Global Best Practices for Cutting the Cost of Building High Speed Rail

[@thetrainguy1]

I feel like Amtrak is doing their best to keep everything in house. And reduce cost of building infrastructure. Like right now they are upgrading the Catenary to support 145mph speeds. All in house.

[@brucerawson5665]

The main thing seems to be eliminating consulting fees. Taking charge of the project and it's operations would help reduce over runs and litigation.

[@P0w2you]

This is honestly what I've heard from CAHSR CEO Brian Kelly about how they are going to extend California high speed rail project. Not just to the bay or to LA, but even to Merced and Bakersfield. they are gonna split up the sections into different small contractors doing individual specialized things. Hiring more staff to move away from there large amount of consultants, and having 3rd parties in hand before. I'm gonna Miss Brian Kelly ;-;

[@jalapenobomber]

A thousand thumbs up!

[@E.B.Cefeti]

This was fantastic. Thank you for sharing.

[@H3lue]

Can you build the NEC-Tor-Mon via Burlington & Pittsburgh? Yes please!

[@sjd3l4l59]

Thank you for posting this, very informative

[@sjd3l4l59]

Regarding number 9 (Institutional Governance), I've heard other transit activists argue that having a steady stream of projects (as opposed to sudden, single, massive projects) allows institutional learning and improvement over time. So I was surprised to hear Mr Lewis mention a one-off special purpose vehicle. That vehicle was within DB, however, so maybe the staff and all the knowledge and experience they gained just gets assigned to the next project. Would like to learn more.

[@pradlee]

Interesting... except for the weird comments about China. Vs in his own words how German projects "get the key to the kingdom" and can, e.g., make modifications to buildings without owner's approval? Or how the US has historically used eminent domain against very specific groups of people and/or for projects that really aren't for the public good. RE China not having any environmental review -- the US could do with less environmental review. Besides the fact that NEPA in practice doesn't actually focus that much on the environment, rail transit is clearly good for the environment. RMTransit's discussion of China's approach to building rail and how that's let them build SO MUCH: kzbin.info/www/bejne/m5m3qmCnhruNnq8 . Everyone else could probably learn something from them, "terrible dictatorship" or not.

[@yizhouwang3645]

Very good except for 31:34 . Indeed China does have a terrible dictatorship and close to non-existant property rights and environmental reviews, but it's still worthwhile to learn a lot of lessons from. For example their usually standardized sh*t for everything, them overbuilding the stations especially compared with Japan, their extremely complicated jubctions and etc. China and Japan build a lot of elevated and tunnelled sections to increase speed btw. Also land acquisition is also not cheap in the cities, while it could be much easier to do in the rural areas. So to summarize, their cost savings could be greatly attributed to economy of scale and the know-hows (In fact they have been building railroads for tens of years, starting with Qinhuangdao-Shenyang railroads at 2003 with 270 kph and gradually go to Wuhan-Guangzhou HSR with mostly above ground. ) and build the train stations far in the suburbs. However you can still claim that it’s good sides are basically taking the best practices around the world at that time but it’s weaknesses are pretty unique.

[@davefroman4700]

Lol. There are peoples homes in china that are in the middle of highways because they refused to leave their homes. Secondly China does a much better job at protecting environments today than the US EVER has.

[@qjtvaddict]

Tell me you know nothing about China without telling me you don’t know what you’re talking about

[@qjtvaddict]

Stop making excuses nitpicking China needlessly

[@yizhouwang3645]

@@qjtvaddict You thought that overbuilding HSR is nitpicking? These money can go to better places, to kitchen tables, to help small businesses, and to stimulate local consumptions, or even to build metros in smaller cities instead of another HSL that speeds up the connection between one OD pair by 20 minutes. Also, criticizing airport style train operation is not nitpicking, it is just what you may do in a society where HSR is a norm and talking about proper capacity relieving in a country where more than 100 pairs of HSR in a single line is also a norm.

[@Sacto1654]

They're going have to really cut the cost of construction on a per mile basis. Dedicated lines for high-speed rail can get really expensive fast, as the Japanese found out during the construction of the original Shinkansen line from 1959 to 1964, Texas Central Railway's increasing cost to get the right of way and China Rail High-speed (CRH) finding itself US$1 trillion in debt.

[@qjtvaddict]

We have to build dedicated as there are no lines to upgrade as they don’t exist freight track does not count

[@LaurenLover81]

Here’s a real cost cutter, Maglev trains encapsulated going at 1,200 miles an hour. Drastically cutting travel/ commute time. And a much better plan and use of rail technology without the need for aging friction based rail tracks.

[@qjtvaddict]

That’s for international travel 😅 regular maglev is good enough 375 mph is enough

[@LaurenLover81]

@ I’m not a fan of 2 to 4 hour trips from NY to DC, vice versa. 375 mph is 38 mins, 1,200 mph is 10 mins. Quack Pot Congress and Wall Street didn’t at least pass a bill for maglev DC/ NY commuter rail for the elite?

[@davidhill3724]

its a simply answer more grants to companies like Brightline less funding going to amtrak.

[@packr72]

No public funds for private companies.

[@davidjackson7281]

@@packr72 You do not understand the economic history of how governments help industries develop.

[@qjtvaddict]

@@packr72$$$ to anyone looking to build enough