Steps are under way to bring true high-speed rail to California, albeit not until 2030. But that'll just give Southern California plenty of time to ensure that when San Franciscans hop off their train in LA there are tons of good ways of getting around that don't involve renting a car.
« Would Clinton Want to be VP? | Main | Last DC HITS Even »
Good News for the Far Future
16 May 2008 12:11 pm
Comments (29)
Taking drivers off the 5 between LA and SF would be nice but not at the huge cost of a high speed rail connection. It's not carbon positive. Focus on the commuters between Lancaster and Pasadena or between Watsonsville and San Jose. They either have to move closer together or work from home.
"As long as you want to go only where the rail line leads. Otherwise, not so much."
Yea, who wants to go to podunk cities like San Fran and LA?
1) High speed rail and earthquakes. What could possibly go wrong.
2) Think I have an idea for Hollywood's next disaster move.
3) Which will kill the whole concept.
4) This world REALLY needs more engineers with a perverse interest in politics. For example, after 20 years of work and several $Billion dollars, nuclear energy in this country is
still on hold because Senator Reid doesn't want
nuclear waste in Nevada (Yucca Mountain.)
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain
5)So a nuclear waste depositry which should have opened in 1998 may not open until 2020 - if ever.
Wonder how much money Senator Reid gets from Saudi Arabia and the coal companies?
6)Any fool should have known that the depositry should have been put on the Mexican border. On the high ground with elevation dropping toward the south.
As long as you want to go only where the rail line leads. Otherwise, not so much.
And yet people still want to fly between LA and San Francisco, even you though you can only go where the airplane lands. Go figure.
1) High speed rail and earthquakes. What could possibly go wrong.
One word: Japan
"High speed rail and earthquakes. What could possibly go wrong."
By that rationale, no buildings should be built in California.
Re Ethel-to-Tilly's comment "1) High speed rail and earthquakes. What could possibly go wrong.--
One word: Japan"
-------------------
1) Okay. So we'll film the disaster movie with a JAPANESE high-speed train doing the "Classical Dismount" and hitting a hillside at 200 MPH.
2) Nah. Won't work. American audiences don't give a shit if Asians suffer massive death and destruction. They still have an "Stomp on the Anthill" outlook -- a holdover from the WWII-Pearl Harbor progaganda. That's why everybody laughs during the Godzilla movies.
Has to be a California train wreck.
3) Oh, you're talking about Technical Solutions to avoid disaster. What in the hell makes you think the American voter makes rational decisions based upon complex engineering data?
4) We haven't build a nuclear plant in this country in decades because (a) Jane Fonda told us all that it would melt through the earth and come out in China and (b) When she was young, Jane Fonda was hot and had big tits.
Well, okay. So Three Mile Island here in Pennsylvania -- and a sad-sack extra named President Carter -- had some influence as well.
5) But the point remains. One disaster movie and no one will step foot on a high speed train. Even Amtrak is smart enough to know that. It's the "Back Seat Driver" syndrome.
Wow, 2030? Where did you get that number? People like you, who do not know the facts, spread wrong information (lying) and cause problems.
Earthquakes are not an issue. Earthquakes are not an issue. Guess what? Earthquakes are not an issue.
Who cares about being
better than minneapolis, which was just pushed back it's transportation "2020 plan" to 2030. and vice president-hopeful tim pawlenty just vetoed light rail from minneapolis to st. paul!
the two city-region is larger than san diego & st. louis & tampa & denver & pittsburgh * portland & cleveland but we can't even get light rail between the two cities that form our metro area. good lord.
better than minneapolis, which was just pushed back it's transportation "2020 plan" to 2030. and vice president-hopeful tim pawlenty just vetoed light rail from minneapolis to st. paul!
the two city-region is larger than san diego & st. louis & tampa & denver & pittsburgh & portland & cleveland but we can't even get light rail between the two cities that form our metro area. good lord.
Don-
Compelling, but could you repost with MORE words in ALL caps? I think that WOULD really sell it.
What Ethel said, I'm not famaliar with the schedule for LAX and SFO, but I imagine it is simlar to what we have for Portland and Seattle. Horizon Air has flights almost every hour throughout the day. Replacing all those with some high speed trains would seem to be a net positive.
Andy,
WTF are you ranting about? The article Matt links too says 2030 many times.
1) High speed rail and earthquakes. What could possibly go wrong.
I am impressed that Don either a) doesn't know they have earthquakes in Japan or b) doesn't know they have bullet trains in Japan.
2) Think I have an idea for Hollywood's next disaster movie.
A train crash. O-kay.
That's your big high-concept pitch for a summer blockbuster? A train crash? Well, that's going to pull the kids in, no question. I think I'm beginning to see why Hollywood's dominated by liberals...
Don - Japan has had high speed rail since the 1960s - Japan also has more active faults than California and also has had several "big ones" since the Bullet Train was introduced. Did you see the big disaster movie about the tragic ill-fated bullet trains in the big Kobe earthquake? I didn't either, because there wasn't any.
And I guess you didn't live in the East in the summer of 1979 - millions of people in large population centers at risk - nothing to do with Jane Fonda's boobs regardless of your tiresome hyperbole.
1) Those of you who don't understand how energy and transportation policy is made in this country should rent Jane Fonda's "The China Syndrome" --
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Syndrome
2) Maybe watch Jane Fonda's movie Barbarella first to gain an understanding of how Jane gained her reputation as an expert in nuclear engineering
-- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbarella_%28film%29
Also from the Wiki Three Mile Island page
"The 1979 TMI accident did not, however, initiate the demise of the U.S. nuclear power industry. As a result of post-oil-shock analysis and conclusions of overcapacity, 40 planned nuclear power plants had already been canceled between 1973 and 1979. No U.S. nuclear power plant had been authorized to begin construction since the year before TMI. Nonetheless, TMI added a significant impact on this demise: At the time of the TMI incident, 129 nuclear power plants had been approved; of those, only 53 (which were not already operating) were completed. Federal requirements became more stringent, local opposition became more strident, and construction times were significantly lengthened"
Blame that on Jane Fonda's tits.
Plus you guys aren't considering the political effect from the huge baby boomer generation becoming senior citizens.
THEY won't use high speed trains -- because they KNOW the engineer up front is either (a) A Generation X pot smoking slacker or (b) A covert Islamic Terrorist. They're not sure which is worse but they want nothing to do with it.
Nah --best to take the bus. It move slowly and you can nag the driver if he goes too fast.
Face it -- the elderly baby boomers will determine the transportation options in this country for the next 30 years -- and you WILL be riding in your father's Oldsmobile. With Miss Daisy.
Bwahahahahaha
Apparently the funding for this train is on the ballot in California in '08. I think I'll vote "No". Here's why:
For anyone from the Bay Area: if L.A. Area folks can come up for the weekend, not only will San Fran turn into a city-wide Marina/Cow Hollow, but we'll be even more crowded out of Half Moon Bay, Monterrey, Napa, Sonoma, and all of the other nooks and crannies in our area (I like hiking in the regional parks). And then we'll have to cough up more money to build more parking lots, which will turn our locale into a hillier L.A. Just so some rich folks with business to do in both cities have an easier time. Ump that.
I got nothing against L.A. (I like L.A.), but I'd like to keep it where it is: far away from Northern CA.
And there, my friends, is the mentality of the Bay Area resident. The funny thing is, I've never heard anybody in L.A. say anything negative about their neighbors to the north. It's a very one-way rivalry.
Do you know how bad the financial situation is in California? It would be a miracle if this got built by 2030.
You sounds suspiciously like a Marina resident, P; everyone I know in the Eastern Districts has strong L.A. ties.
I make the trip about 5 times a year and I would kill for this thing. My understanding was that Schwarzenegger was the shutting it down, but I'm glad it seems to be moving along.
The funny thing is, I've never heard anybody in L.A. say anything negative
Wha????????????
about their neighbors to the north.
Oh. Phew. See, that's what gets us riled up. Angelinos hate on everything. When you neglect to include us in the list of things that are overrated, passe, or so-last-week, we feel very left out. :(
Re too many steves' comment "The funny thing is, I've never heard anybody in L.A. say anything negative about their neighbors to the north."
-------------
No, instead the Angelinos prefer to reach up and steal the northerners' water supplies.
They figure if they remain quiet and well-mannered, no one will notice until it's too late.
Focus on the commuters between Lancaster and Pasadena
You mean the ones who can get from their home to their work in a seamless Metrolink-Metro Rail connection with just one change of trains?
By the way, for those worried about high speed rail and earthquakes?
BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) goes UNDER the San Francisco Bay.
And yes, the tunnels do have occasional leaks.
Nobody here cares. Which is not to say we don't think about it when we're actually UNDER the Bay, but basically, nobody cares. Face it, the odds that YOU'LL be on the train when "The Big One" hits are not that high.
Just as the people who were on the Cypress Expressway were the unlucky ones when the Loma Prieta hit in 1989. Fifteen seconds more and the Embarcadero would have gone down - MANY more deaths.
I do think about that every time a bus I'm on goes under one of those overpasses.
But nobody's going to vote on that basis.
Hack, you're in the Yay? Hilarious. But it makes sense.
Personally, the Bay Bridge scares me waaaay more than the Trans-Bay Tunnel. I do about 85 trying to get across that thing before the Next One hits.
The funny thing is, though, I really only think about it when I'm going eastbound. Maybe it's because I don't have that extra layer of asphalt to break my fall...
I hear they're retrofitting the transbay tube on BART... so hopefully nothing will happen until it gets fixed.
-From Berkeley,
Some arguments and counter-counter-arguments:
There isn't one population density in the United States. Some states are very sparse and some are dense. California happens to have 234 people/square mile and France has 295/square mile. So it's quite close.
High-speed trains are very safe. Unlike ordinary trains they are always used in whole sets. There is very little "wiggle" between the cars (there doesn't need to be much) so if the train goes off-rail it basically plows straight ahead. If the ground is reasonably flat (farmland) nothing special happens. It's about as safe as you can go at 200mph.
Modern high-speed trains are very comfortable. There is much more room than in an airplane.
Trains are far more energy-efficient than airplanes and cars.
High-speed trains can easily shift to low-speed and use old rail into city-centers (this is done in Paris).
High-speed trains can be the fastest way to travel in the middle-distance (100-400 miles).
Re Bengt Larsson's comment "There is very little "wiggle" between the cars (there doesn't need to be much) so if the train goes off-rail it basically plows straight ahead. If the ground is reasonably flat (farmland) nothing special happens. It's about as safe as you can go at 200mph."
--------------
Hmmm. I think the California High Speed Rail Authority should hire Bengt to make a public service announcement -- to provide the above reassurance to the riding public.
Comments closed May 30, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
As long as you want to go only where the rail line leads. Otherwise, not so much.
Posted by Wile E. Coyote | May 16, 2008 12:19 PM