Pretty much everything the proponents claim falls apart when you look at it. Here's why in a nutshell:
- The cost is too high Proponents are saying this will "only" cost $42 billion or so. But that's ridiculous. It assumes we'll be building one of the cheapest high speed rail lines in history. The new Bay Bridge was supposed to cost $1 billion, and is now over $6 billion. The average cost over run for high speed rail projects is about 50%.
- The ridership estimates are nonsense The ridership numbers used to justify high speed rail are outrageous. The high speed rail authority estimates 95 million passengers a year. That's 3.5 times the total traffic carried by all Amtrak nationwide in 2009. That's 260,000 people a day, and more than ten thousand people every hour, 24/7.
- The revenue estimates are nonsense The revenue is based on overblown ridership numbers, and also ticket prices that are beyond reason. Already, the HSR authority changed the ticket price from $55 to $110 for the SF-LA trip. At that point, it's cheaper to fly.
- This will lose money for ever Every similar transit program lives off of massive subsidies. In general, taxpayer subsidies are greater than the fares collected. Amtrak loses $32 per passenger. BART loses $6.14 per passenger. Caltrains subsidies cover $13.79 per passenger. (Fares are only 40% of Caltrains revenue.) If high speed rail is like all the similar programs, it will require billions of dollars each year.
- This will be slow. Not high speed. The proponents promise it will be 2 hours and 40 minutes from Los Angeles to San Francisco. That's bunk. There are 13 stops on the way unless you get one of the rare non-stops. And the train is unlikely to ever approach top speed.
- This is not green Proponents say this will 'protect the environment.' But that's wrong as well. Even their own report says this will only make a tiny dent in the air travel and car traffic. Building whole new cities in the central valley desert doesn't protect the environment. Encouraging long distance commuting doesn't protect the environment. If you want to protect the environment, support high density urban housing and a higher tax on gasoline.
