High Speed Rail in the US

[Spiffor]

planes bring much more comfort

Have you ever been on a plane?

Yes, and on trains as well.

I meant comfort wrt speed. Going to Rome from Paris is much faster (all delays included) by plane than by train. Same with the Paris-Warsaw.

As for the comfort within trains, TGV passengers have about as much room for their legs as plane passengers. The French rail company makes as much money from the TGV, as those lines are supposed to pay for the unprofitable lines in the countryside.

It's a bit different in German high-speed trains (which aren't nearly as fast, in my experience). Being atrociously expensive, they afford to be comfortable.

[DanS]

New York City is something of an exception in all of this. It would seem a challenge to reduce the externalities there.

But the bulk of the externalities (and infrastructure needs) in cities like DC or Baltimore are transitory. They are real, but could be and likely will be reduced drastically through higher technology density. I would just as soon see how this transition shakes out. Maybe picovian taxes only in the instance where the change is happening slowly or there are entrenched interests stopping the change from occurring or setting up their own tollbooths on the way.

[KrazyHorse]

But the bulk of the externalities (and infrastructure needs) in cities like DC or Baltimore are transitory. They are real, but could reduced drastically through higher technology density.

Transitory? And wtf does "higher technology density" mean?

Traffic on the DC beltway is NOT a transitory phenomenon. It ****ing sucks, and will continue to suck. How much do you think that rush hour per-car externalities are there? To take a wild-ass guess, 10-20$. That's huge too! Who's going to pay 30$ (two way) to commute at rush hour? They'll take the ****ing metro instead. And the metro will expand to meet capacity and gain new routes. Plus car-pooling will increase dramatically.

Seriously, externalities to driving, especially commuter driving are ENORMOUS.

[Jon Miller]

The only time when the driving is OK is between 11pm and 4 am.

It is terrible, especially in the 'rush hours' (which is almost the entire day, excluding a couple hours at lunch)

JM

[DanS]

Transitory? And wtf does "higher technology density" mean?

Technology isn't really used in driving today. Well, there are proximity sensors when you put your car in reverse. By "higher technology density" I mean that cars will be driving themselves in some fashion before too long. Computational power probably is up to the task now. Driving on the beltway is not overly complex -- a computer should be able to deal with it, given simple communications tools.

Metro takes a metric buttload of time to build and has a useful life of forever. If the problems on the beltway are going to go away (or change) in 20 or 30 years, I would prefer not to spend money on the metro.

[Spiffor]

The subways of Paris or London look like a good investment to me today, 100+ years after...

[Dinner]

I would be sympathetic to using eminent domain to acquire the land required to build train links. But what argument is there for government control of the construction and operation? If these high speed rails are such a good idea then private companies should be able to undertake them. Especially for the northeast corridor and CA coast where the construction costs would only be a few billion dollars it should be possible for private enterprise to collect enough money to do it. Once the costs get into the tens of billions the private credit market begins to dry up, of course.

The big problem for private companies is purchasing right of ways. It only takes one person to say no and unless their is a viable alternative route then the deal is off. As I understand the last attempt to build an LA- to Vegas bullet train was derailed by the private company's inability to secure right of ways so they went to the states (CA and NV) and asked for free right of ways which both states refused.

Honestly, for these types of projects the state is the only one who can get most of them actually working because the state can use eminent domain if it wants to.

[DanS]

Spiff: I agree, but I wonder about the next 100 years. It doesn't seem wise to expect cars to remain the same.

After all, 100 years ago, the US had by far the best passenger rail system in the world (as it has now with its freight rail system). My little home town of 1,500 people had regular service. Passenger rail almost died in the US because cars are very useful.

[KrazyHorse]

The big problem for private companies is purchasing right of ways.

Errr...that's why I made a statement about eminent domain...

[DanS]

Eminent domain is not a cure-all. The right-of-way isn't free. Do the math of running a new line from DC to NYC and then try to square it with the realities of the number of people traveling between the two cities.

[Ben Kenobi]

I can't see why a Boston/Hartford/New York/Philadelphia/Baltimore/Washington bullet train wouldn't work. 450 miles of track, 55 million people served. You are looking at 500k people/km.

Run it at 250 miles an hour, stops every 15 minutes or so, 2 and a quarter hours.

Washington -- Baltimore -- Philadelphia -- New York City -- Hartford -- Boston
(0)...............(40)............(140)........... .(240).................(360).........(460)
(0:00)..........(15:00)........(45:00)..........(1 :15:00)............(1:45:00)....(2:15:00)

[Dinner]

Eminent domain is not a cure-all. The right-of-way isn't free. Do the math of running a new line from DC to NYC and then try to square it with the realities of the number of people traveling between the two cities.

No one claimed it was a cure all. What was said is that private companies have an extremely hard time getting right of ways while the government has a much, much easier time getting those right of ways.

[Dinner]

The big problem for private companies is purchasing right of ways.

Errr...that's why I made a statement about eminent domain...

I was more or less agreeing with you and expanding upon the argument.

[KrazyHorse]

Eminent domain is not a cure-all. The right-of-way isn't free. Do the math of running a new line from DC to NYC and then try to square it with the realities of the number of people traveling between the two cities.

I'm not saying it is. My point is that if private companies are given the opportunity to use eminent domain to acquire land at a current market price and they STILL don't want to do this, then it might be a sign that the gov't shouldn't be doing this either.

[Ben Kenobi]

Do the math of running a new line from DC to NYC and then try to square it with the realities of the number of people traveling between the two cities.

Is it higher then 150 million trips?