DesertXpress Seeks $6 Billion In Federal Loans
DesertXpress still plans to start construction in 2012 – if they can get $6 billion in federal loans:
Officials with the proposed high-speed train linking Las Vegas and Southern California expect to get an answer in six to nine months on plans to borrow about $6 billion from the federal government.
If all goes according to plan, construction would start in the final quarter of 2012, said Andrew Mack, chief operating officer of DesertXpress. Mack briefed the state transportation board Monday on the private-public project that he says has been in development for 10 years.
Mack addressed concerns from Nevada’s newly elected Republican governor that the train wasn’t a good idea:
Gov. Brian Sandoval said the high-speed rail plans have been rejected in two other states and questioned whether it would survive in Nevada.
Mack said the other states were planning to use federal stimulus money, and if the project failed, the states would have assumed responsibility. In this case, the federal government would be loaning the money, so if the project went bankrupt, the government would take over the train. The state wouldn’t have responsibility.
He told the board that $34 billion in federal funds were available to finance rail projects across the country.
Of course, Sandoval is referring to the three states (not two) led by right-wing Tea Party governors – Ohio, Wisconsin, and Florida – that killed their HSR programs out of an ideological opposition to passenger rail. Given the regular traffic jams on Interstate 15 on the weekends, it makes sense that the DesertXpress train could be a viable alternative to driving from Southern California to Vegas.
In fact, Mack pointed to a survey that he claimed showed that potential ridership was there:
He said 45,000 questionnaires were distributed at the California agriculture border station and there was a 5 percent response rate, with an estimated 85-90 percent saying they would try the train.
It’s not clear whether this survey is all that reliable – it sounds like it was handed out at the station and relied on people to send it back, so the respondents are probably self-selecting. Still, I don’t think a survey is needed to show that a bullet train from SoCal to Vegas would be popular.
Of course, the details matter, and the common question is just how popular a train with a terminus in Victorville will be with Southern Californians. That remains to be seen. DesertXpress remains interested in closing the missing link between Victorville and Palmdale, which of course would require the California High Speed Rail Authority to maintain the Palmdale alignment.
At this, point, however, I think the bigger need is to see an HSR system get built. Even if it’s just Victorville to Vegas, actual construction on an actual bullet train can only be a good thing for HSR in America. The long-term case for HSR remains strong, since oil prices are going to remain high for some time to come and since it’s becoming less and less reasonable to spend a day in a car sitting in traffic on a desert freeway, disconnected from the digital devices that make the modern world go. That means there will be demand for fast passenger rail service on key corridors like LA-Vegas.
Plus it puts people back to work. Nevada’s unemployment rate is 13%. DesertXpress is estimated to create 80,000 jobs, over 17,000 of which would be in the Vegas area alone. Nevada is not in a position to turn down those jobs, just as California’s Central Valley isn’t either.
So as far as I am concerned, let’s hope DesertXpress gets its loans and gets construction underway in 2012.
Hell no. Ridership is going to be almost nonexistent without a one seat ride from Los Angeles or Orange County to Las Vegas. This is going to fail, and fail hard, becoming an extremely bad setback for HSR PR-wise. Those six billion dollars in loans represent about 300 million per year in finance expenses alone for that line, representing a supermajority of their highly optimistic revenue estimates. It is not financially feasible. Not to mention that all this line would do is suck money out of CA’s economy and put it into a parasite economy in Vegas.
Remember a few years ago, they were promising this line would be entirely privately financed. Now it’s going to be entirely financed by Federal loans. This is nothing more than a disaster at best, a scam at worst.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 9:25 pm
Ridership is going to be almost nonexistent without a one seat ride from New York or Philadelphia to Florida…..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto_Train
Paulus Magnus Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 9:28 pm
Relevant
joe Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 3:34 am
I’m very curious about the 300 M. It’s not in the article. 300/6,000 is 5%.
The Feds are lending money at 5%? That’s well above the prime rate which banks lend to favored customers and my re-fi rate for a 30 year fixed mortgage in CA.
The Fed target rate is 0.00 – 0.25% which means it costs 15 million to borrow 6 billion.
If the US wants to stimulate the economy, lending 6 B at 0.25% creates jobs, tax revenue and reduces the deficit by 15M /year.
As for failure, Why? Divine inspiration?
TomW Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 7:25 am
How likely the bank thinks you’ll default on a loan secured against the place where you live is less than how likely the feds think Desert XPress will fail.
Peter Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 7:46 am
If they do authorize the loan, though, the interest rate, by statute, will be equal to the cost of borrowing to the government, no matter what the credit risk is. So, it will be quite low. Also, the repayment schedule of up to 35 years is pretty good, too.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:06 am
RRIF loans are at T-bond rates and high 3 to low 4% range. 300 million was gotten by going to a loan calculator, putting in six billion and three percent over 30 years, and multiplying the monthly payment by 12.
BruceMcF Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
The interest as a percent of total capital cost will be greater than the per annum interest rate on the bond.
Donk Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 9:50 pm
Seriously, are they going to get ANY private money? Or do they need to secure this loan first before any private groups are interested?
Andrew Reply:
October 10th, 2011 at 10:26 pm
There’s no point in building this without committed funding for Palmdale-LA high speed rail. Otherwise it has no hope of competing with cheap flights from Las Vegas to one of several SoCal airports. There is no way that people want to drive 1-2 hours to Victorville to take the train (which isn’t going to be a car carrier train anyway).
joe Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 3:43 am
I think you see one of the points for this proposal, to nail down the Palmdale-LA alignment for CA HSR.
The second is to create a market for HSR is the SW US. This project benefits from CAHSR investment. Connecting to the system allows for a greater population of riders.
Nevada wants HSR in CA.
Matthew B. Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 4:35 am
Even if CAHSR goes along I5, the Antelope Valley Line still goes to Palmdale. It’s not ideal, but there is an express service on the line, and the existence of DesertXpress would probably convince Metrolink to provide expanded connecting service. Alternately, DesertXpress could run some FRA compatible trains with a one seat ride making express stops along the Antelope Valley Line. Higher ridership would make improvements along the line more likely to attract funding. I realize that incremental improvements are not as sexy, but it’s still possible to achieve much the same result in a few phases somewhat independently of CAHSR.
Peter Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 5:51 am
Here’s a link to both the original ridership study by URS, and a review of that study by Cambridge Systematics. Also included is an audit prepared for the FRA by Steer Davies Gleave in London.
Cambridge says the study is generally well done, but that there are issues with methodology that will lead to an approximately 10% decrease below the URS estimates.
Risenmessiah Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:15 am
The reason for the federal guarantee is that when the Las Vegas Monorail was built, the state provided bond financing. The company has not been able to recoup its capital costs and thus, there is a real possibility that taxpayers in Nevada are going to be on the hook for those bonds. That affects Desert Xpress because with a tax base of only 2-3 million people that is going to eclipse other expenditures the state might make. Hence, they won’t do it again.
However, given the X Train’s revelation that BNSF is apparently willing to rent the Southern Transcon, it raises the possibility that DX could simply buttress its rolling stock with FRA-compliant engines and switch from electric trains to diesel power from Victorville to San Bernardino. From there, passengers could switch to Metrolink…who would be more than happy to gain revenue from connections.
This is not to say that “doing it right” you don’t link the system directly to HSR to open up both Northern California and Southern California markets so that you can decrease the use of jet fuel and free up more gates at various airports. But the above mentioned arrangement would make L.A. happy at least on an interim basis, and allow things to move forward….
Walter Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 9:31 am
From all indications, X Train’s main goal is selling stock. DX actually wants to build a railroad.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:54 am
I don’t disagree…it’s that they implied they would be able to get priority access to the Transcon through the Cajon Pass. That’s obviously a tactic DX can use too, unless the X-Train people are just making shit up.
Given that BNSF is now owned by Barack Obama patron Warren Buffett, I don’t think it’s idle talk. Most L.A. port traffic is imports, and if the economy stays down, there’s definitely room to shift trackage to free up space for passenger trains again….
Peter Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 2:22 pm
Getting trackage rights for X-Train’s 12 trains or so a week is WAY different than the many trains a day that DesertXpress wants to run.
Risenmessiah Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 10:30 pm
Sure, but as an incremental solution….
Forgive my ignorance, but why can’t CHSRA borrow that money?
Andy M. Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 5:39 am
Does the government actually have any spare money to lend? I though they were deeply in debt themselves. Or are they borrowing money to lend it on at a lower rate, effectively subsidising the loan?
Andy M. Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 5:45 am
Mind you, I’m not saying that’s wrong. If it creates jobs and boosts the economy the subsidy will be more than negated. But I’d still like to understand the mechanism.
Peter Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 5:57 am
Here’s the link to the FRA’s discussion of the loan program: Railroad Rehabilitation & Improvement Financing program
Derek Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:47 am
Being in debt is no excuse not to make a good investment. And being free of debts is no excuse to make a bad investment. Therefore, being in debt is irrelevant.
Andy M. Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:52 am
Yes, I’m not disputing that. I’m just wondering if it makes sense for the government to be lending money to a private company. Basically private investors are underwiting bonds and private investors are spending the money and the government is the middle man whose only purpose is to absorb the risk. So:
1) either the middle man can be cut out and the project’s promotors can borrow that same money directly from those lenders
2) or the goverment can take over the project and realise it itself (European style private partnership) so that when finished, the government controls the infrastructure and can assure different operators have fair access whil paying back the loans.
Nathanael Reply:
October 15th, 2011 at 8:46 pm
The government can print money. Currently Congress has legislated that the money power of government be handed to the Federal Reserve and that the government “borrow” from the Federal Reserve. This serves only one purpose: to give the profits of money-printing to private banks. Congress could undo this at any time, and has in he past with “US Notes”. The Greenback Party advocated direct government control of money-printing (no Federal Reserve).
The federal government is simply not cash-constrained, ever. Period.
I love how in the quote by Mack, he tries justifies the loan because the state is not on the hook, it is just the feds that are on the hook. It doesn’t matter if we throw $6B down a rathole, as long as it is not state money.
They better not give this loan out before they fund the entirety of the LA Metro 30/10 plan with loans.
In other news, there is an election coming up in Seattle, a tax issue to study an expanded streetcar system:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016457737_streetcars10m.html
The responses and comments following this piece sound just like the pros and cons about HSR, including baiting and name-calling between liberals and conservatives, concerns about future fuel prices, arguments about cars equaling freedom, arguments about transit and road subsidies, political incompetence, and even a former executive of Seattle’s transit system who is alleged to be an idiot and is now working at BART!
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/reader_feedback/public/display.php?source_name=mbase&source_id=2016457737
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
Well, the ballot measure goes further than just studying streetcar expansion – it funds a downtown connector, it funds bus route improvements, it funds street repair, it funds bike lanes and sidewalks. And depending on what happens with overall federal funding, the VLF can be leveraged to bring some federal dollars to Seattle to build some more lines. It’s an important proposal and it needs to pass.
There’s an agricultural border control station between California and Nevada?
Paulus Magnus Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:30 am
Yup and all other state border crossings. We are a wee bit, but justifiably so, paranoid about people bringing in stuff that could screw with our agriculture.
datacruncher Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:56 am
California currently operates 16 ag border control stations.
http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/pe/ExteriorExclusion/borders_map.html
synonymouse Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:12 am
They are worried about gerbils.
They are such a bunch of dumb ****s. California gophers are so populous and entrenched gerbils wouldn’t stand a chance.
Hey, how about some Dream Act break for non-native species?
Peter Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:23 am
Some resentment over personal experiences in not being able to bring gerbils into the state?
synonymouse Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 12:02 pm
It is easy to sneak in a gerbil, but jirds are another matter as they come from Africa – US ban on importation from Africa – and Shaw’s jirds in particular are apparently hard to breed. Seems the females are totally dominant and beat up real bad on the males.
The problem with all rodents as pets is the short life span. Too many funerals.
But the naked mole rat lives for 30 years. Scientists are very interested.
Peter Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 12:10 pm
Anyway, Ag inspection stations are not solely intended to prevent the entry of gerbils, but any and all invasive species. There are a lot more than just gerbils.
Nathanael Reply:
October 15th, 2011 at 8:47 pm
The ag border control stations are primarily for fruit flies. If fruit flies ever made it into California, the costs would be astronomical.
VBobier Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:17 am
Yeah, Last I heard there was one proposed for an area nearer to the CA/NV border than the one that’s just near Mineola rd in Yermo CA, which is easily bypassed on a local road…
Just a couple of stories to follow, even though they don’t seem to have much to do with HSR:
http://www.donkeylicious.com/2011/10/age-aint-nothing-but-way-to-screw-over.html
http://thinkprogress.org/special/2011/10/11/340186/boston-police-throw-american-flag-to-ground-arrest-veterans-trash-property-to-protect-green-space-from-99-percent/
I am a strong supporter of high speed rail and I’m certainly no Herbert Hoover/Ayn Rand-disciple but I am far from convinced about the viability of this. I don’t doubt that there is strong demand for high speed rail from LA/OC to Las Vegas, and indeed this is a congested corridor, buy from Victorville to Las Vegas? Very few people will likely drive 1 to 1.5 hours and then take a train another 2 hours.
I am not at all against spending public money but if the US DOT has this kind of money to loan, give it to LA County for the 30/10 Plan. $6B should be enough to complete the subway to the sea.
Derek Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:52 am
Matthew B. had a good point above. DesertXPress could run HSR trainsets from Union Station to Victorville on existing tracks. When the train enters the HSR tracks, then it would run at high speed to Las Vegas. This would save people the inconvenience of driving.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:45 am
Note my comment above. An incremental approach requires BNSF to lease trackage time through the Cajon Pass from Victorville to San Bernardino, wherein passengers can transfer to Metrolink. There is no existing railway for DX to use from V-ville to Palmdale.
Moreover, Metrolink and LA Metro would love the added revenue from getting passengers to make the connection through their system to DX…
thatbruce Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 12:11 pm
UP is still using SP’s old Palmdale Cutoff, cutting across the Antelope Valley from the top of Cajon Pass near Victorville to Palmdale. That would make the problem one of political will, not that the tracks don’t exist.
Risenmessiah Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 10:28 pm
The Cutoff really isn’t an option because I believe it doesn’t actually connect in as much contains a switch to access the BNSF line. Thus the train would have to backtrack up and down just to go that way.
But you are right, even if a track falls out of the sky, there is going to need to be political will.
thatbruce Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
As the tracks are currently laid out, you are correct. As far as dismissing an option simply because the current track layout isn’t suitable, you need to do some basic research to see that where the Victorville and Palmdale Cutoff tracks converge to traverse the Cajon Pass, constructing a connection between the two to allow the movements described would not strain anyone’s civil engineering skills.
A similar junction would also need to be constructed at Palmdale, of course assuming that there is a need and political will to implement this.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 1:07 pm
Not quite what I meant but I understand your point…
Sure, the engineering isn’t that hard to rectify, but the bigger issue is that BNSF and UP would have to coordinate and block off both lines for this touch of magic. For the amount of trouble that’s worth… BNSF will simply offer to have them go through the pass in the first place and get out of their way.
Better question might be…why doesn’t DX mention that with very little route modification it could run trains straight through from LAUS to LV?
Pipe Dream
My personal guess is that if DesertXpress gets the loan, it needs to immediately start planning a connection to Palmdale. Otherwise they’ll be lucky to be able to make their loan payments.
VBobier Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:26 am
They need to do more than just plan, DX needs the money to build from Palmdale to Victorville & then to Las Vegas NV & to add track if needed to expand Metrolinks ROW to Los Angeles from Palmdale, This may be DX’s only hope If the CHSRA goes the cheaper route away from Palmdale/Tehachapi and to Tejon…
Peter Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:33 am
Well, given that they’re not going to get any funding for Victorville – Palmdale unless they complete the planning and environmental review first, I think that should be their first priority…
Nevada’s been known for chutzpah, so this is to be expected. Once the government builds their train to Victorville, they’ll need another loan for it to go someplace actually populated. It’ll end up costing half of what California’s system is supposed to cost. It’ll force CaHSR routing decisions that should be California’s to make. It’ll have been built with other peoples’ money, through other peoples’ communities. Just to take gamblers to casinos. I imagine the passengers will want free fares – they expect transportation to casinos to be free, after all. So the government will have to subsidize this thing forever, or just eat the losses on the loans.
I’d be happier if Nevada went the California route, and voted several $ Billion of its own money for the project. But Nevada is refusing to pay anything. Wisconsin, Florida, and Ohio would be building high speed lines, if they had gotten sweet deals like the one Nevada wants.
Donk Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:24 am
Yeah exactly. Nevada should foot part of the bill for this. It’s like they expect to build it to Victorville, and then make it California’s problem. The federal government shouldn’t put a penny into this until somebody else (e.g., Nevada, private investors) step up first.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:49 am
Okay, but let’s be realistic here.
Federal spending needs to be partially independent of population and there are plenty of transportation needs in states that are relatively empty. Those states (like Nevada) can’t underwrite the same amount of debt as California, New York, or Illinois.
The Pacific Railway Act was premised in part on the fact that unorganized territories obviously lacked the tax base to accomplish what Illinois already had building the Chicago-St. Louis line that provided a land bridge between the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway.
Yes, I know, 30/10 is real important. But is it a national priority and is a greater national priority than DX?
Paulus Magnus Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
Yes and yes.
BruceMcF Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 1:10 pm
Yes, 30/10 is a bigger national priority than DX. By rights, 30/10 would be getting a richer mix of grants alongside loans, and DX would be getting loans alone.
If the CAHSR does not go via Palmdale, developing an express passenger path on the alignment from Palmdale would seem like an easier case to justify capital funding than the DX proper. And that would be complementary to both the CHSR and to the DX.
Alon Levy Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 2:19 pm
I agree with the first paragraph, but not the second. The Antelope Valley Line is not the most important commuter line in LA; it should get less priority than the Orange County Line, the San Bernardino Line (bottlenecked at one track at key spots), and the local transit system. If there’s money for a tunnel-heavy line other than the Subway to the Sea, the priority should be Vermont, or perhaps doing the Eastside extension right and sending the Red Line east on Whittier.
Donk Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:50 pm
The next “tunnel-heavy line” after the Subway to the the VA should be a 405/Sepulveda line from Sherman Oaks to Westwood to LAX.
Risenmessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 12:25 am
Candidly…no.
Vermont certainly has the ridership, but then you would have to figure out what to do with the portion of the Red Line that is along Vermont…
I would advocate for drilling a new tunnel under Vine and Santa Monica to allow for another subway line to shift through Hollywood. This could be done in conjunction with Crenshaw, Vermont, or Expo…
Alon Levy Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 2:15 am
Convert it to a north-south line independent of the east-west line from Union Station (hopefully East LA in the future) to Westwood (hopefully Santa Monica)?
Risenmessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 8:37 am
Hold on… I’ll draw you a map in a little bit….
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 1:01 pm
Alon,
The white lines on this map indicate the areas of additional subterranean guideway MTA should build. They are independent of how the service lines should be run.
Part of the problem is that L.A. still needs a BART-like solution to replace Metrolink…but unlike other California cities can’t fit streetcars into its highest density bus routes. In other words, light rail is usually reserved for inner city travel but that is just not possible in L.A. However, that bifurcates their own service and is slowing them down.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 1:01 pm
Er…this map:
http://g.co/maps/rvfrp
Jon Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 1:30 pm
Link doesn’t work
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 2:27 pm
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=205447004479464900895.0004af1eed01f28c06dee&msa=0
How about this one?
thatbruce Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:26 pm
It works. See also LA’s previous commuter rail map for other likely lines, which is reflective of the denser parts of LA even ~100 years later.
LA could do with a subway system with a number of operationally-independent lines, but not as a replacement for Metrolink. The distances which the Metrolink system covers put it into the inter-city commuting class, not the intra-city commuting class which most subway operations fit into.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:41 pm
Yes, I know.
What I mean is that the Bay Area BART is very effective shuttling commuters and struggling to manage congestion using light rail or buses closer in.
In L.A. there’s plenty of capacity to move people around locally but no real service to the true suburbs.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
BART sucks at getting commuters into the City. No one else in the world builds 50 mile long subway lines, there’s a reason for that.
Caelestor Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 2:09 pm
If an earthquake takes down any of the freeways in central LA, the whole region is screwed. Good to have some back-up infrastructure in place.
Andre Peretti Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:17 am
Attracting more foreign visitors seems to be more interesting for Las Vegas than investing in a train. Persuading airlines to start non-stop flights costs less and earns more.
In 2010, foreigners represented 18% of total visitors, but 27% of the revenue. Foreigners are big spenders.
Andy M. Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 7:58 am
Even so, surely for a foreign visitor being able to do LA and Vegas on the same day would make the package more attractive overall?
Andre Peretti Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 8:46 am
Certainly, but it would have to be a one-seat ride from LV to LA. People, in general, don’t like transfers but that is even more the case for foreigners.
I still maintain that Desert Express needs to run directly into the LA Basin in order to succeed, probably via Palmdale. If it does, it’ll surpass all ridership projections. If not, then it’ll be a setback to HSR in general for this country.
Another thing is that 6 billion dollars could be directed to complete the CV-LA link. Just saying.
Tony d. Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:19 am
Or complete the CV/SJ link ;)
Donk Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:36 am
Why doesn’t DX instead focus on building the LA-Palmdale-Victorville segment of the route? They can keep their parking structure and transit center in Victorville, but instead of people driving from LA to Victorville, they will drive from Victorville to Las Vegas. This way, the first section of track would actually be usable.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:39 am
Because no one would actually do that?
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Land without water is cheap
Land with water not
Dust blowing
You can acquire land from Victorville to Las Vegas very cheaply because developers and other speculators won’t bid up the land because it someday…possibly become houses that use sand showers with xeriscape lawns.
Secondly, the population of incorporated areas in the High Desert already is over half a million. So even if you ran the train infrequently on the parking lot model, it would still probably get riders….
thatbruce Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:28 pm
How do their cars get from the LA Basin to Victorville so they can then drive from Victorville to Las Vegas ?
VBobier Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 6:19 pm
By way of the local Freeway(Interstate Hwy to some) usually.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 11:58 am
I don’t think so. I looked at the federal program and actually I don’t think CAHSR is a good candidate for their funds?
Caelestor Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 2:11 pm
Yeah, I know that CAHSR doesn’t really qualify for these loans. I’m just thinking of what CAHSR could do with $6 billion.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 5:12 pm
Keep PBQD and allied consultants wallowing in pork for 10 years?
I would say a snowball has a better chance of not melting on a hot August afternoon on the Strip than this project has of getting $6 billion in Federal funding. Yep – the Republicans are going to line up to help Harry Reed get 80,000 jobs for Nevada.
Peter Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 5:43 pm
Unless I’m completely mistaken, this loan program does not require Congressional approval for the FRA to lend the money.
Elizabeth Reply:
October 11th, 2011 at 8:44 pm
I believe that is correct. The idea is that the program doesn’t require a budget – there is either supposed to be no credit risk or the borrower is supposed to pay an upfront premium to cover it.
Unless Nevada or California or someone steps up to guarantee the bonds, it is hard to see these as investment grade.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 12:53 pm
It would be loan, there won’t be any bonds issued. Since there won’t be any bonds there’s nothing investors to buy. Since there won’t be anything to buy they won’t be anything to rate.
Total of 35 Billion authorized by Congress.
http://www.fra.dot.gov/Pages/177.shtml
Jack Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 8:31 am
Why can’t we borrow 20B from this again?
Elizabeth Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 12:20 pm
Because even with the very *happy* numbers, the most debt that this could support is in $10 bn neighborhood.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 3:23 pm
Which is still a rather significant and useful amount of money, so what’s the problem again?
joe Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:14 pm
The problem is that this is a significant and useful amount of money available at a low cost.
1/10 of the *happy* number is useful.
VBobier Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:29 pm
DX wants to run at 150 instead of 220, so to Me It seems like that’s one of the reasons for the lower cost, of course running in nearly empty desert and trying to avoid wilderness areas where wildlife lives or tries to at least doesn’t hurt. Just cause land looks empty of animal life doesn’t always mean It is empty of animals, they just want to avoid humans and the environment in general.
Peter Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
“just want to avoid … the environment in general.”
So, they’re building the train in orbit?
;)
thatbruce Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:01 pm
I thought that DX’s top speed was being set by FRA regulations, rather than seeking waivers. Could be wrong.
Peter Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:31 pm
They also have some ridiculously steep 4.5% grades, as well as 100 mph curves in the middle of nowhere.
Nathanael Reply:
October 15th, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Indeed RRIF loans might be sufficient to get from Bakersfield to LA.
DesertXpress would be much better off using the Cajon Pass to connect to CAHSR between Ontario and Riverside, as this would put Los Angeles, the Inland Empire and San Diego within flight competitive time of Las Vegas. Northern California will never be within flight competitive time of Las Vegas by rail as long as the Sierra Nevada exists.
Seems like the only reason they’re not planning on doing this already is the cost of tunneling the pass. Anyone seen an estimate of tunneling costs for this pass?
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 2:38 pm
No.
Sending passenger traffic from LAUS to Las Vegas via Cajon puts it in conflict with freight and Metrolink.
The only one seat ride is going to be through Palmdale because that’s not a high priority freight route. As a temporary solution, DX could run from Las Vegas to San Bernardino and let Metrolink handle it from there.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 3:23 pm
Not if they build their own rails in it of course.
Andrew Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
DX does have to go thru Cajon and San Bdno to LA, with its own high speed rails, which can also be used for Phoenix-LA. Should also connect to Riverside for San Diego traffic. CAHSR Palmdale detour will not survive the current re-think, so DX should just forget about going thru there. For California’s sake, let’s hope DX never gets built at all. If it does, let the casinos pay for it and force them to build us HSR between S Bdno and LA, also to Riverside. This would give us a head start on HSR service between LA/SD and Phoenix.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 4:08 pm
You have it backward.
DX knows what they are up against navigating through the Inland Empire and Union Pacific. CAHSR and PBQD, it appears do not. That’s why I am doubtful that we will see any extension of Phase 1 east of downtown Los Angeles. Instead, I think that there will be one line serving Orange County, San Diego, Phoenix, and Tucson that goes south and then east.
The Alameda Corridor east will relieve pressure up to Colton and then BNSF will go north and UP east. Metro and Metrolink will then use faster service on its trains to bridge the service gap.
Andrew Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:40 pm
phoenix line has to go thru inland empire and palm springs; ROW issues can be worked out in the time frame we’re talking about. The main priority now is not the build anything we’ll regret later, e.g. anything going thru palmdale.
Jon Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:05 pm
I am assuming DesertXpress would build their own rails. I would have thought that was obvious.
A route through Cajon would likely cross over and under the existing tracks but not run parallel with them due to very different gradient and curvature requirements. So there is unlikely to be the issue of having to share the ROW.
In the Inland Empire CAHSR have withdrawn all the UP alternatives and are planning to follow either I-10 or Metrolink between Ontario and San Bernadino. Getting to either of those from the south of the Cajon pass should be fairly straightforward.
So the question remains- how much would it cost to build new 150mph rails through the Cajon pass?
Peter Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:30 pm
A lot. It’s already going to cost $6 billion to get from LV to Victorville. Extrapolate from there.
Andrew Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:30 pm
This q came up before and it seemed like nobody knew because the route hadn’t been ‘engineered’
Jon Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 9:54 am
Yeah, that’s what I suspected. Would be interesting to see a ballpark estimate.
thatbruce Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:39 pm
Some time ago I posted a fanciful description of a route staying in the median of I-15 from Ontario through Cajon Pass, then briefly following CA-138 to meet the existing tracks at the top. Steep but doable. As for cost, I have no idea, beyond assuming that modern-day American Engineering would price it at significant fractions of a billion.
RisenMessiah Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 5:44 pm
Remember, even for the Grapevine PB is suggesting they cross fault lines at grade. That means either up and over the pass or digging so far down to miss the fault zone. And in order to avoid long stretches of 5% grade there will be “stilts” on either side coming down the mountain….
Peter Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 10:02 am
Why is no one using technical terms to describe aerials or viaducts anymore?
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 10:25 am
Memo to all: please use the precise technical term “Civil engineering profit center” henceforth. Your cooperation is appreciated.
thatbruce Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 10:32 am
Its an easy way to decipher the poster’s overall feelings towards the project. ‘Stilts’ usually means that you’re against the project, unless you’re directing the attack against the retained engineering firms (hi Richard).
synonymouse Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 11:12 am
Stilts is in reference to planners’ “futuristic” erectile obsession. Monorail stupidity.
In the contemporary contest every time you gratuitously put something up in the air you are creating a shelter, and a police problem with the “underclass” gravitating there. Pathetic commentary on our social dis-order but cities and towns already have enough blight problems to contend with.
Real railroads only elevate when absolutely necessary. Entrenched bureaucracies are not hobbled by such mundane concerns. They can and do spend hundreds of millions of toll money, etc. to relocate away from the depressing ghetto mit many aerials to right next to the yuppie ballpark shorn of stilts not long ago.
Risenmessiah Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 12:06 pm
I’m being tongue in cheek. The viaduct construction was a source of contention and people should be aware because PB’s own study indicates that because there are two fault zones for the Grapevine you would need to account for and adjust grades accordingly. Cajon is more compact and has more elevation change is an overall shorter range….
thatbruce Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 10:29 am
It’s comments like ‘digging..down to miss the fault zone’ that really make me wonder about people’s education. That line of mountains surrounding the LA Basin? They’re being pushed up by the movement of a lot of separate faults. There is no ‘down’ that humans as a species can economically reach that would put us ‘under’ any of these fault zones.
Risenmessiah Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 12:14 pm
“Fault zone”, “rupture zone”…. I think you are being disingenuous here. Shaking is worst on the surface. Add to that the alluvial soils and other crushed up bedrock that forms from previous quakes and you have unstable areas between the surface and the hypocenter which is some miles below. In the same way that you can anchor buildings or other structures below this shallow area…. it helps. Elevated structures amplify shaking, meanwhile.
Am I a board certified geologist? No… Member of a professional engineer association? No… Have I lived in California for many many many years, and subsequent earthquakes…yes.