4 ms·

I think he specifically wants California to build this instead of wasting $100bn on the HSR project. I'm sure he'll be open to building hyperloops elsewhere as

by jvm 13y ago

I think he specifically wants California to build this instead of wasting $100bn on the HSR project. I'm sure he'll be open to building hyperloops elsewhere as well.

the_watcher 13y ago
If he can stop California from lighting that $100bn on fire chasing HSR from Bakersfield to Fresno, then this will all be worth it. I voted against all of those propositions, but I'd have reconsidered if you told me Musk would be the one playing with the money.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > If he can stop California from lighting that $100bn on fire chasing HSR from Bakersfield to Fresno, $100 billion is an approximation of an old estimate of the total system cost (which includes HSR with terminii in the San Diego, LA, Sacramento, and San Francisco, and a upgrades to a number of existing intercity and commuter rail systems that would connect to HSR) -- the most recent estimate is much lower at $68.4 billion. The Bakersfield to Fresno line is a ~$3 billion first construction segment which will initially be used to improve exisiting Central Valley heavy rail passenger service and which will eventually be part of the HSR initial operating segment from Merced to Palmdale. No one is lighting $100 billion on fire chasing HSR from Bakersfield to Fresno. For more, see http://www.hsr.ca.gov/About/Business_Plans/2012_Business_Plan.html http://www.hsr.ca.gov/About/Business_Plans/2012_Business_Pla...
  - jvm 13y ago
    Lighting 3 billion on fire is still pretty bad no?!? I started having doubts about this project when I found out technicals were skeptical, but when the bombshell dropped that it would have cost half if SNCF built it on the I-5 corridor[1] I decided there's no way I could continue to support it. It's just a device for politicians to bring pork to their districts, and anyway at this point it seems doubtful that it will ever actually exist. [1] http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2012/07/11/the-cahsr-sncf-bombshell/ http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2012/07/11/the-c...
    - dragonwriter 13y ago
      > Lighting 3 billion on fire is still pretty bad no?!? Building something with immediate utility to improving existing service is lighting money on fire. The initial construction segment was chosen, among other segments considered for that role, because it provides considerable short-term return in terms of improvements in service on an already heavily traveled intercity rail route, as well as providing a good foundation for the initial operating segment for HSR. > but when the bombshell dropped that it would have cost half if SNCF built it on the I-5 corridor The SNCF proposal -- as those criticizing the High-Speed Rail Authority for rejecting it always fail to mention -- would have both used an alignment with lower ridership projections (and, thus, substantially less expected revenues) and required the State to provide SNCF with a revenue guarantee, both of which violate the laws governing the HSR project, and have the open-ended potential to cost the State far more in the long run.

by jvm 13y ago

I think he specifically wants California to build this instead of wasting $100bn on the HSR project. I'm sure he'll be open to building hyperloops elsewhere as well.

the_watcher 13y ago

If he can stop California from lighting that $100bn on fire chasing HSR from Bakersfield to Fresno, then this will all be worth it. I voted against all of those propositions, but I'd have reconsidered if you told me Musk would be the one playing with the money.

dragonwriter 13y ago
> If he can stop California from lighting that $100bn on fire chasing HSR from Bakersfield to Fresno, $100 billion is an approximation of an old estimate of the total system cost (which includes HSR with terminii in the San Diego, LA, Sacramento, and San Francisco, and a upgrades to a number of existing intercity and commuter rail systems that would connect to HSR) -- the most recent estimate is much lower at $68.4 billion. The Bakersfield to Fresno line is a ~$3 billion first construction segment which will initially be used to improve exisiting Central Valley heavy rail passenger service and which will eventually be part of the HSR initial operating segment from Merced to Palmdale. No one is lighting $100 billion on fire chasing HSR from Bakersfield to Fresno. For more, see http://www.hsr.ca.gov/About/Business_Plans/2012_Business_Plan.html http://www.hsr.ca.gov/About/Business_Plans/2012_Business_Pla...
- jvm 13y ago
  Lighting 3 billion on fire is still pretty bad no?!? I started having doubts about this project when I found out technicals were skeptical, but when the bombshell dropped that it would have cost half if SNCF built it on the I-5 corridor[1] I decided there's no way I could continue to support it. It's just a device for politicians to bring pork to their districts, and anyway at this point it seems doubtful that it will ever actually exist. [1] http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2012/07/11/the-cahsr-sncf-bombshell/ http://pedestrianobservations.wordpress.com/2012/07/11/the-c...
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > Lighting 3 billion on fire is still pretty bad no?!? Building something with immediate utility to improving existing service is lighting money on fire. The initial construction segment was chosen, among other segments considered for that role, because it provides considerable short-term return in terms of improvements in service on an already heavily traveled intercity rail route, as well as providing a good foundation for the initial operating segment for HSR. > but when the bombshell dropped that it would have cost half if SNCF built it on the I-5 corridor The SNCF proposal -- as those criticizing the High-Speed Rail Authority for rejecting it always fail to mention -- would have both used an alignment with lower ridership projections (and, thus, substantially less expected revenues) and required the State to provide SNCF with a revenue guarantee, both of which violate the laws governing the HSR project, and have the open-ended potential to cost the State far more in the long run.