Friday, January 29, 2010

Here come the Choo Choo trains


As Obama freezes the budget by spending more on HSR.

As for California, here is a UC Berkeley symposium on the problems and challenges. UC transportation professors make some claims:

"Horvath’s life-cycle analysis of the three modes suggests that high-speed rail will produce some 10 million metric tons of CO2 per year during construction. Furthermore, electricity to run the trains must be generated from coal-fired plants, leading to additional greenhouse gas emissions once HSR is operational.

The only way to recover the environmental costs of this mega project is to assure a high passenger load from the start; otherwise, the carbon footprint of air travel would be significantly less. “Fewer people taking the train in the first couple of years counts heavily against HSR in terms of emissions,” Horvath concluded."

Translation, HSR is likely to consume more energy then the equivalent airlines in California. So, if we get Capntrade, then expect a global warming premium for HSR, above that for air travel. We will need Barney to give us emission slips.

"Even if high-speed rail attracted everyone who drove and flew between the Los Angeles basin and the San Francisco Bay Area during the year 2007, it would amount to only eight million passengers per year, nowhere near the numbers projected by the California High Speed Rail Authority, explained CEE professor Mark Hansen. But even that estimate is optimistic. HSR would be extremely unlikely to capture most current air travelers due to lack of transportation connectivity in most California cities and regions."

Translation: The HSR is likely to be underutilized because of local access problem, which will take ten years to adjust.

“If it is built, it will be the largest infrastructure transportation project in the U.S. since the Interstate was constructed beginning more than a half century ago,” Madanat said. “It is a complex endeavor and requires a complex understanding of the engineering, economic and environmental issues.”

Translation: Expect a construction cost of around $100 billion plus.

Another perspective on costs:

"In January 2008, the rail authority told the California Senate Transportation Committee (as reported on page 16 of the committee’s staff report) that the $33 to $37 billion estimate was still valid “as of October 2007.” Yet construction costs have climbed rapidly since September, 2003, when the EIS estimates were made. Denver’s FasTracks cost of $4.7 billion was considered firm in 2004; since then, cost estimates have risen by 68 percent."

Translation: Cost will be more than $100 billion.

Where is California going to get the money? Every dollar of federal taxes from California yield about 95 cents in return.

Translation: Cost will be $110 billion plus, for California.

For a ten year construction schedule, the financing costs will be near $8 billion a year, considering California's poor credit rating. California currently runs a $15 uillion/yr deficit.

Translation: California's deficit will soar to $30 billion dollars a year, which will be about half of the State's budget. Prediction, this project will result in a series of vu grafs, which will cost about $1 billion to generate, and the project will be cancelled.


And this report that California will once again run out of cash in April, meaning the HSR should be cancelled today.

I would like an economist who knows California's political economy to explain why this has any realism to it.

No comments: