California's Bullet Train to cost nearly 100 billion

[n2doc]

By Ralph Vartabedian, Los Angeles Times
November 1, 2011
California's bullet train will cost an estimated $98.5 billion to build over the next 22 years, a price nearly double any previous projection and one likely to trigger political sticker shock, according to a business plan scheduled to be unveiled Tuesday.

In a key change, the state has decided to stretch out the construction schedule by 13 years, completing the Southern California-to-Bay Area high speed rail in 2033 rather than 2020.

The delay allows inflation to drive up the price over the additional years of construction.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority, the state agency running the project, plans to unveil the new business plan in a news conference Tuesday morning in Sacramento.


more
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-high-speed-rail-20111101,0,1124440.story

[xchrom]

1. recommend

[greytdemocrat]

2. I bet this never carries 1 person. n/t

[nebenaube]

3. I plan on using it regularly. n/t

[ParkieDem]

4. Good lord.

I know I will get flamed for this, but I have never thought that high-speed rail would work in this country, except possibly in the northeast. We can enhance our rail system without it being "high-speed." $100 billion? Think of all the other projects that could be funded with that money.

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. Why not? Does high speed rail depend on a dense population?

The northeast doesn't NEED high speed rail. It's got a good system as it is, and the destinations are not that far apart that you need to go 200mph between them. High speed is more needed in the great distances in the middle of the country - Chicago to Denver; Atlanta to Dallas, etc. Not every can, or wants to, fly those distances, particularly with the way the airlines are run these days. I remember when air travel was comfortable and convenient - now it is uncomfortable and inconvenient.

Know who does NOT want long-distance high speed rail? The airlines. If they had some real competition they'd be forced to actually return to providing customer service.

[Laluchacontinua]

27. $100 B over 13 years is about $8B a year. That's a pittance for a decent mass transport system.

$8 B is the cost of 1 Tomahawk missle.

On edit: should have said that's less than the cost of a Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II ($11 billion).

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

Cost of a tomahawk is actually about a million. Or a million & 1/2.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/25/cruise-missiles-missile_n_840365.html


but you know, who's counting, as long as it kills people?

[snooper2]

28. And I'm sure they will end up paying $138.40 for each gallon of paint

[SidDithers]

32. $8B is the cost of 1 Tomahawk missile?...

Ummm, don't think so.

Sid

[TheWraith]

33. Uh, no. That statement is completely wrong.

The US' entire circa 2003 stock of ~3500 Tomahawk missiles is only priced at $2.6 billion total, making the cost of each missile around $750k.

[ParkieDem]

46. I would agree

... that $100B over 13 years is not much for a decent transport system - but this is just one line.

[county worker]

35. There are 3 ways to get from San Diego to San Francisco and places in between now.

You can drive, fly or take Cal trans or Amtrak. All are slow, inefficient and costly. The fuel savings alone would pay for the bullet train.

[DainBramaged]

37. Aren't those 4 ways?

[county worker]

38. Cal-trans and Amtrak are the trains that run up and down the coast on the same right of way.

They are considered one means of transportation.

[DainBramaged]

42. But you can't ride them at the same time?

ergo, four-way.

[county worker]

47. Amtrak runs from Los Angles to Seattle with the Coast Starlight.

The other trains are a joint effort by Cal-trans and Amtrak so you could be riding them at the same time.

[txlibdem]

53. Does Sea-Tac airport still have that beautiful people mover?

I loved riding that thing but that was decades ago...

[county worker]

54. I don't know, I've never been there.

[txlibdem]

57. Bummer.

[txlibdem]

59. Found it on youtube - sweet automated people mover inside the airport

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdaI_ZZqoqw

The freaky thing for me watching this video: the computer voice speaks several languages.

[Norrin Radd]

65. Sea-Tac now has a light rail train to Seattle, with interesting art

at all of the stations.

[Psephos]

5. $100 billion is more than the GDP of 130 different countries.

See for yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29

History suggests there will be more price "surprises" ahead, too.

[Johonny]

6. infrustructure pay a little now

or a lot later. Longer you wait, the more it costs to redo Americas infrastructure, yet we continue to delay :(

[valerief]

7. Well, this is better way to piss away money than WAR. nt

[LibDemAlways]

8. Californians who would like to experience travel by

fast rail should consider going overseas where bullet trains exist now. I'm 58 and will never live long enough to see my state have anything resembling modern rail transportation.

[txlibdem]

51. Hear, hear! I agree 100%

Once you've actually ridden the bullet train you are hooked. It is fast, the ride is smooth and the cost is reasonable. Also, it's powered by electricity so there are NO contrails, NO nasty smoke smell like at the airport, NO importing fuel from nations that might not be our friends. Just clean and powerful electric motors pulling the bullet train along at fantastic speeds.

[Exultant Democracy]

9. Long overdue. Too bad republicans hate big ideals, we should have a transcontinental line.

I have a feeling that there are economies of scale that could easily be exploited to save money if we were a little more ambitious.

[txlibdem]

61. Only one? I think we should have 5 high speed lines going N-S, 4 going E-W

That would form a high speed rail grid that you could easily transfer to and from.

[kestrel91316]

10. It better go right into SF instead of ending in some cow town in the Central Valley. And

it better have a stop at Union Station in LA. And we need a high-speed connection directly to LAX.

You can't take Amtrak into SF right now. You have to hop on a bus at the end to get into the city. Completely moronic.

Transit in CA improves only by baby steps. It's pathetic.

[n2doc]

11. Hell you couldn't take BART to SF airport until fairly recently.

And you still cant take the METRO system in DC to Dulles airport. Lots of stupid decisions based on special interest group involvement.

[kestrel91316]

15. It's gonna take me 2 hours to get the 20 miles down to LAX at Christmas on transit.

I refuse to go by Flyaway bus or shuttle or private car because last time I did, there was a triple Sigalert on the 405/10 and it took HOURS and I missed my flight and it turned into the trip from hell, lol.

Metro/light rail never goes on city streets at all. I can handle the 2 hours because, rain or shine, that's exactly how long it will take.

But we need light rail from the Valley directly to the West side and LAX. Seriously.

[txlibdem]

52. You still can't in Dallas (to DFW)

It makes me think that Dallas isn't a very forward-looking city at all.

[Bluenorthwest]

16. Once a day, Coast Starlight leaves Union Station Los Angeles

and it will take you to Oakland direct, although not the City direct. The other lines do the cow town tango.

[KamaAina]

22. It takes, what, twelve hours?

And costs a bundle. It's mainly for tourists, alas.

[LeftinOH]

40. It takes approx 10.5 hours and costs about $90 one-way in coach, and there are

stations in Oakland and Emeryville. From each, there is continuing Amtrak thruway bus service to San Francisco -to the Ferry Terminal and beyond. Driving time is approx 6-7 hours (during which time the driver is obligated to pay attention to the road the whole time), and costs approx $50-$60 worth of gas. Total savings by driving: Approx $30-$40 dollars. Then there's tolls and parking fees.

I've taken this train, and it's worth a little extra time and money to *not* have a car in tow. It all depends on what the traveler's needs are. Some die-hard drivers might find themselves pleasantly surprised at how relatively easy it is to get around without a lugging a car everywhere.

[KamaAina]

23. You'd think they'd at least have a ferry from Jack London Square

to the Ferry Building.

[LeftinOH]

41. Amtrak has a bus line from the train stations in Oakland and Emeryville to the Ferry Terminal

(and a few other spots) in San Francisco; it's part of the train schedule and can be purchased with the train ticket.

[XemaSab]

60. California needs ONE public transportation system

Instead of the 200 or so we currently have.

[JohnnyRingo]

12. Thanks in part to our idiot governor John Kasich it'll be easier to build.

The stimulus afforded Ohio with about half that amount to build a N/S high speed rail that traveled from Cinci to Cleveland including a stop in Columbus. It was cleverly named the 3C rail by former gov Strickland who spent $2m for feasibility research. Morons from the Tea Party cried about the wasted stimulus money so when Kasich began his term in 2010 the first thing he did was refuse the project.

Of course he begged the White House for the cash instead, but the administration countered with a "use it or lose it" policy, and the rail project went to California instead. I only wish they had to take our governor with the money. LOL

[renegade000]

13. pass the smelling salts!

infrastructure investments cost money? heaven forfend!

yes, better we just sit on our butts not employing anyone and let our passenger rail system grow increasingly substandard. we'll just let all those silly foreign countries waste their money on boondoggle projects like this...and laugh as we revel in the modern dignity and glory of air travel :P

[FarCenter]

14. In CA, it will never get past the environmental impact study stage

At least not the useful bits that connect into LA and San Jose from the first segment to be built from Fresno to Bakersfield.

[Islandlife]

30. That's right...forgot about the EIS

Add another $5,000,000 to the projected cost.

[Safetykitten]

17. Of course. We were loooking at a 400 grand sod job also at the LA site.

[gratuitous]

18. The faster it's built, the less it costs

But expanding the schedule from nine to 22 years? Gee whiz, it'll cost a lot! Right now, with the recession and historically low interest rates gifted to us by our financial overlords while they wrecked the economy, money is incredibly cheap to borrow. If California wasn't held hostage by "no tax" Republican jerkwads, the smart thing to do would be to plunge on debt, and start building tomorrow. LA to Oakland or SF in an hour and a half, and you don't have to go through the airports? Sign up a million or so people every month for that!

Construction jobs for the project, create a few thousand equity barons by condemning their property for the rail right of way and paying top dollar, and then the ongoing benefit of a high speed train connection between the two population/business centers of the state. You'd have even Republicans clamoring for extensions to Sacramento and San Diego within five years.

[RaleighNCDUer]

19. Let's re-write that lead, OK?

California's bullet train will pump $98.5 billion into the economy over the next 22 years, employing tens of thousands of people in the state and across the country, before it opens its final stretch of rail to passengers.

I don't know about anyone else, but I LOVE the idea of high speed rail - I have a persistent sinus condition which causes me excruciating pain at the altitude changes while flying, so therefore I don't fly. For me to travel coast to coast would take days. I don't expect to live to see coast to coast high speed rail, NC to CA in less than two days, but I really like that idea. I wish it was a current option.

[txlibdem]

63. If you're alive and kickin' in 2020 you should see it, thanks to the $48 million

"USDOT Awards North Carolina and Virginia $48 Million to Develop High-Speed Rail Between Raleigh, NC and Washington, DC
September 27, 2011



WASHINGTON – U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced $48.3 million for North Carolina and Virginia to advance the development of the Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor, which will link Raleigh, NC, to Washington, DC via Richmond, Va. These grants will ultimately spur high-speed and intercity passenger rail development as far south as Charlotte, NC, and Atlanta, Ga., and to the Tidewater Region of Hampton Roads and Norfolk, Va.

"Thanks to the investments we are making today, Americans across the Southeast will have convenient access to faster, more efficient passenger rail connecting to destinations all along the Northeast Corridor," said Secretary LaHood. "Passenger rail will also help alleviate traffic along congested sections of I-95, foster economic development and provide Americans with a greener, cleaner, more sustainable way to travel."

The federal investment announced today will fund a number of high-speed rail projects in North Carolina, Virginia, and Washington, DC:"

http://americanhsra.org/

Here's the planned high speed lines:
http://www.ushsr.com/ushsrmap.html

[redgiant]

20. Un-be-fucking-lievable! n/t

[redgiant]

26. And anyone who believes...

...that 100 billion won't escalate is smoking too much medical marijuana.

[Jackpine Radical]

24. How much did we spend last year on our various wars?

Perspective…

[Xithras]

25. They need to dump the current plan, fire the entire staff, and start over.

Stations that look like cathedrals, elevated trackways soaring 80 feet over the surrounding towns and countryside, alignments that require the relocation of entire freeways, eminent domain proceedings that will destroy thousands of homes, historic buildings, schools, and businesses, routes that offer little traffic relief to those who actually need it most, the list goes on and on.

Here's a crazy idea. How about we build our high speed rail system the same way EVERY OTHER high speed rail solution on the planet has been developed? Begin developing regional commuter rail solutions that will allow people to commute to work every day, go shopping, and otherwise live their local daily lives without cars. Then expand that system with inter-system links, city by city, that will permit people to easily move between urban areas. THEN, and only then, add a high-speed thru-link between all the systems to allow passengers to transit the state on a single train. This is how Japan did it. This is how Germany did it. This is how France did it. This is how China is doing it. Put in regional rail FIRST, because it's cheaper and has a more immediate impact in traffic and pollution. Put in high speed links LATER for convenience, after the public has already been sold on the value of the rail systems, and after most of the urban right of way has already been established.

And scrap these pie in the sky design concepts. If the Japanese can wait for their bullet trains in simple concrete platform rain shelters, so can Californians. We don't need multibillion dollar stations with glass ceilings that sail hundreds of feet into the air.

[miyazaki]

36. You nailed it. Great reply.

Years ago it was projected to cost nearly as much as the International Space Station, so its nothing
really new to me. Europe and Japan rail works for very good reasons with extreme regional population
densities. Have to service these areas first and primarily.

California's big issue was never transporting people from north to south anyway.

[XemaSab]

45. So much word

The other day I was in the Bay Area and it took me two damn hours to get from Richmond to San Mateo.

There's no reason why the Bay Area should not have a world class public transportation system with BART to San Jose, San Rafael, Livermore, Vallejo, and everywhere in between, plus integrated bus routes and other forms of public transportation that are planned on a regional scale.

[Retrograde]

49. That's what our Congresswoman is advocating

The plan called for building what was essentially a wall down the middle of the city, and a huge parking structure that would take up most of downtown. Some sane folks in government (yes, there are a few) countered with a proposal that would bring the high-speed section up to the San Jose station, then use the existing tracks and trains for the last leg to San Francisco. The savings would be enough to electrify the existing tracks, put in the rest of the grade separations, and run more local expresses.

[RegieRocker]

29. How many trains could we buy with 17 Trillion?

[bvar22]

31. Use ONLY parts manufactured in the USA!

If we buy everything from China,
it won't help OUR economy.

I wouldn't mind MY tax money building High Speed Rail in California
IF Americans got The JOBS!
:patriot:


Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[lib2DaBone]

34. China is constructing 50K Miles of high speed rail.. ..

China is constructing 50K Miles of dedicated high speed rail. (dedicated means that the trains run at 300mph and have no interference from car traffic.)

China is also putting in fiber optic cable in major business areas and installing high-efficiency small-package, nuclear power plants while upgrading their electric grid.

China also announced this week that they are moving forward with their space shuttle program.. while the U.S. has closed down its NASA Shuttle operations.

Mr. Obama annunced this week that he will continue to spend $40 Billion a month in Afghanistan and he will surge the war in the ME after we withdraw a few troops from Iraq. (Simply spreading the troops to to other locations.)

Make of it what you will.. but I think most people can see the writing on the wall...

[Laluchacontinua]

39. +1. Yes, the writing is pretty clear. China's infrastructure is being developed for economic

leadership. The US's is being left in the 19th century.

[ParkieDem]

44. Yeah, but ...

China doesn't have to worry about thinks like environmental impact studies, compensation for taking property, farming communities standing in the way, etc. when it comes to their infrastructure projects.

Let's not forget that in addition to their nuclear plants, they're also building 200+ coal-fired generation plants as well. So, the electricity operating China's high speed rail projects probably won't be the cleanest out there.

And their safety record is soooo admirable .... http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/21/world/asia/anger-and-suspicion-as-survivors-await-chinese-crash-report.html?pagewanted=all

[toddwv]

43. That's not even enough to buy a half-decent war...

but it will still be too much.

[lutefisk]

50. That 100 billion could have paid for almost a whole month of "Occupy Iraq"

But passenger rail reduces oil consumption and profits...

[devilgrrl]

48. War is definitely cheaper.

:eyes:

[Leopolds Ghost]

55. bullsh*t.jpg

That $100 billion price tag accounts for the fact that five or so US firms have a lock on all government rail transit construction contracts.

They got the Federal gov't to intervene to prevent a Spanish firm from bidding on a tunnel for the Metrorail Silver Line in DC/Northern Virginia... in a construction project awarded by the federal airports authority so that they could have a convenient black hole for graft.

They killed the Seattle Monorail outright after limiting bidding to two firms, one of which was bidding on the competing Seattle "light rail" project, which is scheduled to go nowhere since all extensions of it would be underground (none of which the State actually intends to build, so they killed the monorail simply because there was a chance it might actually get built) and the firm refuses to offer competitive bids on tunneling as that would enable Europeans to get into the market.

[txlibdem]

62. Every $1 billion spent on infrastructure creates between 18,000 and 34,000 jobs

Mr. Pitney says political opposition is likely to grow, especially in California's current fiscal climate. "At a time when government at all levels has to cut back, many voters will wonder why California is spending so much on a system that so few of them will ever ride," he says.

But the bad economy could also be a selling point. California has the second-highest unemployment rate in the nation. Studies show that for every $1 billion spent on infrastructure remediation creates between 18,000 and 34,000 jobs, says Barry LePatner, author of "Too Big to Fail: America's Failing Infrastructure and the Way Forward."


http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/1102/Can-Obama-s-high-speed-rail-plans-survive-California-sticker-shock

This Mr. Pitney is a real brain. The flight from LA to San Francisco is one of the most heavily traveled, 2nd only to Chicago to New York.

[Throd]

56. A bad idea, horribly implemented, at obscene cost.

Can't Tom Scumberg ever find a real job?

[Safetykitten]

58. But we need dog killer art. That's not cheap.

[MilesColtrane]

64. Yow! I wouldn't want to be traveling 220 miles per hour...

when an earthquake hits.