The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train • Hacker News Board

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#71

Post by trome » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 10:44 AM UTC

akiselev wrote: post #52

wycx wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not think US mineral rights are much of an issue. Australia has similar, or perhaps worse problems with high cost intercity high speed rail. Every time a Sydney to Melbourne fast train is investigated, cost estimates are among the highest in the world per kilometer, without the challenging geography of California. I suspect some form of rent seeking (or likely multiple layers of rent seeking) is part of the prob…

They're not an issue if you're not building a tunnel. My point is that in Switzerland and most European countries they're not a problem even if you are. Although all infrastructure projects in western countries are subject to rent seeking and NIMBYism that drive up their costs, the degree of rent seeking depends on the state/province/country and project complexity. Much of the relevant land in the mountainous parts o…

Yeah, infrastructure costs tons of money even when the land itself is free, unless you can get away with doing a substandard job.

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#72

Post by tazjin » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 10:44 AM UTC

trome wrote: post #70

yummyfajitas wrote: post #5

I'm pretty sure the people calling it a boondoggle are correct. Obama included $3B in the 2009 stimulus package for it back in 2009. Not a single yard of track has been laid. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/us/high-speed-train-in-ca... http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/263782-obama-high-s... The project is hoped to finish in 2029, which is 12 years from now. For comparison, China build the Qinhuangdao–Sheny…

Good luck with that, our safety standards for train cars in the US are head and shoulders above Europe, and in a whole different universe than India & China. Add to that that it is illegal to buy up all the land around rail lines and lease it out to subsidize the rail company, and its no wonder we have to spend more! This is before we even talk about fault lines, soil conditions, land cost, lawsuits, etc. that are in…

> our safety standards for train cars in the US are head and shoulders above Europe

It's strange to regulate something you don't have. Maybe Europe has learned from actual experience with trains what standards are needed?

Lets see what President Trump does with these sorts of things in his $1tn infrastructure package.

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#73

Post by yummyfajitas » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 10:49 AM UTC

imjustsaying wrote: post #25

yummyfajitas wrote: post #5

I'm pretty sure the people calling it a boondoggle are correct. Obama included $3B in the 2009 stimulus package for it back in 2009. Not a single yard of track has been laid. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/us/high-speed-train-in-ca... http://thehill.com/policy/transportation/263782-obama-high-s... The project is hoped to finish in 2029, which is 12 years from now. For comparison, China build the Qinhuangdao–Sheny…

You are comparing California labor construction costs to the costs of third world laborers. What's the cost difference here; 10 to 1? Surely 5 to 1 at the least? Then you gotta figure the cost of compliance with all the different bureaus and regulations that don't exist in China or India to make something like this happen in California. And then there's the litigious cost amplifier that is another distinctly American…

So let's import Chinese and Indians and have them build it. If American labor can't get the job done, let's not use it.

The goal is getting train service rather than funneling money to unions, right?

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#74

Post by labrador » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 10:51 AM UTC

ubernostrum wrote: post #40

labrador wrote: post #35

As a California usually in favor of all sorts of new technologies and futuristic projects, I am totally opposed to building this train system. The air travel infrastructure is already in place and could work even better with an investment of a fraction of the $64B. Airplanes don't need expensive rails to ride on in the sky. What's better about getting into a coach of a train and rolling on the ground over getting in…

If you think the existing air travel infrastructure was built in its entirety for "a fraction" of $64B (in 2016 dollars), I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you. Most of the cost of air travel is hidden in places you don't think about, and might surprise you if you knew how much it added up to (or how much tax money -- in the US, around $300 million per year currently, and around $9m/year of it in Californi…

I didn't say it could be built in it's entirety for a fraction of the cost, I said the existing air travel infrastructure could be improved and made more efficient for a fraction of the cost.

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#75

Post by vilhelm_s » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 10:51 AM UTC

kalleboo wrote: post #44

rtpg wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We also need to focus on the right problems. I know we all want fast trains, but if we're going through major cities we likely won't get that fast (unless we do like the Shinkansen and build the entire train on a 3-story platform). If we're willing to spend $50 billion, let's spend that on some slower trains that connect cities anyways. Maybe you don't do LA-SF, but giving higher inter-connectivity is good. What happ…

What also happens in Japan is that the train company owns that land, the mall, and maybe a couple apartment buildings nearby, so that they have an interest both in people riding the train and shopping at the mall (so e.g. the train company has an incentive to keep fares low enough to keep shoppers coming). A significant portion of Japanese train companies' income comes from retail real estate.

According to this blog post[0] the same used to be true in the U.S.---light rail was payed for by property developers.

Interestingly, he says this eventually led to the collapse of the Los Angeles street car system, because it was financed by the the increase in land value, and once the development was complete there was no longer a cash stream to pay for operating costs.

[0] http://kontextmaschine.tumblr.com/post/144726791758/was-thin...

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#76

Post by labrador » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 10:53 AM UTC

kalleboo wrote: post #50

labrador wrote: post #35

As a California usually in favor of all sorts of new technologies and futuristic projects, I am totally opposed to building this train system. The air travel infrastructure is already in place and could work even better with an investment of a fraction of the $64B. Airplanes don't need expensive rails to ride on in the sky. What's better about getting into a coach of a train and rolling on the ground over getting in…

One problem with domestic air travel in the U.S. in particular is all the dead time in getting to the airport, security, boarding. In comparison, here in Japan you can show up at the airport 20 minutes before your departure time with no problems. If you didn't book a ticket in advance, make it 30 minutes to get a ticket from a vending machine. It really is an air-BUS. The question is what kind of security theater wil…

I'm afraid the same kind of security theater would apply to a high speed train, though the chances of it being driven into a building are low, it still would be a choice target. I would take a few billion out of that 64B price tag and improve air travel security to make the checkin process take less time and be less intrusive.

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#77

Post by trome » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 10:54 AM UTC

akiselev wrote: post #59

Animats wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most expensive line under construction is the Tokyo-Nagoya maglev line, at $50 billion for only 286km. It's maglev at 500km/hr, and it's 90% in tunnels. They're going straight through the Japanese Alps. Under construction since 2013, opening scheduled for 2027. 43km of track is already in operation as a test track. Here's a ride video.[1] JR expects it to be profitable. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CKwchJ…

That is an early cost estimate and tunneling estimates are by far some of the most innacurate in civil engineering because you never know how much the geology will differ from what the estimate assumed. Construction on the first tunnel segment started a year ago and won't be complete until the 2020s so it'll take a while before the developer knows how bad the overrun will be on that section, let alone for the whole l…

Sooo crunchy there, jeez! Tunneling isn't as unpredictable as you suggest, rail lines are often completed on time and under budget[1]. When you do crazy stuff like try and build the largest tunnel ever built with cutting edge technology and don't plan for failure[2], that is when things go bad.

Luckily, rail doesn't need giant tunnels, tunnel boring machines for that size tunnel are a known quantity.

1 - https://www.ch2m.com/newsroom/news/new-seattle-light-rail-li...

2 - http://q13fox.com/2016/07/21/bertha-seattle-tunnel-project-2...

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#78

Post by trome » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 10:57 AM UTC

205guy wrote: post #39

hourislate wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's best that this doesn't happen because it will just turn into a boondoggle and the tax payers will be on the hook for it. It would make sense hiring a European or Asian country to come in and build it for us with 1/5 of the resources and in 1/3 the time. If a country like Switzerland can dig through solid granite for 35 miles under a mountain (Gotthard Base Tunnel) someone out there other than a US company…

The French already said they could build the California high speed train for half the current estimate, or something like that. As mentioned in other comments, it's the popular opinion and government fragmentation in the US that makes this impossible. In France, the train builders and operators are nationalized (roughly) and the central government is much more powerful (not in terms of absolute power but rather in pu…

Sure, if we restricted eminent domain litigation and returned environmental impact statements to being under 75 pages (as they are legally required to be already) we could build rail much cheaper, but Trump has not said jack in regard to getting that cleaned up.

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#79

Post by trome » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 10:59 AM UTC

55555 wrote: post #30

hourislate wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's best that this doesn't happen because it will just turn into a boondoggle and the tax payers will be on the hook for it. It would make sense hiring a European or Asian country to come in and build it for us with 1/5 of the resources and in 1/3 the time. If a country like Switzerland can dig through solid granite for 35 miles under a mountain (Gotthard Base Tunnel) someone out there other than a US company…

I wouldnt want China or India to build it for us, but I would offer Japan, Germany, or Switzerland a premium.

Uhh, they cut corners on their train cars. Where we allow 1 inch of crush when an impact happens and limited twist, they allow a foot & change, with significantly more twist allowed. There are other safety standards they are not bound to too, unlike rail in the US.

Re: The hunt for dollars to build the $64B bullet train

#80

Post by trome » Mon, Dec 26, 2016, 11:04 AM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #73

imjustsaying wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are comparing California labor construction costs to the costs of third world laborers. What's the cost difference here; 10 to 1? Surely 5 to 1 at the least? Then you gotta figure the cost of compliance with all the different bureaus and regulations that don't exist in China or India to make something like this happen in California. And then there's the litigious cost amplifier that is another distinctly American…

So let's import Chinese and Indians and have them build it. If American labor can't get the job done, let's not use it. The goal is getting train service rather than funneling money to unions, right?

We actually did this with the Chinese and Irish immigrants [1], and some rail lines would kill off workers to avoid paying them once a rail line was complete.

That being said, American labor isn't the issue, Chinese already cost $4/hr and importing them costs quite a bit, whereas the labor market stateside is pretty soft in that segment. It likely would not make sense unless your good with mass executions to cut costs.

1 - http://web.stanford.edu/group/chineserailroad/cgi-bin/wordpr...

Edit: dmoy states labor is $4/hr in China, not $3/hr.