Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
HSR is 3x the cost of conventional passenger rail. HSR also doesn’t get freight revenue to help defray costs, the traditional way NA passenger rail routes were supported. All revenue is either through ticket sales or government subsidies.
Compounding that, conventional passenger rail hasn’t been profitable since at least the 1950s, one of the reasons both CP and CN were all too eager to pawn off their passenger rolling stock to VIA in the early 70s.
Over the last 3 years, the French rail company SNCF has needed a €35B injection from the government to remain solvent and cover ongoing expenses. This is above existing subsidies.
The German rail company is in similar shape. Deutsche Bahn estimates that it needs €14B for infrastructure upgrades. Their ‘on time’ performance is now down to 75%, which is very low for them.
In China, an estimated 90% of their HSR routes are unprofitable. It is unclear how far the central government will go to prop up these routes.
It always boils down to “speed costs, how fast can you afford to go?” It’s also not a linear relationship.
If you’re worried about cost: car infrastructure is the most expensive per capita. Unlike public transportation, roads are almost entirely government subsidized, with virtually no tolls or pay roads anywhere in the country. The worst part of subsidized highways are the spillover costs: oceans of subsidized parking lots and wide subsidized roads to service all the cars. In most NA cities, 60% of surface area is devoted to cars. What a waste.
That’s not counting the private costs, which people massively underestimate. Cars cost an average of $14k a year. This is why Canadians and Americans spend more on transportation than almost any country in the world.
And what do we get for all that extra cost? A lower quality of life: The longest commute times in the world, amongst the highest traffic deaths in the developed world (which is the biggest killer of children in Canada), a housing crisis due to low density, obesity and cardiovascular disease due to lack of incidental exercise, and high property taxes to maintain all that inefficient asphalt.
Canadians are also amongst the highest per capita carbon emitters, in large part due to tailpipe emissions and car centric urban design.
It’s not just cars, now is it? Thirty percent of all freight in NA is carried by truck (compared to 70% in Europe). If we focus in on “last mile” it’s near 100%. Also, depending on jurisdiction, the gas tax and licensing fees pay for the road infrastructure. If you don’t have a car, you’re not contributing.
That’s why the costs of road infrastructure were initially tolerated, with personal use secondary. Once people got used to the freedom, and car ownership exploded, road works were emphasized.
Having said that, HSR, does nothing for commute times. That’s the domain of buses, light rail, trams, subways and conventional rail. All of which have been neglected, but that’s a separate issue. HSR is also energy intensive, as energy required to move an object is proportional to the square of velocity.
The tracks have to be pretty much prefect to maintain stability. Given the amount of frost heaving we get, that 3x the cost of conventional rail might be extremely optimistic. Sections of track in Sweden, for instance, have been reduced from 200km/h, very much the lower limit of what constitutes HSR, to 130km/h, not far off the current speeds here on some sections, due to track deterioration.
I would like to see all rail infrastructure owned by a crown corp, with private rail companies competing with their own rolling stock, both freight and passenger. They’d pay the crown corp for track/station use, with those funds paying for maintenance and upgrades. That move would greatly improve the rail situation here.
As far as HSR, it an expensive boondoggle waiting to happen.
But good rail reduces the dependance on car infrastructure. Less lanes to maintain, less traffic means less wear of the road. Transit doesn’t need to be profitiable itself to still be worthwhile. It can bring value in other ways like increasing land value near stations, reducing car traffic and emissions, providing social, cultural and business connections.
Most highways and roads cost more to maintain than they bring in revenue as well.
Regular, reliable rail makes sense. It’s much cheaper to build, cheaper to maintain and the rolling stock is cheaper too. There’s also the energy demand, it increases in proportion to the square of velocity. HSR is just too expensive for the limited benefits.
Almost all of the wear on our roads is from truck traffic, with one maxxed out tractor trailer equaling the wear caused by roughly 10,000 personal vehicles. HSR does nothing to alleviate that.
Rail has to be competitive with cars to maintain and encourage ridership. High speed rail can offer significantly faster travel times than cars.
The time to build regular reliable rail was decades ago, we should strive to build more modern technology that will serve us longer into the future and encourage people to switch from driving by being faster. HSR can still be reliable so long as maintaince is properly funded.
HSR is 3x the cost of conventional passenger rail. HSR also doesn’t get freight revenue to help defray costs, the traditional way NA passenger rail routes were supported. All revenue is either through ticket sales or government subsidies.
Compounding that, conventional passenger rail hasn’t been profitable since at least the 1950s, one of the reasons both CP and CN were all too eager to pawn off their passenger rolling stock to VIA in the early 70s.
Over the last 3 years, the French rail company SNCF has needed a €35B injection from the government to remain solvent and cover ongoing expenses. This is above existing subsidies.
The German rail company is in similar shape. Deutsche Bahn estimates that it needs €14B for infrastructure upgrades. Their ‘on time’ performance is now down to 75%, which is very low for them.
In China, an estimated 90% of their HSR routes are unprofitable. It is unclear how far the central government will go to prop up these routes.
It always boils down to “speed costs, how fast can you afford to go?” It’s also not a linear relationship.
If you’re worried about cost: car infrastructure is the most expensive per capita. Unlike public transportation, roads are almost entirely government subsidized, with virtually no tolls or pay roads anywhere in the country. The worst part of subsidized highways are the spillover costs: oceans of subsidized parking lots and wide subsidized roads to service all the cars. In most NA cities, 60% of surface area is devoted to cars. What a waste.
That’s not counting the private costs, which people massively underestimate. Cars cost an average of $14k a year. This is why Canadians and Americans spend more on transportation than almost any country in the world.
And what do we get for all that extra cost? A lower quality of life: The longest commute times in the world, amongst the highest traffic deaths in the developed world (which is the biggest killer of children in Canada), a housing crisis due to low density, obesity and cardiovascular disease due to lack of incidental exercise, and high property taxes to maintain all that inefficient asphalt.
Canadians are also amongst the highest per capita carbon emitters, in large part due to tailpipe emissions and car centric urban design.
It’s not just cars, now is it? Thirty percent of all freight in NA is carried by truck (compared to 70% in Europe). If we focus in on “last mile” it’s near 100%. Also, depending on jurisdiction, the gas tax and licensing fees pay for the road infrastructure. If you don’t have a car, you’re not contributing.
That’s why the costs of road infrastructure were initially tolerated, with personal use secondary. Once people got used to the freedom, and car ownership exploded, road works were emphasized.
Having said that, HSR, does nothing for commute times. That’s the domain of buses, light rail, trams, subways and conventional rail. All of which have been neglected, but that’s a separate issue. HSR is also energy intensive, as energy required to move an object is proportional to the square of velocity.
The tracks have to be pretty much prefect to maintain stability. Given the amount of frost heaving we get, that 3x the cost of conventional rail might be extremely optimistic. Sections of track in Sweden, for instance, have been reduced from 200km/h, very much the lower limit of what constitutes HSR, to 130km/h, not far off the current speeds here on some sections, due to track deterioration.
I would like to see all rail infrastructure owned by a crown corp, with private rail companies competing with their own rolling stock, both freight and passenger. They’d pay the crown corp for track/station use, with those funds paying for maintenance and upgrades. That move would greatly improve the rail situation here.
As far as HSR, it an expensive boondoggle waiting to happen.
But good rail reduces the dependance on car infrastructure. Less lanes to maintain, less traffic means less wear of the road. Transit doesn’t need to be profitiable itself to still be worthwhile. It can bring value in other ways like increasing land value near stations, reducing car traffic and emissions, providing social, cultural and business connections.
Most highways and roads cost more to maintain than they bring in revenue as well.
Regular, reliable rail makes sense. It’s much cheaper to build, cheaper to maintain and the rolling stock is cheaper too. There’s also the energy demand, it increases in proportion to the square of velocity. HSR is just too expensive for the limited benefits.
Almost all of the wear on our roads is from truck traffic, with one maxxed out tractor trailer equaling the wear caused by roughly 10,000 personal vehicles. HSR does nothing to alleviate that.
Rail has to be competitive with cars to maintain and encourage ridership. High speed rail can offer significantly faster travel times than cars.
The time to build regular reliable rail was decades ago, we should strive to build more modern technology that will serve us longer into the future and encourage people to switch from driving by being faster. HSR can still be reliable so long as maintaince is properly funded.