HSR: Local logic

Burlingame's own Kent Lauder has published an opinion piece in the San Mateo Daily Journal that raises several excellent issues with high-speed rail.  Kent writes

The arguments we have heard for the construction of high-speed rail are not the result of reasoned, objective studies or careful analyses based on the factual evidence. They are based on whimsy.

Consider the proponents’ rationales: One, it will create jobs. Two, it will be an alternative to cars and it will help the environment by reducing greenhouse emissions. Three, its cost will be defrayed when 43 million people per year use this system. Four, it will be financed in large part by federal money.

One, of course it will provide jobs, a bridge to nowhere provides jobs, as do all governmental programs, no matter how unsound the project. The critical consideration is the cost/benefit factor; how much bang for the buck? As a convenience for those wanting to wait in line at the airport, this does not meet a high standard.

Two, will it help the environment by reducing emissions? Only when compared to cars, not planes. The impact on the environment, as it carves it way across converted, fertile farm and grazing land, as well as through communities that will be split apart by its massive walls, will be more destructive than constructive.

Three, 43 million riders a year, presumably its break-even point, works out to about 123,000 people a day, or 5,000 per hour — 24 hours a day — every day! Who are these people? San Francisco and Los Angeles are dead-end terminals, not accessible to the rest of the country. At six hours (riding time only) round trip, no one is going to be using this as a daily commute. Real commuters will fly, as they do currently. It’s faster.

Four, federal dollars will amount to only a very small percentage of the total projected cost of 40 (read 60) dollars. We pay the rest.

The proponents’ reasoning is but a vague reference to not wanting to fall behind other countries (Japan and Europe) that have HSR; as if the construction of a futuristic, Tomorrowland ride were its own justification. Those countries have their own specific sets of circumstances that are not pertinent to our own. It is poor reasoning to extrapolate their situation onto ours. Incidentally, they are experiencing their own financial difficulties.

But more critically, the arguments are an ego-generated rationale that reflects a 1900s mind set of blind allegiance to “progress,” as in bigger and faster is better. That is anachronistic thinking. It may have been proper for a time, not so now. Progress, in its truest sense, is true innovation which leads to a betterment without impairment. Progress arises out of cultural needs, not artificially induced “wants” derived from wishful thinking.

One alternative to this project, one that would reflect true progress, would be to invest this money in new forms of alternative energy. It would provide jobs. It would be a thousand-fold more effective at lessening environmental damage. Energy independence would make, not lose, money for the state.

The cost-benefit difference of HSR versus developing energy independence is so staggering as to be laughable, yet such logic will never trump the stubborn, rationalizing entrenchment of its apologists.

In addition, here is a link to the 3 1/2 minute video that was shown at last night City Council meeting during the HSR update.   A common reaction to the video is "it's just as bad as we thought".  

Comments

[Holy Roller]

My grandson made me watch a DVD this weekend-"Food Inc."
It has nothing to do with HSR.
Everything to do with corparations that develope a business structure.
Once you buy into one, you have to pay for the others. Or your investment will be lost, and you will be unable to do business with any other.
You get stuck with no means of opting out due to contracts that were signed.
Even though the system, you originally expected is not needed anymore.
If we pay for a project that will take 10-15 years to build and maintain, the tech. and world would be such that we are stuck with a system that is obsolite, before it has it's first user.
Watch the DVD "Food Inc."
Maybe then you can make since of this comment.

[Russ]

Another perspective on HSR. Mine.

Danger on the tracks
November 18, 2009, San Mateo Daily Journal

There are several obstacles on the high-speed rail tracks, yet the proverbial train is speeding at over 125 mph down the track through the Peninsula regardless of how big, how dangerous or how costly the obstacles might be.
The obstacles are bigger than a group of whiny NIMBYS, (although if there were six high-speed trains per hour whizzing through your backyard, you might whine a little too.) The obstacles are real, they have been repeatedly voiced, yet no one on the California High Speed Rail Authority, (CHSRA) is listening, no one in state office is listening — heck, the president isn’t even listening.

The CHSRA seems to be ignoring at least three major barriers to completion. For starters, there doesn’t seem to be an “owner” for the project — meaning, the state isn’t responsible for the project’s completion, the federal government isn’t running the project, and no local body has jurisdiction over the project. Who will take responsibility to complete the job, especially if the whining gets louder, the lawsuits multiply, the costs rise exponentially and the project drags on for decades?

Then there’s the lack of public support along the Peninsula corridor. At every public meeting thus far, there has been an overwhelmingly high number of people against the current plan, no matter what the alternative design for the train might be — at grade, above grade or below grade. The “Caltrain Connection” alternative seems to be the favored choice for many. That plan calls for HSR to terminate in San Jose and allow riders a transfer onto Caltrain, saving billions of dollars and still achieving the goal of high-speed rail.

The biggest concern, however, is under-funding, (not like the other concerns aforementioned are minor), but by comparison, no money equals no project. Except in this case. It seems that the CHSRA is shrugging its shoulders and saying, “No worries, we’ll get private investors and federal grants — we only need $34 billion.” Question: Who will invest in a project that doesn’t have an owner, has no public support, will have a plethora of lawsuits attached to it and will take years to complete … if it can be completed at all? Of course, there’s always we taxpayers.

Because of the immensity and continual rising costs,the Peninsula will undoubtedly wind up with the cheapest and least appealing of the alternatives — a 35-foot or taller raised track system that splits Peninsula cities in two. As the first segment scheduled for completion, our lives will change dramatically as construction is touted to begin in 2011 — just over one year from now!

Perhaps the only way to get our elected leaders and the CHSRA to listen is to have a representative on the CHSRA board that lives on the Peninsula. Currently, the Northern California portion of the board consists of representatives from San Francisco and San Jose. In effect, the Peninsula has 0 percent representation yet 90 percent of the impact.
Once again, San Mateo County is left to watch on the sidelines as our communities are physically divided in half by this project. We’re waiting for a train that will careen through our communities at enormous speeds and with enormous costs both in dollars and in loss of our quality of life.

Residents of the Peninsula, blow your horns now. There is danger on the tracks. The quality of life and money you save may be your own.

Russ Cohen is a former Burlingame councilman and avid fan of public transit.

[Pam]

San Mateo Times editorial goes after Schwarzenegger

GOV. ARNOLD Schwarzenegger has killed an effort to seek $1.1 billion in stimulus money for a number of practical rail projects. Instead he is focusing all his attention of obtaining federal funds for the proposed bullet train from San Francisco to Southern California. Let's hope Washington has the sense to say no to the governor.

Under the federal economic stimulus plan, $8 billion is available for high-speed train projects, which can include conventional rail improvements to increase train speeds.

The realistic projects that Schwarzenegger decided to forego in favor of the fanciful Boondoggle Express included computer-guided braking systems that would allow conventional trains to go 110 mph, railroad crossing improvements, track additions, overpasses and maintenance.

These projects are ready to begin and could have added real improvements in a timely manner to the nation's second busiest rail corridor, including a reduction in travel time between Los Angeles and San Diego from three to two hours.

The California Department of Transportation's rail division was about to submit the request for funds for the above projects by the Oct. 2 deadline.

Unfortunately, Schwarzenegger nixed the application and instead told state officials to seek $4.7 billion in federal rail stimulus funds for only the high-speed train project to boost its chances for funding.

That was a grave and foolhardy mistake. The bullet train is estimated to cost about $40 billion, a figure that is likely to grow far higher if it ever gets under way.

Voters approved a bond measure that authorizes $9 billion in bond sales for the train. But even if California received all of the federal rail stimulus funds it is seeking, it would still be way short of what is needed.

The bullet train does not have an adequate business plan or a right of way. There is no realistic estimate of ridership or what fares would be. Nor are there any other readily available sources of public or private funds for the train.

But Schwarzenegger prefers to indulge in fantasy rather than reality. The money he is passing up would have gone for shovel-ready projects, according to Rich Tolmach, president of the California Rail Foundation. "Hundreds of millions of dollars were thrown away. Now these rail projects will not get their fair share of federal stimulus money."

The purpose of the federal stimulus package is to quickly create jobs by financing ready-to-go public works projects that provide a real public benefit.

Doling out billions of taxpayer dollars for an unrealistic California bullet train that is a long way from construction would be highly wasteful and a misuse of stimulus finds. Schwarzenegger's request should be denied.