Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

marketurbanism.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

#31

Post by scythe »

I had guessed this would work myself:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13632763

Note that neither I nor SMCF had suggested the cities on SR-99 would be excluded from the HSR service area, but that transportation "spurs" would be created at some point in the future to connect those towns to the HSR conveniently. This concurs with projected trip data (linked and discussed in above thread) suggesting that most trips from the CV cities end north of the Gilroy or south of Palmdale, i.e. Bakersfield to Fresno even with direct-to-city HSR has difficulty competing with the convenience of cars (which are going to get cheaper as battery technology improves). As such it's my opinion that HSR on the I-5 corridor would not really underserve those towns, although they would (correctly IMO) no longer be the first to get rail connectivity.

Re: What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

#32

Post by khuey »

powera wrote: post #26

If this project makes financial sense, ideally an existing railroad company would run it. Berkshire Hathaway (as the owners of the BNSF railroad) is the only US-based company that has the capital and railroad experience to even consider it. In this situation, I'm not sure how or why the California government would turn away any foreign company willing to do it.

The project can make sense for the State of California in ways that are impossible for private investors. For example, providing fast convenient transport to places people want to go generally increases the value of land. The state can benefit from this passively via its taxing authority while a private investor would have to purchase land outright with an enormous capital outlay (if it were possible at all). HSR is also a substitute good for short-haul air travel, which is typically provided with government subsidy (in the form of airports).

Re: What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

#33

Post by mahyarm »

rayiner wrote: post #28
ubernostrum wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never underestimate the ability of "very conservative" people, who hate tax-funded infrastructure, to nonetheless be heavy users of that infrastructure. Remember, even Ayn Rand accepted payments from entitlement programs she hated.

It's not a question of liberal versus conservative. The main value of HSR is allowing people to rapidly move between city centers for business or pleasure. How often do people in Bakersfield need to go to LA or SF?

If the HSR is fast enough, it might induce a long distance commuter community in bakersfield as it induces demand. So it's hard to say.

It's kind of like the joke that it's cheaper to live in vegas and fly every day to work in SF than to live in SF.

Re: What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

#34

Post by stereo »

rayiner wrote: post #3

This is a classical example of American "worst of both worlds" governance. People in Bakersfield aren't going to take the HSR to LA, at least not in enough numbers to justify connecting Bakersfield to the HSR. It'd be better to just build a straight-shot HSR and take all the money you save and give a tax break to folks in Bakersfield, or something . But our political system isn't able to achieve that result. How do E…

It’s no rose garden over here either. The Lorraine TGV station is built in the middle of nowhere, halfway between Nancy and Metz, because both cities wanted a train station.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gare_de_Lorraine_TGV (short), https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gare_de_Lorraine_TGV (longer, in French)

Re: What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

#35

Post by sctb »

masterleep wrote: post #10
rayiner wrote: post #3

This is a classical example of American "worst of both worlds" governance. People in Bakersfield aren't going to take the HSR to LA, at least not in enough numbers to justify connecting Bakersfield to the HSR. It'd be better to just build a straight-shot HSR and take all the money you save and give a tax break to folks in Bakersfield, or something . But our political system isn't able to achieve that result. How do E…

California voters are easy to fool once a dead chicken is waved in their direction regarding "saving the environment." Once the initial funding passes, the real constituencies are politicians' friends in the public union, consulting, and construction industry. So the route basically doesn't matter as long as the money flows.

We've asked you before to stop posting ideological boilerplate, which this is. The effect on the discussion is predictable and not what we're here for, and we ban accounts that refuse to stop.

Re: What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

#36

Post by mixmastamyk »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #16
mixmastamyk wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know quite a few folks living out there in the central valley, they are very conservative. They hate the idea of costly train being built with their tax money. That doesn't mean they wouldn't grow to like it eventually, but it wont help ridership in its early and fragile years.

I'm betting in the summer they'll be happy to occasionally take the high speed rail into LA to go to the beach. Hour and a half each way.

Well, it will no doubt arrive at Union Station, which is at least another hour from the beach, sadly, due to traffic.

Re: What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

#37

Post by dragonwriter »

rayiner wrote: post #28
ubernostrum wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never underestimate the ability of "very conservative" people, who hate tax-funded infrastructure, to nonetheless be heavy users of that infrastructure. Remember, even Ayn Rand accepted payments from entitlement programs she hated.

It's not a question of liberal versus conservative. The main value of HSR is allowing people to rapidly move between city centers for business or pleasure. How often do people in Bakersfield need to go to LA or SF?

> How often do people in Bakersfield need to go to LA or SF?

When I lived I Fresno, people in my household needed to go to somewhere in the LA or SF area (mostly the latter) more frequently than we needed to go to LA when we lived in the SF Bay Area.

Re: What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

#38

Post by dragonwriter »

throwaway999d wrote: post #15

HSR is a great example of what happens when a bunch of coastal elites look at the countryside ("flyover country") and assume it's empty and worthless so nobody will object if they run a bulldozer through it for a big government project. On the contrary, California's Central Valley is one of the most vibrant and important areas of the state with property claims going back to the homesteading period. So shocking that t…

> HSR is a great example of what happens when a bunch of coastal elites look at the countryside ("flyover country") and assume it's empty and worthless so nobody will object if they run a bulldozer through it for a big government project.

If you look at the prop 1A results map, most of the counties (inland or coastal) it would serve with stations tsupported it, while most of the rest opposed it. Though coastal/inland split might explain the non-secret counties that supported it, and the smaller number of served counties that opposed.

Re: What I learned today about SNCF and California HSR (2012)

#39

Post by dragonwriter »

throwaway999d wrote: post #19
calichoochoo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of land needed for HSR is much less than that needed to transport current and future population by either air or road. Just look a how much prime land SR-99 and of course many HSR opponents want to widen it.

Nice talking point. Locals actually use roads. They will never use this "bullet" train to go to cities hundreds of miles away from where they live and work.

IME (having grown up in Fresno) people from the valley travel to SF and LA areas quite a bit.
Post reply on HN