3 ms·
Every high speed rail in history has come in way over budget I'm gonna have to go digging through some stuff to see if I can find a source but I'm pretty sure
by inferiorhuman 4y ago
Every high speed rail in history has come in way over budget
I'm gonna have to go digging through some stuff to see if I can find a source but I'm pretty sure that's not the case (even if you ignore authoritarian style countries like China). California government is fairly dysfunctional and that makes things more expensive, and I say this as a proponent of CAHSR.
The biggest problem with CAHSR though is that the rich suburban fucks (especially on the SF peninsula) are trying to kill HSR with death from a thousand paper cuts^W^W lawsuits. That's how you get things like cities (coughathertoncoughbelmontcough) wanting underground sections built on someone else's dime. They'll cite things like noise while ignoring that a.) electric trains are quieter than diesels and b.) grade separation eliminates the need to sound the horn.
It's a really nasty self-fulfilling prophecy.
- antognini 4y agoA relevant comparison here is with Spain. California is currently projected to spend around $110 billion for about 500 miles of track. By contrast Spain built out a network of 2000 miles of rail for about $70 billion. Other European countries have similar costs. California is the outlier.
- ZoomerCretin 4y agoAmerica is the outlier. The problem doesn't just exist in California.
- brnt 4y agoSpain is sparsely populated though, with the highest urban density in the world. It would be a place where rail both makes sense due to excellent urban networks and not much right of way issues.