tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post2867964754421087722..comments2023-10-30T09:03:07.163-07:00Comments on California High Speed Rail Blog: CHSRA Project Workshop Presentation Now Available OnlineRobert Cruickshankhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comBlogger91125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-15187796815262091262009-08-14T00:26:35.984-07:002009-08-14T00:26:35.984-07:00Anonymous said...
What is absurd is hobbling a pur...Anonymous said...<br /><i>What is absurd is hobbling a purported express line with an unnecessary detour into a remote area</i><br /><br />LA county is not a remote area. no mater how you slice it. It isnt now and sure won't be in the coming decades. calling LA County a remote area of the state is like calling end of life planning "Obama Death Panels."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-48468868725872680262009-08-13T11:07:34.304-07:002009-08-13T11:07:34.304-07:00What is absurd is hobbling a purported express lin...What is absurd is hobbling a purported express line with an unnecessary detour into a remote area.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-3892748780126618252009-08-13T10:31:25.181-07:002009-08-13T10:31:25.181-07:00Anony-mouse emerged from his mousehole to say:
&qu...Anony-mouse emerged from his mousehole to say:<br />"<i>If the hsr is going to insist on detouring far to the east thru the Tehachapis it should adopt an alignment with gradients that can accommodate freight.<br /><br />What private operator, let's say a company with real world experience running a railroad, is going to want a line that cannot handle freight to offset poor passenger revenues? Who's going to pay to maintain two tracks when single track will suffice?</i>"<br /><br />Since you've chosen "argument by rhetorical question", riddle me this: what Express HSR system anywhere in the world is designed <b><i>to accommodate heavy freight?</i></b><br /><br />If the proposal was for an Emerging HSR corridor, the point would be well taken. In the context of an Epxress HSR line, its absurd.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-13201389184726133842009-08-13T09:36:59.518-07:002009-08-13T09:36:59.518-07:00If the hsr is going to insist on detouring far to ...If the hsr is going to insist on detouring far to the east thru the Tehachapis it should adopt an alignment with gradients that can accommodate freight.<br /><br />What private operator, let's say a company with real world experience running a railroad, is going to want a line that cannot handle freight to offset poor passenger revenues? Who's going to pay to maintain two tracks when single track will suffice?<br /><br />Kopp's hsr is a turkey like the BART SFO line but on a much bigger scale. Too big and too expensive for the state to run indefinitely. Eventually it will have to be taken off the taxpayer lifeline and then there will be much pointing of fingers, just as with the ill-conceived, circuitous, underperforming BART SFO line.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-74863920251356585962009-08-13T09:30:38.709-07:002009-08-13T09:30:38.709-07:00Fred, just two things:
1. There are two ways of d...Fred, just two things:<br /><br />1. There are two ways of defining capital profit. One is whether operating profits exceed depreciation. To my knowledge, SNCF and the mainland JR companies are profitable by this metric. The other is whether the line has paid off its construction bonds; this takes some time - the three HSR lines that have paid their bonds are also the first three to have been built, and the next two had their debt wiped before they had the chance to pay it off.<br /><br />2. The lack of a gas tax in the US is a subsidy, since tailpipe emissions cause considerable health problems. To balance just air pollution externalities, excluding carbon emissions, the US gas tax needs to be hiked $2.21/gallon.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-50619662771273119262009-08-13T09:06:29.782-07:002009-08-13T09:06:29.782-07:00Fred Martin said...
"Operating at a profit is...Fred Martin said...<br />"<i>Operating at a profit is distinct from recovering capital costs.</i>"<br /><br />Except for the small minority that are ideologically opposed to all capital subsidies for intercity travel, this is a red herring.<br /><br />There is no serious claim that the system will recover all capital costs, the system does not depend for its success on recovering all capital costs and the rationale for building the system does not rest on recovering its capital costs.<br /><br />The claim is that the system will yield an operating surplus, <b><i>and Fred Martin concedes that at the outset in order to avoid being distracted from pursuing the red herring</i></b>.<br /><br />There are two prospective scenarios that we face.<br /><br />In the optimistic scenario, energy costs will remain somewhere in the present neighborhood, the US will work through its sluggish rates of real investment in productive capacity of the past fifteen years, and in that scenario, California will clearly experience substantial population growth. That growth will require new capital investment in transport capacity across the board, including for intercity transport tasks.<br /><br />The HSR is the more capital efficient means of providing that transport capacity. And of course, since it increases the range of transport options, it will increase the average efficiency of both road and air transport as well, since those for whom road and air transport are less efficient options will be disproportionately represents in the HSR ridership.<br /><br />In the pessimistic scenario, prices of petroleum and close petroleum substitutes explode, and as the core economy with the greatest exposure to petroleum prices, that hammers the US economy more than any other large high-income economy. In that context, both the competitive position and the public benefit of HSR is much stronger than the corresponding situation in the EU or Japan today.<br /><br />In a future that is mostly an extension of the present, the eighty years of capital subsidy bias in favor of intercity road and air transport infrastructure means that removing that bias and leveling the playing field is the most capital-efficient strategy.<br /><br />And in a future that represents that greatest risk to the economic and, indeed, political sovereignty of the nation, the benefit of investing in HSR is a slam-dunk.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-64543972940981592742009-08-12T23:59:26.232-07:002009-08-12T23:59:26.232-07:00Operating at a profit is distinct from recovering ...Operating at a profit is distinct from recovering capital costs. Operating at a profit is not so hard to do considering the trunk line nature of HSR. Given that operating costs are a small fraction of the enormous capital costs of HSR, recouping capital costs is something that has not ever been attained without heavy public subsidy. Even the French and Japanese efforts have required heavy subsidy, and their HSR is basically the capstone for well-established passenger rail and urban transit systems. The US is under-developed in these areas, and this is why building fancy HSR is 'putting the cart before the horse'. (By the way, if you have ever been to Sendai, you would realize that it has a great transit system.)<br /><br />Furthermore, remember that Japan and France developed their HSR systems when their air travel systems were very expensive and highly regulated. This isn't the case in the US, where air travel remains quite cheap. Automobile use is also very expensive in Japan, and fuel taxes are high in France.<br /><br />In every detailed study I have seen, the capital costs of HSR requires heavy public subsidy even in a favorable competitive environment. The creative accounting of separating "profitable" operating companies from heavily subsidized public infrastructure companies is a shell game. These subsidies can be justified in certain social and environmental terms and according to efficiency measures, but HSR most certainly does not pay for itself. <br /><br />http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/42202Fred Martinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-75420799459604733462009-08-12T19:19:08.627-07:002009-08-12T19:19:08.627-07:00Hey, Alon, I am still waiting to hear your explana...<i>Hey, Alon, I am still waiting to hear your explanation about how the French and Japanese systems pay for themselves...</i><br /><br />They first lines, the Tokaido Shinkansen and the LGV Sud-Est, were funded by bonds, which were then paid back within a few years. Subsequent lines were funded out of the system's initial profits, plus some extra bonds (which were again repaid, more or less).<br /><br />I'm papering over the fact that JNR was forced to build so many unprofitable local lines that it got into debt and collapsed while two of its lines were incomplete and had not yet paid their bonds. However, having been completed, those lines have high ridership now and would almost certainly be able to cover their original debt, if the Japanese government hadn't wiped it as part of the company's restructuring.<br /><br />I'm also papering over the fact that SNCF operates commuter lines, which are subsidized locally and which Amtrak uses to argue that railway companies always need subsidies (as if Amtrak operates local commuter rail). SNCF the national intercity rail operator is profitable - it just contracts to run the local commuter lines. Not that it's any excuse - the mainland JR companies manage to make a profit on the local commuter lines - but the Amtrak-style lines it operates overall make money.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-4650494903039685512009-08-12T09:28:15.972-07:002009-08-12T09:28:15.972-07:00Richard says...
"CHSRA and its consultants a...Richard says...<br /><br />"CHSRA and its consultants are simply lying about travel demand. There really is no question."<br /><br />Richard, predicting things 20 years into the future is a pretty tough business. Why don't you take a few minutes and tell us a little bit about what you think the cost of electricity from renewable resources might be to run the trains, versus say the cost of jet fuel to run the planes?<br /><br />Hint: Do you think it might be possible that declining worldwide oil supplies might lead to greatly increased prices versus electricity generated from renewable sources? When building systems that will be running 30-40 years from now, you have to think about things like that. Maybe thats why China is investing $300 Billion in it?<br /><br />http://www.ecnmag.com/news-chinas-bullet-train-081109.aspxRubber Toehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15723504969375352982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-54644697022324356942009-08-12T00:33:15.783-07:002009-08-12T00:33:15.783-07:00My french customers today said they are looking fo...My french customers today said they are looking forward to selling us their trains and they are confused by why it took them 12 hours to get from la to sf. Its beyond their comprehension. i had to explain to them that americans do things a little differently and by the way did they see the health care debates"<br /><br />LOL they don't understand us at all but wished us luck. I asked them If I could stow away in their suitcase when the go home.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-44895829053064619652009-08-11T23:50:44.520-07:002009-08-11T23:50:44.520-07:00Hey, Alon, I am still waiting to hear your explana...Hey, Alon, I am still waiting to hear your explanation about how the French and Japanese systems pay for themselves...Fred Martinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-64584890985756448292009-08-11T23:42:11.013-07:002009-08-11T23:42:11.013-07:00Fred, the Acela alignment is even more conducive t...Fred, the Acela alignment is even more conducive to human development. So based on water politics, the Feds should just give the money to the Northeast and leave California out to dry.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-35802253336891067072009-08-11T22:05:27.596-07:002009-08-11T22:05:27.596-07:00The Colorado River flow was divided up well before...The Colorado River flow was divided up well before the state of Nevada and Las Vegas became political players, so Nevada has a tiny claim of Colorado River water. It doesn't matter how close Nevada is, because Los Angeles and California staked their claim well before Las Vegas grew into a city. This sort of legal legacy isn't going to change. Marc Reisner's <i>Cadillac Desert</i> has a good discussion of this water history.<br /><br />If you are concerned about water and urban development, the Delta and the upper San Joaquin Valley are much better for urban development than the dry lower San Joaquin Valley. Palmdale and the Antelope Valley are inhospitable places for humans. Guess which alignment serves the Delta and upper San Joaquin Valley better? Altamont.Fred Martinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-1329175858541827992009-08-11T21:14:41.256-07:002009-08-11T21:14:41.256-07:00Rafael, even in humid areas, cities need extensive...Rafael, even in humid areas, cities need extensive water works to function. New York's water supply comes from the Catskills, about 100 miles to the north. The difference between New York and Los Angeles is that LA has to compete for water with irrigation-based farming, whereas the Northeast can practice rainfall-based agriculture.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-80134844497822301962009-08-11T18:53:54.276-07:002009-08-11T18:53:54.276-07:00@ anon @ 1:30pm -
a quick gander on the map tells...@ anon @ 1:30pm -<br /><br />a quick gander on the map tells me Las Vegas is close to the Colorado river and Los Angeles isn't anywhere near it.<br /><br />The city of angels recently had to accept a 15% cut in water pumped down south from Tracy because of the Delta smelt, a little fishie in the tidal zone between Vallejo and Stockton. Researchers consider it something of a canary in the coalmine, the decline of its population as evidence that excessive diversion of water was causing the water in the Delta to become too saline. If that were permitted to continue, it would lead to loss of farmland and wildlife areas.<br /><br />Now, you can argue if preserving the Delta is worthwhile if it constrains growth in the LA basin. However, if you look anywhere else in the world (except Libya) you'll find that people have always settled near natural sources of fresh water. California is an anomaly in that most of its population is supported by water that is pumped over hundreds of miles.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-23277208863043178472009-08-11T18:43:47.765-07:002009-08-11T18:43:47.765-07:00@ anon @ 1:11pm -
CHSRA conducted an extensive tu...@ anon @ 1:11pm -<br /><br />CHSRA conducted an extensive tunneling workshop using Australian software called Quantm that was used to analyze literally thousands of alignments across the transverse range. The software allows planners to disallow certain areas of the 3D map, e.g. because they are wildlife refuges or suspected aquifers, pockets of natural gas, weak rock strata etc. They can also specify maximum gradients, minimum curve radii, maximum acceleration/deceleration rates, where tracks have to run at grade and other constraints. Genetic algorithms are used to identify viable and optimal alignment variations.<br /><br />The workshop yielded massive reductions in the cost estimates relative to earlier rough numbers PB produced using conventional reckoning. It also showed that while there were hundreds of viable variations for crossing both the San Andreas and the Garlock fault at grade but only a single one for the Grapevine - and even that ran close to a wildlife refuge.<br /><br />In addition, I'm sure LA county had an interest in seeing the Antelope Valley included in the route. At the time, it was the fastest-growing portion of the county. It is also home to an airport that could relieve LAX, but only in conjunction with HSR service (in practice, that means HSR platforms in a new passenger terminal building).<br /><br />Your position appears to be that the CV and Antelope Valley are flyover country and that HSR competes only with short-hop flights in the Bay Area-LA basin. This is not true, the majority of HSR ridership will actually come from people who would otherwise drive for hundreds of miles. Residents of the CV and AV are actually likely to use HSR much more than those in the Bay Area and LA basin.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-21971260365489140362009-08-11T13:53:37.463-07:002009-08-11T13:53:37.463-07:00@anonymous: let's say that all 50 states legal...@anonymous: let's say that all 50 states legalize gambling and Las Vegas is forced to reinvent themselves as a diversified economic powerhouse. I would expect that they would then, in their economically depressed state, be pushing even harder to have a HSR line to southern california. I don't expect CA to pay for the whole thing, and while initially ridership would be disproportionately weekend-centric, having a HSR connection to the SoCal economy might be LV's last great hope should gambling revenue deteriorate. Such a situation would make LV more like Bakersfield or Fresno, but like I said, since we're already building the line over the mountains, the rest of the trip is relatively cheap.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12007392734653660123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-18889751830623879042009-08-11T13:30:32.763-07:002009-08-11T13:30:32.763-07:00For budgetary reasons all 50 states will have to l...For budgetary reasons all 50 states will have to legalize gambling. They simply cannot let instate money go to out-of-state casinos.<br /><br />Las Vegas may have diversified but gambling is still its cash cow. Just look at what has happened to Reno in the wake of Indian casinos that cater to gamblers who used to have to climb the Sierras.<br /><br />Besides LV lacks the water for unlimited growth. The longterm hsr market isn't there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-69335276789063935902009-08-11T13:11:27.065-07:002009-08-11T13:11:27.065-07:00@Alon
I think we're saying basically the sam...@Alon <br /><br />I think we're saying basically the same thing, if that one option to cross the fault line at grade doesn't work out, that would drive the line underground over the fault line. It's not that there's only one option going over the grapevine, it's that there's only one option that crosses said fault at-grade.<br /><br />I don't believe that the Vegas connection was a driving force for CAHSR choosing the Tehachapi alignment, but the end result is a really, really nice benefit for southern californians who are campaigning for a LA-LV line. It makes such a connection far cheaper and therefore more likely to happen. It also makes a SF-LV line possible and while I don't think such a line would get very high ridership from SF as it would most likely approach 4 hours, some San Jose-ans might use it and the CV certainly would. And while it might only be an extra 72km to go up the cajon pass, we'd have to build the cajon pass line which would be very expensive, and it's 130km shorter if you connect at Mojave instead of palmdale (and there's already a rail ROW from mojave to barstow you could use). On top of that, the run from mojave to barstow, even going through palmdale and victorville, could be run at higher speeds than are planned for the streches between sylmar and rancho cucamonga.<br /><br />If you were just trying to build a line from LA to LV you probably wouldn't go through palmdale (even though that's only 20-something miles longer from LAUS than going over cajon) because a cajon-pass line would better serve the IE and san diego, but like I said, it ends up working out well for a LA-LV line or even an anaheim-lv line, whether that was the intention or not.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12007392734653660123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-49444248797874393732009-08-11T13:01:48.283-07:002009-08-11T13:01:48.283-07:00Legalizing casino gambling in California is inevit...Legalizing casino gambling in California is inevitable and that will belie the need for an expensive rail connection to a an LV in decline.<br /><br />The Grapevine is manifestly superior to the Tehachapis even for service to the Central Valley. That's why I-5 is there.<br /><br />There has been a lot kvetching on this site that the hsr has already been studied to death. Considering the quality of the resulting plan maybe the studiers were dead.<br /><br />The Tehachapis detour is a serious detriment. The CHSRA should perform a intensive evaluation of the one Grapevine alignment before proceeding.<br /><br />The CHSRA is presenting this as an obvious choice. It is not. Constructing the Tehachapis line will prove to be on the same order of difficulty as the Grapevine and the gradient just as steep.<br /><br />Let's say the hsr turns out to be underperforming to the point that projected revenues are simply not forthcoming. You have two full tracks thru the Tehachapis but you can get by with single track. Sending freight thru on the other track could generate revenue to offset the disappointing passenger business. But with a 3.5% ruling gradient I don't know if that is feasible even with electric locomotives.<br /><br />The Tehachapis is the only possible freight alignment. I don't think it is possible to construct something akin to the Loop on the Grapevine. That's why it wasn't done in the 19th century. But as an hsr alignment the Grapevine may be feasible and if so is clearly preferable geographically.<br /><br />If the Tehachapis turns out to be as big a stymie as I suspect future generations will lambaste the CHSRA, Kopp, Bechtel et al for having failed to do their homework and allowing themselves to be bullied by some developers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-49358091652639654822009-08-11T12:34:38.647-07:002009-08-11T12:34:38.647-07:00Does "CP" refer to Consist Parking?
CP ...<i>Does "CP" refer to Consist Parking?</i><br /><br />CP = Control Point. Standard nomenclature for remotely controlled railroad junctions.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-8411576984621634562009-08-11T12:33:53.715-07:002009-08-11T12:33:53.715-07:00Andy, both the Tehachapi and the Grapevine alignme...Andy, both the Tehachapi and the Grapevine alignments allow crossing major faults at grade, assuming a ruling gradient of 3.5%. However, the Grapevine alignment only offers one such possibility, which may turn out to be unsafe once the meter-level geological studies begin. The Tehachapi alignment offers multiple options at the project level, which makes it almost certain that at least one option will be available.<br /><br />The Las Vegas option doesn't figure - for one, the project is centered around California, without any consideration for connections to other states. If the authority could count on a connection to Phoenix and Las Vegas, the system would likely be configured somewhat differently in the Inland Empire.<br /><br />Besides which, SF-LV is only 72 km longer via the Grapevine and Cajon Pass than via Palmdale and Victorville. Conversely, SF-LA is 74 km longer via the Tehachapis. The Grapevine corridor is faster overall - it's just that it's not certain it can be built. If it were a 150 km detour then it might be worth it, but 74 isn't long enough to bet the project on it.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-65749825714396767962009-08-11T12:28:18.598-07:002009-08-11T12:28:18.598-07:00@ Rafael 8:07 AM
Does "CP" refer to Con...@ Rafael 8:07 AM<br /><br />Does "CP" refer to Consist Parking?Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-41360035752966704882009-08-11T11:26:58.839-07:002009-08-11T11:26:58.839-07:00IMHO the single biggest risk is the Tehachapis det...<i>IMHO the single biggest risk is the Tehachapis detour coupled with the 99 corridor.</i><br /><br />CAHSR wants to claim that the Tehachapi alignment was due to the fact that they would have to cross a major fault line in a tunnel going over the grapevine but are able to cross slightly smaller, less active fault-lines and do so at grade by going over Tehachapi.<br /><br />If that's the whole truth, that's fine, but the one ginormous thing that the Tehachapi line has going for it that the Grapevine does not is that the Tehachapi alignment makes a Las Vegas spur much, much cheaper by dragging the N/S line over the mountains. All you have to do now is drag rail over cheap, relatively flat, sparsely populated desert.<br /><br />Getting a Vegas spur is going to be politically difficult, regardless of how many people are going to ride it. I don't think it would happen if we had to pay to drag the line over the mountains as well. An extra 10 minutes on SF-LA trips is worth it, in my opinion, to make the Vegas line financially feasible. (whether it's the DX people or CAHSR building their own line, or some combination of the two).Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12007392734653660123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-40336095841385097902009-08-11T10:49:36.718-07:002009-08-11T10:49:36.718-07:00IMHO the single biggest risk is the Tehachapis det...<i>IMHO the single biggest risk is the Tehachapis detour coupled with the 99 corridor. Between the extra miles and the extra stops you are looking at an extra half hour.</i><br /><br />No, it's not half an hour. It's more like 10 minutes, if the train skips all the extra stops.<br /><br />And re: freight, one could argue it the other way. If there's room for just one two-track tunnel through the Grapevine, it's better to use it to relieve freight, which handles gradients worse. Passenger rail can live with going from the LA Basin to the Central Valley through Antelope Valley and lose only about 10 minutes. Freight loses hours from the same exercise.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.com