.
- Chinese airlines are in a huff about having their business yoinked by new HSR lines, and are calling for “policy support,” which is actually just a tax break. By 2020, 80% of domestic flights will compete directly with cheaper rail routes. (Bloomberg)
- The US DOT is considering a request to include a route from Cleveland to Pittsburgh in its HSR plans. The existing Keystone Corridor through Pennsylvania accommodates trains up to 110 mph; OH and PA want to create jobs and strengthen regional economies by extending it further. (AkronNewsNow)
- “Political types who dominate the rail authority” have some seeing the CA HSR plans as a glass half-empty. Basically, the people in charge are a bunch of crooks and liars who want to siphon state money into their bank accounts and hate parks, rivers, and the citizens of California. (LA Weekly) [SButtonZ button="digg"]
- The latest cost estimate for Illinois’ 110 mph HSR plan is at $4.5 billion, but the project “isn’t high speed” and isn’t worth the cost, says a rail advocate. It just doesn’t reduce travel time that much. The alternative? A $12-13 billion, 220 mph route from Chicago to St. Louis. (Chicago Business)
- The guy who’s suing to stop the construction of the SF-LA line says it’s not just NIMBYism that motivates his cause. An elevated train would be enormously loud–perhaps violating environmental law–and it’s possible, in theory, to bury a train without incurring prohibitive cost. (Wired)
- As trains threaten airlines, so do they threaten cars: a British foundation for motorists says the “green” viability of HSR in the UK is marginal at best and suggests we might be better served using the $27 billion it’ll cost to buy 2.3 billion trees. (Guardian)
- And lastly, a bit of optimism. A politician surveys the US HSR Assn.’s conference and highlights the importance of staying competitive technologically, the jobs American HSR projects would create, and the vigilance we need to maintain to make legitimate infrastructural changes. (HuffPost)
Does it cost more to build a subway 40 ft below ground than it does to build an elevated train 40 ft above ground? Hmmm… Good questions.
Simcity says it does
elevated stations though have a larger landfootprint than subway stations (also according to sim4) but maintenance is comparable
thats all I got
sure lets plant 2.3 billion trees and drive like there is no tomorrow!
110mph is not high speed, go for doing it right and yes it costs more but at least its a true high speed option, spread the costs out over the life of the line and expected income and I think it would bring in a lot more then the slow speed version
oh man they better not destroy the views from the sf-la train by sticking it in a hole or putting up sound walls around it
maybe they can encase it in a big acrylic tube or something but sticking people in underground holes for more than 20 minutes at a time is a recipe for das boot
Surely it won’t be buried/walled off for the entire length of the route.
Well, I wouldn’t dismiss these concerns as mere NIMBYism. These are large footprint projects. Some of these concerns, environmental and aesthetic, are perfectly legitimate.
There’s no reason why we can’t have these fights–just have them faster. Federalize these projects, expedite the review, make the adjustments and and work through the issues as best we can and build. If the local opposition becomes too intense, move on to the next project. There are at least two dozen good projects to be done. (Besides, I bet that only happens once….).
Just to be clear, the Keystone Corridor from Philly to Harrisburg supports 110mph in many/most places on the Amtrak owned ROW. West of Harrisburg on the CSX owned ROW it isn’t even electrified.
Jimharper is right on: There’s no reason why we can’t have these fights–just have them faster.
As most of you reading this know, one of the biggest challenges with inserting HSR into an already urbanized area – even if it IS SoCal – is the turning radii that are so much greater than standard heavy rail. Route options analysis is brutal.
That said, I simply don’t get how a culture so focused on cars – and the gashes through the landscape required for highways – can have any NIMBY reaction about HSR. True, logic and public sentiment have limited overlap, but seriously.
What is needed is a fairer tax system, kids. Right now, exurban, un-compact development is heavily subsidized. Every new housing development outside the currently developed area gets subsidies in the form of roads, power, water, telecom infrastructure, etc. – and has been unabated since the end of WWII.
We need a Fair Tax District, a mechanism whereby urban metro areas can develop distance-based overlays. Not that you can’t build new out there – that would honestly be un-American – but that if you chose to, you pay your fair share. The rest of us in the (more) compact areas are tired of paying for you.
Once you have that mechanism, you have a fair revenue stream to add HSR to the regional infrastructure. As exurban development slows the overlay contribution slows, but first cost is always the stumbling block anyway.
There is one thing that most of our fellow countrymen that have never left this country (let’s call it this continent) do not know and reject to understand:
High speed rail has nothing to do with urban mass transit that stops at every corner!!!!! Comparing HSR with subway or elevated rail is the dummiest thing. Urban transit has a purpose to move people within greater metro and limited vicinity area such as LA/ OC, maybe to SD- the range of less than 200 miles. This mode contains subway, light rail or commuetr rail which could be elevated, monorail, etc. This mode of transportaton makes frequent stops and does not develop speeds over 110-120 mph.
High speed rail is an intercity transcontinental type of transportation that shoudl serve as a better substitute for our dysfunctional cattle herding puddle jumpuing air lines that resemble 3rd world. That’s what European high speed rail infrastructure does: it serves as the fastest and most comfortable form of connection between remote cities and different countries. The recent TGV recorord was set at 367 mph (not clicks- miles, it equals to ~591 km/h). Beats our airline dump, security humiliation and everything else totally ugly that relates to domestic air travel.
High speed rail doesn’t make stops at every little community. You board in London and next stop is Paris (that’s right, use the Chunnel, the Channel Tunnel) or Liverpool, board in Geneva and stop in Frankfurt. No air port parking, shuttles, lanes, layovers, marshal laws. You get your 2 minute boarding, excellent service, comfortable seats, WIFI, personal entertainment station, good beer (no ID check) and real coffee in porcelain cups. And no lost luggage. Or… you can choose to travel only 120 mph overnight in the luxury sleeper width full mobile room and board service.
For yor information as well, magnetic levitaion (aka Maglev) in Japan can not pull as many cars as Euro Rails, and at the same time Euro trains are faster.
Eurostar, Thalys, TGV, AVE, Elipsos, Luria, Talgo, Bahn……. here is the link:
http://www.raileurope.com/train-faq/
But the best way is to take a trip to Europe, and not in the organized group of American tourists, but go free, get Euro train pass for as many countries as you want.
Just like everything else that gets into the hands of total idiots called politicians, it gets screwed up entirely, money stolen and projects killed. Not to mention that half of CA government staff are not even Americans!- it’s the feeding ground and free ride for the entire 3rd world.