7 ms·

The cost is going to be high, maybe $100 billion by the time the project is done. Even with the feds helping, that is a huge sum. Are we really going to get the

by larsbot 13y ago

The cost is going to be high, maybe $100 billion by the time the project is done. Even with the feds helping, that is a huge sum. Are we really going to get the most "bang" for our bucks? How often do people travel between LA and SF anyways? Improve BART, VTA light rail and CalTrain (in the Bay Area), and I suspect it will have a much larger positive impact on the lives of more people.

Anechoic 13y ago
* How often do people travel between LA and SF anyways?* According to the WSJ, 6 million people per year travel between LA & SF via air every year. I can't find highway numbers, but I gotta believe it's about the same order of magnitude, if not higher. Improve BART, VTA light rail and CalTrain (in the Bay Area), and I suspect it will have a much larger positive impact on the lives of more people. All of the above need to be done, both will have a positive impact of even more people.
- larsbot 13y ago
  Cal-HSRA predicts that by 2040 the train will reduce highway miles traveled by 10 million miles a day[1]. For comparison, in May 2013, there were 15.3 billion miles of travel just on California highways[2]. A reduction of 10 million miles a day would be about 2%, and assuming people continue to move into the state, the number of highway mile traveled per day will likely be quite a bit higher in 2040 than it is today. I don't know, it just doesn't seem like a very compelling argument to me. The state doesn't have unlimited resources. Spend the money where it will do the most good. [1] http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/newsroom/fact%20sheets/Good%20for%20the%20State,%20Good%20for%20the%20Environment.pdf http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/newsroom/fact%20sheets/Good%20for... [2] most recent month with available statistics, lots more data available here http://traffic-counts.dot.ca.gov/ http://traffic-counts.dot.ca.gov/
  - Anechoic 13y ago
    A reduction of 10 million miles a day would be about 2%, In highway terms, that's a significant reduction. A reduction on the order of 1-3% (it depends on a number of factors including number of lanes, and distance between exits) can get you from LOS F traffic (stop & go) to LOD C/D traffic (heavy, but moving traffic).
kposehn 13y ago
There would be a huge benefit from a high speed rail network in California, for sure. My main issue is the way they are going about it, which is a highly politicized construction process along with some really out-of-order prioritization. It would be much better to start with the low hanging fruit, like grade separation and electrification of Caltrain. That line would benefit immensely from some major upgrades, such as longer station platforms. To be fair, the most recent round of upgrades (ctc, quadruple track sections, new rolling stock) have been very well done.

by larsbot 13y ago

Anechoic 13y ago

* How often do people travel between LA and SF anyways?* According to the WSJ, 6 million people per year travel between LA & SF via air every year. I can't find highway numbers, but I gotta believe it's about the same order of magnitude, if not higher. Improve BART, VTA light rail and CalTrain (in the Bay Area), and I suspect it will have a much larger positive impact on the lives of more people. All of the above need to be done, both will have a positive impact of even more people.

larsbot 13y ago
Cal-HSRA predicts that by 2040 the train will reduce highway miles traveled by 10 million miles a day[1]. For comparison, in May 2013, there were 15.3 billion miles of travel just on California highways[2]. A reduction of 10 million miles a day would be about 2%, and assuming people continue to move into the state, the number of highway mile traveled per day will likely be quite a bit higher in 2040 than it is today. I don't know, it just doesn't seem like a very compelling argument to me. The state doesn't have unlimited resources. Spend the money where it will do the most good. [1] http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/newsroom/fact%20sheets/Good%20for%20the%20State,%20Good%20for%20the%20Environment.pdf http://www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/newsroom/fact%20sheets/Good%20for... [2] most recent month with available statistics, lots more data available here http://traffic-counts.dot.ca.gov/ http://traffic-counts.dot.ca.gov/
- Anechoic 13y ago
  A reduction of 10 million miles a day would be about 2%, In highway terms, that's a significant reduction. A reduction on the order of 1-3% (it depends on a number of factors including number of lanes, and distance between exits) can get you from LOS F traffic (stop & go) to LOD C/D traffic (heavy, but moving traffic).

kposehn 13y ago

There would be a huge benefit from a high speed rail network in California, for sure. My main issue is the way they are going about it, which is a highly politicized construction process along with some really out-of-order prioritization. It would be much better to start with the low hanging fruit, like grade separation and electrification of Caltrain. That line would benefit immensely from some major upgrades, such as longer station platforms. To be fair, the most recent round of upgrades (ctc, quadruple track sections, new rolling stock) have been very well done.