Pipelines A-OK. HSR? Gtfo.
yea the two are completely comparable in every way.
Both involve eminent domain, jurisdictional issues, environmental assessment and long connected network.
comparing a simple pipeline that is mostly underground to a railroad are two completely different construction projects in every form including the ones you listed..
That's right, Luna says it's not the same, case closed
Some of the issues are the same (right of way, environmental impact studies, etc). But hopefully you can still agree a pipeline meant to carry bulk commodities is quite different than a transportation network meant to carry large numbers of human passengers. We don’t say a city sewer system is the same as an airline and that’s a close analogue to pipeline:HSR.
Most cities can't fucking get money to build commuter and light rail, almost exclusively because of conservative governments. What makes anybody think we'd spend even more for HSR?
The story earlier this year was that Amtrak was looking to cut some long-haul routes and majorly expand regional, city-city routes. Let's see if the Republican governments in these states are willing to put $1 toward these projects.
Most cities can't fucking get money to build commuter and light rail, almost exclusively because of conservative governments. What makes anybody think we'd spend even more for HSR?
The story earlier this year was that Amtrak was looking to cut some long-haul routes and majorly expand regional, city-city routes. Let's see if the Republican governments in these states are willing to put $1 toward these projects.
These days, conservative governments are largely too distracted with defending participation trophies for centuries-old traitors and their dedicated monuments to slavery and the subjugation of non-white races to be bothered to do anything for anyone that isn't living in the 18th or 19th centuries.
Yeah I'll accept that argument when cities stop paying for suburban and rural highways running through townships with 10 people in them. And it's made worse when gerrymandered, conservative state houses actively make it harder to spend money on transit projects. Tennessee tried to block a new bus line in Nashville by making it illegal for buses to pick up and drop off passengers in the center lane of a road.Those cities aren't run by conservatives. If you meant to say "most cities can't get conservatives in other areas to pay for their city's commuter and light rail instead of the city paying for it themselves" then you're closer to being accurate. At least HSR makes a pretense of saying it benefits more than a subset of the citizens of a single city like commuter/light rail do.
I know right, railroads are so antiquated compared to your 19th century car technology.LOL, railroads are the very definition of living in the 18th and 19th centuries. You might as well throw into the conversation that you want high speed barge service on canals while you're at it, or improved telegraph service.
The story earlier this year was that Amtrak was looking to cut some long-haul routes and majorly expand regional, city-city routes. Let's see if the Republican governments in these states are willing to put $1 toward these projects.
It's as if you didn't need a right of way for one.That's right, Luna says it's not the same, case closed
Yeah I'll accept that argument when cities stop paying for suburban and rural highways running through townships with 10 people in them. And it's made worse when gerrymandered, conservative state houses actively make it harder to spend money on transit projects. Tennessee tried to block a new bus line in Nashville by making it illegal for buses to pick up and drop off passengers in the center lane of a road.
I know right, railroads are so antiquated compared to your 19th century car technology.
There’s no real reason why federal taxpayers in Nevada should be footing the bill for commuter rail or rural roads in Tennessee.
Hate to be bearer of bad news but the Federal government already has several programs that target local transportation projects. And why shouldn't there be? The cities pay more than their fair share in federal taxes, why shouldn't they expect getting some back for infrastructure.I’m talking about the federal government subsidizing commuter rail not states. I can understand the frustration at the intra-state level since the benefit to city residents is much closer at the state level. There’s no real reason why federal taxpayers in Nevada should be footing the bill for commuter rail or rural roads in Tennessee. Not quite the same case for Murfreesboro suburban roads to get paid for by the state and not Nashville light rail.
As for cars vs trains, for routes like LA-SF the 20th century tech of jet planes seems better than either of the former 19th century tech. The infrastructure already exists. And the opportunity cost of building HSR seems like it would be better applied towards new trees or something if your problem is with the environmental impact of plane travel.
A question for the east coasters: how long do passengers typically spend underground on the big city subways? I've familiar with the DC Metro and Chicago systems where the trains are only underground when they absolutely have to be with most of the track running on the surface or elevated. Thinking about the hyperloop idea, I'm wondering how long people are willing to stay underground without going bugfuck crazy.
we tried the articles of confederation. it sucked.I’m talking about the federal government subsidizing commuter rail not states. I can understand the frustration at the intra-state level since the benefit to city residents is much closer at the state level. There’s no real reason why federal taxpayers in Nevada should be footing the bill for commuter rail or rural roads in Tennessee. Not quite the same case for Murfreesboro suburban roads to get paid for by the state and not Nashville light rail.
we tried the articles of confederation. it sucked.
Yes. We in America usually build infrastructure in seriously demented ways with an army of consultants and swampy contractors who only live to drive up the price. This isn't remotely limited to rail projects either.
A better comparison is maybe the French who and do can build stuff at 40% (or less) of what we pay and they're not exactly a low regulation/non-union environment.
This isn't correct. In California for example our prevailing wage laws make the labor cost substantially higher than even in France. Under California Prevailing wage law the average Journey man construction worker pay is over 40 an hour. This is much higher than in France where is closer to $25 USD an hour. Regulations in France are not nearly as high as they should be.
When California shifted its bullet train plan into high gear in 2008, it had just 10 employees to manage and oversee design of the largest public construction project in state history.
Consultants assured the state there was little reason to hire hundreds or thousands of in-house engineers and rail experts, because the consultants could handle the heavy work themselves and save California money. It would take them only 12 years to bore under mountains, bridge rivers and build 520 miles of rail bed — all at a cost of just $33 billion.
State officials followed that advice, and for the next several years, development of the nation’s first high-speed rail line was overseen by a minuscule government staff.
Now, more than a decade later, that decision has proved to be a foundational error in the project’s execution — a miscalculation that has resulted in the California High-Speed Rail Authority being overly reliant on a network of high-cost consultants who have consistently underestimated the difficulty of the task.
Today, these consultants manage nearly every aspect of the job: They direct day-to-day construction work in the Central Valley and negotiate with farmers to buy land. They assess the geological conditions in the San Gabriel Mountains and estimate how many people will ride the future system. They produce tens of thousands of pages of reports and attend community meetings. They even oversee other consultants.