Skip to content
Subscribe

California high-speed rail project slammed by peer review

Published:

An ad-hoc group of transportation experts, headed by former state director of transportation Will Kempton, slammed the California High Speed Rail Authority saying it needed  "a thorough reassessment of a number of critical engineering, financial, economic and managerial issues."  Um, that doesn't leave much for them to be in approval of, does it?

Their report was released Dec. 3, probably in response to state officials approving a $4.3 billion "train to nowhere" on Dec. 2 as the initial part of California high-speed rail. It will go 65 miles from Borden to Corcoran, passing through Fresno. That's $66 million a mile or $12,500 a foot. I'm going to take a crazy risk here and say there will be breathtaking cost overruns that no member of government or private enterprise could have ever predicted, except if they somehow had access to a calculator and common sense, that is. Thus the final price will certainly be much higher for this hamlet-to-hamlet railroad track that even proponents are admitting won't be used for a good long while. (Perhaps Sacramento could expand on this and start building stairways to nowhere in state offices in hopes that legislators and bureaucrats would get lost and do us no further harm - but I digress.)

This peer review group, which was organized by the legislature, noted the following major problem areas.

- Funding is unreliable, especially considering the wobbly conditions of the state's finances and the certainty that the federal government will not give nearly as much as initially predicted. Also, Republicans in DC have said they will attempt block any and all federal funding.

- Costs have already soared enormously. But we already knew that. The initial bond issue in 2008 approved by voters was for $9.95 billion. But costs are already at $40 billion and rising. Also, it's unclear whether the bond measure can include revenue guarantees for investors. This will probably be decided in court.

- Ridership and revenue projections are unrealistic. This directly affects the ability to raise money from private investors, who will want to know precisely how they will be paid back.

- The California High-Speed Rail Authority is seriously understaffed and lacking in accountability.  The roles of the various parties are undefined and unclear. This can and will only lead to chaos, as well as cost overruns and the inevitable lawsuits.

- "The authority needs to be clear about how much of the proposed 800-mile system would run at ground level versus through a tunnel or atop an elevated track." I find this unbelievable. How could they have not already done this? Well, I guess the answer is obvious. Putting high-speed rail through, for example, the San Jose corridor means it must be above or below ground. There is simply no room to put it at ground level. Even if there were, it would not be feasible because then the trains would have to constantly slow down at car crossings, which defeats the whole purpose of high-speed rail. But putting it above or below ground means huge additional expense. And not just in the San Jose corridor, either.

It's difficult to see how California high-speed rail will be completed at anything close to current cost estimates, if it indeed is ever completed at all.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

California high-speed rail project slammed by peer review

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us