• Many alt-energy industry leaders are already fighting to be heard in Copenhagen — but at least everyone gets free electric bicycles. (HuffPo)
• Read it and weep: The Wuhan-Guangzhou railway is scheduled to open by the end of the year, and will take passengers 1070 km in 3 hours. For comparison, that’s the distance from Portland, ME to Richmond, VA. (GlobalTimes via ttpolitic)[SButtonZ button="digg"]
• New Jersey Gov.-elect Chris Christie has signed off on issuing more than $1.2 billion in bonds to fund transportation projects — adding to the state’s nearly $34 billion in existing debt. (AP)
• A foray into New York City’s steam system: Do the visible indicators of steam leaks give the public a sweet opportunity to participate in infrastructure maintenance? (UrbanOmnibus)
• Ben Adler opines on how Strasbourg gave up the car, and what it means for vehicle-dependence in American cities. (Next American City)
• Wired sounds off on the U.S.’s alleged “superproject void.” (Wired)
A remarkable “before and after” gallery of cities destroyed by war, speculation, or development. (Oobject)
What do you want to bet that Christie’s transportation projects nearly all have to do with building roads.
I suppose I shouldn’t complain too much – rail and bicycle projects are slowing gaining in popularity as time goes on.
Not much to add but I think two recent interviews might be interesting for those thinking about the void of superprojects, getting HSR running the US, and the general nature of infrastructure in this country:
Kazys Varnelis interviewing Joseph Tainter, author of The Collapse of Complex Societies
And an interview with Varnelis himself at Triple Canopy.
As to China: whether you agree with their politics or not, they do show the benefit of having a central authority that can negotiate (or more like dictate) what needs are to be met by infrastructure between their provinces.
[...] touches on a high-speed railway line that will travel a 1,070 kilometer route in three hours. Infrastructurist notes that that’s like having a train that could take you from Richmond, VA to Portland, ME [...]
@JM,
Re China, the financing model of HSR in China is typically like this: the Ministry of Railway provides part of the funding representing the central government; the provinces where a particular HSR line passes will be responsible for the land and any relocation cost which will be considered as equivalent investment; sometimes certain third-parties such as insurance companies, social security fund will also invest in a project. They all share the equity ownership based on their investments.
The provinces, almost without exceptions, are very enthusiastic about the HSR since it brings in investment and employment as well as long-term development benefits.
Thanks for the details Greg! So it’s political will on both sides of the coin. Would be nice to have as much enthusiasm here in the US.