[Graeme]

CalPIRG promotes high-speed rail

Members of the California Public Interest Research Group at USC organized and attended a press conference in front of Los Angeles City Hall on Thursday to promote CalPIRG's spring break bike tour, a campaign raising awareness about the proposed high-speed rail line that would extend from Northern to Southern California.

The $9.9 billion bond needed to finance the train - which would be owned by the state - will be on the November ballot, CalPIRG advocate Emily Rusch said.

A CalPIRG press release predicts the train will take 92 million drivers off the road annually, which would reduce the need to expand highways and airports.

The total cost to build the high-speed rail is about $40 billion, however, on the ballot this November will be a bond of about $10 billion to begin the project. The estimated price for high-speed rail tickets from Los Angeles to San Francisco is expected to be around $55.

The $40 billion to build the high-speed rail system is less than the amount needed to expand California highways and airports, Rusch said.

dailytrojan

[BicycleCommuter]

Every local, regional, or state govt should stop expanding road capacity and invest in bicycle, pedestrian, and transit infrastructure, especially electrified, non-petroleum based transit as well as non-motorized, transit oriented development.

[emersonbiggins]

This is probably going up for referendum at the worst possible time (an age of ballooning deficits in CA), except for anytime after it. The time for floating this was before the dot-com bust; they could actually be using it right about now, in fact, if that had taken place.

Here's hoping they vote for it, though. Zardoz, this means you.

[Graeme]

Michael Dukakis: Toll road bad news is high-speed rail good news

The recent 8-2 California Coastal Commission vote against the Foothill-South Toll Road extension through Orange County may have been bad news for those who like to build and drive on crowded freeways, but it was great news for the traveling public.

The $1 billion its sponsors wanted to spend on a toll road could go a long way toward paying for the cost of that portion of the state's high-speed rail plan that could take travelers from Los Angeles to San Diego in 55 minutes and from Irvine to either of those cities in less than a half-hour while eliminating a lot of congestion on Interstate 5, not only in Orange County but along the entire route.


The proposed high-speed rail bond issue that will be on the ballot in November will carry an estimated cost of $9 billion. It would be matched by the federal government with a contribution that is less than the cost of a month of the Iraq war. And it could be supplemented by billions in contributions by major investors in development around the system's stations.

The bond issue is a small price to pay for a high-speed rail plan that will create thousands of jobs, reduce congestion on our highways and at our airports, cut pollution and global warming, help revitalize the state's older cities, preserve our parks for generations to come and save us a lot of pain at the pump.

It ought to be one of California's top priorities.

sacbee

[alokin]

very nice, but too late.
The days of public spending are over.

[ReverseEngineer]

Obama has finally indicated a big infrastructure project to get a lot of Funny Money; Tres Gran Vitesse Obama Gotta love this quote:

You might as well have the government invest in nuclear-powered bicycles," Mitchell added. "That's probably the only thing I could imagine that would be more of a waste of money than inter-city rail.

So, is high speed rail going to help us, hurt os or make no difference at all?

[Voice_du_More]

Obama has finally indicated a big infrastructure project to get a lot of Funny Money;

Tres Gran Vitesse Obama

Gotta love this quote:

You might as well have the government invest in nuclear-powered bicycles," Mitchell added. "That's probably the only thing I could imagine that would be more of a waste of money than inter-city rail.

So, is high speed rail going to help us, hurt os or make no difference at all?

Reverse Engineer

I think superfast rail will take off if they get it going in time. You know there will always be some who disagree with everything, and usually among those is someone with a Phd who has a different political ideology than you. That said, we should never have let the auto lobby kill public transportation back in the fifties.

I honestly think that either the leaders are stupid in a way that defies comprehension or they are trying to make it appear like things are moving along positively while secretly making plans to be in a cave in the Alps in about three years. There is no way that Dow 8000 means the economy is out of the water, neither peak oil nor climate change have been mitigated, and there is a host of other issues to be tackled. Entitlements in the US is another. The baby boomers are about to retire en masse leaving a gaping whole in the American Dream.

I have good hope in the people of my area that they can remember how to make it together when the time comes. Right now everyone is more than a little grumpy because for some they have to make it through the month on half as much Miller Lite, while others have to eat at $20 per plate restaurants instead of $50 per plate restaurants.

There is also alot of people bending the rules here and there to help out a friend. It will all only get worse, if it is bad to begin with. I could see the tea parties turning into civil disobedience and finally unrest before a second Obama term is through.

This Admin seems to be more in the dark about peakoil than the last. At least Cheney is going after oil and you know he knows it's important. Biden seems to think a collective train ride to a love feast in Baden Baden is the answer. Fire up the furnaces boys, the camps are coming online.

May God help us.

[Caffeine]

If it's actually implemented well, high speed rail sounds like a great idea, for areas with sufficient population density for this to be practical.

[alokin]

The thing would be to reactivate rail at all. The important issues are frequency and price and density of nets. You are not really served if you only get from one big city to the other and then have to rent a car, which adds to your traveling costs. High speed rails are in some cases very good, but they are much more expensive. Often a usual train which runs quite frequent and goes everywhere would do the same job, but this doesn't look anything as exciting as high speed rail.
Overall, the railway is the most effective transportation system, the most environmentally friendly, the most convenient, and the safest.
My only hope is that if the US works on their railway net that Australia will do the same.

[dinopello]

While the dollars are still modest, the attitude is a big change from previous administration who not only didn't have rail programs, and not only was opposed to state and local gov't using their Federal highway funds for rail projects but also actively worked to thwart locally funded rail efforts by throwing obstacles up via the DOT and EPA.

This group has a lot to do with the groundwork for the change

[Peepers]

Pres. Obama Press Briefing on High-Speed Rail

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/watch.aspx? ... HP-A-41630

Pres. Obama held a press briefing on high-speed rail’s affect on transportation, the economy and our dependence on foreign oil. He was joined by Vice Pres. Biden and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.


And who is this insulated ignoramus "Mitchell" who was quoted in the initial post of this thread? Sometimes I don't think people get out much and experience the world.

And population density doesn't necessarily determine the success of passenger rail. France, home of the TGV and many other fast passenger rail services, has the same population density of Ohio.

Norway, with half the population density of West Virginia, has an amazing system of fast passenger rail services. West Virginia has one Amtrak train that runs three days a week.

Get out and see the world, people.

[mos6507]

While the dollars are still modest, the attitude is a big change from previous administration

Finally someone other than me is realizing that the Obama administration is a marked change from BushCo.

[The_Toecutter]

Hopefully this high speed rail system can be built before complete economic and governmental collapse occurs...

The airline industry, in all likilihood, will still argue against this becausde it will rely on government funding as they haver through modern history(hypocrites they are); had it not been for their lobbying, we may have had high speed rail systems connecting major cities in the southeastern US about 10 years ago.

[Ludi]

Finally someone other than me is realizing that the Obama administration is a marked change from BushCo.

Yes, apparently he's even MORE like Hitler than Bush:

Fire up the furnaces boys, the camps are coming online.

High speed rail = Hitler.

[bencole]

So, is high speed rail going to help us, hurt os or make no difference at all?

Reverse Engineer

High speed rail won't make any difference at all. The high speed is basically just a convenience for commuters who live far away from their job, it just facilitates a lifestyle that is rapidly becoming obsolete. My question is, in a economic downturn where are all these jobs going to be that people will be in such a dire rush to get to?
The money would better be spent on upgrading the existing rail system since the current trains in existance are perfectly adequate for moving people are cargo.

[mefistofeles]

The money needed for the president's plans begin with an $8 billion "down payment" from the stimulus bill, to be followed, he hopes, by $1 billion per year for five years, requested in the federal budget to accelerate the program.

Although he's well intentioned the amount allocated towards high speed rail is absolutely pitiful. Also let's give credit where to where its due, this is Reid's idea and not Obama's.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... 7517.story

In a town that loves to connect the dots, the funding increase raised suspicions that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who played a key role in writing the bill, pushed for it in order to promote home-state interests, namely the Anaheim-to-Las Vegas project.

One thing I can't understand is having been to Vegas a few times why he didn't actually fund the monorail instead. If the Monorail is fully funded from McCarron airport to the Sahara then you could conceivably land at the airport and not have take a Taxi at all, unless the high speed rail network connects to the MGM.

It would also be alot faster and cheaper to extend the monorail by 1.8 miles than to build hundreds of miles of high speed rail.

Obama is such a lightweight Reid proposes and fund's something and he's trying to claim credit.

[heroineworshipper]

Guess $700 billion infrastructure plan #2 didn't pan out. A better investment is a 1 way train to Calif* from everywhere else, since that's the natural flow.

Oh yeah, that 10 foot long Las Vegas monorail didn't go to the airport because of the taxi union, not that you'll be living there much longer. U need a 1 way monorail to Calif*.

[mos6507]

The high speed is basically just a convenience for commuters who live far away from their job.

Are you sure about that? The node points on these trains are pretty far apart. Are they even going to make any stops along the way other than the cities marked? (I hope they do, because the one that goes from Boston to Canada passes right through Vermont.)

[Newfie]

The high speed is basically just a convenience for commuters who live far away from their job.

Are you sure about that? The node points on these trains are pretty far apart. Are they even going to make any stops along the way other than the cities marked? (I hope they do, because the one that goes from Boston to Canada passes right through Vermont.)

Yup, pretty sure he is right. Big waste of money to support the elite.

Better to spend money on interurbans so you can get around, town to town, without a car.

[TheDude]

I'm for it, so long as it stops at the In-And-Out-Burger.

$8 billion might lay ca. 200 miles of track, judging by a European example I took a quick look at: LGV Sud-Est - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Total in 2007 Euros would've been 10 billion euros = 13.17 billion USD.

Since 1980, every state effort in the United States to build high-speed rail has failed. Budget-battered California has proposed a 220-miles-per-hour bullet train that would link San Francisco to Los Angeles in two-and-a-half hours -- with a price tag of $45 billion.

Anybody suggesting to President Lobulus Auriculae Maximus that electrifying freight might be more sensible? Probably not sexy enough for the iPhone set though.