of cash.
It carries 151 million passengers a year, and serves 35 million people in Greater Tokyo + 19 million in Shin-Osaka over 300 miles of track.
The result is a population density of 180k per mile of track.
Now, compare this with San Fran/La.
LA has 17 million people in Greater LA. The Bay area has 7 million people. The distance is 375 miles from LA to San Fran. This gives us a population density of 45k people per mile of track.
You’re looking at about a 5th of the Japanese population density in California.
Now, to blow your mind, the BoWash corridor,
452 miles of track with about 55 million people. Better, but still, at about 121k people per square mile, or about 2/3rds of the Tokyo Shinkansen.
Texas is even worse, at about 30. It’s simple not economically viable in the US, because even in the most densely populated regions, you don’t approach a population similar to Japan.
Texas is even worse, at about 30. It’s simple not economically viable in the US, because even in the most densely populated regions, you don’t approach a population similar to Japan.Population density alone does not determine the market for mass transit. One must also look at current travel volume and modes of transportation against which mass transit would compete.
For instance, how many people currently travel each day Houston - Dallas, or Houston - San Antonio, or Dallas - San Antonio. How many by highway? How many by inefficient short-hop air? And what percentage of that market can be captured by high-speed rail?
And frankly, waiting until population density reaches "packed in like sardines" levels like in Japan would be STUPID because it would make acquiring right-of-way next to impossible. It's much better to identify areas of population growth and build the infrastructure BEFORE projected population densities reach their peak.
“Population density alone does not determine the market for mass transit.”
This is true, but population density is by far the largest determinant. Unless high speed rail goes down in price and cost, it will be a white elephant in America.
“One must also look at current travel volume and modes of transportation against which mass transit would compete.”
That is true. You also have to look at the ridership options. What percent of Americans compared with what percent of Japanese folks, are willing to take trains to get to their destination? What percentage of Americans are willing to leave their cars behind? Not nearly as many. This is the other part. Usership rates in America are less efficient than in Japan, so you would need to see higher density in the US in order to acheive the similar profit ratios as you see in Japan.
“And frankly, waiting until population density reaches “packed in like sardines” levels like in Japan would be STUPID because it would make acquiring right-of-way next to impossible. It’s much better to identify areas of population growth and build the infrastructure BEFORE projected population densities reach their peak.”
Again, it’s a white elephant. My opinion is that Americans would be far better served to invest taxpayer dollars into the widening and expansion of existing road networks to accommodate growing demand.
High-speed rail isn’t anywhere close to working in any part of America, other than the east coast corridor, and that has nothing to do with 1950’s thinking.
Transit should fund itself, not be a parasite on the back of drivers sucking up road taxes.
Change of subject a little....
They are proposing street cars for parts of DC. I think it is 18 miles of track down certain streets to help move folks. No it is not light rail like in Baltimore, real street cars. I guess it will get more jobs for the Metro staff.
I haven’t seen street cars in 40 years. I guess we are re-cycling ideas. I wonder if they will re-install the overhead wires, I guess they will have too.
what a boon-doggle
Just what we need. Amtrack on speed. Just another giant pit to shovel tax-payers dollars into for eternity. If there were any chance to operate such a thing at a profit, you’d see private investors doing it already.
I haven’t seen street cars in 40 years. I guess we are re-cycling ideas. I wonder if they will re-install the overhead wires, I guess they will have too.
YouTube: The Modern Streetcar
what a boon-doggle
I don't think so.
I'd much rather ride one of those Modern Streetcars than some stupid bus.
What percent of Americans compared with what percent of Japanese folks, are willing to take trains to get to their destination? What percentage of Americans are willing to leave their cars behind? Not nearly as many.
That percentage actually increases significantly where adequate transit systems are available.
And ridership always spikes with every increase in gas price.
You're not dumb enough to think gas prices are going to go down, are you?
Again, it’s a white elephant. My opinion is that Americans would be far better served to invest taxpayer dollars into the widening and expansion of existing road networks to accommodate growing demand.
A white elephant indicating what?
The GOP surrender of our nation to the 'Rats???
Hey... IKE had a good idea with the Interstate Highway System...
But those were only 4 lane, and later expanded to 6 or 8...
Now we have what? 10 lanes? 12 lanes?
It's getting pretty foolish to just keep adding lanes, especially considering that Oil will NEVER be as cheap or plentiful as it was back in IKE's day.
Just what we need. Amtrack on speed. Just another giant pit to shovel tax-payers dollars into for eternity. If there were any chance to operate such a thing at a profit, you’d see private investors doing it already.
Have you ever considered joining the Libertarian Party?
It would give you a chance to get out and meet other like-minded Ferengi.
“That percentage actually increases significantly where adequate transit systems are available.”
Are you suggesting that Americans are more or less likely to ride on these bullet trains than the Japanese who’ve had 20 years with the technology? My point, is that even assuming they’ve had the technology for the same amount of time, most Americans prefer to ride their vehicles. This is a cultural difference between America and Japan.
“You’re not dumb enough to think gas prices are going to go down, are you?”
In constant dollars? Yes, I think we will see gas prices go down. I’m not one of the peak oil folks, who have little vision. It has always been the case that as prices increase, more oil fields become profitable, and as techology improves, the price associated with oil extraction will come down.
“It’s getting pretty foolish to just keep adding lanes, especially considering that Oil will NEVER be as cheap or plentiful as it was back in IKE’s day.”
So it’s less foolish to waste 1 trillion dollars on these bullet trains, that do not take you where you need to go? Ike’s interstate system paid for itself in the increased efficiency across America. These bullet trains do not have the same benefit. They are at best a gimmick, and at worse, a money pit and a white elephant.
Being from Canada, I wish we had a politician with the drive and vision of Ike to expand our major transportation systems to interstate standards.
As it is the system is burdened, by choke points at bridges as other posters have brought up. It would be far more cost-efficient to open these bottlenecks.
This is a cultural difference between America and Japan.
I think that's a myth.
Americans will take whatever mode of transportation is the most convenient way of getting to whereever it is that they want to go.
It could be a car, trolley, bus, bicycle, skateboard, boat, monorail, plane, balloon, motorcycle, rocket, snowmobile, donkey, minivan, SUV, high-speed rail, maglev, pogo stick, hang glider... and a hundred other ways I could dream up.
Americans like CHOICES.
And your mass transit obstructionism deprives them of having a CHOICE.
“I think that’s a myth.”
Given that the land of the free elected Obama, perhaps you are right that Americans would be willing to give up the freedom and independence of the automobile. I am betting on the opposite. My impression of Americans is just the opposite. People don’t take the bus unless they have no other option.
“Americans will take whatever mode of transportation is the most convenient way of getting to whereever it is that they want to go.”
Exactly. For the vast majority of Americans, that means the automoble. This is vastly different in Japan. Part of the problem is that with the train, you still need to get from the end of the train to wherever you are going, and you still have to do something about your car on the other end. It’s simply unattractive.
“And your mass transit obstructionism deprives them of having a CHOICE.”
Levying increased taxation deprives them of choices. I’ll take money in my pocket everyday so I can afford gas to drive, over having to shell out for an expensive boondoggle in California, which I’ll never see let alone use.
But I guess that’s what a national excise tax would be perfect for. White elephants.
Full speed into the grave to never resurface!
Part of the problem is that with the train, you still need to get from the end of the train to wherever you are going, and you still have to do something about your car on the other end. It’s simply unattractive.
No different than taking a plane, only much less hassle with reservations/security and trains make more convenient stops along the way. For trips less than 500 miles, high-speed rail is much faster than taking a plane.
There’s no way public transportation can save time or money.
You have to have a car at both ends to make it work and that’s flat not practicle.
I wouldn’t even take an airline plane less than 500 miles because soneone has to take you to the plane and you have to rent a car at the other end plus you HAVE TO DO IT ON THEIR TIME SCHEDULE NOT MINE!
“Trains/light rail carry far more passengers and require fewer drivers.”
The one they just built between Escondido and Oceanside CA doesn’t cary enough passengers to pay the help let alone the fuel, maintainance and never will return a cent of the investment.
If it gets 4 people per trip it’s been mobbed!!!
No one but an illegal or welfare case would ever waste their time on the thing!
You have to have a car at both ends to make it work and that’s flat not practicle.
Park your car, take the train, rent-a-car or take a cab when you get there, take the train back home, and pick up your own car in the lot where you left it.
Or if you don't want to rent-a-car or cab, take a bus, or light rail, or monorail, or whatever else might be available.
You can even take a stage coach if you find a train stop where they don't care about horse droppings.
You must be a welfare case that the only thing you have to do in your life is go to the welfare office once a month where time means nothing.
Travel time is a wast of part of my life and I eliminate every minute of it I can.
Public transportation is nothing but time consuming.
i’ve never used it and no one will ever force me to waste my time using it or having to put up with the riff raff that rides it!
“No different than taking a plane, only much less hassle with reservations/security and trains make more convenient stops along the way. For trips less than 500 miles, high-speed rail is much faster than taking a plane.”
And cars destroy them at that distance.
A real rail system once flourished in this country. And, although it may never be rebuilt, that will be due more to a failure of vision than some number crunching budgeteers.
Light rail goes in fixed limited locations. Buses are flexible and can be rerouted as transit patterns change.
hmmm...something just doesn't seem to fit together too well here...
Light rail goes in fixed limited locations. Buses are flexible and can be rerouted as transit patterns change.
Yes, light rail is best suited for those high-volume local commuter routes that don't change.
Buses are best suited to less popular routes where ridership is more unpredictable.
they=there
I can well imagine and if possible would not of built the system.
The highway system modeled on socialist Adolph Hitler, capitalized and pulled the economic rug out of the cities, which were repositories of hundreds of years of free market investment.
It, highways, caused by government force massive economic misallocation.
Big thing in North NJ was the Light Rail System. They pass empty half the time. Huge waste of money;
I’ve considered and rejected the idea of joining the Libertarian Party several times. At the local and state level I have voted for individual libertarians when I felt the Republican was too liberal, but the party as a whole supports some things I don’t agree with. On the other hand the same is becoming true of the Repubicans. I’ll have to see what happens in 2010.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.