Slashdot Mirror
California's Bullet Train Hurtles Towards a Multibillion-Dollar Overrun (latimes.com)
schwit1 quotes the Los Angeles Times: California's bullet train could cost taxpayers 50% more than estimated — as much as $3.6 billion more. And that's just for the first 118 miles through the Central Valley, which was supposed to be the easiest part of the route between Los Angeles and San Francisco. A confidential Federal Railroad Administration risk analysis, obtained by the Times, projects that building bridges, viaducts, trenches and track from Merced to Shafter, just north of Bakersfield, could cost $9.5 billion to $10 billion, compared with the original budget of $6.4 billion.
The federal document outlines far-reaching management problems: significant delays in environmental planning, lags in processing invoices for federal grants and continuing failures to acquire needed property. The California High-Speed Rail Authority originally anticipated completing the Central Valley track by this year, but the federal risk analysis estimates that that won't happen until 2024, placing the project seven years behind schedule.
The whole project is expected to cost more than $68 billion.
The federal document outlines far-reaching management problems: significant delays in environmental planning, lags in processing invoices for federal grants and continuing failures to acquire needed property. The California High-Speed Rail Authority originally anticipated completing the Central Valley track by this year, but the federal risk analysis estimates that that won't happen until 2024, placing the project seven years behind schedule.
The whole project is expected to cost more than $68 billion.
It may work eventually, but it's a boondoggle for construction companies and mayors/governors.
It will never have a single paying passenger. This has been an easy prediction since at least the year after it was approved.
It's the 21st century, not the 19th. How many airports could you build with $68 Billion ?
Big projects done by government, bad. No further information needed! You need to fly or drive yourself instead, because that is what St. Ronnie and his new top disciple The Donald want you to do.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I am shocked that by LA Times writer Ralph Vartabedian's article on the supposed risk and overruns to California's ongoing high-speed rail (HSR) effort. Vartabedian is a known opponent of HSR whose every article drips with antagonism against this project, as a quick review of his past articles will clearly show. Anyone who reads the purported analysis (in fact a single Powerpoint file, taken out of context) will quickly see that the article's claims are not justified -- for example, a *possible* $3B overrun (really less, since this compares against obsolete estimates) does not equal a 50% budget problem for a project of this size. The entire state stands to benefit immensely from this project, which will connect BART, Caltrain, and VTA users in the North with Metro, Metrolink, and Amtrak users in the South --- and connect both to the isolated, ignored, economically-depressed Central Valley. Californians, and all who believe in progress, should embrace this transformative project and reject the uniformed mudslinging by the Vartabedians of the world.
Government projects spend twice as much and achieve half as planned. Because they are spending taxpayer's money, not their own money.
In other news, water remains wet.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
So, one unmitigated debacle justifies another? What exactly are you smoking?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Why not start upgrading the track to run at 150 mph in segments and speed up the trip?
Because Amtrak is a corporate welfare basket case that will never come close to justifying itself economically. We have aircraft now. Passenger rail is for short-distance commuting, and it's barely cost effective at that.
If done correctly, high speed rail could work on the west coast.
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
What is so difficult anout doing ground radar surveys so that you know in advance what you are going to encounter
Because if you identify all the problems upfront, and give an accurate estimate, then YOUR PROJECT WILL NOT BE APPROVED. It is much smarter to drastically lowball, and then start jacking up the costs after enough has been spent to invoke the "sunk cost" argument. Business people are taught to ignore sunk costs, but in politics, sunk costs are never ignored.
Not really - as soon as they announce the project (with the current spending estimates), all the property along the route immediately increases in value.
Do you truly believe this was totally unforeseeable? There is no possible way for them to have predicted it, and taken the price rises into account when budgeting? Let's say they look at 100 past projects, and 98 of them went WAY over budget because of "land price increases", then it is perfectly reasonable for them to just assume that land prices will not be a factor for new projects?
Or do you believe that they look at those 100 past projects, and realize that they made billions and billions by intentionally lowballing the initial bid and then demanding cost overruns, and decide that it is in their financial interests to do it again?