Why The US Has No High-Speed Rail

Gotta start connecting all these major cities as fast as the internet has or close to it.

They need to go ahead and start here as a trial run.

map-mobile.png


Working in NYC and living in DC or vice versa would be incredible.
 

During his campaign, President-elect Joe Biden talked about a “rail revolution” that would include large increases in funding for Amtrak and potentially coast-to-coast high-speed rail (HSR) service. A member of his transition team talked about expanded and faster Amtrak routes displacing short-haul airline service. Especially if the Senate changes hands after the George runoff election, a major infrastructure bill and/or stimulus bill next year might well include large-scale federal grants for such projects.

If this has a familiar ring, it’s because one of the first legislative accomplishments of the Obama administration was a High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR), enacted as part of a major economic stimulus agenda in 2009. HSIPR offered multi-billion-dollar grants for true high-speed rail projects in California, Florida, Ohio, and Wisconsin plus a wide array of smaller grants to upgrade medium-length Amtrak corridors.

Republican governors in three states rejected the high-speed rail grants because they said they feared they could potentially leave their state budgets to cope with construction cost overruns and ongoing operating subsidies for the rail lines. Those funds were reprogrammed for Amtrak upgrades. But California eagerly accepted $3.9 billion for its planned 520-mile California high-speed rail system that was supposed to link Los Angeles and San Diego in the south with San Francisco and Sacramento in the north, at an originally estimated cost of $25 billion.

The results of all these grants are disappointing, as documented in a detailed Reason Foundation assessment by demographer and transportation analyst Wendell Cox. Here is the essence of the report’s findings:

This is going to be the killer issue every time....

California HSR: the cost for a scaled-back (Los Angeles to San Francisco) system has tripled to $75-80 billion, and the available funds are being spent solely on a 119-mile initial segment from Bakersfield to Merced in the middle of the state. (The entire 520 mile stretch was initially estimated to cost around $20-$30 billion.....now only 119 miles is gonna cost $75 billion!!)

There is no current plan or funding to build the rest of the planned 520-mile system.

Amtrak Northeast Corridor: The $0.75 billion grant has made some marginal improvements, enabling a top-speed increase on a small segment from 150 mph to 160 mph. Some of the work is still uncompleted.

Five other intercity Amtrak corridors: some of the planned additional trains have not been added, and only two corridors have seen top-speed increases to 110 mph, with the others still running at 79 mph. These modest gains cost $3.4 billion.

That is very little real-world improvement for a total expenditure of $8.1 billion. Cox’s report goes into some of the reasons why.

First, true high-speed rail —of the kind we see in Europe, Japan, and China — is hugely expensive. It requires an all-new HSR-only right of way, with much gentler curves and complete separation from any highway grade crossings. This often means extensive tunneling and elevated construction.

The cost per mile of the planned 520-mile California high-speed rail system, assuming it could actually be built for the current estimate of $80 billion, is $154 million per mile. And Amtrak’s own estimates for replacing its existing Northeast Corridor with true high-speed rail work out to over $500 million per mile.

Second, nearly all overseas high-speed rail lines that have achieved high ridership attracted it mostly from previous rail passengers who upgraded from conventional passenger rail. Except for Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor, we have no such large-volume passenger rail between U.S. cities. In all its other intercity corridors, Amtrak at most handles a few percent of all intercity passenger trips, with nearly all going by car, bus, or plane. So upgrading existing Amtrak lines from 79 miles per hour top speeds to 110 mph—even if it attracted a few more passengers—would have very little effect on actual travel in those corridors

One of the key themes of the Biden administration may be trying to reduce CO2 emissions and, during the campaign, passenger rail was presented as if it can make a significant contribution to that goal. What is left out of this vision is that, except for the Northeast Corridor, all Amtrak trains are, and will continue to be, powered by diesel locomotives. That is hardly a green alternative. In fact, a decade ago, the Union of Concerned Scientists compared the CO2 emissions of intercity trips by individuals or families using bus, train, car, SUV, and plane. For a family of four, Amtrak turned out to have the highest CO2 emissions per trip, while the intercity bus had the lowest. For a lone individual, riding the bus still beat the train, but the train was better than the car, SUV, or plane.

These findings suggest that policymakers should take a very hard look at any proposal that resembles the 2009 High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail program. That program spent many billions of taxpayer dollars with little real value as a result.

This shit is really expensive
 
Its expensive because they are negotiating with land owners. The best route is run the lines along major highways, like I-95. They always find a way to add more lanes, but instead they should create space for the dedicated railway. Eminent domain as needed. It would save time and money.
 
Its expensive because they are negotiating with land owners. The best route is run the lines along major highways, like I-95. They always find a way to add more lanes, but instead they should create space for the dedicated railway. Eminent domain as needed. It would save time and money

That sounds cool, until historically you look at the number of minority households lost to highway development....

I will say this in the greater Cleveland area a lot of our highways are bridges over water or vast areas of land......

To add an HSR would mean to increase the weight tolerance of those bridges........
 
That sounds cool, until historically you look at the number of minority households lost to highway development....

I will say this in the greater Cleveland area a lot of our highways are bridges over water or vast areas of land......

To add an HSR would mean to increase the weight tolerance of those bridges........
Yea, they've always carved up black neighborhoods for highways. In Miami, the Overtown area was decimated because of this. What I was referring to is using that existing land, so minimal land grabs would be necessary.


For the Vegas/LA line, they are working with the state to run it right down the middle of this highway. No land owners to appease.
 
That sounds cool, until historically you look at the number of minority households lost to highway development....

I will say this in the greater Cleveland area a lot of our highways are bridges over water or vast areas of land......

To add an HSR would mean to increase the weight tolerance of those bridges........
PBS had one of those black history documentaries which showed the economic impact of highways on black businesses. Folks use to have white folks coming by drinking and shopping after work and when the highways were completed they were ruined.
 
I think its more complicated than saying America lacks the will to build high speed rail. Im no engineer however the geography of the east coast of the United States differs greatly from china. One the Appalachian mountains mount a significant obstacle. Two the the falls and winter seasons on the east coast can be harsh. Not to mention Americans are very adverse to higher taxes being raised for such a massive endeavor. And with all the regulations and red tape it may take up a decade for the project to finish. So a Politian who may be behind this massive undertaking might be voted out, and the next Politician will pull funding for the project. Our political system makes long term infostructure project very difficult because its too easy for politicians run on lowering taxes and pulling expensive projects.
 
Last edited:
My take is also politics. Politicians control the budget and we continuously hear "We don't have money for that!", but billions come out of thin air for ukraine. They are also getting their pockets lined by lobbyists from auto and air. Couple that with having to negotiate with private landowners, things get really expensive. (Just look at California's project).

China doesn't have to deal with any of this. The government builds where they want and spends to get projects done. If I were in charge, I'd commission a study to design a route up the east coast following I-95 as much as possible. Then I would imminent domain all land needed.
 
The Orange County Board of County Commissioners unanimously voted earlier this week to create a special district for the 719 acres encompassing Universal Orlando Resort and ongoing expansions. Taxes and fees collected in that area will fund the district. All land is owned by either Universal Orlando or the company which owns the Hilton Orlando adjacent to the park.

The special district will reportedly use $174 million in bonds to fund infrastructure, including a planned rail service station connecting the Orlando airport to an area near the park.
 
Yea, they've always carved up black neighborhoods for highways. In Miami, the Overtown area was decimated because of this. What I was referring to is using that existing land, so minimal land grabs would be necessary.


For the Vegas/LA line, they are working with the state to run it right down the middle of this highway. No land owners to appease.

Most places don't have this luxury, Florida, where Brightline built their initial line included. It worked for them there because the parent company owned the other company that owned that property and the rails (Florida East Coast) already. Otherwise, the price likely wouldn't have made it worth doing. That's basically in the middle of the desert where there isn't shit else at. That's not going to be the case in most states.
 
If Africa can have HST, no reason this shit hole country cannot have it.

Rail Projects Signal New Era Of High-Speed Travel​



iStock-1124263332.jpg
 
Groundbreaking ceremony held for high-speed train from Las Vegas to Los Angeles

Federal, transportation and union leaders gathered in Las Vegas Monday to drive spikes into a symbolic rail, marking the beginning of construction for a $12 billion high-speed rail line that will link Las Vegas and the Los Angeles area. “People have been dreaming of high-speed rail in America for decades,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said Monday ahead of the groundbreaking ceremony. “It’s really happening this time.”

BY MIRANDA NAZZARO
04/22/24


90f88d85-e0ea-44cd-ac9f-77bd96dc080e-large16x9_2404221131BRIGHTLINEGROUNDBREAKINGPT2_frame_22852.jpeg




 
New York Site Chosen to Build Las Vegas-California High-Speed Trains

By Matthew Impelli
Sep 09, 2024


…On Monday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, from New York, announced that Siemens Mobility will be building a new factory in upstate New York to construct high-speed trains. The 300,000-square-foot (28,000-square-meter) facility in the upstate village of Horseheads, will develop the American Pioneer 220 trains.

"Upstate New York is unmatched in rail car manufacturing capabilities, with a deep, proud history pioneering the rail industry and a community that is excited to get to work building America's future," the New York Democrat said in a statement.…

chuck-schumer.jpg

U.S. Senator, Chuck Schumer speaking at 2024 DNC
 
Groundbreaking ceremony held for high-speed train from Las Vegas to Los Angeles

Federal, transportation and union leaders gathered in Las Vegas Monday to drive spikes into a symbolic rail, marking the beginning of construction for a $12 billion high-speed rail line that will link Las Vegas and the Los Angeles area. “People have been dreaming of high-speed rail in America for decades,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said Monday ahead of the groundbreaking ceremony. “It’s really happening this time.”

BY MIRANDA NAZZARO
04/22/24


90f88d85-e0ea-44cd-ac9f-77bd96dc080e-large16x9_2404221131BRIGHTLINEGROUNDBREAKINGPT2_frame_22852.jpeg






I hope they get this thing built quickly and hopefully less than 20% over budget
 
why do we need high speed trains though? serious question; planes do their jobs; im just not sure why its needed...

Check this out




A short recap, in China, they have high speed rail. They have 3 viable options for medium to long range travel. As a result they are all competitive and affordable.

If the US got a reliable and viable rail option, buses and planes will be less crowded, fares would come down and there'd be less traffic on nearby roadways.
 
Check this out




A short recap, in China, they have high speed rail. They have 3 viable options for medium to long range travel. As a result they are all competitive and affordable.

If the US got a reliable and viable rail option, buses and planes will be less crowded, fates would come down and there'd be less traffic on nearby roadways.

that makes sense!!
 
I'm scared as fuck to get on a plane. But I'll would travel in a bullet train in a heartbeat:yes:

China did it right, they built dedicated rail lines above any potential hazardous intersections and without sharp curves.

As a result their trains can truly travel 200+, unlike here most "high speed" trains top out around 124, but constantly slow down or stop for crossings and curves.
 
Check this out




A short recap, in China, they have high speed rail. They have 3 viable options for medium to long range travel. As a result they are all competitive and affordable.

If the US got a reliable and viable rail option, buses and planes will be less crowded, fares would come down and there'd be less traffic on nearby roadways.

podcast was very informative; i listen to the whole thing!! im onboard...
 
I hope they get this thing built quickly and hopefully less than 20% over budget

It’s scheduled to be completed before 2028.

Los Angeles has the 2028 Summer Olympics, they want that train operational to get Olympic visitors from Las Vegas to LA. quickly.

The games will be in LA, the after parties will be in Las Vegas.

Also, when the LA/Vegas line is completed, they will immediately break ground to extend the line from Vegas to Salt Lake City, UT.

Why?

Cuz SLC has the 2032 Winter Olympics.

Again, the games are in SLC, the after parties will be in Vegas.

And….add to that Vegas has NFL, NHL and WNBA teams. MLB with the Oakland A’s opening season in Vegas is 2028. They recently blew up the Tropicana Resort/Casino and begin building the stadium on that site in 2025.

The NBA and MLS also plan to expand into Vegas in the 2030s.

They want to reduce passenger traffic on I-15 between California, Nevada and Utah.
 
Back
Top