patrick.net

About rails and housing choice...

It seems to me that high-speed rail is supportive of concentrated, urban living, at least as it's done in Europe. It's a pretty good match for cities which became large before the advent of the automobile.

It’s a pretty good match for cities which became large before the advent of the automobile.

Agreed. SF is by no means large.

I rather have an electronic toll road system.

Peter P,

San Francisco proper is a bit larger than Hausmann's Paris of 1840-1914 but, even with the broad boulevards, 'etoiles', parks and squares, they made space for a national government, two major universities, businesses, retail, and pretty-decent-to-luxurous digs for about 3.1MM gesticulating French.

The Baron Hausmann's my hero, urban genius division.

It seems to me that high-speed rail is supportive of concentrated, urban living, at least as it’s done in Europe. It’s a pretty good match for cities which became large before the advent of the automobile.

Exactly. These are what Robert Cote would term "obsolete pre-automotive cities" (OPACs). Retro-fitting existing cities that are currently w/o much rail infrastructure is prohibitively expensive, mainly due to the exorbitant costs of excavating/building around existing homes, businesses and infrastructure. L.A.'s Metrorail has proved this many times over. And I agree that the biggest limitation to HSR here is poor local transportation and how car-centric the whole west coast is.

BTW, where is Robert when we have a topic tailor-made for him?

Also, subway trains here do not look safe. There are too many weird people walking around.

This is probably going to be the transportation of the future (if they can ever get FAA approval):

http://www.moller.com/newm.htm

It even gets decent mileage (est. 20 MPG) which will no doubt improve over time. And since you will not be stuck for hours in gridlock, it will save gas over any ground-based car, even today's most efficient hybrid.

And since you will not be stuck for hours in gridlock

With enough flying cars, there will be gridlocks in the sky.

With enough flying cars, there will be gridlocks in the sky.

Not likely anytime soon. Flying is three-dimensional, while driving restricts you to a 2-dimensional plane. As a result, the amount of open "lane" space available to air traffic is geometrically larger.

Of course, they aren't making anymore sky ;-).

John H,

Interstates don't make any direct revenues either, but their impact economically is great. It just depends upon where the public elects to apply their funding.

From a speed, footprint, efficiency, ROI standpoint, rail's not a bad option for future planning, but it's made equivocal by choices we made long ago.

Interstates don’t make any direct revenues either, but their impact economically is great. It just depends upon where the public elects to apply their funding.

All roads should be tolled according to speed, distance, and vehicle weight.

With enough flying cars, there will be gridlocks in the sky.

But think of the FREEDOM.

Here's a relevant article... the guy who helped plan BART and then became critical of it, died today:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/12/12/BAGMTMTT0G1.DTL&feed=rss.bayarea

"If BART has achieved any sort of unquestionable success, it was as a public-relations exercise,'' he said. "As a result, it may be that BART's most successful outcomes have been felt outside the Bay Area. BART has been heralded as a pace-setter for transit systems throughout the world.''

He placed much of the blame on BART's decision to build a system to lure suburbanites "from the luxury of their cars" with "a luxury rail system" with cushioned seats, carpeted floors and a modernistic design instead of creating a system that focused on faster, more frequent service.

It's true. Every time I'm on BART, I wonder why it's so "70's futuristic" and impractical (carpet??) - unlike the proven NYC subway system.

So now it's a "substantial cooling" not a HOUSING CRASH? (Fed notes)

Kind of like saying Elton John is...... fashion conscious?

High speed rail is a great concept. London to Paris in 2 hours very soon right? It will do wonders for their economies. But in the US? Inconceivable. We lack the brain power. Crack addists and drunks run the current system. This combined with unprincipled unions and quotas make this an impossibility in the US. Furthermore, the current public transportation in the US was devastated when the civil rights attorneys no longer allowed law enforcement to properly police public spaces. Apart from sepcific areas in Manhattan, would you take your family on public transportation at all hours? Until law enforcement guarantees our safety with the current system you can forget about investing billions i this new one. Could this be the next "big dig"?

Furthermore, the current public transportation in the US was devastated when the civil rights attorneys no longer allowed law enforcement to properly police public spaces.

Really? This is sad. Why?

hmm, all interesting ideas, doc1.

the technocratic country that put a man on the moon and split the atom did it thru crack addicts and drunks?

I can't say that I feel too safe on the Paris Metro at night either -- that's why they have big red 'duress' buttons on the platforms...

and civil rights attorneys are to blame for everything?

compared with paris or london, sydney is a mixture of car and train cultures. Rail lines were put up through the expensive 'north shore' and throughout the western areas, and suburbs full of commuters grew up around them. although american-style suburban sprawl also took hold from the 1920s with the advent of the affordable motor car. the roads are generally overstressed and narrow coming into the inner ring suburbs and the city -- the further in you go, the more narrow and Victorian the streets. Someone decided to convert the CBD from charming 5-storey Victorian buildings into 40 storey skyscrapers with the same narrow streets and consequently without rail links it would be impossible to get people in an out.

there was a funny irony in that they completed a grand 'central station' in the early 20th century at the height of the age of rail, only to find that the CBD drifted north to the harbour away from it, and across the harbour via the new bridge, and suddenly there were motorcars and sprawling suburbia -- the motorcar created suburbia in its bungalow form...

interestingly, the mayor of the city is a keen advocate for extending a light rail link passing through said central station and through the middle of the city, running north-south right through the elongated CBD. it's currently set up almost like a 'toy' where it originally ran mainly from central straight to the casino and 'exhibition centre' and little else, hmm. they then extended it to a couple of suburbs beyond to wring some usefulness from it. the state govt however is not convinced that a single rail line is going to be useful or flexible enough to cover the needs of CBD travellers vs the bus network -- they see it as just another expensive 'solution' and fixed rail line on top of the underground loop, a near-useless monorail, and an existing bus system. it's a tough call... melbourne still operates a terrific grid of trams, but then they have the layout to do it...

doc1 Says:

"High speed rail is a great concept. London to Paris in 2 hours very soon right? It will do wonders for their economies"

There's been a high-speed Eurostar rail link London-Paris, London-Brussels, London-Amsterdam for over a decade. Having been out of the UK for almost 7 years now, I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised to find that other European capital cities have been added.

speedingpullet, eburbed was being wry before with his 'freedom' comment...

Published Saturday, December 9, 2006, by the San Mateo Daily Journal
By Keith Kreitman

When Judge Quentin L. Kopp tells me at age 78, as the newly
elected chairman of the California High-Speed Rail Authority
, he has finally reached the
apex of his career, I sit up and listen...

From San Francisco to Los Angeles, alone, he tells me, with stops
along the way, it will be only two-and-a-half hours at 50 bucks one
way, with guaranteed reserved seats. (Where were you, Judge Kopp,
when I languished for nine to 11 hours on Amtrak for the same trip
at even more money?

The total cost for the project is expected to be $33 billion, one of
the most expensive in world history. Yet, even though the original
funding will be from 30-year general obligation bonds, the first of
which will hit the ballots in 2008, the rail line will be privately
operated and without any government subsidies. Based on the
experiences of other nations with such lines, Kopp anticipates
enough running profits to pay off these bonds in 10 years.

Things are already in motion, he tells me, with 14.3 million in the
works to begin engineering and to set up right-of-way acquisition
procedures (except on our Peninsula) and 199 millions for newly
awarded (through June 30 2013) project managers Parson Brinckerhoff
Quade and Douglas. The state budget for 2007-8 is expected to bring
in 103 millions to actually begin buying rights of way. And 2008,
hopefully, brings the votes for a $9.95 billion bond starter for
construction.

random user Says:

> As to a high speed train, I’d love to see one from
> SF to LA. But I don’t know if it’s practical or not.

Let’s say 400 miles of track with a right of way ¼ mile wide. That is 100 square miles or 64,000 acres. If you figure an average price of $200K an acre it will cost about $12 Billion for the land plus another few Billion for legal costs to take the land through eminent domain. Lets call it $15 Billion for the land.

The new 5.4 mile 3rd St. light rail in SF is about a quarter Billion over budget and will probably come in at just under $200mm per mile. It is my guess that with economy of scale that the state could build the high speed rail for half the cost of SF or $40 Billion.

If we add in cost overruns and inflation it will probably cost about $70 Billion for a high speed rail from SF to LA (or about $2,000 from every man, woman and child in the state). Since rail will not pay for itself we will have to subsidize it for years to come…

>>Rail is is amazingly efficient at transporting bulk, time insensitive material. People are neither. Rail transit is stupid. Rail transport is efficient and necessary.

It's been argued that there are no profitable models in the business of transporting people from anywhere to anywhere.

-Cruise ships don't count because they're not really transporting people, rather providing them with an entertainment experience.

-Airlines as an industry has done nothing but lost enormous amounts of shareholder capital.

“If a capitalist had been present at Kittyhawk back in the early 1900s, he should have shot Orville Wright. He would have saved his progeny money. But seriously, the airline business has been extraordinary. It has eaten up capital over the past century like almost no other business because people seem to keep coming back to it and putting fresh money in. - Warren B

Cars are the only profitable means of transportation - at the cost of everyone via time and money. It works because it's so inefficient.

Furthermore, the current public transportation in the US was devastated when the civil rights attorneys no longer allowed law enforcement to properly police public spaces.

Yeah that's why the subways are empty in NY. Oh wait.

Anyone considered the possibility for the government to ship in massive foreign labor to do major infrastructure construction? Laborers can be housed in temporary tents/domes on the construction site.

Since much of the inflation-sensitive cost is lobor, this can be a real solution.

What is "profit" anyway?

In a zero sum game of life, where do profits come from?

I don't know about a right of way ¼ mile wide. that would be exaggerating by about 10x I would think -- not that FAB is known for doing that ;)

the right of way could virtually be 10 metres wide, even allowing for transit in both directions...

In a zero sum game of life, where do profits come from?

largely from fleecing philippines villagers for gold, copper and hardwood reources in 99:1 profit-sharing relationships in the present, I believe...

and swapping beads for land, and other such, in the past...

Different Sean Says:

speedingpullet, eburbed was being wry before with his ‘freedom’ comment…

LOL! No $hit... ;-)

Still, its not every day that I get to use a version of my favourite all-time joke as a reply...

On a related note - the UK is starting to re-vamp its antiquated rail system - especially for freight. Plans are afoot to add spur lines to larger manufacturing outlets, so that freight can be easliy transported across the UK and into Europe. Planners are finally figuring out that on islands the size of the United Kingdom, road tansport is slow, expensive and wasteful.

As Robert Cote points out, freight rail is still the most cost effective way of getting stuff from A to B.

But I imagine there will be similar issues with a high speed train.

No such issues with Acela. Even $150/RT to LA on HST can be very attractive. But even at that price, it is difficult to break-even.

If you figure an average price of $200K an acre it will cost about $12 Billion for the land plus another few Billion for legal costs to take the land through eminent domain.

On the bright side, land along the route will get a boost in value. So new suburbs can be established and new condo communities can be built. The sale of housing can pay for some of the costs.

Let's say 10000 units can be build directly above or around each HST station. At an average of $100K profit per unit and 5 of these hubs, $5B can be brought in.

HARM Says:

This is probably going to be the transportation of the future (if they can ever get FAA approval):

It even gets decent mileage (est. 20 MPG) which will no doubt improve over time. And since you will not be stuck for hours in gridlock, it will save gas over any ground-based car, even today’s most efficient hybrid.

I see the last item on the features list is 'emergency parachutes' -- that's a good inclusion, given that they'll probably needed a lot as time goes by.

Unfortunately, 20 MPG is crap -- it's the same as a present-day non-hybrid motor car. A road vehicle could get 500 MPG if properly designed... even the Prius gets about 55 MPG in a combination city/highway test...

Couldn't you just run the rail right up the 5 fwy?

First, rail is the second most effective transport mode with pipelines being the big winners and oceangoing cargo being the third place coming on fast.

BTW, according to some reports, Artic ice will be gone by 2040. This should open new sea-routes that are presently frozen.

See, global warming is good!

Couldn’t you just run the rail right up the 5 fwy?

HST cannot go up and down Grapevine Pass.

See, global warming is good!

See, global warming (if such thing exists) is good!

According to the most reliable and latest reports Antartic ice is net accreting.

See, no global warming!

Please save the lame attempts at distraction for appropriate threads.

Huh? If I wanted distractions we would be talking about sushi already.

Global warming appears to be a reality, as noted by glaciers and snow lines receding further every year (also known as Global Pattern Baldness). The jury is out on whether Antarctic ice is increasing or decreasing at present. Warmer oceans melt it, precipitation adds to it.

I assure you, if temperatures continue to increase, eventually Antarctic ice will be gone. In the age of the dinosaurs, the average global temperature was 16° higher, the seas were 200 ft higher, and there were no global icecaps at all...

Different Sean, atomic/rocket technology is courtesy of Hungarian trained scientists (Szillard, Edward teller, Neumann), and a few Germans and Italians. Oppenheimer? a real lightweight who likely colluded with the Communists. But my point is that such a systme would have to be run very autocratically outside the scope of political correctness and beyond the reach of trial/civil rights attorneys so that the best/brightest could run it. Furthermore for it to be available to the masses, the safety of its citizens must be guaranteed. (Not in this politically correct society.)