From The Daily Caller
5:19 PM 02/12/2019 | Energy
Chris White | Energy Reporter
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom abandoned a high-speed rail project Tuesday that sought to connect Los Angeles to San Francisco.
He suggested the high cost of the project made the idea a pipe dream.
Newsom dialed back anticipation for the project during California’s State of the State address. The Democrat suggested building a high-speed rail line between Bakersfield and Merced — a distance of 160 miles — rather than a project designed to connect the state’s two largest cities.
“Let’s level about the high-speed rail,” Newsom said. “Let’s be real, the current project as planned would cost too much and, respectfully, take too long. Right now, there simply isn’t a path to get from Sacramento to San Diego, let alone from San Francisco to L.A. I wish there were.”
Former Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown’s plan would have cost nearly $77 billion and taken more than a decade to complete, according to recent estimates.
“Critics are going to say that’s a train to nowhere, but I think that’s wrong and that’s offensive,” said Newsom, who was elected after Brown was term-limited in November 2018.
FILE PHOTO: California Governor Jerry Brown delivers his final state of the state address in Sacramento, California, U.S., January 25, 2018. REUTERS/Fred Greaves/File Photo
“Abandoning the high-speed rail entirely means we will have wasted billions and billions of dollars with nothing but broken promises … and lawsuits to show for it,” Newsom said, adding that he does not want to send the $3.5 billion in federal money allocated for the project back to the Trump administration.
The rail project has faced a lot of controversy throughout the years. Backers of a campaign to eliminate California’s most recent gas tax, for instance, pushed an initiative in 2018 directing Brown to halt the high-speed rail project and use any unspent funds on road improvements. (RELATED: California’s Gas Tax Opponents Push A Unique Way To Pay For Road Fixes)
The new ballot initiative would have required any funds not needed for repaying rail bonds instead go to other transportation work. Supporters said the measure staves off criticism that eliminating the state’s recent pricey gas tax makes it more difficult to make infrastructure improvements.
Newsom’s decision to ditch the project comes at an awkward time for Democrats. A document posted online fleshing out elements of the so-called Green New Deal suggests Democrats are looking to “[b]uild out highspeed rail at a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary.”
Some conservatives in the state are upset that the project will continue to exist in some form.
“Make no mistake about it: Gov. Gavin Newsom’s announcement today is not about killing the wasteful High-Speed Rail Project, it is about keeping it very much alive,” Carl DeMaio, chairman of Reform California, said in a press statement Tuesday. “Newsom wants to spend tens of billions on a rail line between Merced and Bakersfield — a complete waste.”
Follow Chris White on Facebook and Twitter
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The only reason anyone travels from Merced to Bakersfield is if they started somewhere else, and are on their way to someplace else. It’s an unpopular, out of the way route even for cars. Newsom is trying to get credit for his “spending reforms” without harming any of the fat cats living off your and my dime. And he doesn’t want to send back any of the money stolen from taxpayers nationwide and funneled into some union pockets, no doubt. Swamp thief. Period.
It is sad.
The Democrats do not have the guts to speak the truth. Everything must be politically ‘correct’.
The Democrat cannot say they were wrong, wrong, wrong, ….
Newson translated “Critics are going to say building a high-speed rail line between two small centers is a complete waste of public money.”
No really!!!
Newson quote” “but I think that is wrong and that’s offensive”
‘Offensive’. Come on man. Really is really tough.
“Newsom dialed back anticipation (William: Dial back on an idiotic Democrat Project) for the project during California’s State of the State address. The Democrat suggested building a high-speed rail line between Bakersfield and Merced — a distance of 160 miles — rather than a project designed to connect the state’s two largest cities.
“Let’s level about the high-speed rail,” Newsom said. “Let’s be real, the current project as planned would cost too much …
…Former Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown’s plan would have cost nearly $77 billion and taken more than a decade to complete, according to recent estimates.”
“Let’s be real” in California? are you kidding me?
I recall our last Dem Gov in OH promoted hsr and appeared to get it with Obama’s Stimulus in ’09 (let’s call it the Green Old Deal), which would pay for all track upgrade and bullet trains (so they said). In early ’10, promoters published a study saying, yes indeed those free federal dollars will do it, except the details made clear it was not hsr, it was some track upgrades to allow 20th century tech passenger cars to go 88mph tops. Nevertheless, Dems wanted it and our news folks said free federal money, what’s not to like? (h/t griff). Kasich (before he lost his mind) ran against it, won, and cancelled it. Our press didn’t care about election or mandate, they screamed about it and said this $ will just go to other states like CA and their modern hsr will leave OH in the dust. I haven’t seen any newspaper admitting error that saved OH billions. And I don’t see them asking Alexandria Obama Cortez anything, even the most obvious: What’s “new” about the Green New Deal?
+1
So what good will be a high-speed train between Bakersfield and Merced? Middle of the Central Valley with no connection to any community of real significants (sorry Bakersfield, not much to write home about). We are a state that is running into pension problems in the near future but we can afford to waste billions on a train to nowhere. No wonder so many people are leaving the state.
https://coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2019/02/california-governor-finally-sees-reason-on-high-speed-rail-and-then-he-doesnt.html
https://coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2016/05/the-us-has-the-best-rail-system-in-the-world-and-matt-yglesias-actually-pointed-out-the-reason.html
I wonder what else he will be real about? given that Moonbeam was really unreal about so many things. Like, really!
“Let’s be real” is probably a good name for the post-Jerry Brown era in California.
According to the San Jose Mercury News (ref: https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/02/12/californias-high-speed-rail-by-the-numbers/ ), California has already spent $4 BILLION on the so-called high-speed rail program fronted by former Governor Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown, and that is with essentially zero miles of track laid.
By the time all the contract change/termination costs and the remaining construction costs are in, this project will likely have fleeced California and other US taxpayers for over $7 BILLION for a low speed train that goes 160 miles between the city of Bakersville (pop: 380,000) and the city of Merced (pop: 81,000).
That’s a net cost of about $44 MILLION per mile.
The Mercury News also offers this comparison:
— Projected one-way ticket price in 2008 for two and a half-hour high-speed rail trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles: $55
—One-way ticket price for one and one half hour plane flight from San Francisco to Los Angeles in February 2019: $75
The writing was “on the wall” from the start that this project would be a colossal failure. Unfortunately, Governor “Moonbeam” Brown just looked the other way in his hubris to leave a lasting legacy of his administration.
So, yes, Moonbeam, the dumb a$$, left California with a lasting legacy . . . just not the kind that he intended.
A slight correction. It is the train to bankruptcy, not the train to nowhere.
Also I believe trains use diesel fuel, which are fossil fuels, so how are they more “green” than aircraft?
Carolyn,
The original plan was that eventually the trains would be electric, like the current “bullet” trains in Japan and France. The future source of that electricity was conveniently not a matter of concern in planning the Brown Boondoggle. I do not know if the planned future construction is to include electrified overhead wires infrastructure for future electric-powered train use, or if this will be dropped to save money.
The Japanese Shinkansen rail lines use a 25 kV AC power supply (20 kV AC on Mini-shinkansen lines), to overcome the limitations of the 1,500 V direct current used on the existing electrified narrow-gauge system. The current N700 series Shinkansen draws 17.1 MW at maximum acceleration. Power is supplied from overhead electrified wires.
The French TGV rail lines us a variety of electric power systems (ranging for 6.5 to 12.2 MW at maximum acceleration, all at 25 kV AC). Power is supplied from overhead electrified wires.
I guess the California bureaucrats operated on the Field of Dreams theory: If we build it, the green electricity will be there.
One final note: it was only the hubris of former Governor Moonbeam (with complicity of the US DOT) and the desire to “create jobs” that led to the decision that California should build its own HSR system from the ground up, as opposed to the economically-sensible decision to just buy/implement the existing HSR technology of the Japanese or French systems.
I don’t know what’s with you guys in the US today… with your current spirit you’d never have built the Union Pacific, interstates, gone to the moon
“I don’t know what’s with you guys in the US today… with your current spirit you’d never have built the Union Pacific, interstates, gone to the moon”
It has nothing to do with spirit. It has everything to do with common sense.
President Kennedy didn’t say “We will go to Mars and return safely” because, at the time, it was an unrealistic goal. Just like the Green New Deal is an unrealistic goal today.
I have a dream that one day we will clear cut all of America to provide all the wood pellets for the EU to virtue signal its true green potential.
There was an economic need for the Union Pacific.
There is no economic need for high speed passenger rail.
Especially since the left has been pushing the ripout of rail lines for decades in America. Can you say “rails to trails”?
High speed rail is profitable in China. As I read they have train interval between Beijing and Shanghai 3-5 minutes.
Build price for high speed train per 1km is around 55 mil. $ in California, 22-39mil. $ in Europe, 9-12 mil. $ in China.
Here is whole point. Building 1km of high speed railway must be cheaper than building of 1km of standard highway. Usage of less material because railway is narrower. Less compensations because land under railway bridges is still usable.
Your “analysis” leaves out way more than it includes.
1) Declaring anything “profitable” in China is a exercise in obfuscation. Being a communist country, outsiders have no idea what anything costs.
2) While the track is cheaper than a 4 lane road, it doesn’t carry anywhere near as many passengers.
3) High speed trains, 3 to 5 minutes apart? Safety nightmare.
4) $55million per mile is probably the most accurate. Europe is heavily subsidized and the Chinese numbers are for the most part just made up. $55million per mile is about what a 4 lane interstate costs.
5) Land under highway bridges is still usable as well.
“While the track is cheaper than a 4 lane road, it doesn’t carry anywhere near as many passengers.”
.
So says someone who has never ridden the subway(s) in NYC.
I love how socialists are always moving the goal posts.
The claim was about HSR. I point out that he’s wrong. He replies with a comparison to subways.
Which BTW, also don’t carry as many passengers per hour as does a good 4 lane road.
Having driven through NYC on many occasions that one made me laugh, too. I would love to see a major city shutdown all street traffic and force all people and cargo to be moved by commuter rail. That would be hi-larious! From a distance.
“$55 million per mile is about what a 4 lane interstate costs.”
…
You are an order of magnitude too high: http://blog.midwestind.com/cost-of-building-road/
So trains cost 10 times more to build than do highways. My bad.
MarkW,
I lived 4 years in Bay Area, CA, I’m living in Europe, I spent few months in China on business trips, tried only Maglev train line (430km/h) of the world in Shanghai.
So I can only say, they got it right and we (US and EU are wrong).
2) around 1000 (just guess can be 2000) people each 4 minutes both ways is 30.000 per hour. This is capacity of 12 lane highway. Highway would be around 60m/180feet wide, train tracks are 9m/27feet wide.
3) It works. 300km/h/188mph.
4)$55 million per mile changes nothing. They are doing it around $10 million per mile. Low costs are done by modular construction and pylons through country and tunnel under cities.
5) Land under 30m/90feet highway bridge does not see light of the day. It is practically unusable. Land under 9m/18feet railway bridge not so much.
Ah yes, the standard, if only we were a totalitarian government, then we could force the people to do the things that we believe are good for them, argument.
http://www.bjreview.com/e-mail/2009-05/31/content_198320_2.htm
Here are interesting things written
Does this make a difference? In China, the government just takes the land needed for transportation rights-of-way, with little (perhaps zero) compensation to the land owner. In the US, obtaining rights-of-way for transportation corridors crossing private lands requires significant payouts to the landowners (even under eminent domain statutes) or very expensive litigation in court to fight over the associated “just compensation” associated with governmental taking of private property.
This was one of the facts that early-on showed the cost estimates for the Brown Boondoggle were absurdly low.
53% of CA residents are thinking about leaving due to the high cost of living.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/02/14/majority-of-california-residents-want-to-leave-poll/
The sad part about this is America of old would have completed the project on time and on budget. But now look at such projects which descend into chaos, lawsuits and with the public purse essentially looted.
What is so difficult about delivering a few hundred miles of HSR track through largely desert, especially given modern construction methods and use of TBD’s etc. Sure there is earthquake risk, the Japanese seem to handle that quite well with their systems so it is not unsolvable by any stretch.
The interstate highway system was publically funded, so I don’t see why some select rail routes can’t be built to HSR, supporting 210mph+ and also be publically funded. If any market can support it would be the SD-LAX-SFO corridor.
When you look at what China has achieved with HSR (hundreds of miles/year), the USA should be ashamed and bloody embarrased by this outcome and inability to deliver track miles at a reasonable cost. I hope this isn’t looked back on in the future as a historical turning point.