Our Evidence-Free Media
Back to the Peninsula for a moment (and if you look at this blog’s posts in recent months, you’ll see we’ve not spent much time there at all), where John Horgan of the San Mateo County Times is spewing more nonsense as part of his anti-rail crusade:
Caltrain, which relies on heavy subsidies from three counties for its day-to-day functions, is a relatively successful transit setup. Can you imagine what the taxpayers will be responsible for if high-speed rail ever graces this area and other parts of California?
Every unbiased analysis of HSR’s projected operating costs indicates deep and abiding deficits as far as the eye can see. Who will have to pick up those ongoing costs? We will.
This is complete nonsense. Horgan assumes that high speed rail is basically the same thing as Caltrain, which it’s not – by providing intercity rail, it serves a very different travel market. He asserts that “every unbiased analysis” of operating costs projects “deep and abiding deficits” – but I’ve never seen any analysis at all that projects HSR can’t cover its own costs. Horgan is simply making this up. Jayson Blair was fired by the New York Times for fabricating sources and quotes, yet the San Mateo County Times appears happy to let Horgan make up studies out of thin air and they won’t call him on it.
Horgan has been a leading anti-rail writer on the Peninsula for some time. As we know, his neighbors strongly support high speed rail, so he is not only making false statements in the pages of his newspaper, but his claims are rejected by his target audience. That doesn’t stop him from willfully ignoring the evidence from around the globe showing that HSR attains high ridership and doesn’t need operating subsidies – evidence from Russia, Taiwan, Spain and even the United States of America.
Now, we could also argue whether it’s wrong at all to subsidize transportation systems. We subsidize roads to a massive extent, and if we properly taxed the rich instead of letting them get off scot-free while our society collapses around us, we’d have plenty of money to go around. But even by the unnecessary “no operating subsidies” rule, HSR passes with flying colors.
I’ve given up expecting honest analysis from John Horgan. I do not expect him to see this post and suddenly feel bad about spinning lies and decide that he needs to be accurate and fair in his columns. But it is a legitimate question as to why the San Mateo County Times still pays him to write a column. Once upon a time in this country, newspapers held all their writers to basic journalistic standards, even their columnists. By letting Horgan lie to their readers, the San Mateo County Times is merely eroding its own credibility – and at a time when newspapers are struggling to survive, it’s not something they can afford to keep enabling.
Is there any current HSR system currently?
What are the most successful projects and least successful?
We need simple soundbites of success to pound into people’s minds.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
March 7th, 2011 at 11:28 pm
Acela runs an operational profit limited only by seat capacity. It (along with Northeast Regional) also holds 50% of BOS-NYC, 66% NYC-DC, and 90% PHL-NYC/PHL-DC air-rail markets despite being quite slow, averaging only 65-80mph. European HSR train sets run operational profits and for journey times comparable to SF-LA gets about 70% market share. There is also a tremendous amount of automobile traffic between LA-SD that will get taken up by CAHSR.
This guy is a jackass. But his kind of bullshit sells what few papers the withered, chain owned SMC Times still sells. Just like how the SF Chronicle sells papers peddling bullshit that feed people’s prejudices, and their own agenda instead of being a news source.
Also: Notice how these biased news organizations are losing money?
VBobier Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 4:51 pm
Hopefully people there would stop buying that newspaper, For a few months just to send a message, Cancel subscriptions and say why their canceling, Sooner or later they’d get the message or go under.
And who is picking up the ongoing costs of our highways and runways? We are!
It just blows my mind how some people pick on HSR for its costs, yet completely ignore that highways and runways cost taxpayers money too!!!
Paulus Magnus Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 12:00 am
User fee mythology undercuts highway costs.
Literally millions and millions of Americans in their work place and in their living communities use FREE transportation every day. It has a cost which is shared by all. And the expense for the free transportation is gladly shared and happily subsidized by ALL who use it. The FREE transportation shared by all goes by the name of — elevators.
How we all share in the use of our transportation systems, and pay for them, and yes even subsidize them is the ongoing challenge we all face.
“as far as the eye can see”
After the nose (“HSR doesn’t pass the smell test”), now it’s the eyes.
It seems sensory organs are on their way to replacing brains.
“but I’ve never seen any analysis at all that projects HSR can’t cover its own costs. “, is what Robert wrote here.
Come on Robert, who are you kidding. You did read the Reason Report I understood.
http://reason.org/news/show/1003045.html
The executive summary states:
And while the Rail Authority forecasts between 65 and 96 million intercity riders by 2030, the due diligence report finds these projections are dramatically inflated. After compiling numerous ridership studies previously conducted for California rail systems, the study demonstrates the state can expect 23 million to 31 million riders a year in 2030.
Any failure to meet the Rail Authority’s lofty ridership projections would force ticket-price increases, further cutting ridership, or require taxpayer subsidies to cover the financial shortfall, adding to future budget deficits. The due diligence report finds “the San Francisco-Los Angeles line alone by 2030 would suffer annual financial losses of up to $4.17 billion.”
Your constant debunking of that report, yet over the last 2 to 3 years now, so many of their projections are becoming reality.
Look at the cost estimates. Authority said $33 billion back in 2008, now we see we are up to $65 billion. Authority claimed over 100 million riders, now they are down to $43 million, and still they refuse to release new ridership numbers.
Horgan has it right.
MGimbel Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 7:12 am
Oh yes, because anything done by the Reason Foundation has to be factually correct…
joe Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 7:29 am
“Reason Foundation advances a free society by developing, applying, and promoting libertarian principles, including individual liberty, free markets, and the rule of law.”
HSR is a public lead project, by definition, HSR must fail.
Since HSR hasn’t begun, how can negative cost and ridership predictions be correct?
Why has public lead HSR not failed in Japan, China, Spain, Russia, France? What is the inherently inferior with the Unitied States?
Nathanael Reply:
March 10th, 2011 at 2:41 am
The Orwellian-named “Reason” Foundation are well known to be funded by the Koch Brothers and other fossil fuel interests.
Alex M. Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:49 am
Money, money, money. Is that all you care about? HSR isn’t cheap, but neither are our other forms of transportation (in the long run, they’re more expensive). Cars aren’t going to be enough in the future. We need trains, and HSR will be profitable. Trust me, when gas is $5.50 per gallon see how the public reacts when you tell them that HSR is “too expensive.”
Arthur Dent Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:34 am
The public’s reaction on “too expensive” depends on the order of things. Will the HSRA release their latest cost estimates and do a simple rerun of the ridership models before $5.50 is hit? The Authority has an incentive to hide information and delay.
Alon Levy Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 12:56 pm
The due diligence report said the budget would run over from $30 to $80. In real terms, it may or may not have run over to about $45; they’re trying to deal with the scope creep forcing els in the Central Valley right now.
High gas prices will not end anti-rail gerrymandering. The only thing that can end that is these clowns utterly discrediting themselves. That will happen eventually but before we get there, expect the straw arguments to get hairier and hairer. Of course gas prices will not rise in a straight line but there will be peaks and troughs and at every trough, the gas guzzlers will grin and say “told you so” while hoping that nobody will notice how flawed their arguments are. We’ll be seeing calls to cut gas taxes and even to outright subsidise gas.
I’m not worried that these arguments won’t bite the dust in the end. I am worried that they will waste so much time that there won’t be an alternative in place the day gas prices really start to hurt badly.
joe Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 7:33 am
…Waste time and hurt everyone.
I never bought and read as many newspapers as when I lived in SF and commuted south on Caltrain. Who is their readership?
How many drivers read a newspaper going to work? Or surf the web in traffic? If this newspaper conglomerate had any sense, they’d figure out public/mass transit riders are readers, drivers are not.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 12:02 pm
A disturbingly high number of them I suspect. I know one lady who has even crocheted while driving.
joe Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 8:27 pm
I saw a guy playing a flute with two hands while reading sheet music and driving on 280 S near Colma in thick traffic circa 2000.
Public transit is the newspaper’s best friend. If the bay area had better mass transit, the newspapers would have more eyeballs and circulation.
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 8:35 pm
No bullshit here, but I noticed a guy jerking off in his car once on the freeway. He was lucky it was me who noticed because most people would have called the police, haha. He had a jacket over his lap and it was blindingly obvious that he was pumping away underneath.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
Dya at least flash your high beams at Syn?
We should remind our critical readers [e.g. m brown] that the scenarios on which the Reason foundation report predicts there to be huge shortfalls are those on which there is no Federal funding for construction. Since there are already billions of Federal dollars dedicated, these no longer apply.
[Just as a reminder - the Reason report only shows that HSR wouldn't cover its operating cost because it assumes a high level of service (matching the CHSRA ridership estimate) but a low level ridership. Running mostly empty trains every 15 minutes is, of course, is not something any HSR operator would do.]
In reading the numerous articles on HSR, it seems to me that the term “subsidy” is used very inconsistently. There’s two ways to define a subsidy in terms of HSR operations/maintenance costs: 1) Does the subsidy cover those operations/mainteance costs? or 2) Does it also cover the pay back of the capital costs that went into building the HSR infrastrure? In the first case, almost all HSR systems throughout the world don’t require that kind of subsidy. That is, they make enough revenue from the farebox that the government doesn’t have to “subsidize” its operations/maintenance costs. In many cases, like in France, the TGV’s profits go to subsidize other parts of SNCF’s conventional network. Eurostar is a private company and posted profits last year, likewise with Japan’s private HSR companies. Even ACELA posted a profit from that standpoint. When it comes to point (2) on the other hand, I only know of two HSR systems that can boast that claim…the Tokyo to Osaka line and Paris to Lyon line. They repaid their initial capital loans. Many HSR critics like to use the second point as a argument; however, they’re being rather hypocritical. Very few transportation projects actually pay back their initial capital costs. Do roads or freeways pay back their initial capital costs? Unless its a tollroad, that’s very hard to track or determine. Likewise with airports, landing fees charged to passengers didn’t come about till the mid-70′s. But I don’t ever see anyone criticizing a new airport runway expansion or new freeway because the project won’t pay for itself??
synonymouse Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:33 am
Only the most die-hard hsr foamer believes the CHSRA will not require an operating subsidy. All the average voter and taxpayer has to do is take a look at BART or Amtrak. No more than one can imagine a privatized BART can one imagine the CHSRA under private operation. The patronage machine unions will simply not permit it. My prediction is that the most militant union, the TWU, will get it and will promptly go out on strike. The machine will intervene, as with BART, claiming public emergency, and management will cave. More red ink.
And what will happen to top speeds after a wreck due to deferred or shoddy maintenance. It will be cut back to save on wear and tear. So much for competitiveness. Do you think the freight railroads will be interested in buying this thing when the state loses interest? It is not Conrail. The NdeM electrification debacle provide a worst case scenariol for the CHSRA.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:44 am
Amtrak’s high speed rail system makes a profit. CAHSR is being built in a market even more favorable to high speed rail than the NEC (the NEC has a higher population, but we have an absurdly higher number of trips). Therefore, the eminently reasonable supposition is that CAHSR will run an operational profit.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:47 am
Amtrak makes money on corridors where the speed is competitive with driving.
synonymouse Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:52 am
The hsr has to be competitive with airlines. Dump the detour.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:57 am
It is competitive with airlines except for people who live a the airport and want to go to an airport hotel at the other end of their trip.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:06 am
Including pre-board time and time taken to connect to the city center, it is time-competitive. It should also be considered that, on a strict “time in air vs time on rails” comparison, it is almost directly comparable to Amtrak on the NYC-DC corridor (approximately 90 minute flights vs 2 hours 50 minutes on Acela and 3:10-3:30 on NE Regional), which holds two-thirds of the air-rail market share. Therefore, we can reasonably conclude that CAHSR will divert at least a majority, and most likely a supermajority, of passengers from the SF-LA air corridor.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:39 am
America’s Finest Transportation Planning Professionals are working as hard as they can to maximize “pre-board time” for CHSR. Level the playing field!
In your run of the mill advanced industrialised first world democracy, you can enter a train station (note: train station, not “high speed rail station” entirely separate from and unequal to commuter rail station”) from any of a dozen access points all along the (lengthy) length of the platform, walk directly, without forced detours, onto the platform from which your train is known (weeks or months in advance) to depart from, carrying your ticket in your pocket (either a printed machine-readable piece of paper or machine-readable document on your mobile phone), and wait briefly on the utilitarian but mostly rain-roofed platform for your train to arrive.
The plan in California, per America’s Finest Transportation Planning Professionals, is, of course, the exact opposite. First, navigate to the sole (or one of two) Secured Access Points to the High Speed Station Complex. After passing through security checkpoints and filing through fare barriers, operated by single purpose “smart” cards sole-sourced from a defense contractor such as Cubic, Inc, ride 30 feet into the air to arrive at the Secured Passenger Waiting Concourse Area. Moments before the train is due to arrive, the departure platform (Need To Know Information) will be announced. At this point you may proceed another 20 feet vertically to arrive at the Dedicated High Speed Train Platforms. Remember to have the High Speed Train wait extra time for straggling passengers to finally file their way up from the Secured Concourse Level via the strategically limited Vertical Circulation Amenities.
Saving 5 minutes of trip time on each end via non-idiotic, human-focussed station design is trivial — and saves hundreds of millions of dollars of construction cost. Making up 10 minutes by running trains heroically faster, on the other hand, costs billions more to construct and operate, driving up energy and equipment and right of way costs.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:43 am
http://caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2010/10/station-design-101.html
Paulus Magnus Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:58 am
Which is certainly something that ought to be avoided and changed and deserving of our advocacy for the prevention of such problems.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:15 pm
In your run of the mill advanced industrialised first world democracy, …..
That’s the way it works in the US too with some notable exceptions which have serious, well known, design flaws.
thatbruce Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:55 pm
The problem is that the CAHSRA’s design firms seem to be intent on imitating examples with serious, well known, design flaws, at least as far as station design goes.
Richard does exaggerate somewhat; for instance only allowing people to enter the platform area mere moments before the train arrives isn’t done on any other rail-based operation that I’m aware of, HSR, secured or otherwise. But, all the other obstacles in the way would start impacting the traveller’s end-to-end time, even if you generously limited the measurement of such from station outside to station outside.
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 4:54 pm
Amtrak tries to do this. Technically you are only allowed to wait on the platform 10 or 15 minutes early, but this cannot be enforced at every station. I once arrived 30 minutes early for a Surfliner. The security guard said I had to wait in the lobby. I simply went over to a Metrolink platform and she lost sight of me. But the point is that they don’t want you on the platform.
They REALLY enforce this at San Diego station. They even make you wait in line. How many doors are there on a train again? I refused to wait in line like a cow waiting for slaughter.
quashlo Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 5:15 pm
Actually, China’s railway network, including CRH, does this very thing. It’s actually an excellent example of how to make accessing stations / platforms as inconvenient as possible. First you line-up to purchase your tickets, then you line-up to pass through security, then you wait in the concourse with hundreds of other people, then you line-up to enter the platforms. It’s just like the airport…
thatbruce Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 5:43 pm
@quashlo:
Do they release the passengers onto the platform ‘moments’ before a train arrives, requiring that the train wait for passengers to be funneled onto the platform as Richard outlines, or ‘minutes’ before as per Spokker’s example, where passengers are on the platform ready to board the train as it arrives?
Additionally, is this at all stations, or just the terminal stations?
quashlo Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 6:25 pm
Minutes, of course. Anything less is impractical, especially given the size and limited access of many of their stations. There’s usually only one or two platform access points… It’s a chore just getting to / from the train, and I wasn’t even hauling any baggage.
This was standard procedure at any suburban or intercity station I’ve visited in China, although there’s also bag checks in some of their subway systems (e.g., Beijing).
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 8:01 pm
Yet another reason to ignore China’s HSR plans. They are really fucking up right now.
Alon Levy Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 8:05 pm
When I took the trains in China (not high-speed, but still), there was security theater, sure. It took less than 5 minutes.
If you’re trying to find incompetence comparable to that of American transportation planners, you won’t find it in China. You’ll find some in Britain and some in Canada, but that’s about it. You might as well try to find a developed country with worse health care than the US.
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 8:07 pm
Security shouldn’t take any minutes.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 8:13 pm
One of the solutions, for the anxious, it to put waiting rooms on the platform.
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 8:17 pm
Why would you put waiting rooms on the platform and what does it have to do with anxious people?
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:23 pm
Why would you want to be on the platform more than a few minutes before the trains arrives. It’s cold in the winter, hot in the summer. The waiting room or the bar or the coffeeshop or whatever else is in the station is much more pleasant. There are anxious people who have to loiter on the platform, give ‘em a waiting room. Relatively common here in the East. Keeps the weather out of the escalators, stairs and the passengers who have the urge to anxiously loiter on the platform.
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:33 pm
There is nothing like standing topside at Union Station on a cool night, watching the cars go by on the 101 and admiring the Downtown LA skyline while waiting for your train.
Andy M. Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 1:01 am
In Spain you are required to pass through a baggage check, but this is just a scanner to drop your bag on and no patting down or anything. This is not just HSR but also at many conventional stations served by long distance trains, but not with total consistency. Because these machines are not manned around the clock there may be certain times that you cannot access the platform, but this is purely because of the security. They normally make sure that somebody is at the machine at least 15 minutes before the train arrives.
Alon Levy Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 2:06 am
In the East, the way it works at major stations is, you’re only told the platform number 5 or so minutes in advance, after which you have to scramble in single file to the platform, show your tickets to a station agent, board the train somewhere, and find a seat. At the minor stations, it works roughly like how it should work, i.e. there’s open access to the platforms; but then yo need to show tickets to conductors as you board.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 9:39 am
Only in Penn Station New York. Stand at the bottom of the stairs under the main arrival/departure board so you can see the announcement and maybe hear it. Use the stairs on the LIRR level.
jim Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 11:01 am
Platform assignments should be stable. They are on Deutsche Bahn. The 15:17 to Karlsruhe leaves from platform 9. It left from platform 9 yesterday; it will leave from platform 9 tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, the day after that, to the last syllable of recorded time, or at least until there is no longer a 15:17 to Karlsruhe. After all, the set of platform assignments used today worked. Why change them? Why reassign trains on the fly? You might get it wrong. It ain’t broke; don’t fix it.
Alon Levy Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 3:13 pm
If I remember correctly, you need to file into the platform at 30th Street Station, too.
David Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 4:30 pm
I took the Wolverine service from Chicago’s Union Station several times and they would have you line up inside the waiting area, which was not remotely big enough, so you would snake around the inside of the station blocking passageways and generally being uncomfortable. They would ID everyone as they walked through the gate. Completely insane.
Caltrain doesn’t let you wait on the platform in San Francisco either. Off peak, anyway, I don’t know about during the regular commute.
I have never seen this kind of nonsense anywhere else in the world.
Spokker Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 5:04 pm
It isn’t allowed during peak commute either.
Listen, we need to pay people to open those doors. It’s a jobs program.
Look, all I can say is that it’s a big problem for me. Lines and security make it less likely I’ll take the train. When I was in San Diego I did not wait in line. I walked around the building a couple times and then I boarded after everyone else did. If I am forced to wait in line, it feels like an airport.
Alex M. Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 6:22 pm
Wow, I really hope it won’t be like that.
quashlo Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:39 pm
Well, I don’t think we need to start any China-bashing here… My intention with mentioning that was just to show that there is precedent for designing stations the way Richard described. His descriptions are obviously exaggerated somewhat, but I don’t think it’s too far-fetched from what’s actually out there right now in China. At least in Chinese railway planners’ minds, monumental railports are the best way to handle crowds. I don’t agree, and after experiencing turn-up-and-go HSR in Japan (with faregates, mind you), I find this airport-style approach appalling. But if you don’t know much about rail travel in China, you can formulate your own judgments:
http://www.56.com/u61/v_NTc5MDg5Nzg.html
This is a NHK documentary about New Year’s train travel in China. Unfortunately, the audio’s all in Japanese, but just the visuals are an eye-opener if you don’t know what the situation is like over there. Of course, we will never have crowds like this…
Andre Peretti Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:26 am
“a wreck due to deferred or shoddy maintenance”
HSR maintenance has to follow very strict procedures, like for airplanes. Not following them would be criminal, and I don’t imagine anybody taking the risk.
The TWU is certainly not more militant than the famously strike-prone French unions who, whatever their excesses, never put passengers’ lives in danger. I don’t expect their American counterparts to act less responsibly.
synonymouse Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Maintenance in Calfornia can be downright 3rd world. Muni broke down again this am.
One of our more noxious local pols introduced a bill requiring employers to hire stoners. Before y’all go apoplectic that operators would be exempt remember all it would take is a tame judge to find that exclusion “discriminatory” and management would have to “accommodate”. Nothing like an already overcompensated station agent nodding out.
Alternatives to mass transit rail are not standing still. Electric cars obviate the air pollution argument and it is just a matter of time before automated or robotic highway technologies come down the pike, literally. The hsr will need all the speed and the shortest route possible to somewhat competitive and justify those subsidies. Go TRAC.
J. Wong Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 1:18 pm
You really are from another reality! Guess what? The courts have already ruled that it is not discriminatory to have physical and performance requirements for jobs such as operators.
synonymouse Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 1:53 pm
Not too long ago courts ruled in favor of Jim Crow. All it takes is one compliant judge.
Packing the courts is the way to run a machine.
J. Wong Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:21 pm
No, it takes more than one “compliant” judge since judges do get overruled, you know. And where is your evidence that the courts have been packed? If anything, they have been packed by Republicans not Democrats. How do you think Republican judges would rule?
synonymouse Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:33 pm
The ninth circuit court of appeals. I rest my case.
J. Wong Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
SCOTUS. I rest my case.
bleh Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
There’s the myth that the ninth circuit court is full of clowns coming up with ridiculous judgements.
The ninth circuit court doesn’t get overruled more often than the other ones, it’s just that the ninth circuit is huge.
Many people->many cases->many decisions->high share of SCOTUS appeals.
But hey, you’re probably convinced that the supreme court is packed with Chinese islamofascist spies working for PB, so feel free to keep going.
VBobier Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:06 pm
I suppose You have money for the electric car and to change the custom batteries they require? I say custom as there is no standard for size, shape or even on how to charge the batteries yet, As much as I like electric cars, I can not buy one and I doubt I’d ever be given one either.
Automated or robotic highways? Bah humbug, These will be more expensive than what’s around now, You’ve been watching too much iRobot Me thinks.
synonymouse Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 3:34 pm
The same people who have plenty of dough to buy the newest I-stuff will buy electric cars. That’s supposed to save the consumer economy.
Al Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 6:39 pm
Electric cars are about 100x as expensive as the newest I-stuff.
VBobier Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
But then Synonymouse must be made of money…
I’v gotta be honest I stopped reading Horgans article after only reading a few sentences, from their I knew it was going to be stupid. I knew it wasn’t worth my attention.
dave Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:21 am
What I’ve learned is that A Nimby will be a Nimby and a Denier, a Deniar. You can never win, all you can do is put real information out their and hope people have the smarts to come up with a accurate conclusion, the one the makes sense. But if you want to play a tune to the Morris Browns out their, forget that. It’s a waste of time, keyboard strokes and life just reading what they say.
While this article doesn’t speak to high speed rail, it does illustrate the growing discrepancy between perception and reality in the American landscape. And in large part, we can blame a media establishment that no longer feels the need to provide information or views that are based in facts. Journalism is now about spouting your worldview, facts or reality be damned. And we can see the real and negative effects from this style of careless and dangerous reporting. We have an under-informed populace that believe myths to be facts and rumors to be real.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/feb/27/republican-attack-unions-class-wisconsin
In a new 21 page document titled
Big Trouble for California’s $66 Billion Dollar Train, a through finanacial analysis of this monster is presented.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/50305033
The credentials of the Authors are without question. This project must be stopped and stopped soon.
J. Wong Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
These are the same “impeccable” authors who have already been discredited as biased in their previous report.
synonymouse Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:21 pm
I flashed thru this document and will have to go back and read it carefully. It is certainly damning. Probably the worst criticism is that guaranteed return to private investors will lead to virtually no cost controls. The unions will go berserk.
The CHSRA will have to rebut these claims one by one in detail. I don’t see how the pols could ignore this, especially when they have to vote to cut welfare programs.
Peter Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:23 pm
Dude. This whole series of articles is written by people who live half a mile from the tracks or so. What the hell do you expect them to say?
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:58 pm
If they are a half mile from the tracks they won’t even know when a train is passing through.
joe Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:06 pm
The report is hilarious.
It’s not scholarly at all. It is glib and silly; “From the Authors of”, yeah that’s how a fictional hollywood movie trailer opens.
The section titles are over the top funny and sensational.
But her’s what damning;
The CC-HSR explanation for why they oppose HSR – NIMBYism
20 foot high wall.
200 trains a day on steel wheels (ha ha)
120 MPG
In… the heart of our neighborhoods.
Thousands of trees eliminated
years of dirt, dust and noise
Wow – stop it now !! Except none of their objections are economic or relevant to anyone not sitting next to the existing 100+ year old right of way.
“The current plan for High Speed Rail on the Peninsula calls for a 20-foot high wall, with another 20 feet of wires stretched overhead, bearing 200 trains a day, on steel wheels, running at speeds of up to 120 miles per hour through the heart of our neighborhoods. Thousands of trees would be eliminated. Years of construction, dirt, dust, and noise would be required. If the current plan goes forward, local businesses and residents stand to lose – financially, aesthetically, and in quality of life. There are better ways to build a train! We need to make sure it gets done right, which means we need to increase our local community power.”
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:33 pm
“CHSRA substitutes illusions for hard reality.^2″
Oh good, the assertion that the CHSRA is a magician is sourced. Quite damning I say.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:38 pm
Curious–the unnamed “they” (I skimmed through this thing, and didn’t see any names) don’t provided ideas on how to “build the system right” or better (“they” need to look at Clem’s posts and blog, and link or quote if they are even partially serious), nor do “they” mention the problems of oil dependency (which will require local transit and HSR), the problems of which were predicted here and elsewhere as coming back two years ago at about this time.
I was taught long ago that if you are going to criticize something, you had better have a superior alternative. I don’t see that here, just complaining and fear that the taxpayers will have to pay the construction bonds (so what else is new?), and fear of potential operating losses (maybe, more likely not based on other experience in the real world, including the Acela). There is also no mention at all of the costs of the highway system, which have been discussed here at some length.
I hope we have enough time to outlast the dinosaurs.
Dan S. Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 5:35 pm
Isn’t it true you could just substitute Caltrain for HSR in that argument and thereby deflect all their vitriol from CAHSR to their own local Caltrain system. Caltrain’s plan for the future involves eliminating grade crossings and electrification too. Okay, you’d have to change 200 trains a day to 100 trains a day, but no big diff. These guys aren’t anti-HSR, they are totally anti-rail. I look forward to challenging this attitude for the coming decades! (I also have a feeling we can outlast them.)
VBobier Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 1:55 pm
“You and Whose Army?” Comes to mind, It isn’t going to be stopped, Morris Brown. I only see one monster here, One who likes $5.00 a gallon gas and I’ve seen gas stations where It’s close to that now, Dispute that piece of reality, If You dare:
$5.00 a gallon has arrived(YouTube video on site too)
$5 a Gallon Gas on Way, Ex-Big Oil Exec Says
And It’s not isolated, Here’s a Google search on the subject of $5.00 a gallon gasoline in California, Will people ride HSR if It goes where they need to go to? I say hell Yes they will and It’s happened elsewhere in the world, Cars will still be used, Just not as much. Unless You’re an insane idiot, Oil is not unlimited, It’s a finite resource, All the easy places to drill have been found(Except for Palins head, But It’s known to be empty of any usable oil already), Now the areas the oil industry is looking in is very risky and expensive to boot, Trains built the USA, Not automobiles, Cars are nice and have their place and do help, But their not cheap to maintain and neither are the highly subsidized roads that they require, paved roads require Concrete or Asphalt, heavy duty machinery and qualified people and all that has a cost and It’s not nothing or free by any means. I have a real need for an automobile(unlike some), As I’m mostly immobile without one, As I don’t see Myself bringing food home by a dial a ride bus(which wanders all over the place here in the Desert) or going to My relatives place, as dial a ride doesn’t go between the Barstow area and the Victorville area and could get Me stuck out in open without any shelter.
synonymouse Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
Enough with the $5.00 gas thang. Why do you think the Saudi are opening the valves – they don’t want anybody to get too committed to alternatives to their cheap oil Why would do this if they knew there weren’t any effective alternatives. There are.
Eric M Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:53 pm
Wake up!!! and rising!
political_incorrectness Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 3:20 pm
They? Really? What proof of there is that? They do not care as long as the money keeps coming. Why are the oil speculators not looking into the Saudi’s opening the valves? Why is oil continuing to rise? Either way, why keep playing a game with oil speculation when we can have alternatives that are less or non-oil dependent?
Andre Peretti Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 4:02 pm
The Saudi have just signed a multi-billion deal with Areva for nuclear and solar power plants. Their declared aim is to cut oil dependence by 8% yearly until it reaches zero.
They are also investing on HSR (Haramain project) and other rail lines. They calculate that decreasing home consumption will free up more oil for export and help finance the investments.
Isn’t it funny to think that American drivers are actually financing Saudi rail?
D. P. Lubic Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 4:54 pm
Gasoline is up to $3.39 in Virginia, $3.59 in West Virginia. Diesel fuel at $3.99. Very rapid rises, 40 cents in two weeks.
YESonHSR Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 6:37 pm
And yet all this screaming about raising the gas tax even a whopping 5 or 10 cents for investment…child like mindset in this nation
wu ming Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 12:16 am
if the saudis had the ability to affect the price of oil with production increases, they would not have this flat production for the past decade.
Aaron Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:40 pm
The last time I was in Japan, gas was upwards of $6.00 per gallon, it took us approximately 3 hours to get from one airport to the next in a bus, traffic was a nightmare, and my Shinkansen ticket for about 45 minutes of travel was around $200 (American). You add this on top of the HSRA consistent failure to fill in the data gaps an you can guarantee yourself $10.00 per gallon gas (need to add transportation tax to cover bond debts and construction costs of the HSR), roads that fail, hopefully no bridges fail, and a fantastic ride on Amtrak from Borden to Corcoran. As other states turn the money away and start facing the problems they have that are here and now, here is California absorbing all the leftovers thinking we can make good use of it. The best part of it all is we have a $300,000 per year CEO running the show with a fleet of hundreds of consultants just salivating=the perfect scenario for WASTE!
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:52 pm
You will have to raise the gas tax to fix roads anyway, with or without HSR.
Alon Levy Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:33 pm
It’s a $43 billion project, and you’re worried that the CEO makes $300,000 a year? Really?
Dan S. Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 12:13 am
Wow, HSR in CA will *guarantee* me $10 per gallon gas? Thanks for warning me, Aaron. And I’m not really even getting HSR in CA, I’m only getting an Amtrak ride between two cities I’ve barely ever heard of? Dang, why aren’t more people listening to you? This is serious!
Fact check, anyone?
A ticket from Tokyo to Osaka on the most heavily used high-speed rail line in the world costs 14050 yen or about $170 USD for the fastest train and takes 2 hrs 35 mins. They can and do price it higher than plane travel because it is more popular. The line runs near capacity with 16-car trains with 1300 seats with, e.g., 11 trains departing Tokyo for Osaka between 8 and 9 AM. In fact, this line accounts for over 80% of combined air/rail travel between these two cities. And it accounts for 85% of JR Central’s operating revenues, even though it is only 28% of their entire operating kilometers. That’s $11 billion dollars in revenues (for 2009) from a single HSR line.
What a waste indeed.
Of course the private sector doesn’t waste money at all because of the profit motive, and the high-paid CEO’s that don’t work for the government are completely different.
Another fun fact: Did you know that the Tokkaido Shinkansen completely paid off its initial construction costs in 12 years?
tony d. Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 2:59 pm
$66 billion (if it wasn’t false) would still be cheaper than the $100 billion for road and airport expansion.
Sorry Morris, but this train has left the station and isn’t coming back. To bad for you, now go to sleep.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 3:39 pm
The 100 billion isn’t expressed as year-of-expenditure either.
joe Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:07 pm
Or the fact it costs me 0.50 a mile to operate a vehicle that uses these awesome – subsidized freeways.
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:25 pm
50 cents? But I got a great deal on a used car I mean it only turns left and doesn’t have a backseat but I definitely pay less than 50 cents to operate this here vehicle. ONLY MORONS PAY 50 CENTS PER MILE now great bargain hunters like Me~
D. P. Lubic Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 12:14 am
Your comment reminds me of a car I used to own, which turned into a politician–specifically, a Republican. The oil lobby liked it because it took a can of oil with every tank of gas (worn valve seals), the tobacco lobby liked it because it smoked, and a bad strut cap made it knock every time I turned left!
And it was painted red, too!
No Fortunate Son Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
The “study” is garbage.
It is nothing but the anonymous assemblage of frothing community activists.
This isn’t even a Wendell “I have a Correspondence Course MBA” Cox Koch funded hit piece, but the rantings of backwards locals.
Elsewhere in the world, where HSR runs an operational profit, is capital replacement and rehab covered by the operational budget? Or when major capital rehab is needed, does governement need to appropriate more money?
Andre Peretti Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 7:18 pm
It’s not easy to calculate in Europe as rail operator and track owner are now different entities since rail is deregulated. The Paris-Lyon line was created when SNCF still owned track and trains. It was financed with 10-years bonds and was profitable enough to pay them off ahead of time.
Now, things are different. RFF is the state-owned company which builds and maintains the tracks. SNCF and other companies pay RFF a toll. In 2010 SNCF paid around €11 billion ($15bn) in tolls, representing 33% of the farebox.
It’s difficult to say whether TGV lines built after Paris-Lyon pay for their construction cost because HSR is only a part of the network and no separate figures are available for it. RFF currently has a €8bn deficit which is probably due to regional unprofitable lines.
Future TGV lines will be PPP. The winning bidder will receive a fixed amount and collect the tolls for a duration of 44 years. Any cost overrun or delay will be the private company’s concern.
House Majority Whip McCarthy: California high-speed rail plan doesn’t make grade
http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/03/08/2104345/house-majority-whip-mccarthy-california.html
WASHINGTON — House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday denounced California’s current high-speed rail plans, further clouding the political future of an ambitious project running through his own Central Valley hometown.
A fourth-generation Bakersfield native, McCarthy said Tuesday that California and the federal government would both be wise to avoid spending billions of dollars on a train he predicted would become a money sink.
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 8:44 pm
Notice: If you reply, based on past experience, Mr. Brown is not likely to respond. However, you might as well respond on the Miami Herald’s web site, because Brown did not offer any comments of his own. It is, at best, another piece of spam.
YesonHSR Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:00 pm
WHHOOO cares Brown!! Big woop..a Repub follows his marching orders ..even if the HSR is in his district..that BTW Voted FOR Prop1A ..The state is big and Blue so it does not make a hill of beans what he thinks…HSR will be built!!
Jack Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
Eh, If we didn’t have Morris here to stir up trouble it wouldn’t be nearly as fun. The fact that he holds to his belief he can stop this train from happening is so delusional I laugh every time I see one of his posts. I wonder if he’ll go apocalyptic when CA get’s 2billion from the Florida funds.
Allow me to demonstrate how to post with an example.
So it looks like we’ve got a little Rick Scott of our own. House Majority Whip McCarthy wants to reject money for high speed rail for similar reasons.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/03/08/2104345/house-majority-whip-mccarthy-california.html
“A fourth-generation Bakersfield native, McCarthy said Tuesday that California and the federal government would both be wise to avoid spending billions of dollars on a train he predicted would become a money sink.”
As the project becomes closer and closer to breaking ground, opposition is become more intense and numerous (even if we are just seeing opinion pieces from Reason and John Horgan over and over again). The difference between California and Florida seems to be that we already have some money to break ground, while Florida’s construction was hinging on that $2.4 billion.
I would like to know McCarthy’s stance on widening SR-99.
So to recap, you post a short intro to the article you want to highlight. There is no need to even copy/paste the banner headline. Then post the link. Then post a short snippet. Then expand on your thoughts about the article. You don’t even have to post much. Maybe a one liner. Just something other than the article itself.
This session of posting 101 is now complete. Your homework, Morris, is to post five good posts and say seven Hail Mary’s.
Jack Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 9:09 pm
*applauds*
From the Washington Post — an article looking at the new census and what is says about California:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/08/AR2011030805866.html?hpid=topnews
Robert continually trumpets, the population explosion coming our way demands HSR.
But what we see is:
“For the first time since it achieved statehood, California will not gain even a single congressional seat as a result of the census. In contrast, Texas, with a population of 25 million, will pick up four new House seats. “
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:04 pm
See, it’s not so hard to add a comment.
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:21 pm
By the way, hopefully we educate some of those Mexicans so they can someday afford to ride the high speed trains.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 10:30 pm
Just because California won’t be getting any new Congressional Districts doesn’t mean the population isn’t growing. It just means that the population didn’t grow fast enough to get another district.
Spokker Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:32 pm
It’s a distortion. A better article: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0309-census-20110308,0,1596789.story
“California grew by 3.4 million people in the last decade, a rate that was on par with the national average.”
PeakVT Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:06 pm
But what we see is:
… that Morris Brown can’t figure out that other states might grow faster than California. Duh.
Question about the ridership presentation here: http://www.calhsr.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/2011_01_10_Ridership_Peer_Review_first_meeting.pdf
On page 32 there is a comparison between the California system and the Paris system that looks good on paper. It shows the sizes of each city and the ridership of both systems. It certainly makes me hopeful that ridership predictions aren’t out of this world.
So what am I missing? Are these diagrams actually nonsense?
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:15 pm
Yes. It’s the usual crack-smoking rent-seeking fraud from systematically mendacious consultants who are paid to say whatever it takes to justify fraudulent projects.
Just for starters, draw a bubble representing “greater LA” which is clearly much bigger and more important than “Madrid” or “Paris”. (In the same way that “San Jose” is more important than “San Francisco” because the population is larger, never mind the density or total lack of transit accessibility.)
Then draw a bubble representing “Bay Area” and compare that to “Barcelona”. Clearly bigger, right? Right! Therefore, everything is OK.
(Just don’t ask about how the “Bay Area” metro subway system is doing, or how the “Bay Area” regional rail network is doing compared to Barcelona’s, or how many hours on average is takes the “19.0 million” of “Greater LA” to reach LA Union Station compared to the paltry measly “10.5 million” of “Paris Region” getting to the Gare de Lyon.)
A classic case of how to lie with statistics: illustrate numbers that are of nearly no relevance using big bright red circles; never even mention numbers that have critical relevance to potential public transportation ridership from a CBD station– ie actual present day regional ridership to the CBD by the actual present day population.
They’re lying through their teeth and they know it. And that’s exactly what they’re paid to do. You can’t possibly imagine Cambridge Systematics and friends would continue to land other megaproject “study” work if they failed to consistently deliver the desired goods, do you?
Donk Reply:
March 8th, 2011 at 11:44 pm
Sure but the comparison is still meaningful enough to get the numbers in the right ballpark.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 12:00 am
OK. How about this fun fact:
* Zürich population: 2% of “Greater Los Angeles”
* Number of passengers passing through one single station in Zürich > entire LA rail network ridership!!!
Or, alternately you can ignore such niggardly facts on the ground and instead close your eyes and use CHSRA Peer Review Deliver The Answer The Client Is Paying To Hear Logic:
* Population of Alaska > population of Lyon
THEREFORE
* HSR ridership to and from Wasilla should be “in the ballpark” of Paris-Lyon.
Alon Levy Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 12:14 am
Okay, let’s actually compare regional rail trip times from the endpoints of the lines to the nearest HSR station.
Paris:
Cergy – Gare de Lyon: 0:54
Saint Remy – Gare de Lyon: 1:02
Versailles Rive Gauche – Gare de Lyon: 0:55
Pontoise – Gare de Lyon: 1:01
Creil – Gare de Lyon: 1:22
Los Angeles (some lines truncated due to encroaching on neighboring metro areas):
Oxnard – Burbank: 1:13
Mission Viejo – Anaheim: 0:32
Riverside – LAUS (phase 1 only): 1:23
San Bernardino – LAUS (phase 1): 1:28
San Bernardino – Riverside (for phase 2): 0:18
LA’s trip times are a bit higher, but that’s a consequence of larger size. It’s true by any mode, and is why gravity models scale ridership with the 0.8-0.9th power of population, instead of linearly. So there’s a history of modeling for it. LA also has a separate advantage in having many stations in its metro area on the same line, on the model of Japan, leading to much lower access times in phase 2.
The problem with transit in LA is that all the above times are in principle. It doesn’t take too long to reach LAUS, but due to low ridership and FRA rules, the frequency is low, especially off-peak. Many of the trip times above aren’t available outside rush hour, and the rest have pitiful weekend and off-peak frequency. Although LA is getting serious about funding transit, it’s not serious about running it well, and unlike Caltrain isn’t trying to modernize its commuter operations even a little bit.
Andre Peretti Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 5:09 am
Your arguments rest on your opinion that California’s local transit is poor and will remain so forever. Nothing proves it. It’s just an opinion and, as such, it can’t validly be opposed to an estimate based on proven facts. Another opinion could be that the private-car-reigns-supreme era is on the wane and local transit will have to improve and diversify as a new market emerges.
One thing is certain: underestimating ridership can be very expensive. The Paris region network is now totally saturated at peak hours and commuting times are sometimes 50% longer than they were 30 years ago. It’s a loss of business for SNCF, and billions will have to be spent to solve the problem created by “an unpredictable ridership rise” (CEO’s words). Unpredictable? No. Just unpredicted, for lack of vision.
I think CHSRA, whatever its organizational flaws, has vision.
Drunk Engineer Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 7:26 am
Indeed, it can be very expensive once things are cast in concrete. And in the case of the CHSRA, they accomplish a neat trick of both overestimate ridership and underdesigning capacity. Design of passenger flow through train stations is woefully inadequate, and there are obvious bottlenecks in the train network as currently proposed.
We saw the exact same thing happen with the BART network 4 decades ago, which has just half the design capacity of the trolley network it had replaced, and track bottlenecks that should have been blindingly obvious.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 12:32 pm
Four decades of completely unmitigated failure at every step on every project are an excellent guide to transit in California.
The same cast of guaranteed failures are “in charge” (meaning, are the consultants) for CHSR.
They certainly have a glowing vision about how to deliver the most public-private wealth transfer, while following none of the practices that have actually been proven to deliver real results in the real world.
There’s a reason that Paris is “totally saturated” while California transit is a basket case. And people (not just Big Evil Oil, but the people who “design” and “run” those systems) are working very very hard indeed to ensure that it remains a basket case.
Nathanael Reply:
March 10th, 2011 at 2:48 am
As usual, you sound like someone who has never actually ridden MetroRail in Los Angeles. You proceed to exaggerate.
PeakVT Reply:
March 9th, 2011 at 12:00 am
The Cali numbers are one case out of a lot of possible cases. You’d need look at a spreadsheet with all of the factors to get a clear picture. But spreadsheets don’t project well.