"national prowess..." no, but international comparisons are important especially lately when considering CAHSR. China has been setting new bars in regard to transportation. The standard distance for money making routes has always been considered 2-400 miles (Las Vegas-LA, Dallas-San Antonio and etc). But the Chinese have moved the goal post and have shown that 1200km or 745mi can be competitive with air and car.

Also,

CO2 per capita

2018 CO2 Emissions/cap Trend last few years.

United States 15.52 Flat lined
Japan 8.7 Slight increase
Germany 8.6 Decreasing
China 7.4 Increasing but not to levels of years past

The US can stand to learn what works in other countries if CO2 reduction is a goal.


BOB2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm for electrification, if and when it is shown
> to be cost effective and/or necessary, and the US
> is way behind. I've only worked on four or five
> RR Electrification studies in my career. I even
> wrote a "backstop" AQMD RR Electrification rule,
> as RR is a "BACT" (best available control
> technology)for air pollutants (other than electric
> generation, which is still a significant
> reduction-at a very high cost per ton of emissions
> compared to other cheaper reductions).
>
> Of course, as we spew thousands of tons of CO2
> stuck in gridlock every day, we can all wait for
> hell to freeze over (or Greenland to melt) to have
> any rail passenger service on this bloated gold
> plated segment, while we look to fine more money
> to electrify...? And we have to do this even
> after this current pile of taxpayer cash is fully
> squandered, because we need to leapfrog the
> Chinese, or else our intenational technological
> noodle will get limp?
>
> I guess now, that patriotism, in the name of
> jingoistic boondoggles, is indeed the last refuge
> of those defending these scoundrel's with their
> fingers in the taxpayers wallets....
>
> Of course, if hyperbole like that only farted
> "golden eggs" instead of jingoistic sophistry, it
> wouldn't be a problem for this taxpayer, with you
> personally footing the bill for the gold plated
> cost is no object" boondoggle, as a manly display
> of our technological international "high speed"
> national prowess...
>
> As opposed to say, an "efficient" taxpayer funded
> project, truly designed to meet actual travel
> needs in these congested mid distance corridors?
>
> It is about efficiency. Which is why some of
> these projects, like Brightline, in both Florida
> and to Las Vegas have "pencilled" out, and/or it's
> about a national will to spend money, where they
> already had the build up demand, like Germany....
>
>
> Let's see Amtrak record year 35 million interciyt
> passenger, and Germany 1.2 billion? How many
> intercity passengers does Japan have? What is the
> average trip length, distance between cities, how
> many were built as bypasses to existing
> overcrowded slower lines? And, where is the
> United States in that set of transportation
> "needs" and "opportunities" where it makes most
> sense to spend our public or private resource on
> rail passenger services?
>
> While you're searching for money to electrify for
> another ten years... I'll take any new
> infrastructure money for "efficient" projects,
> like the US Link-LAUS Run Through, with "real"
> properly planned "efficient" cost benefit
> analysis, which I saw the first results on over 25
> years ago... Or maybe for for the Del Mar Bluffs
> 110 mph. double track bypass tunnel, and on an
> electrified LOSSAN, first proposed over 40 year
> ago by American High Speed Rail......
>
> Dear Ralph Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Dear Ralph and beloved Koch bros,
> >
> > It cost a lot of money to move people quickly
> and
> > efficiently. China isn't leap frogging the
> US's
> > economy because they are investing in Siemens
> > diesels or Guatemalan chicken buses but because
> > they've learned from those advanced economies
> of
> > Japan and Germany, and they've learned to
> > recognize advancement when they see it.
> > Brightline isn't investing in electric trains
> from
> > Vegas to LA because they are slow and
> inefficient
> > trains, but because they've learned from their
> 3rd
> > world Florida endeavor and are ready to take
> the
> > next evolutionary step.
> >
> > We must think outside the chicken pen and
> advance
> > our society in a forward thinking manner and
> not
> > get caught up in third world slow-mo-jo tech.
> >
> > Sincerly,
> >
> > ISAT (International Standards and the
> Advancement
> > of Technology)
> >