The Economist: "High-speed trains: Going nowhere fast"

http://www.economist.com/node/21549960

The Economist wrote:Even California, America’s last big hope for high-speed trains, is reconsidering

Looks like the most we can do now is increase speed on existing tracks for higher speed rail. Of course there is Desert Xpress.

morris&essex4ever wrote:Looks like the most we can do now is increase speed on existing tracks for higher speed rail. Of course there is Desert Xpress.

DesertXPress is pretty much a joke. They're wanting nearly six billion in RRIF loans, instead of being privately funded like they initially claimed, and even if they did manage to build it, they'd quickly go bankrupt (the loan payments would be about 75% of total revenue and I don't know anyone who believes their revenue or ridership projections).

Paulus Magnus wrote:

morris&essex4ever wrote:Looks like the most we can do now is increase speed on existing tracks for higher speed rail. Of course there is Desert Xpress.

DesertXPress is pretty much a joke. They're wanting nearly six billion in RRIF loans, instead of being privately funded like they initially claimed, and even if they did manage to build it, they'd quickly go bankrupt (the loan payments would be about 75% of total revenue and I don't know anyone who believes their revenue or ridership projections).

So you think DesertXpress would not carry that many riders and would not have as much revenue as they claim?

That's funny, I don't remember California reconsidering the project. The project has problems to be sure but we're not at that point yet.

morris&essex4ever wrote:

Paulus Magnus wrote:

morris&essex4ever wrote:Looks like the most we can do now is increase speed on existing tracks for higher speed rail. Of course there is Desert Xpress.

DesertXPress is pretty much a joke. They're wanting nearly six billion in RRIF loans, instead of being privately funded like they initially claimed, and even if they did manage to build it, they'd quickly go bankrupt (the loan payments would be about 75% of total revenue and I don't know anyone who believes their revenue or ridership projections).

So you think DesertXpress would not carry that many riders and would not have as much revenue as they claim?

Correct.

Amid all the usual whining and blsme=throwing among the mostly young and impressionable crowd who bought into Mr. Obama's promises and pipe-dreams of three years ago, there remains one silver lining -- the first upgrade of the present San joaquin system at the south end of the Central Valley. That improvement remains permanent, and can be used as a linchpin as further developemts, both in the cost of fuel and the distribution of pop8lation, inveigh further in the direction of gradual expansion, just as has been underway in the Northeat Cooridor since the mid-1960's.

That process, ufortunately, is usuallly the way large and expensive projects get dome in the real world, especially when political concerns and/or opposition block a more direct approach. We will all be long gone before a true Southland-to-the-Bay HSR is completed, but the unworkability of sustaining the present auto-centric suysem (as opposed to allowing it to evolve into something revolving around smaller, but still persoal vehichles covering shorter distances) continues to be demonstrated.

To the newcomers to this forum, I can only suggest that you sit back and enjoy the show == but be prepared for a long one.

Just a reminder that even the countries that have extensive high-speed rail systems are themselves "auto-centric". The highway in this picture is not empty.

Thats what you call a balanced transport system . you have the choice to take HSR , or take your car .
I am comletely nonplussed how many opponents of HSR seem to think that if a high speed rail line is built , it somehow reduces their freedom to take their car .
Of course , in countries such as the USA and NZ , we dont have that freedom (Choice ) , we can take our car , but we cant take HSR . Basically our Governments have said , we are not givng you the choice to take HSR , you must drive .
Yet somehow , many people see the provision of HSR as the government forcing that form of transportation on them .

David Benton wrote:Of course , in countries such as the USA and NZ , we dont have that freedom (Choice ) , we can take our car , but we cant take HSR . Basically our Governments have said , we are not givng you the choice to take HSR , you must drive . Yet somehow , many people see the provision of HSR as the government forcing that form of transportation on them .

If HSR was self supporting, you'll have a valid point. But it isn't. Taxes, which everyone must pay whether you ride the train or not, to subsidize building and operating HSR means everyone is being forced to pay for that form of transportation. Just because HSR breaks even (or not) in a few locales in the world doesn't mean it'll break even everywhere. Taxpayers cry foul when planners wish to build bridges and highways to nowhere too.

electricron wrote:

David Benton wrote:Of course , in countries such as the USA and NZ , we dont have that freedom (Choice ) , we can take our car , but we cant take HSR . Basically our Governments have said , we are not givng you the choice to take HSR , you must drive . Yet somehow , many people see the provision of HSR as the government forcing that form of transportation on them .

If HSR was self supporting, you'll have a valid point. But it isn't. Taxes, which everyone must pay whether you ride the train or not, to subsidize building and operating HSR means everyone is being forced to pay for that form of transportation. Just because HSR breaks even (or not) in a few locales in the world doesn't mean it'll break even everywhere. Taxpayers cry foul when planners wish to build bridges and highways to nowhere too.

It's not just a few locales. Every HSR system I've found financial information for breaks even on operational costs and the Madrid-Barcelona line in particular has a 20% profit margin. That said, news reports since then indicate the Freya system has been losing money hand over fist; I haven't found detailed financials for it however though it doesn't terribly surprise me, it doesn't appear to be a particularly useful line to build.

Paulus Magnus wrote:It's not just a few locales. Every HSR system I've found financial information for breaks even on operational costs and the Madrid-Barcelona line in particular has a 20% profit margin. That said, news reports since then indicate the Freya system has been losing money hand over fist; I haven't found detailed financials for it however though it doesn't terribly surprise me, it doesn't appear to be a particularly useful line to build.

Operational costs don't include the capital costs for the right-of-way, the train stations, nor the maintenance shops and yards; costs that can exceed operating costs when prorated over 30 years or less. Those are costs every taxpayer must pay whether they ride the trains or not.

electricron wrote:

Paulus Magnus wrote:It's not just a few locales. Every HSR system I've found financial information for breaks even on operational costs and the Madrid-Barcelona line in particular has a 20% profit margin. That said, news reports since then indicate the Freya system has been losing money hand over fist; I haven't found detailed financials for it however though it doesn't terribly surprise me, it doesn't appear to be a particularly useful line to build.

Operational costs don't include the capital costs for the right-of-way, the train stations, nor the maintenance shops and yards; costs that can exceed operating costs when prorated over 30 years or less. Those are costs every taxpayer must pay whether they ride the trains or not.

Which is irrelevant when your complaint referred to "self-supporting" and taxes to subsidize the operation of HSR and my response was specifically in reference to said operational costs.

Can you find me a profitable road

David Benton wrote:Can you find me a profitable road

Yes, I can. Turnpikes have not only paid off their bonds required to build, but also rebuild them. Check out the Turner Turnpike or Will Rogers Turnpike in Oklahoma for examples.
The tolls for the Golden Gate bridge have not only paid off bonds for its initial reconstruction and to repave and repaint the bridge on a continuous basis, they also have been used to subsidize bus transit across it as well.
In either case, only the people actually using the roads or bridges eventually pay for them....