Posted on 02/02/2023 9:41:58 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Well, it’s big in Japan...
That is what proponents of California’s high speed rail project say when asked about the whys and wherefores of the system. In other words, if it works somewhere else it will work here.
That argument, though, falls in the face of a rather basic fact: California and Japan are different.
It is true that Japan’s high speed rail system, first begun in 1964, actually makes money – a lot, in fact. The iconic first line, Shinkansen Tokaido, alone carries 90 million people a year and has an operating profit of about $4.4 billion dollars. That does not include capital costs, but teasing that number out after 60 years of operation and the privatization of the route in the late 1980s is extremely difficult – suffice to say the deal has “worked” for the owners.
There are multiple other Shinkansen lines in Japan, most of which also realize an operating profit (the latest expansion to Hokkaido – the very large island north of the Japanese mainland – has proven to be problematic, though.)
Focusing on the Tokaido line – the line typically referred to for comparison - shows a few similarities but many glaring differences. It’s distance is 320 miles, not terribly different from the 390 miles from Los Angeles to San Francisco. Also, it takes two and half hours – again not too dissimilar - and, in a downtown to downtown comparison, is faster and more convenient than flying (though not cheaper – it’s about $100 to fly and about $160 to take the Shinkansen) just like California’s project is supposed to be.
But that’s about it.
First, there is the issue of population. The Tokaido line (with its “Nozomi” train only stopping in the largest cities and hence the fastest) runs from Tokyo to Osaka, which alone have combined populations of 17 million, compared to 11 million for LA (including the county) and San Francisco.
In the cities along the Tokaido route there are 9 million more people; in the space between LA and SF, there are less than 3 million. For comparison, the smallest city on the Tokaido is Shinagawa at 400,000 people; the smallest city on the California system is Gilroy, at 58,000. All told, the average “stop population” between LA and SF is about 250,000 – on the Tokaido/Nozomi is 2,250,000.
It is these concentrations and the economies of scale they allow that drive the success of the Tokaido line - California’s system is simply not in the same league.
The Nozomi train operates 32 1,300-seat trains each way every day; pretty much on the half-hour with fewer overnight, while the two other slower (but still high speed) trains on the same system operate much more frequently and make many more stops.
Note on the following information– when dealing with California High Speed Rail (CHSR) Authority numbers - time or money - it is a good idea to remind oneself that they have never been right before, so really really big grain - meet salt.
The CHSR system will – in its “horizon year” of 2040, operate 105 southbound and 103 northbound trains per day over the system. Southbound, 64 trains will start in San Francisco, 20 in San Jose, and 21 in Merced. Northbound, 42 trains will start in Anaheim, 44 in Los Angeles, and 17 will start in Merced (note – that means 86 trains will pass through LA northbound every day.)
The system will operate 18 hours per day, with six hours designated “peak;” about half of the trains will operate during those six hours, the other half during the 12 “off peak” hours.
That means LA’s Union Station will – during the morning commute – see a train going north about every eight minutes, every day.
At 1,200 (could be a bit lower, could be a bit higher as the final design is not yet set) seats per train, about 10,000 people could leave LA between 7 and 8 a.m. For the system to hit its ridership (and therefore revenue) goals, about 5,000 have to.
Six trains will run non-stop from LA to SF and 10 will run with only stops at San Jose and Burbank – the non-stops are expected to meet the 2 hour and 40 minute time limit set by original bond; the other trains will not.
Like the Tokaido, California’s system will charge different fares for different distances traveled … sort of.
The 2020 ridership estimate report shows a ticket price (one way) of $100 from San Francisco to Bakersfield. The cost to travel to LA or even Anaheim? Also $100. It appears planners simply worked – in accordance with the original bond measure - backwards from a typical Southwest fare to set the cap.
For those traveling to/from smaller cities, the fares are obviously less. For example, San Francisco to San Jose is $26, SF to Merced is $66, Los Angeles to Anaheim is $34, etc..
While the high-speed rail has been touted as a way to make lower cost Central Valley housing more accessible, the fare rates could significantly impact that desire as it would cost about $30,000 a year to commute from Merced into the city (admittedly, it can most likely be assumed there will be some sort of farepass/frequent user program will cut that price.)
But at numbers in the thousands per month, the incentive to move out of more expensive cities becomes far less – why spend the money on train fare rather than on a more expensive, more central home if it’s going to be a wash, unless you were going to move anyway to raise a family and mow the lawn?
As to overall finances, the most the CHSR says the LA to SF system will cost is $113 billion and it will be done in 2033, four years after the Central Valley “starter kit” is done.
Exactly where the money will come from remains a bit of a puzzle, but the CHSR is hoping the Cap and Trade money it gets will be extended to 2050 (an extra $10-20 billion,) that they will find more federal funds including non-transportation grants for things such as renewable energy and “social equity.”
As to a private investor, the CHSR admits they are not quite ready for that but that once the system is running and turning an operational profit businesses will come knocking to invest.
Speaking of operational profit, the CHSR projects there is a “99.4%” likelihood it make an operational profit by 2040. It should be noted “operational profit” is just that – how much more money you bring in than you have to spend every day and is not related to the capital cost.
If – IF – the system makes $1.4 billion it expects to in 2040, that would give it a return on capital investment of 1.4% percent. That’s not terribly good and may make private companies think again and again and again about investing.
In other words, if (not accounting for inflation) the CHSR simply saved its money to build the rest of the system – the San Diego, Sacramento extensions – it would take about 40 years of “profit” to cover the cost
And those revenues figures are based on having about 1 million riders a week, about 140,000 a day, about 6,000 an hour, 100 a minute.
For proper context: Currently about 2.5 million people fly each year between LA and the Bay Area. And about 700,000 currently take Amtrak to/from Bakersfield to Oakland and/or Sacramento. That’s 3.2 million - total.
Note - assuming the new system attracts a few more riders in the Central Valley alone, that means the “south from Bakersfield” and the “Merced to San Francisco” and the “long haul” trips will have to attract about 50 million riders alone
Obviously, a whole bunch of other people drive to and from and in between, but I don’t think it is unreasonable to wonder if the 51 million annual riders the HSR estimates will use the system may be just a tad bit on the optimistic side
All this to be able to get from Fresno to Bakersfield for $63 six years from now.
That’s 20 bucks more than Amtrak charges today.
* * *
No, JR’s HSR does not make money. The numbers are skewed by excluding the costs of infrastructure.
And California has always taken the most absurd route to HSR planning anyhow, which results in it allegedly costing ten times per mile more than what they spend on it elsewhere in the world.
The writer is quite the optimist, worrying about the profitability of a railroad that may never be built.
I’m all for high-speed rail
Just let private investors and companies run it.
Then we’ll know exactly how good an idea it really is.
The U.S. is too spread out so it’s not really doable.
Just in general...even in Europe...I don’t think any of the high-speed rail projects have a real pay-back situation. It’s just infrastructure money from each gov’t that makes these happen in the end.
And I’ll just say...having ridden a couple of times on German high-speed rail...it’s an uneasy feeling when you get above 200 kilometers per hour.
One other HUGE DIFFERENCE - the nicest places to visit, live, and work in Japan are the central areas of the big cities (assuming one doesn’t need a 20 Acre FreeRepublic Ranch), while the inner cities in the US make Haiti look like a paradise. I suspect that 90% of airport customers have nothing to do with our central cities and would prefer NOT to be dumped there.
(assuming one doesn’t need a 20 Acre FreeRepublic Ranch)
We grew up calling them “hobby farms”.
Daniel Boone’s idea of dense housing. Nice places to raise a family.
This is a good point you’ve made.
They seem to have overlooked the biggest difference between California and Japan. In japan you’re not worried that some indigent crazy living in a corner of the station’s going to walk over and push your wife and child onto the tracks.
I’m taking a wild guess that the authors first name “Thmoas Buckley” is misspelled, unless that’s a Japanese interpretation.
Democrats are idiots and never factor in culture.
Japanese are pretty homogeneous and comfortable
in small controlled confined areas.
I’m a white guy and I like my freedom and my space.
screw your trains. I don’t even like airplanes and I was a Boeing Engineer for over twenty years.
Personal transportation made a lot of people very rich.
Y’all figure it out.
Thanks.
Japanese public transportation is safe. I mean safe from being accosted by ferals.
“the nicest places to visit, live, and work in Japan are the central areas of the big cities, while the inner cities in the US make Haiti look like a paradise”
How do the Japanese keep their cities so nice?
Making our big cities “nice” makes more sense than moving people from distant homes into and out of the cities each day.
How are they going to collect the fares? If they arrest people who refuse to pay, it will be racist.
“No, JR’s HSR does not make money. The numbers are skewed by excluding the costs of infrastructure.”
And corruption costs. Japanese wouldn’t tolerate it.
California’s high speed rail to nowhere ?
Not familiar with the Japan system but have spent a lot of time in Taiwan. The underground train system in Taipei was built in 3 yrs on a 4 yr project and under budget. Went through a major earthquake with only a few ceiling tiles knocked loose. Super clean, no one litters in Taiwan. There is a large fine if caught with chewing gum in there.
All across the country the trains are on time to the minute. People are friendly and kind, happy to help you.
The suburbs of Los Angeles and San Francisco spread out for many miles.
There might be five trips involved:
1. walk to catch a bus/subway
2. bus/subway to departure RR station
3. the high-speed train trip (via the central cities)
4. bus/subway from destination RR station
5. walk to destination after getting off bus/subway
If you drive, you have ready transportation at your destination. And your car better be ‘green’ by 2050.
There is corruption in Japan, probably around the level of the US.
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.