French President’s Newsworthy High Speed Rail Vacation
The recently elected president of France, François Hollande, made news with his use of high speed rail for his vacation this month:
Frugally-minded Hollande, who promised during spring’s presidential campaign to save money by catching trains, took high-speed rail on Thursday from Paris with his girlfriend, Valerie Trierweiler.
They’re headed for the Fort de Bregancon, an official retreat in southeastern France.
They travelled first class. But it’s a stark contrast from the unpopular Sarkozy, who was criticized for vacationing using a Dassault Falcon 7X jet and an Airbus dubbed “Air Sarko One.”
Hollande has carefully cultivated a “Mr. Normal” image. He says traveling by train is an important symbol at a time when “many French want to go on vacation…and can’t.”
The backstory to this is that in France, bullet trains are seen as the populist, affordable method of traveling around the country, a legacy of the decision of Hollande’s Socialist predecessor, François Mitterand, to subsidize TGV prices so that they would be broadly affordable to the public. Hollande has been positioning himself as a populist, in contrast to the glitz and glamour of the Sarkozy era, and his decision to take the train is certainly part of that move. Plus it has a lower carbon impact, which makes a difference too.
California’s governor likes to show his frugality in similar ways. Currently, a flight from Sacramento to LA via Southwest is seen as the main low-cost travel choice for getting around the state. But I have no doubt in my mind that Governor Brown looks forward to the day (should he live that long) that he can take a bullet train from Sacramento to LA, and have that be the populist travel option available to and affordable for the masses.


You tried to cite a page that Google does not show on that book. Let’s not forget that Mitterand and his fellow socialists consistently voted against the TGV until taking power shortly before its inauguration.
synonymouse Reply:
August 5th, 2012 at 10:57 pm
“frugal”? Quelle betise
Assurement pas le drole de train de M. Moonbeam.
Miles Bader Reply:
August 5th, 2012 at 11:00 pm
Why did they vote against it? [What was their transportation plan?]
Andy M Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 3:01 am
I believe they wanted to retain a dense network of classical lines at affordable prices. They saw the TGV as abstracting attention from that and creating a two-tier system with high-speed versus classical lines. In a way they were right as the intervening years have seen the local and classical systems in many regions retrench with many rural lines being bustituted. But the question is whether this would have happened anyway, which it probably would.
Max Wyss Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 4:22 am
I think it would have happened anyway, and if I remember correctly from my reading, the Paris – Lyon line was getting at capacity.
However, what happened, is that the service on the classical lines got cut, and it is just nowadays that the Régions are building it back up again (but still not to a very high level)
As usual, Robert gets the story completely wrong:
Max Wyss Reply:
August 5th, 2012 at 11:51 pm
The issue I have with the “14 ne TGV train lines” is that I cant list them. Essentially two come to my mind: the line along the Côte d’Azur (which would become rather expensive because of a big percentage of tunnels), and a second line towards the South East (because the current line is getting at capacity, even with signalling upgrades). Of course, I may miss some others, but I can’t get to that mentioned total.
Andy M Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 3:07 am
Other proposed lines I can think of
- filling the gap between Montpellier and Perpignan, hence connecting Spanish and French HS systems.
- Paris – Orleans – Lyon
- second Nord line, this time serving Arras and so serving the regions that lost out when the present Nord line opened.
- missing bits of Rhin- Rhone corrdior
- missing bits of Est corridor, including connection to German HS system, and branch to Luxembourg.
- extending Atlantique line towards Bordeaux, ultimately to Hendaye.
I don’t know at what stage these systems are, and what effect the recent decison may or may not have on them. Also, depending on how you count, you can consider each of the above a single project or as several independent projects, as even when subdivided many of the bits still make sense as standalone extensions.
Max Wyss Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 4:20 am
Thanks, Andy.
I would have to confirm it, but the connections towards the Spanish border already have the Declaration d’interêt public, and would be built anyway. The same applies for the Rhin-Rhone segments. Unless there are lots of connectors, Montpellier – Perpignan should not be very expensive.
That leaves the second line to Lyon, the second line to the Nord, and the Bordeaux extension (plus the Côte d’Azur).
agb5 Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 2:37 am
The Côte d’Azur TGV line has been talked about for decades but has always been difficult to justify given the high cost (because of difficult terrain) and relatively little gains in travel times. Today TGV trains travel at slow speed along the cost to get to the major city of Nice.
Many experts think the best way to connect Nice with HSR is to come down through Italy and approach from the East, but this is politically difficult for SNCF to accept. Maybe budget realities will put the Italian option back on the table.
Nathanael Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 9:11 pm
With the much-contested tunnel from France to Italy looking like it’s actually going to get built, that might make it more likely for France to consider the Italian option.
Max Wyss Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 6:12 am
But between Torino and Genova (where the line most likely would hit the coast), there are additional mountains, and there is no HSR.
Also keep in mind that the new Mont Cenis tunnel will be mixed operation, freight and passenger. And having a big spread of speeds reduces the capacity of the tunnel considerably (that’s also what gets seriously discussed about the Gotthard base tunnel, where fast passenger trains will run at 250 km/h, and freight at 80 to 100 km/h. That will also require very careful scheduling.
Andy M Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 6:17 am
“May” being the powerful word in this statement.
Outgoing governments typically start lots of projects in a two prong strategy, on the one hand they try to harvest votes in an attempt to cushion their oncoming defeat, and on the other – knowing full well that they are unable to follow up on all their promises, they are obliging the next government to cancel major projects early in their term and so send their approvals rate spiralling. That gives the new opposition breathing room for reform as their popularity instantly shoots up in the polls. Its an old strategy and every failing government does it.
14 new lines in one bang seem overly optimist by any count. Cancelling half of them or even two thirds or all but one or two is thus not an anti HS measure by any lengths, but just restoring post-election reality.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 6:13 pm
We’ll see what happens. France and Spain both had properly ambitious HSR expansion plans. To sacrifice them for the sake of austerity is foolish, and Europe is already on the precipice of catastrophe thanks to four years of austerity. Let’s hope Hollande, trying to walk a fine line between growth and austerity, doesn’t fall prey to the same foolish decisions like those made in Portugal to cancel an AVE extension.
Max Wyss Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 6:16 am
I hope neither, but then, the potential of the connection between France and Spain is considerably bigger than the Portuguese connection to the Spanish network. The connection between France and Spain crosses several hundred kilometers of tourist areas, and it is also well connected towards the North.
France? What do the French know about HSR? I thought they only existed to steal money from gullible Americans with silly things like “investment-grade business plans.”
synonymouse Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 12:44 pm
The French don’t stand a chance with the CHSRA – they failed to tom to the Chandlers.
good post.
I can’t agree more.
Off topic but of interest–more commentary by William Draves (NineShift) on the California system, which includes a link to an environmental site discussing the same:
http://nineshift.typepad.com/weblog/2012/08/california-high-speed-train-game-changer-for-america.html
http://www.earthtechling.com/2012/07/california-high-speed-rail-on-track-in-spite-of-uncertainties/
I wrote about those lines in RAILROAD.NET • View topic – Second thoughts about TGV-network expansion working from Le Figaro – Conjoncture : L’État va renoncer à des projets de ligne TGV and autotranslators Google Translate and microsofttranslate.com: map of extensions
From the article and various sources about what’s under construction:
Under construction:
- Metz/Nancy – Strasbourg
- LeMans – Rennes
- Tours – Bordeaux
Likely to be built:
- Bordeaux – Toulouse, reducing the Paris-Toulouse time from 5h to 3h15m.
- Nîmes – Montpellier
- Paris Gare de l’Est – Charles de Gaulle Airport in Roissy
Lines likely to be canceled or placed on low priority:
– Marseille – Nice, which is expensive, there is no agreement on the route, and the Paris-Nice by TGV will not be much faster than by air.
– Lyon-Turin, which now would have rather low freight traffic, not enough to pay for it over 20 years. However, if the economy takes off again, there will be plenty more.
- Rhin-Rhône’s remaining 50 km between Dijon and Mulhouse, which will cost about 1 billion euros for about 10 min improvement.
- Rennes to Brest or Quimper, which may be a bit expensive for the passengers it will have.
- Poitiers to Limoges, likewise.
- Bordeaux to the border with Spain, a lame duck because it’s rather expensive and there’s opposition to high-speed lines in the Basque country. It may only go to Mont de Marsan or Dax.
Lame duck = Google Translate of “a du plomb dans l’aile”, “has some lead in its wing”.
Lines graphed by not mentioned in the article’s text:
- Paris to Caen or Rouen – Le Havre
- Rennes to Nantes
- Paris to Orléans – Bourges or Nevers, then to Lyon
- Dijon / Besançon – Bourg-en-Bresse – Lyon
- Narbonne – Montpellier, Perpignan, Toulouse
- Dax – Tarbes
PeakVT Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 2:47 pm
Dax-Tarbes? Who knew Sarkozy was a foamer?
Loren Petrich Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 3:48 am
How so?
Looking at that list, it seems like there is a lot of tonneau de porc in it, like going to Quimper and Caen and the like.
Consultant, professor look to bring training for high-speed rail to UNLV
Off-off-topic: NASA’s new Mars rover is now online. You see? Americans can be trained to do unit conversion right.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 12:24 pm
How do you know the BBC didn’t do the conversions?
Alon Levy Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 1:15 pm
I’m referencing the fact that a previous Mars rover failed because of English/metric unit conversion error.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 2:30 pm
They probably did the whole thing in metric/SI.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
How do we know that “NASA” didn’t fake all the “engineering” displays and communications that the sheeple were duped into believing were “real” last night on their so-called “live” broadcast from what they said was “JPL” but was really a sound stage in Hollywood with the miles and inches hastily taped over by blue helmeted UN metric storm troopers?
How do we know you’re not just typing “random words” incessantly on “random topics” as a obfuscation because you know that we can’t handle the truth?
BTW Alon: it was a non-lander that was lost because of pound-seconds. You only get 9/10.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 3:12 pm
Due to the influence of Nancy Pelosi mind rays I was busy watching reruns on TVLand instead, so I wouldn’t know.
VBobier Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 1:13 pm
Plus We can deliver 1 ton packages to remote locations on almost untested technology, the rover could last anywhere from 2 years to 10 years I’ve read, people over at Seti@Home have been watching this…
Caltrain receives $3.2 million for modernization
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 11:25 am
Caltrain’s limitlessly incompetent staff and Caltrain’s limitlessly corrupt consultants to receive $3.2 million of pure, unadulterated pork, which they will spend on themselves and their friends.
Negative public benefit to be delivered.
Another $200 million, please! They’re not done yet. There’s so much else they need to give to their friends. Because, alone of all the billions of humans on earth, only their special friends truly know how to design and build a signal system, one that Caltrain’s mighty fleet of two dozen trains, alone among all the trains in the entire world, can truly feel comfortable with.
Everybody concerned deserves to die in a fire.
Reality Check Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 11:52 am
Here’s the full press release:
Caltrain Receives $3.2 M for Modernization and Safety Improvements
The Uncertain Future of the California Bullet Train
synonymouse Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 12:43 pm
The litigation will demonstrate that Prop 1A is not worth the toilet paper it is written on.
Translation of “It’s California, so there will always be lawsuits.” = “It’s Chinatown, Jake.”
Derek Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
False. Phase 1 Blended will offer a one-seat ride all the way to Los Angeles Union Station. However, Phase 1 Full is required to get to Anaheim without a transfer.
Maybe the plaintiff was referring to Bay to Basin, which would require a transfer at the Sylmar/San Fernando station.
synonymouse Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 12:59 pm
Quoting PG&E Richard in the above article: “We will be looking for federal funding, to be sure, arguing that this can help free up freight capacity, assist goods movement through the Central Valley and enhance the efficiency of ports.”
This comes after crowing they have enough money for Bako to Palmdale. What utter nonsense is this? Does this guy know anything? There is no, as in zippo, passenger service, over the Tehachapi Loop. This is because the UP claims too busy but there is in actuality not that much demand. And the UP and BNSF lines in the Valley don’t need freeing up; otherwise the class ones would not be catering up to Amtrak or demanding monies for track expansion.
And of course the Tehachapi Roundabout will not be at all freight compatible. What a dip. And they fired Van Ark on this clown’s orders?
In California related news, COASTER now lets you buy round trip tickets online, emailing them to you for printout or showing on your smartphone.
Damn! I thought this crap only happens with China HSR …
Caltrans’ records show problems with tests on Bay Bridge, other bridges
synonymouse Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 1:54 pm
Aren’t you happy now that there was no reborn “Key System” type rail track included in the design. If the Bridge failed they would blame the train’s vibrations.
There have to be some darn NIMBYS behind this lack of faith in the Program. C’mon naysayers, Jerry wants to get some shit built.
synonymouse Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 1:55 pm
Uh, naysayers and deniers. Forgot that touch.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 2:39 pm
The Roeblings over spec’d the materials used in the Brooklyn Bridge. Because they wanted to be sure it was still safe if the suppliers tried to cheat. Turns out they were right and they over spec’d the over specification. They did this because they were experienced bridge builders… and knew there would be problems like this. I suspect the Romans learned the same thing from the Greeks and Egyptians…
I wonder if Reid-Obama’s offensive against Adelson and Romney might derail the Deserted Xpress, under whatever name.
Alon Levy Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 2:06 pm
What offensive? So far Romney is scoring own goals.
synonymouse Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
Reid – he’s from Nevada after all – has to have some skeletons in his own closet so you have to ask why he would be a party to the Nixonian friends and enemies list investigation of Adelson and practically charging Romney with tax evasion. None of these functionaries have clean slates and want to reveal the intimate details of their personal finances. Remember Nancy’s insider trading?
Reid has really gone out of his way to rub some powerful people in Nevada the wrong way. Wynn and the others have to see what’s going on with Adelson. They could be next. Hopefully his career is over.
The Deserted Xpress is just the Sin City Monorail writ large – put both out of their misery straightaway.
Joe Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 6:28 pm
Have you never heard of the Honey Badger? Senate majority leader, recently re-elected and could not give a shit. He is pounding away. Thank god he is a HSR advocate and Pelosi is backing him up.
I smell a Federal grant for HSR cooking in the next Congress.
Mmmm.
O/T: there is a presentation summarizing the impacts of the various Fresno-Bakersfield options posted on the CAHSR website
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/assets/0/152/232/496/45382d7a-1858-4026-84fb-fd42a8e9d036.pdf
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 5:47 pm
Note that ALL of the bypass alternatives they present have lower cost than the dimwit “existing rail corridor”.
The question any remotely rational person would ask is why nobody is spotting some sort of pattern here and why this whole “bypass” thing isn’t extended to include the west of Fresno and the far west of Bakersfield.
A quarter of a billion here to relocate a freeway in an “existing corridor” here, and an extra billion or two there, and pretty soon you’re talking real money.
Joe Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 6:42 pm
Why that is an amazing discovery.
Could you make the trip to Gilroy’s next council meeting and let the city know about this pattern?
The city recommended a downtown station and not the bypass station. If we only knew.
You can explain this pattern to the council and mayor. We are a small town so just be yourself.
I’ll sell popcorn and watch.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 6:44 pm
Welfare queen.
VBobier Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 7:14 pm
A fictional term, Welfare Queens do not exist, this is a made up term, a Right Wing Talking Point, a MYTH and a LIE…
joe Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 7:19 pm
Thank you Mr Noé Valley Nice to see your classless retort.
Now did anyone really not know bypasses were less expensive ?
Neil Shea Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 7:25 pm
Well, Richard, at least you are consistent. You also recommended we bypass San Francisco and just serve Oakland — no actually you preferred Livermore — instead.
That would save a lot of money. And it would sure show PB that we are Master of Our Own Domain. You aren’t going to fool us by trying to bring our new train to some existing transit center or community hub. We would rather use this as our opportunity to sprawl some new exurbs. (But no one will profit from THAT though!)
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 9:26 pm
Atta boy, Neal!
With just a few more years of practice you’ll be reading at a third grade level.
Neil Shea Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 10:04 pm
Maybe the upperclassman would care to show his work by listing some better choices in proven transportation engineering firms, pointing of course to their track record of completed projects across different countries (such as HK, UK, PRC, Taiwan, NYC) and their demonstrated low prices.
We’ve heard a lot about how awful these people are. Remind me which unsuccessful bidder should we have chosen and which firms should we have begged to bid on the HSR work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsons_Brinckerhoff#Representative_projects
Stephen Smith Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 12:36 am
Starts with an S, ends with an NCF…
Nathanael Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 9:08 pm
Well, Richard, of COURSE it’s cheaper to skip all the existing cities. But then it actually WOULD be a train to nowhere.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 9:29 pm
http://www.cahsrblog.com/2012/07/downtown-extension-is-no-surprise/#comment-159560
http://www.cahsrblog.com/2012/07/downtown-extension-is-no-surprise/#comment-159577
Q&A: Amtrak President Joe Boardman on the Rational Inevitability of High-Speed Rail
Alon Levy Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 5:03 pm
Sigh. And I spent today’s post on a cheerful study from last year regarding Vancouver, when I could have ranted about how comments like “150 billion is a small portion of our GDP” and “this is necessary to have the free flowing mobility” are wrong, false, and mistaken.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 5:21 pm
150 billion is a small portion of our GDP. And train travel along the NEC is one of the more rational solutions for insuring mobility along it.
……whether or not 150 billion dollars is a reasonable amount to spend to do that is a different question.
Joe Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 6:23 pm
Rail enthusiasts will find a way to screw this up by creating some lowball threshold for cost effective service, any figure beyond that threshold and the project should be stopped.
Joey Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 10:14 pm
There I fixed it.
Joey Reply:
August 6th, 2012 at 10:14 pm
Dammit, strikethrough doesn’t work in block quotes apparently.
Stephen Smith Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 12:44 am
The problem isn’t so much the fact that it’s $151 billion, it’s that throwing $151 billion at a problem like US rail inefficiency is just going to make things worse by rewarding incompetence, setting the bar even lower for next time. I hate analogies, but the drug addiction one here is pretty good. Yes, by removing the heroin from your son’s veins you will make him feel shitty tomorrow – it’ll suck that there’s no HSR line being built in 2012 or 2013 or whatever. But in the long run, you can’t keep chasing the high – it’s just not sustainable. You end up passed out in a ditch with a needle in your arm muttering things like “$151 billion NEC HSR” and “$7 billion Union Station” (btw, I don’t think either of those costs actually includes the 6 tunnels of HSR at Union Station, right?). At some point you need to just bite the bullet, kill a few projects or two, and do the dirty work of actually making things cost reasonable prices.
Alon Levy Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 4:37 pm
$150 billion is a small portion of GDP, but intercity rail is a small portion of transportation, and transportation is a medium-size portion of spending. It’s similar to how $4 is a tiny fraction of my annual income, but I’m still not going to spend that on a half-liter bottle of water.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 5:25 pm
This guy seems to think it’s important enough to spent huge amounts his spare time writing about it.
http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2012/07/10/northeast-corridor-hsr-90-cheaper/
The Northeast’s solution to getting from Boston to DC and all the points in between is HSR.
Probably the solution for Cleveland-NY and all the points in between and NY-Toronto and NY-Montreal which then makes Philadelphia-Montreal really cheap and Boston-Toronto and Boston-Montreal very cheap.
The cost issues are intertwined with that but have separate solutions. That can be applied to building HSR in Florida. Or Chicago-Detroit. Or Atlanta-Charlotte. Or…
Reality Check Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 11:11 am
Amtrak’s $151B Price Tag Hits a High Speed Bump
Alon Levy Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 4:38 pm
I stopped reading that article at “recent high-speed rail successes in the United Kingdom.”
Russia to build high-speed rail for World Cu
Jerry Brown Shows He’s an Equal Opportunity Offender
synonymouse Reply:
August 7th, 2012 at 11:24 am
He can be thanked for throwing money at boondoggles.