California High Speed Rail Thread - project updates & related discussion ONLY

[jg6544]

Spending on freeways never "works" in CA and hasn't for years. This nonsense about adding carpool lanes to the 405 makes me crazy. It will only make matters worse. I'd be a lot happier if they just blew the damned thing up and replaced it with rapid rail or diverted the $ to speeding up construction of the subway to the sea.

It is impossible to "improve" freeways in CA fast enough to keep up with the traffic they generate unless you want to pave over the entire state. The 405 could be 20 lanes wide and it would still be a parking lot.

[phoenixboi08]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

I never said that a high speed rail wouldnt work or should not be built, but this body, the California High Speed Rail Authority has proven itself to be inept, indifferent, deceptive(virtually all of their projections have been debunked by various government agencies and transportation think tanks) and arrogant and woefully underprepared to work with the communities that will be directly affected by this project

That's a fair argument. Though, I feel it'd be most fruitful to speak to the specific instances in which you find this to be true...so the rest of us who don't know can get a better picture.

[pesto]

Ok. I'll explain why HSR is ridiculous for California.

First you argue about freeways WITHIN LA and weigh them against HSR. Not relevant; HSR wants to run trains BETWEEN LA and the Bay Area, where there are no jams, and plenty of room for the future (5 already has the rights of way and room). Building better transit along the 405 corridor is a no-brainer but has nothing to do with connecting "near Madera to almost Bako" (which is what HSR is now proposing in the 4th iteration).

To use it will cost FAR more than cars or air, be much slower (the great majority of trains will make multiple stops and/or changes of train) or require getting to Union Station or DT SF, two areas which are proverbially jammed with traffic in the first place. If anyone wants, I can post this analysis in some detail again.

How do we know it isn't going to work? Well, presumably it will work in the sense of actually running. But we know it will require permanent subsidies, since HSR has had 4 years of trying to find private investors, partners, private lenders, etc., and has found exactly zero who are willing to put money in. Even the proposed Japanese and Chinese builders DEMANDED US federal guarantees of payment before putting a nickle in. And not one analyst has ever thought it would make money (which is how HSR sold themselves) or was properly funded or had an operating plan that made sense.

Just as a side note, why is irrational defense of HSR not trolling? Yet pointing out the facts of its weakness (which Jerry Brown, 3 Democratic auditors, 2 Democrat controlled legislative bodies, the LA Times, various neutral academics, etc. have repeatedly done) is trolling?

[fflint]

This is supposed to be a thread about California High Speed Rail--about a railroad, about high-speed train service, about transportation.

This isn't supposed to be a thread about other modes of transportation and why they're so great. It isn't supposed to be a thread about other projects, or what is and isn't happening in other states. It isn't supposed to be a thread for those who have no interest in CAHSR to use as a platform for preaching partisanship, political and cultural ideology, and grand philosophy. And while opposing viewpoints can enrich a discussion, this thread isn't supposed to be dozens and dozens of pages of "Again, I hate it!" and "Again, I don't want it!" and "Again, if you don't hate it you're crazy!" There's no good reason to read in this thread something like "Thank God Florida knows the free market is the only legitimate way to build anything, ever!"

But this thread hasn't been what it was supposed to be for quite some time now. The other day, a forumer felt the need to ask me where the train was going to terminate in San Francisco. He realized the answer was somewhere in this thread, but understandably didn't want to spend an eternity wading through all the preaching and bickering and philosophizing. Forumers can no longer easily locate any useful information about the CAHSR project in its own dedicated thread. Few even try anymore. And nobody interested in railroads, high speed train service, or CAHSR specifically is going to bother to join SSP and contribute, given the nature of this thread. Forum fail.

[drifting sun]

Originally Posted by fflint

But this thread hasn't been what it was supposed to be for quite some time now. The other day, a forumer felt the need to ask me where the train was going to terminate in San Francisco. He realized the answer was somewhere in this thread, but understandably didn't want to spend an eternity wading through all the preaching and bickering and philosophizing.

This was probably me; I asked this question twice and did not get any takers, although I admit I am also guilty of feeding into the trollish back-and-forth.

So, what about that termination on the SF end? What plans have been floated around? What are people's opinions on the potential need (or not) to dig tunnel to the Trans Bay Terminal from the Caltrain station? Would such a tunnel face routing issues with the already-begun "Central Subway"?

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by fflint

This is supposed to be a thread about California High Speed Rail--about a railroad, about high-speed train service, about transportation.

It is and there's no doubt CA needs HSR as an alternate mode of transportation in the LA-Bay Area corridor.

[fflint]

The Transbay Transit Center, under construction right now, is the planned terminus for CAHSR in San Francisco. While the tunnel that is to carry Caltrain and high-speed service from 4th and King to the Transbay terminal is a long way off, the center itself will open in 2017 with all necessary infrastructure to accomodate two underground levels of electric train service.

Here's the Transbay site about a week ago, posted by forumer Peanut Gallery:


Check out the project website for all kinds of info, pictures, schedules and even a sweet video or two. There's a dedicated Transbay Transit Center thread here on the forum.

[Nexis4Jersey]

When will work start on the Tunnel or the Caltrain upgrade?

[fflint]

Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey

When will work start on the Tunnel or the Caltrain upgrade?

Good question. According to an article in today's Chronicle, Caltrain electrification may take "the better part of a decade." While I don't know of any timetable yet for the Caltrain-CAHSR tunnel work, I do know they won't run diesel trains in a tunnel that long--so I wouldn't expect to see a completed tunnel before full electrification.

[wakamesalad]

Here is a good aerial shot I took of the terminal project site:

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by pesto

Ok. I'll explain why HSR is ridiculous for California.

First you argue about freeways WITHIN LA and weigh them against HSR.

I'll make the same argument against the 5 or the 101.

HSR will move more people between LA and SF faster than any freeway ever could. Travel time between LA and San Francisco if you use LAX and SFO is still over three hours if everything goes right at both ends. HSR will compete with that travel time, even figuring in the time it takes to get to Union Station from the westside of LA.

By every measure, HSR is, as it has been in the east coast corridor for decades, a vital third alternate mode for those who, like me, loathe flying and loathe LAX even worse and who don't always want to make the drive (which is the only way I will make the trip now).

[Nexis4Jersey]

What kind of soil is the terminal being built on?

[Busy Bee]

^Yeah, it does look like an awful lot of cave in prevention going on there. Must be sandy?

[M II A II R II K]

Can a Bullet Train Shrink California’s Carbon Footprint?


July 27, 2012

By Roger Rudick

Read More: http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2...bon-footprint/

Near Antwerp, Belgium, there’s a two-mile section of high-speed rail (HSR) line with solar panels over the tracks to help power the system. That kind of technology is essential to maximizing environmental benefits from California’s proposed bullet train, according to a new study co-authored by Berkeley’s School of Civil and Environmental Engineering. California is poised to begin construction of an HSR line from San Francisco to Los Angeles early next year.

- But before the electrically powered trains start cleaning up California’s air, they have to make it dirtier. That’s because the construction generates pollution. “We calculated after ground breaking, so the net benefits come at best 10 years after the system starts running,” said Mikhail Chester, a professor at Arizona State and a study author.

- And some of that depends on how quickly people switch from driving and flying to using the train, he added. According to the study, entitled “High-speed rail with emerging automobiles and aircraft can reduce environmental impacts in California’s future,” 67% of the construction pollution for HSR comes from making cement. “But construction is a one-time cost…the benefits continue for the life of the system,” he said.

- “I think the point about running smaller trains during off-peak times is important, to avoid excess capacity,” said Rick Geddes, Associate Professor, Department of Policy Analysis and Management at Cornell, in reference to the study. He also pointed out a difficult trade-off: the faster the trains, the more power they consume. But higher speeds attract riders from heavily polluting airplanes—so it’s important to find the sweet spot that does the most to reduce emissions over all, he said.

- Even if California HSR is powered by wind and solar, bad regulations could negate the benefits, according to the study. Under a cap-and-trade policy in which the right to emit carbon is sold on the open market, the efficiencies of the train could drive down the price of carbon offsets. In other words, if the “cap” is too high, the train could just end up making it cheaper for other sectors to pollute. But assuming the state can avoid self-defeating policies, the only other way to reduce carbon emissions is to impede travel, said Clark. “Because under any scenario, California’s going to continue to grow.”

.....

[Nexis4Jersey]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

^Yeah, it does look like an awful lot of cave in prevention going on there. Must be sandy?

That wouldn't be so good during an Earthquake...

[fflint]

^Seismic engineering takes soil conditions into account.

[dl3000]

Most of the soil in downtown is historic fill which is all kinds of crap, and young bay mud. It's tough to build on. They probably put pilings down to old bay mud or sandstone bedrock.

[202_Cyclist]

High-speed rail will shift Highway 99 through Fresno

By Tim Sheehan
Fresno Bee
Jul. 31, 2012

"Caltrans estimates that it will cost about $226 million and take up to three years to relocate a stretch of Highway 99 through Fresno to make way for high-speed train tracks.

The estimate by the state's transportation department includes acquiring the private property needed to shove the freeway west by about 100 feet between Ashlan and Clinton avenues in central Fresno, as well as building new traffic lanes and demolition of the old highway, according to a report to the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

The authority, meeting Thursday in Sacramento, will consider approving an agreement with Caltrans to handle the 2.5-mile construction project. No time frame has been set for when the freeway work would begin..."

http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/07/31/...e-highway.html

[peanut gallery]

On the question of soil conditions at the Transbay site, a local article touched on that last week:

At the eastern end, Beck says buttresses are being built and seven foot diameter casings are placed 250 feet down then filled with concrete to help stabilize the silty soil. The eastern end was once covered with water and called Yerba Buena Cove, "We're drilling down to bedrock, excavating out the existing soil and replacing it with concrete. And that's just to improve soil quality here in this area so it resists heave as we excavate the site."

It's not ideal soil to build on but obviously very possible given everything that's already been built in the area. The article also mentions that about half the total schedule is excavating and then building back up to the surface.

[Cirrus]

Mod note
There have been some complaints that this thread has become so cluttered with political discussion about the merits of CAHSR, that it is impossible for people interested in the project to use this thread for its originally intended purpose, which was to discuss updates and keep track of specific details.

Both topics are permitted, but it is not fair for one to make the other impossible or overly inconvenient.

So with that in mind, we are going to split this discussion into separate threads. Please continue to use this one for its original purpose, to track the details of the project as it moves forward. If you would like to discuss "larger" issues relating to the overall wisdom of the CAHSR project, use the other thread.

I'll move some posts from the last few days over in to the other thread, so it will have a natural start point.