As I searched for projected ticket price information on the proposed high speed train in CA I came across the following April 2008 web site article on http://www.VentureBeat.com entitled:
Why the California High-Speed Rail plan is fundamentally flawed
April 11, 2008 Martin Engel
[Note from Eric Eldon: I wrote a rather positive article this week on the proposed $10 billion California High-Speed Rail bond measure. If approved by the state’s voters this November, the bond will lead to high-speed trains stretching from Sacramento and the Bay Area all the way down to San Diego. Martin Engel, a transportation commissioner for the City of Menlo Park, Calif. (a city that the train would run through), thinks its a terrible idea because it’s so expensive and because it’s solving the wrong problems. Here’s his response.]
If I may, I would like to respond, more or less point by point to your article, Eric. Actually, the train ticket price that is most frequently quoted is $55 one way for the SF to LA route. That will be in 2030, according to the CHSRA [Ed. My source on fares is here]. What do you suppose that $55 will have risen to in twenty years, when these trains are finally running?
Train ticket sales today, for regular as well as high-speed trains worldwide, begin at twice the $55 amount for similar distances. Even not-so-zippy Acela (the Washington D.C. to Boston commuter train) is more costly. Many bloggers who’ve visited Europe or Japan will convey that information; that is, it’s expensive to ride those trains. And you doubtless know, all passenger rail systems are massively subsidized; so their expectations of profits are highly hypothetical.
You talk about the “value” of this project. A better way would be to talk about the “cost/benefit” ratio. You have to acknowledge that the costs will be staggering, regardless of where the money comes from. There are many examples of under-pricing (lowballing) infrastructure projects (Bay Bridge; Boston Big Dig; the Eurotunnel, for example). A Danish researcher, Bent Flyvbjerg, has published findings about this practice. My point is this: Is there a cost point for this project that makes it no longer worthwhile? Say, like the Iraq war. And, if so, what would that be?
If you become a student of this practice, you will discover that you cannot disagree with a cost projection of $100 billion (not the currently projected $42 billion). It will be all borrowed money, both from public state and federal treasuries and private ones. These debts require not only interest payments, but also a return on principle, like a mortgage. When you say that it will not all come from California, you are probably right. However, it is California that will have to repay these loans. Some say that it will help our economy. What if many of the investors are from overseas? Is being in hock to overseas investors such a good thing for the state’s economy?
Given the fare cost and the limited connections, the likelihood of lower income workers using this train as a mode of commuting is actually rather slim. Those people would prefer slower and lower cost modes of transit. Let us be clear here, whatever this train is, it is not mass transit. In large high-density areas such as the LA basin, it could serve commuters, but that is not the rhetoric or the intention of the developers.
Yes, they claim that it will create 450,000 new jobs and will require 300 thousand man-years to construct. The fact is, there is no way of predicting this. Half a million jobs will be created in the next fifty years — or not — based on large, macro-economic forces, the nature of the global and national economy, the well-being of California’s industrial and agricultural capacity and similar basic sea-changes. Were such job growth to take place, it would be presumptuous to give credit for such expansion to the creation of a north-south railroad system.
Speed of travel, the CHSRA claims, will be faster by train than plane. No matter what the obstacles are, that’s nonsense. Indeed, airports are becoming more efficient at moving people through the terminal obstacle course. At the same time, it is naive to believe that this train, and others, will not require far greater security measures than are now in place. We have been blessed by not having a post 9/11 terror attack. I suggest that with the next one, there will be a major clampdown, trains included.
Back to the $42 billion cost. Construction, which won’t begin for another several years, will take 10 years, more or less, to complete. Do you want to predict the construction costs 10 to 15 years out? You already know about sinking dollars, rising inflation world wide, fierce competition for construction materials, decline in credit availability, etc. The $42 billion is a number like the $55 train ticket. Even if it were true today, which it isn’t, these numbers will skyrocket. I say again, $100 billion total costs are not unreasonable.
A word about environmental benefits of the train. I suggest that they will not be anywhere near as great as claimed. Comparing “the train of the future” with the automobiles of the present is unfair. Planes and cars in the future will be more ecologically friendly. Electricity, on the other hand, may become dirtier (fossil-fuel powered plants) as our demands increase exponentially. This is a domain where it is almost too easy to overstate benefits in politically correct language.
Eric, you mention the increase in riders on other rail carriers. The CHRSA frequently predicts 117,000,000 passengers annually. They even paid a consulting firm to come up with those numbers. 117 million people is over a third of the entire U.S. population. How rational is that?
There are many more issues that need to be seen through lenses other than those provided by the train developers. Amazingly, very few people have been willing to seek out alternative perspectives or to challenge the rail authority’s assumptions.
Martin Engel was born in Germany, received an M.A. from Harvard, and a PhD from Syracuse. He served in the US Air Force. He has held faculty positions at Wayne State University, Carnegie-Mellon University and most recently at Stanford University. He was also a senior program officer at the US Department of Education, and a program director at Apple.
This commentary can be found at the following URL
Larry,
Thanks for looking into the cost! I always wondered why the train proponents don’t start small like adding an Amtrak run on Friday’s to Vegas with a return on Sunday. I would think people would go for that if it was competitive with driving or flying.
Who do you believe when it somes to High Speed Rail….Some guy named Larry Gilbert, or a man who has served his city and his State, and made both better places to live? God Bless Curt Pringle and his vision for a better future and shame on Cave Men like Mr. Gilbert who think the automobile can solve all of our problems.
Forward Thinker, can you make a case for the high speed train? All Larry is doing is getting a discussion going. Somehow I don’t think Curt is completely independent. I am not going to look at who donates to his campaigns, but I will bet he gets money from people who will benefit from this deal. Bond dealers, etc.
If Amtrac can’t turn a profit, I doubt this thing will. But, please make the case. I will listen.
I do want to add one comment on trains. I don’t think they are reliable. Granted my experience may be extremely, extremely rare but four out of the last four times I rode or was going to ride the train I have not completed the trip. The only times I have ridden Amtrac recently was from San Juan to Solona Beach. I have had my trip interupted by earthquake, fire, and flood. The forth time may not count because I did not actually get on the train. I called ahead and service was down for scheduled maintenance.
Granted I don’t have the best luck with flying either. The last time I tried to fly to Vegas my wife made the flight but I was to catch the next flight with the lugage. My flight had engine problems just before takeoff and that was a three hour delay. Then when getting ready to get another flight, someone ran the security point and they emptied the airport. I got my bags and drove Vegas instead. I am a huge fan of driving!
Forward thinker.
Mayor Pringle and I have agreed and disagreed in the past. We sat next to each other at a luncheon prior to his presentation in the DC area regarding Anaheim’s “development without redevelopment” in the Platinum Triangle.
We have also disagreed on KOCE on the 30 year TEMPORARY extension of Measure M.
Curt has a valid Agenda. To bring tourism into his city. For that you are right in commending him for doing his job. Tourism is the life blood of Anaheim and if he can find a way to bring thousands of other Californians and tourists to town on a high speed train to fill their hotels and venues it will be beneficial for Anaheim. However, that my friend is self serving.
Mission Viejo, the place I call home, is not a destination. While this is alleged to be an upscale community I am not too certain as to the ridership and benefits we would get while all Californians pay off the 30 years of Bonded Indebtedness called progressive thinking.
Like everything the president is trying to do we are confronted with the $64,000 dollar question. Where do you plan to get the $100 billion to fund this major transportation experiment?
In voting for Prop 1A last year voters were led to believe that the state had a good shot at getting more federal support than the entire national bucket set aside for high speed transportation in the current stimulus plan.
You obviously didn’t listen to the radio campaign. Had you bothered to pay attention, you would know that high speed rail will ease traffic congestion and fight global warming. And you can’t put a price tag on that!
Uh, yes you can…. I think it is $100,000,000,000.
“Ease traffic” I guess if you take 1 car off the road you have “eased traffic” to some extent
“Fight Global Warming” I guess if you take 1 Car off the road you have done the same….. Hmmmm those are really some high standards for 100 Billion Dollars
Rogue Elelphant, can you please drop us a line @ http://www.friendsforfullertonsfuture.org/? Would like to talk to you. Thanks.