California High Speed Rail - How Did We Get Here?

[@kopshi]

Man, this video is so useful for anybody trying to dispute the official "California HSR bad" arguments. Before any of these came to light, we just had to debate that the costs were worth it (like the Alan Fisher video) for the benefits we would get in the future. This video and the "Central Valley isn't the middle of nowhere" video are going to prove invaluable for CAHSR supporters.

[@TohaBgood2]

The "Central Valley is the middle of nowhere" people still cause my blood to boil. Most are out-of-staters, which isn't an excuse but does explain why they don't care about the Valley. The most upsetting are the ones from the the Bay and LA areas. They should freaking know better! As a Bay resident, I am biased to think that we don't try to shaft the Valley on their share of infrastructure funds anymore. That this is all SoCal shenanigans. But unfortunately, this is not universally true.

[@ChrisJones-gx7fc]

@@TohaBgood2 I’m in SoCal and it certainly feels like that the cynics in CA are for the most part centralized down here. The two state Democrat leaders who led blocking the remaining Prop 1A funds are from the LA area, saying those funds should go toward transit in their districts. To my knowledge SoCal transit is already receiving some state funding, just as I’m sure the Bay Area is, and high speed rail is only receiving a very small percentage of annual state funding.

[@seanj4119]

@@TohaBgood2 The Bay has started to embrace the Valley more because housing has gotten so expensive that a lot of people are crossing the mountains to buy homes in northern San Joaquin Valley and commuting in. The part of the Valley adjacent to the East Bay is now a Bay Area exclave. SoCal on the otherhand still has plenty of flat land to sprawl into.

[@TohaBgood2]

@@seanj4119 I will agree on this 100%. The Valley has become the Bay and the Bay has become the Valley to some extent. So now I can somewhat selfishly say "don't mess with _us_ ". Yes, this is to some extent self-interested. I'll take it if that means that 6.5 million Californians in the Valley finally get a fair shake!

[@jamalgibson8139]

​@@ChrisJones-gx7fcThat's rich that two senators want to use those funds for transit, because the LA metro is constantly widening roads and stifling transit projects.

[@weirdfish1216]

it blew my mind that the $30 billion number wasn’t even an official estimate. also this video made me realize that, after 2018, basically all of the authority’s problems were/are caused by the federal government being stupid.

[@ChrisJones-gx7fc]

Yeah it surprised me too, and I’m legit curious where it came from in the first place, and why it’s still being spread around online by media as well as critics, i.e. they say the estimated cost has quadrupled when in reality it’s only doubled. It also frustrates me when someone says they’ve spent $100 billion already when that’s so far from the truth. I know it’s best to just ignore those people but as a strong supporter it can be hard not to respond to defend it, even though I know nothing I say will change their mind.

[@denelson83]

i.e., Trump.

[@LucidStew]

$32.785B-$33.625B is official in the 2008 Business Plan. Similar cost estimates also appear in the 2005 EIS.

[@ChrisJones-gx7fc]

@@LucidStew interesting. Prop 1A mentions $45 billion as CAHSR’s 2006 estimate, but that did say for the entire project which could have included Phase 2. It never mentions $33 billion. Opponents said it could be $45-100 billion. My understanding is the initial estimate was made before the full scope of the project was known. $33 billion in 2008 is $47 billion in 2023. 2.39%/year inflation. The current base cost estimate in 2023 is at $106 billion, which would be $74.3 billion in 2008. That’s a little over twice the original estimate if accounting for inflation.

[@LucidStew]

@@ChrisJones-gx7fc I believe the $33-37B number from the 2005 EIS is for everything. "Capital costs were estimated for all of the proposed HST alignment and station options evaluated in this Program EIR/EIS" The 2008 Business Plan does not have a cost analysis for Phase 2. The $33B number is Phase 1. As I've argued before, the cost in absolute terms is also important because for the most part the funding has not inflated, and the original plan was for the bond to cover almost 30% of the cost, which of course can't happen now. Also, if they get $12-16B(this is from the 2008BP) from the federal government, this is fairly meaningless at this point compared to the ~$60-80 billion they need from that source.

[@TheFarmanimalfriend]

Good explanation. I grew up in Merced. We need this project. It is 4 hours, by car, from Merced to San Francisco. It is 8 hours, by car, from Merced to Los Angeles. After that kind of driving I feel exhausted.

[@metadexter]

Just when I think I’ve learned everything I could know about this project you come along with this amazing new analysis! You provided so much invaluable information to understand why the project has faced its challenges and how to combat misinformation. It really seems like so much of the cost overruns are not even their fault.

[@TohaBgood2]

Yep! This guy is a treasure! We've been begging him in the comments under the CAHSR videos to start making videos for a while. And he finally agreed! Enjoy!

[@MarioFanGamer659]

14:04 For comparison, that's a distance of 21.5 times the standard gauge and I just looked images of the Wolfsburg-Berlin HSL (which also is built right next to an existing line) and the space between the high-speed and conventional line clearly isn't enough to fit more than six rails a standard gauge apart (I estimate the gap to be around 9 metres or so) and shows that the distance is in general quite unrealistic. Granted, it's built to "only" 250 km/h and thus more comparable to the few tracks of NEC (which is 240 km/h in a few places) but nonetheless, I can definitively believe these regulations are malicious (especially because they're passed in Trump's last year and we all know his opinion to CAHSR). It also makes me wonder about Texas Central because it too is planned to be placed right next to existing lines at least for Houston and whether the requirements apply there as well, at least if they still exist when the line gets built (and if they actually do but Texas Central doesn't have to abide by them despite comparable speeds, these regulations were passed clearly maliciously). In any case, that's a very good video which further highlights the propaganda against CAHSR and the many strawman arguments used there.

[@blores95]

Always great to see deep diving in to why the news/media parrot the exact same talking point and phrases about certain topics. One place says one thing and somehow everyone just runs with it and no one bothers to even check the original source.

[@TohaBgood2]

Ok, these videos are seriously getting fantastic! The project update at the start and history or topic discussion is a great format. I'm loving this! You rock, Amp! This is the shyt! I don't know if this format has "broad appeal" for the normies, but for a CAHSR superfan like myself this is basically drugs. You da man!

[@AmpereBEEP]

Thank you so much!

[@davidjackson7281]

@@AmpereBEEPSo we are supposed to be patient for 12 more years for a :90 ride to bumf#K Bakersfield?

[@AmpereBEEP]

@@davidjackson7281 We definitely need to press the State and Federal Government for significant funding if we want the more useful segments built. Dragging our feet on that only makes these projects more expensive as more land gets developed and labor/material costs rise. Believe me, as someone who lives in an area that wont even be served by Phase 1, I would really like for the first phase to be built quickly. We can only hope that we receive major amounts of funding from the Infrastructure Bill or this project will be dragging on for a long time.

[@ChrisJones-gx7fc]

@@AmpereBEEP and the longer things take and more costs go up, the more at risk it is of being shut down. At what point is it collectively decided to just end it? To accept the costs and timeline are no longer worth the benefits HSR could provide, leaving just a Central Valley train, or maybe one to SF, but none to SoCal. I’d make the strong case HSR has to at a minimum get across the mountain passes to reach San Jose and Palmdale, NorCal’s biggest transit hub and a connection to SoCal regional rail. One idea I’ve had is CAHSR, along with SCRRA, should consider electrifying Metrolink’s AV Line so they could potentially share it as an interim route to provide direct SF-LA service sooner until their own route is complete. Palmdale to LA is probably the most challenging segment of the entire Phase 1 route, and last to be built once SF-Palmdale service begins. If by the time HSR reaches Palmdale, say mid-2030s, it’s collectively decided at the state level that that’s enough, things have taken too long and cost too much, and the plug gets pulled on any further funding, at least for the foreseeable future, then having an electrified AV Line would at least give CAHSR a path to LA/Anaheim. I’ve calculated the nonstop SF-LA travel time would be under four hours, now slower than total flight travel time but still considerably faster than driving. Chances are once SF-Bakersfield is established, demand in SoCal will be great enough to get CAHSR the funding it needs to get to LA and Anaheim ASAP, eliminating the need for any interim route. But I’d argue it should still be worth considering, given the uncertainty of dedicated funding so far. Plus an electrified AV Line would allow Metrolink to run electric trainsets similar to Caltrain, creating faster, quieter and zero-emissions service that could then be a catalyst for electrifying some of their other routes, something they should already be pursuing.

[@P0w2you]

I really appreciate how you talked about the money cause no one on YT I feel like has ever mentioned how the Trump administration took money from the project! especially being it was almost $1Billion!

[@Geotpf]

Didn't Biden return that money?

[@P0w2you]

@Geotpf yes they did. Just no one mentions how it was taken away. If Trump had won, they wouldn't have given it back

[@Moskeeto]

Republicans are so desperate to prove California is a hellhole that they'll do their best to sabotage everything we do to improve our state.

[@usernameryan5982]

Whatever, they’re probably going to end up spending a quarter trillion dollars in this project. You really think one billion makes a difference?

[@tonyburzio4107]

Trump took it away because the money was being stolen. Biden put it back, and, it got stolen.

[@mrxman581]

Excellent informative video. I learn so much from the videos you already posted. I appreciate all the research you've done and the efficient way you use the tech to show the satellite maps and the before and after sliding comparisons. It really facilitates to better understand the construction progress and nuances. Thanks, again.

[@XeroBritt]

Great overview of the politics behind the project!

[@stephenmodde5944]

Excellent presentation!

[@jjxtwo1]

Excellent video. The clear explanation of what really has happened is quite important accurate information. Subbed.

[@P0w2you]

Absolutely great points! I'm really surprised how concise you where with the info! great job!

[@mcpc303]

A shower thought, is the usps using the high speed rail for express delivery. All the speed, none of the hassle

[@AmpereBEEP]

France did a similar thing with their TGV in the past. I expect it to be very possible, and a potential extra source of revenue once the project opens.

[@michaeljones7927]

@@AmpereBEEP I think the TGV freight service ended a long time ago.

[@TohaBgood2]

@@michaeljones7927 They started doing it in Japan right now though. This sounds like a project that is hard to execute on, but that has potential. Of course, the passenger HSR lines are by definition not adapted to freight service and even light freight like mail might need retrofits and infra investment to make it work well. I'm not saying that this good or even viable, but it certainly warrants study.

[@michaeljones7927]

@@TohaBgood2 The main issue is the weight of a HSR "freight car" and it's impact on HSR track. The revenue this "secondary" service would generate could be very beneficial to the bottom line.

[@jean-lucpicard1477]

Great job bro. Love the analysis and the way you go to the sources. I really appreciate the quality journalism, and you’re just starting out. Great work! You earned my subscription. Keep the news coming!

[@DavidJamesHenry]

The HSR Authority should be paying you for this tbh

[@TheRailwayDrone]

Impressive video. This should be required watching, especially for those who spew false information about why the project has increased in cost, or those who argue against using federal funds to complete this project.

[@TohaBgood2]

I'm literally making a google doc from this to use in my future "discussions" with the less incompetent trolls 😁

[@sannh]

Something I want to know is what does it take for a passenger rail to be profitable once it is in service. The Amtrak Pacific Surfliner has the most ridership outside of the NE corridor, but the adjusted operating earnings is still in the negative. Also compare the HSR to California's existing passenger trains.

[@TohaBgood2]

The real problem is that transportation in general is a "defective" economic model. Or rather, we don't like the pure economics of transportation as a discipline. If you try to price, say, highways according to their fair market price then they promptly go bankrupt. Yes, literally bankrupt. Highways make zero economic sense as a standalone business. They're clearly tremendously useful and generate enormous diffuse economic benefits from the abundance of cheap transportation options that they breed. They turbocharge GDP growth around them, but as soon as you try to price that GDP benefit into the cost of a single use of a highway, it goes bankrupt. People refuse to pay the fair price seemingly to their own economic detriment! No truly profitable rail lines exist around the world. Even in Japan and Hong Kong they are subsidized from real estate. Trying to charge market prices for transportation is like trying to grab water with your hands. It's there. It's valuable. But no one wants to pay what it's worth because no one gets the full benefit from that transportation good. That's why we pay for transportation from our taxes!

[@michaeljones7927]

@@TohaBgood2 These two nonsensical paragraphs are nothing less than verbal BULLSHIT with a leftist bias. Your comments on HSR on numerous channels over the past year have generally been helpful. The abstract nonsense offered here does not advance the cause of HSR in California, or anywhere else in the U.S.

[@arandmoor2572]

The true purpose of mass transit like the HSR is NOT to be profitable. Its to enable economic activity. Fund HSR operation with taxes and don't worry about how "profitable" it is.

[@michaeljones7927]

@@arandmoor2572 The first and foremost purpose of transportation is to move passengers and freight, not to generate economic activity. If that cannot be done profitably by the private sector, the government must provide the service. The importance of the Brightline passenger rail operation between Miami and Orlando that is commencing next week, is that it will demonstrate whether or not a private company can be successful transporting passengers. If it does succeed, Brightline's owner, Fortress Investment Group, may undertake other projects, in addition to Brightline West.. Thank you for your comment.

[@michaeljones7927]

The answer to your question is simple. Generate enough revenue to cover all maintenance and operating costs, and all depreciation, and have enough profit after taxes to provide an adequate return on invested capital.

[@miguelitosantos365]

Thank you for the Good presentation. Please present something on the the ‘Buy America’ policy and waivers to this policy. RFQs for the supply of 6 train sets are out. Just curious who will be these suppliers as there’s no US manufacturer who can make 220 mph electric trains. Thanks again.

[@pirazel7858]

Siemens has a manufacturing facility in California. They are building cars and locomotives there for years. That's why my guess is that the rolling stock will be the Velaro Novo. Californian politicians will love to talk about trains made in Californian and jobs created in California

[@MaxAdams-qy9mp]

@@pirazel7858 i see the ads everywhere now kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z6S5YoSAft-dmLc&ab_channel=SiemensMobility

[@jakehood7463]

Inefficiencies make people who exploit them billions of dollars a year, so when you try to improve things, the entrenched interests will come out hard against it. When the positive arguments for something you don't like are so overwhelming, I guess you do have to resort to being underhanded. Just comes with the territory.

[@jean-lucpicard1477]

Also, where is your link for the discord Chanel you mentioned at the end of the video? There’s no link to discord in your about section.

[@AmpereBEEP]

The Discord Server should be linked in the video's description.

[@ChrisJones-gx7fc]

One other thing is explaining why every aspect of this project costs so much. Break down each aspect, from the cost of materials to labor to acquiring land and just to plan the route, including consultants. Some cynics say this project is just lining politicians’ pockets. I want to know where that belief comes from. What project(s) where that happened has now led some to believe that’s the case with all of them, including this one? It may only be the opinion of a few online, but I genuinely want to know where they get that idea in the first place, and why they believe it’s happening here. The costs do seem really high, at least to someone who’s not an expert in construction costs, especially for a project like this which hasn’t been done before. There’s also the methods they’re using, when seemingly less expensive and more efficient ones are available, such as pre-fabricated bridge segments like what’s being used on HS2 and in China. On the surface this project can seem like a jobs program, building the most complex structure possible so they can hire as many workers as possible and thus demand more funds which increases costs. Another delay has been the utility relocations, which add to costs as well. How much of that has added to the overall budget? Maybe it’s just all the cynic comments getting to me, but sifting through all their biased opinions they can seem to make some legit points. Building infrastructure in the US is inherently expensive, California especially, cause of our environmental, labor and other requirements. We shouldn’t just accept those higher costs though. I know the cost of this project is relatively small compared to what we spend annually on freeways or the military, but that shouldn’t be an excuse either. Maybe it’s just opposition doing their best to keep delaying and driving up costs in order to prove their point, but it’s not just them and the challenges the project has faced and still does can sow doubt among its supporters in its prospects. What can be done to make this project less expensive? Getting the costs down would help increase and maintain wider support, public and political. If the costs keep going up, then you risk losing the support it does have to the point that opponents can end it, leaving just the Central Valley or maybe to Gilroy/SF, and SoCal never sees HSR. If California doesn’t complete HSR to SF and LA/Anaheim, or if it takes several more decades by which point technology and our lifestyles have made it not live up to its expectations, what message does that send? No matter which side of the fence you sit on for this, the fact remains it doesn’t have the funding to reach SF or LA, and there’s one of two political parties who seemingly wants to ensure it stays that way, while the other has shown collectively lukewarm support. The problems it’s faced and has yet to have left some questioning its ambitions, and in all likelihood that’ll continue. If support is to remain strong, things have to happen faster, but there’s no indication that’ll happen or is even possible, at least not in the current political state. Hopefully things politically turn around in the next election cycle, and federal support grows for US high speed rail, including CAHSR, to get it the funding it needs ASAP to finish the Central Valley portion and start on reaching SF and LA. It can happen faster, if we as a nation are willing to make the commitment to doing so. That goes not just for CAHSR, or US high speed rail, but any large scale infrastructure. We’ve done it in the past, and we still can today.

[@onetwothreeabc]

It's not about the cost. It's the WILL to finish the project that is lacking. If I were the governor of Cal, I will dedicate at least a $1 bn/year budget that is guaranteed to fund the project until it's complete.

[@ChrisJones-gx7fc]

@@onetwothreeabc that’s what the state cap and trade funds are. Those last until 2030 unless they get extended (and probably will). Lucid Stew has looked at CAHSR’s publicly available finance records (from their Finance and Audit Committee meetings) to see how much they’re spending per year, about $2 billion, and his view is they should be spending considerably more than that if they hope to reach SF or LA anytime soon.

[@davidjackson7281]

@@ChrisJones-gx7fc$2 B per month? Perhaps per year. Just wondering.

[@ChrisJones-gx7fc]

@@davidjackson7281 you know it is per year. The point still stands according to Lucid Stew’s analysis that’s not enough if they want to make some serious progress quickly.

[@davidjackson7281]

@@ChrisJones-gx7fcAgree. No offense hopefully.

[@onetwothreeabc]

If the public knows the project would cost $100 bn, do you think prop 1A would still pass?

[@AmpereBEEP]

It potentially could have still passed, as that information was provided in the 2008 voters guide. Those who would have voted yes would have still voted yes, and those who would have voted no would have still voted no. It might have even passed with a greater margin as a new station was added in Madera County which was not originally planned to be there in 2008. Overall though, it is very difficult to know what would have happened.

[@onetwothreeabc]

@@AmpereBEEP I agree with you, since the prop said there will be no tax increase. I was in Cal in 2008 and I voted yes. However, looking back, the "no increase tax" verse may become a big hurdle to collect funding for the project.

[@arnkriegbaum]

i estimate 2065 CAHSR will finally be completed

[@tonyburzio4107]

Between the California Cities of Guendong and Xiapong.

[@mateojames3231]

Will the rail line run parallel all the way down to Gilroy? Or will the line loop all the way up to the East Bay just like the Coast Starlight and down to Merced.

[@AmpereBEEP]

The rail line will run parallel to Caltrain all the way to Gilroy, before heading east. In the future, the second transbay tube will likely carry both HSR and Caltrain service from downtown San Francisco into west Oakland.

[@davidjackson7281]

@@AmpereBEEPA 2nd tube lol hahaha. Talk about the SFTC unstarted $7 B tunnel.

[@AmpereBEEP]

I will be bringing this and many other things up in future videos, as there are too many moving parts to explain in the comments section.

[@davidjackson7281]

@@AmpereBEEPLooking forward to seeing them. Make several because your videos are very good.

[@ScramJett]

This idiocy with the IPBs is exactly what RM Transit talked about in one of his videos. He basically was saying that ridiculously unnecessary safety requirements such as these IPBs (and clearances that make stations much bigger than their European counterparts) are one of the biggest causes of cost overruns in transit projects. We need to do a much better job of following the more practical guidelines in HSR rich countries like Japan, Spain, France, and Italy (all of which have complex geography) rather than trying to waste money reinventing the wheel…badly!

[@tonyburzio4107]

Oh horsepuckey. The train was built in the wrong location by a foreign company who had no idea about how hard it was building through delta marshlands in California.

[@denelson83]

It is looking more and more like the big winner of the CAHSR project will be... Cars.

[@jonathanaina7754]

Typical USA Suburbanity

[@TohaBgood2]

Look, people. This has nothing to do with cars and suburbanity. This is agricultural land. The area that they are currently building in is literally the most productive and most valuable agricultural land in the world. There are entire classes of products that come only from this part of California and nowhere else. Quote, "Half of all fruits and vegetables grown in the U.S. come from California, and the state effectively produces all (at least 99 percent) of America's almonds, pistachios, pomegranates, and walnuts." Some of the crops have 90% of the world supply being grown right here on the land that this line is being bult through. In some cases over 90% of the world supply comes form a single California county in the Central Valley! It is logistically impossible and in many cases literally illegal according to state and Federal law to remove some of the critical roads. They serve farms and factories that are not legal to cut off from the road network, or even impede traffic. Even temporary road closures for the duration of construction are often illegal here.

[@TohaBgood2]

@@jonathanaina7754 Dude, this is in the middle of farm country. What "suburbanity" are you talking about?

[@brassmonkey4288]

Bring out another billion! We’re almost done connecting two small Central Valley cities!

[@TohaBgood2]

​@@brassmonkey4288 6.5 million people live in the Central Valley. It's larger than Colorado and twice the size of Nevada. It would be the 18th largest US state if it were a separate state. 4.3 million people live just in the metros that have a stop on the Merced-Bakersfield stretch of CAHSR. Both Fresno and Bakersfield have about 1 million population in each of their metros. You people just suck at geography. That's all I can say.

[@carkawalakhatulistiwa]

Just ask china how made hsr

[@Dog.soldier1950]

Using politicians, bureaucrats and voters to design a RR is asking for what CA got-a money pit

[@tonyburzio4107]

Meanwhile, Brightline is complete and happily racking up real passengers. Complete all the way. Oh, and get this, Florida contributed $14 Million for the whole thing, mostly to get some road work done. Track and stations and trains and signals and lots of other stuff.

[@davidjackson7281]

Fact check my transit friend. According to Banks Rail the government granted about $850 million in total to the $6 billion project. Money well spent.

[@kertchu]

Also, brightline is not high speed rail

[@brassmonkey4288]

Every opposition piece uses the word “boondoggle” because this project is a boondoggle. I support the project, but the mismanagement and bureaucratic red tape have caused the costs to balloon. This project is the epitome of a boondoggle.

[@AmpereBEEP]

It fortunately does not have to be this way, and if we can eliminate even 50% of the red tape and excessive regulations we could see this project built much more quickly and efficiently. Sadly, the State Government has not put much thought into the regulations hindering this project until very recently. With some of the new environmental regulation changes that have been pushed through recently, we should start seeing these projects speed up by about 10-15%. It seems to be on a much better path forward now with the new management(post-2018), so hopefully the project starts making some real progress.

[@tonyburzio4107]

No it's not on a better "path forward", nothing has changed one tiny little bit. It suckethed before, and it sucketh now.

[@gumbyshrimp2606]

It would take $8 Billion in ADDITIONAL funding in the next 5 years for Merced-Bakersfield to be complete by 2028. This is highly unlikely. It would take $80 Billion in additional funding (10x the Merced-Bakersfield) for LA-SF to complete by 2028. This is impossible. At this point, LA-SF by 2040 is a pipe dream considering the tunnels that haven’t been bored.

[@weirdfish1216]

i see someone else just saw the new lucid stew video lol

[@mrxman581]

Well, $5 billion of the $8 billion would simply come from the CA cap & trade amount of around $1 billion per year. The other $3 billion would come from federal funding. CAHSR is requesting $2.7 billion from the next round of federal funding. The award announcements should be made by next month. CAHSR has an excellent chance of getting the entire amount considering that CAHSR has covered 85% of the current costs on the project and construction has advanced at a very good pace as of late as indicated in this excellent video

[@TheRailwayDrone]

If you're going to use Lucid Stew's words, at least source or give him credit for it.

[@gumbyshrimp2606]

@@TheRailwayDrone silence, liberal

[@TheRailwayDrone]

@@gumbyshrimp2606 Stop plagiarizing.