Is California High Speed Rail Worth the Costly Price Tag?
By Faith Eischen | 07/12/2012 | California, Headline, Infrastructure, Legislation | 7 Comments
Credit: treehugger.com
Back in 2008 California voters approved, by a narrow margin, to build the first high-speed train network in the United States. Last week, the plans moved ahead on the high speed rail when the California State Senate approved a critical funding bill. The “bullet” train is supposed to address growing transportation needs as well as create more jobs in California, where unemployment is currently 10.8%. However, these ideal outcomes come at an enormous price. The planning and building of the high-speed train network is estimated to cost nearly $68 billion. The state legislature has yet to approve the $2.7 billion from the voter approved bond money. Once approved, if it is approved, the federal government can then contribute the promised $3.3 billion funding, and building can begin.
Here are ten reasons why the California High Speed Rail Authority believes the “bullet train” will prove to benefit majorly the state of California:
1. First and foremost, the high-speed rail will create more jobs. As many as 100,000 construction related jobs each year that the system is being built as well as nearly 450,000 permanent new jobs statewide created by the economic growth the train system will generate over the next 25 years.
2. Reduced dependence on foreign oil: 12.7 million barrels less per year.
3. Reduced greenhouse gas emissions: 12 billion pounds less per year.
4. Improved air quality.
5. Faster travel on the ground between major metropolitan areas.
6. Congestion relief on freeways and at airports.
7. The trains system will cut air pollution and smog throughout California because the electric power to the trains can be produced by renewable sources like wind and solar.
8. 800 miles of track and up to 24 stations, meaning the railway will be highly accessible.
9. Cheaper, faster, and more convenient travel connected to local public transportation.
10. Enhanced public safety due to separation of tracks and existing roads and highways.
Do you think the California high-speed railway’s price tag matches the potential benefits?
Leave Your Comment →
7 Comments
Matt Metzner
07.12.2012
@mmetzner
It’s a high cost to stomach at the beginning, but this infrastructure project could be a huge benefit to Californians. Tough to determine its value prior to implementation.
Amanda Le
07.12.2012
@amandale
Interesting to see it from a more positive perspective. If this rail does work out then this alt. transportation system could mean big things for the rest of the country. Not sure if this is a risk worth taking but it’s probably not possible for Californians to be more frustrated with government than they already are.
Amos Cooper
07.12.2012
@adcooper12
Rail transportation is huge in Europe and other parts of the world. There’s no reason we shouldn’t have it here either. It’s a nice alternative to driving or flying.
Bob Morris
07.12.2012
@Bob_Morris
Where will the funding come from? California will need at least $60 billion more and the federal government has shut the door on future funding.
Chad Peace
07.12.2012
@Chad_Peace
The train itself is not a bad idea, by the route(s) is/are. They should have two shorter routes, between SF and SAC, and SD and LA. Those would be the most economical, most heavily trafficked, and would clear up the most highway congestion.
Brad R. Schlesinger
07.13.2012
@bradschlesinger
Real high-speed rail, that go long distances and connect major cities from different states is just not going to work in the US. Our system of property rights will make it too difficult to build the long straightaways needed to travel at optimal speeds. The reason why high-speed rail works in China is because their major population centers are concentrated near each other and if they need to build straightaways, they just bulldoze whatever is in the way, because there is no real system of property rights. Really cool, high-tech fast trains is not a valid justification for the government to exercise its eminent domain power, which is what would have to be done in order to make high-speed rail feasible in connecting major cities together. See this article and chart below.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/11/why-the-us-will-not-get-chinas-high-speed-rail/66863/
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.14.2012
@craigschlesinger
If there is market demand for high speed rail, the market will accommodate. But turning to the government is a big mistake. They will go into massive debt to fund the project, infringe on people’s private property rights, and set a dangerous precedent in the process. We hear a lot of “Well if China can build high speed rail then why can’t America?” Well, that’s because China is an authoritarian state that does not recognize private property rights and individual liberty. Shining example for us to follow!