How Florida beat California to high speed rail
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 09. 2023
- Brightline is betting that it can run a commercially viable passenger rail service without massive federal subsidies.
Full text and links: reason.com/video/2023/09/20/h...
---
In 19th century America, trains symbolized modernity. Passenger rail connected the east and west coasts and helped settle the frontier. By 1916, rail accounted for 98 percent of intercity travel.
As it became easier to drive or fly, passenger rail use plummeted. In 1971, the government created Amtrak, which survives on federal subsidies. And most recently the Biden administration gave Amtrak $66 billion in federal subsidies as part of the federal infrastructure bill.
But in Florida, Brightline is showing that it's still possible to run a viable, privately operated passenger rail line under certain conditions. The company is starting service from Miami to Orlando on September 22.
Not only is Brightline the first privately funded intercity rail line in the U.S., but it's also the fastest train in the country outside of the northeast corridor. Topping out at 125 mph in Florida, it will travel from Miami to Orlando in about three hours. For comparison, the Amtrak in the area takes about six and a half hours to complete that same trip.
Mike Reininger, CEO of Brightline, told Reason that passenger rail makes commercial sense under specific conditions, such as the case in Florida, where it connects two populous, tourist-friendly cities that are about 250 miles apart. At that distance, Reininger says, "It is too far to drive and too short to fly. You can approximate the time of flying significantly, improve the time of driving, and you can offer it at a price point that makes it an economic proposition."
There has been one other ambitious effort to build high-speed rail in the U.S.-in California. But that project turned into something so "foolish" that it's "almost a crime," according to Quentin L. Kopp, the former state senator who was crucial in rallying support for a $10 billion bond measure to build high-speed rail in California. He became a fierce opponent of the project when it ran out of money and the agency in charge, he says, broke its promises to voters.
The 520-mile railway between San Francisco and Los Angeles was supposed to be completed by 2020. But after fifteen years of construction, they've only laid track for a 170-mile stretch in the Central Valley. The project, which has received more than $20 billion in state and federal subsidies, is now projected to cost over $128 billion.
Following on its success in Florida, Brightline is also starting to develop a high-speed rail line out west-connecting Las Vegas to Los Angeles. The 218-mile line will have just a handful of stops and plans to reach speeds over 186 mph. But the company is pursuing about $3 billion worth in federal subsidies to complete the project, or about a third of the total estimated cost. Though not even close to the amount of money California needs to finish its project, Robert Poole, the director of transportation policy at Reason Foundation, is "skeptical" once federal money gets involved at all in large infrastructure projects.
"It becomes far less of a business venture. And much more of this attitude that we can do grand things because we don't have to worry about what it costs," says Poole.
But Brightline's Florida project remains a true test of whether there are narrow cases in which American travelers value passenger rail enough to pay for it with their own money.
Photo Credits: akg-images / Paul Almasy/Newscom; Chris Kleponis - CNP/Newscom; Ron Sachs - CNP/Newscom; DPST/Newscom; Everett Collection/Newscom; Everett Collection/Newscom; Everett Collection/Newscom; National Motor Museum / Heritage Images/Newscom; Gary Reyes/TNS/Newscom; Gary Reyes/TNS/Newscom; Gary Reyes/TNS/Newscom; Underwood Archives/Universal Images Group/Newscom; Underwood Archives/Universal Images Group/Newscom; Underwood Archives/UIG / Universal Images Group/Newscom; Darryl Heikes/UPI/Newscom
I’d rather have subsidized trains than another massive subsidized highway. I love what Brightline is doing but also have no problem with tax dollars going toward building train infrastructure.
WASTE OF MONEY. China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
@@electrictroy2010 How much money does the interstate highway make? How much debt is the US in because of highway infrastructure? How many US cities are going bankrupt because they can't afford road and highway maintenance?
@@electrictroy2010thanx for sharing THAT! lol.
@@jamalgibson8139 l don't know. How much and how many?
@@davidjackson7281 The US highway interstate system generates no revenue. We just dumped another 500 billion in the system after having spent hundreds of billions on it since the 50s. The system contributes to sprawl and high-cost, low revenue development of low density suburbs, rather than moderate cost, high revenue development of mid rise neighborhoods and cities. Not to mention enabling highly polluting motor vehicles.
The better investment for our sustainable future is rail mixed with high and medium density cities. Let's stop destroying our valuable natural resources so that people can pretend to live in nature and start protecting that space by reducing sprawl.
California, you cannot lay a 100 feet of sidewalk without all the bureaucracy.
You can't pick up a dirty needle in LA without an environmental assessment.
You can lay down on 100 ft of sidewalk without any bureaucracy at all
@@yossiitzingerIf what you're trying to do is constructive, it's hard. If what you're trying to do is parasitic, it's easy.
Brightline isn’t true HSR. Do your homework.
@@ES-hr6vg 200-250 mph isn't needed. They wear out tracks fast, less quake proof. 100-150 mph is fine for most cases, this isn't concord more like a 737 speed.
Just to claify for anyone reading this, Brightline isn't considered High Speed rail
Do you know what high speed rail is considered in mph? If you did, it is high speed.
@@coachduke9323155 mph is the minimum for high speed rail
@@coachduke9323 Generally, the most lenient requirement for HSR is being able to hit 125 mph for upgraded track, and 150-160 mph for new track. Brightline's highest speed is the Orlando extension, which hits a max speed of 125 mph on a mere 23 miles of newly built track, meaning it's still way short of actual HSR.
By comparison, Amtrak's Acela trains are able to go at max speeds of 150 mph for 50 miles on upgraded tracks, so if Brightline is considered HSR, then Acela would have to be as well (and we all know that isn't the case)
@@coachduke9323high speed train category is above 150Mph
Yeah, everybody keeps repeating that Brightline isn’t high-speed rail officially, but I say in the United States it’s high-speed compared to everything else in the United States since there’s very few trains in the US that even go close to 100 mph.
And I just rode Brightline two weeks ago and it was really smooth at 125 mph
Did ReasonTV miss the plot where both the US road infrastructure and the US airline industry are heavily subsidized to the same degree that Europe subsidizes its rail network?
If you look at the taxes you pay on your airplane ticket, it accounts for about 25% of the cost, and that does not include taxes paid by the airline for rent and fuel taxes. Here in Central Florida, you cant move without hitting a toll road or paying 60 cents a gallon in fuel taxes. Curious what taxes you pay on an amtrak ticket or buying a ticket on a subway?
All libertarians are aware. Privatize that sht.
ROADS operate at a surplus. Both the states & the feds collect more in gasoline/diesel taxes than they spend maintaining the roads. REALITY: China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
@@electrictroy2010 In the US the federal gas tax is not adjusted for inflation and has not been raised in thirty years.
Fair point, the US just put all its eggs into roads while Europe put all its eggs into railroads. What should really happen is get rid of all those subsidies, privatize the roads and the railroads, and now that there is a level playing yield, consumers can decide what they prefer. The roads can even be converted to railroads and railroads can be converted to roads if the owners so chose.
Driving: requires government-issued license, government-approved insurance, consent to police drug testing, and $10k vehicle to use taxpayer-funded infrastructure.
Trains: somehow make money without violating your rights in Florida.
Eminent domain is also a useful tool
@@modenasolone -useful- _evil_
@@SubieNinjaYes the government requiring a reimbursement for the sale of your land to be used for statewide project is so evil.
I could see if the policy was being used for building Factories on housing property.
Not a transit system that get people around the state quicker and better for the economy.
It’s almost like trains don’t require the passengers to operate them
I love the freedoms you get with trains. Cars are not freedom, trains are.
Highways don't turn a profit either. Eliminate subsidies for auto manufacturers and slap a toll on the entire interstate system and then we can talk about Amtrak not being profitable
Not to mention the insane subsidies given to airports as well
Yes they are subsidized but they are also regulated. So give and take.
I thought the airlines were unregulated?@@erikkovacs3097
Highways are not a company? It's the government. Highways and attract are Apple and oranges.
Highways would easily pay for themselves with tolls. Some state highways have tolls, and they keep them way past being paid for, as a revenue generator.
I like cars but they are sooo expensive and I have to drive my kids around everywhere. It is appealing to me to have trains and buses like they have in Europe.
TRAINS ARE WORSE. China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
@@electrictroy2010Have you looked at the subsidies involved in road infrastructure and air travel? My bet is not.
Good video. Kinda wish they’d be a bit more clear about how subsidized car travel and air travel is too, though. Why is rail the one mode of transportation that’s supposed to support itself without government assistance?
"Why is rail the one mode of transportation that’s supposed to support itself without government assistance?"
Why do people always assume that is the argument being made? Privatize all that sht. Reason is a libertarian publication.
Did you not realize that ReasonTV is a production of the Reason Foundation, a Libertarian "think" tank? The bias and deception is baked into their format.
@@MilwaukeeF40C It's more that part of the argument has been forgotten. And it's not just transportation. Power infrastructure, water infrastructure, all were funded through "Eagle Capital," the US Government. As much of a fan as I am of privatisation, it's what makes electrical deregulation difficult.
@bengaltiger96 FALSE. Most electric & natural gas & phone companies were built by private companies. Learn your history. ROADS operate at a surplus. Both the states & the feds collect more in gasoline/diesel taxes than they spend maintaining the roads.
REALITY: China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
@@electrictroy2010 Tennessee Valley Authority funded and owned by the Federal Goverment - started in 1933. Hoover Dam was gov't funded. Two out of every three electric utilities in the US are publicly owned. Phone companies are considerably easier to build and maintain than power companies - especially in the cellular age, so I'll grant you that. And if ROADS operate at a surplus, why is there a $700 billion backlog of road and bridge capital needs? There's often been a government sweetheart deal that fuelled privatisation - look at the initial railroads which gave early investors so much land it ensured generational wealth for centuries. Its a utility Cleetus, not a freezer full of frozen yogurt on the back of a moving truck doled out on hot summer days to children playin' in the hot sun for fuggin' nickels!
1. Brightline is NOT high speed rail. 2. Brightline already HAD the Florida East Coast Railway ROW, but California has to build an entirely new one. 3. Brightline's main return on investment comes from property development NOT from railway operations, which are a loss leader. 4. California HSR has NEVER been about the LA-SF connection. It's been about the state's OVERALL rail plan from 1980, which has been an overwhelming success. The latter is a bit hard to explain, but starting in 1980, CA took over intercity rail from failed private operators (Amtrak is only interSTATE). The first was CalTrain, then Capitol Corridor, LOSSAN, ACE, Metrolink, etc. Over time, improvements were made so now Capitol Corridor actually makes money, Metrolink actually cuts traffic, and CalTrain is the most cost-efficient public transit in the entire USA. What CAHSR ACTUALLY does (if you bother to read the planning documents, which Reason's "journalists" don't bother to do) is fill in the missing links to make these intercity systems effective and profitable. 5. The current limitations of CAHSR were imposed by the FRA under ARRA in 2008 by mandating a central valley start - CAHSR didn't want to do it. The ACTUAL state rail plan would have started with the Southern Link between Burbank and Bakersfield, allowing timed transfer service to have opened by 2023 connecting LA and SF and opening up the High Desert Corridor to a PPP with Brightline.
What was the original Burbank-Bakersfield route?
@@davidjackson7281 The only way it's done now is on an Amtrak BUS. Getting north by RAIL is through San Louise Obispo
Was originally going to type up a comment bringing up these points, but you basically covered everything I wanted to. It's honestly annoying how people constantly compare Brightline to CAHSR without doing the bare minimum research to realize that they're completely different projects.
A more apt comparison would be to compare CAHSR to something like Brightline West or Texas Central, but even then it still wouldn't be entirely accurate since neither are anywhere near as complex as CAHSR, not to mention the fact that the former cut a bunch of corners and the latter has spent years on life support before needing to be saved by Amtrak
Side note: I think you should probably edit your comment so that each point is on a separate line. I agree with the points you made, but having everything in one big clump really kills the comment's readability
@@davidjackson7281 There was originally a plan to run HSR roughly parallel to Interstate 5 (Tejon), but this was later shelved in favor of running a more circuitous route (Tehchapi) to Palmdale (future connection to Brightline West via High Desert Corridor) and then Bakersfield
Cope.
the interstate highway system is the biggest case of corporate welfare in US history. for over 70 years we have payed for the infrastructure trucking companies use and wear down. if they payed tolls or their fair share in relation to the amount of damage they cause to the road, rail would look a lot more enticing. Shit, public transit would look a lot more enticing. Honeslty. all these greens raving about electric cars, should really be hailing public transit, or better said mass transit such that we can break the grip of car reliance our nation has come to.
Greens should be shouting defund and privatize the roads.
to break the grip we would have to radically redesign our towns and neighborhoods which would mean bulldozing a lot of private homes
@@MilwaukeeF40C privatizing roads simply turns road funding into a round about sales tax on all goods moved by truck.
@PhantasmPhoton We already bulldozed our cities to build road infrastructure. Now that we're starting to figure out what a bad idea that was we can repair our cities. We don't necessarily have to bulldoze them all over again, just change our zoning and land use policies.
@@murdelabop Exactly. Japanese cities have far more lenient zoning, especially the large ones like Tokyo, and the natural form those cities take is midrise density with scattered pockets of intense density and a relatively thin halo of low rise housing and single family housing that is more dense than most American suburbs. There are suburbs like America's in Japan here and there but they are much less common. Economic and market forces simply do not create and maintain American style cities. They're built by policy.
Sleeper trains can also compete with planes.
You travel leave in the evening and arrive by morning so you don’t have to take a day off for travelling. And train stations are more convenient than airports most of the time.
Train stations are more convenient, because most of them run downtown to downtown. No getting stuck in traffic from the airport to the city.
Unless you have Japanese style hostess yelling announcements over the intercom that keeps waking you up.
In many cases, it is still cheaper to fly in the evening and stay at a hotel overnight. And it is always cheaper to take an early morning flight after sleeping in your own house.
@@mirzaahmed6589 but do you really want to go through all those TSA lines and security checks??
@@ianhomerpura8937pre check it takes me like 8 minutes in a busy airport
Rail is competing on uneven footing. People often make fun of libertarians by saying “who will build the roads” well maybe roads wouldn’t be our first choice of transportation if the consumer had to front the full cost of each trip. Maybe they’d be using rail more often. Or flying. Or biking. Or walking. Regulators can’t fathom the creativity of the free market.
Or just traveling less. Is that so bad? People are fckn spoiled.
@@MilwaukeeF40C now that is actually live in the pod, eat the bug. You’re a caricature.
There's a difference between "you will own nothing and you will be happy" authoritarian planning and contentness with deciding not to go anywhere for whatever reason.
@@MilwaukeeF40C “deprive yourself” for a nebulous greater societal good, is a philosophy that will not resonate in libertarian circles.
Plenty of libertarians don't give twoshts about getting far away from the homestead. So if a free market turns out not to provide convenient or cheap transportation, big whoop.
The International Union of Railways (UIC) defines high-speed rail (HSR) as a railway system where tracks are “new lines designed for speeds above 250 km/hr (155 miles per hour) and in some cases, upgraded existing lines for speeds up to 220km/hr (136 miles per hour).”
Website for UIC says "upgraded existing lines for speeds of up to 200 or even 220 km/h".
@@davidjackson7281 Which is included in my quote. The point is that the existing lines do not reach 200 km/hr (125 mph) and the new lines do not reach 250 km/hr (155 mph). Their proposed line between Los Angeles and Las Vegas will be true high speed rail. This doesn't mean that the Florida service is bad, just that it does not meet the definition of high speed rail.
@@danielcarroll3358You are absolutely correct. The hsr tag comes from the media and the public picks up on it. Of course, BL doesn't deny and clarify this characterization of its service.
Isn’t it just moving the goal post considering some 125mph old built train lines are referred as Highspeed
@@natenae8635Isn't it the average speed, not the top speed, that actually counts?
The Vegas to LA line makes a lot of sense. If they have red eye trains people can take a morning train to Vegas, party it up, and then take the red eye home and sleep in their own bed (taking a cab or Uber from the station to home). Intelligent scheduling will probably be the key to making some of the potential routes actually profitable.
You’re comparing apples to oranges here. Floridas brightline “high speed” train service only runs up to 125mph and uses existing trackage meaning for a good portion of its right of way limiting the amount of trains they can run on the line. So it was much cheaper and faster to build BUT isn’t as capable. Plus their line is much shorter than Californias
Meanwhile CAlifornia is building their high speed railroad to operate at speeds of 220mph on a brand new right of way to optimize speed and access to population centers along the way while also building the line to remain grade separated from public roads to help with track safety (Unlike brightline). AND on top of that the California High Speed rail project is the first of its kind in the country! Meaning large amounts of infrastructure has to be built just to build the railroad, and on top of that an entire new workforce has to be trained in this sort of construction which is also going to raise costs.
Now don’t get me wrong, both services are going to be excellent once they’re completed but you can’t compare them, especially when one of them is doing something that has never been done in the US before. It’s a shame really, for being called reason TV you aren’t being very reasonable 🙄
Came here to say this. Brightline in Florida is NOT high speed rail.
Correct UK are building HS2 (High speed rail 2) new track 225mph trains also original cost 33billion now 90 billion these projects are not cheap but in the long run are worth it
This is 100% accurate. People are stupid or willfully ignorant if they think Brightline is the same as CHSR.
this is a political propaganda video (libertarian)
Come back to this thread in 50 years and I guarantee that the CA line will run at speeds far less than 220 mph.
Already large sections of the line are going to run at 110 mph (which is already optimistic given it’s shared rail with commuter trains).
Why point out the public dollars that can go to intercity rail but ignore the public dollars going to intercity highways? At least rail has the potential to be profitable. Not so for our roads.
The roads are paid for with fuel taxes. The users of the network are paying for it.
@@Inquisitor6321 That is not true. In 2020, state and local motor fuel tax revenue ($53 billion) accounted for 26 percent of highway and road spending nationwide. Some states are better, but the state with the highest share covered by direct user fees and taxes (Hawaii) still only covered 71%.
Everyone pays for the roads regardless of whether or how much they directly use it
@@brennanconway3728 What happened in 2020? That was the beginning of the plandemic which shut the economy down in some places by about 75%. That's not a good measuring stick.
@brennanconway3728 this doesn't accou the for federal gas tax revenue. How.much of it went to highway infrastructure?
@@joelrodriguez9661 federal gas taxes fund 84% of federal road maintenance. But you have to remember that the vast, vast majority of roads (including all US Highways AND the entire interstate system) are owned and funded by states. Federal government owns 3% of roads, most of which are roads in national forests and parks, military bases, and Indian reservations.
The remainder does go into the highway trust fund which is used to build new highways. The fund is not solvent, however, because gas tax has not increased since 1993 and requires annual transfers from the general fund
Jerry Brown forgot to consider California has no continuous coastal plain. The Bay Area and the Los Angeles basin are both surrounded by mountains, and following the highway alignments would yield routes much too steep and/or winding for true high speed rail. Imagine running a Shinkansen train up The Grapevine.
HSR up the Grapevine route would be sooner, shorter, faster, cheaper, and quicker than the Tehachapis and San Gabriels route. Grapevine is no more diffcult than the others with less tunneling by 10 miles. The decision was political and not based on true feasibility studies. The Tejon property nimbys fought hard against it and Palmdale wants development and fought hard for it. But the better route was decided against. Earthquake faults are a false argument. They can happen anywhere at anytime and the HSR would be properly designed for safety.
@@davidjackson7281 GO GRAPEVINE. It's the best route. PERIOD.
That's not quite accurate. It would have been more than possible to take the direct route along the I-5 corridor (which is literally a flat, straight line), but doing so would completely miss the point of the project - CAHSR was never about just connecting SF to LA, but rather connecting the entire state together, which is why Prop 1-A in 2008 specifically required the cities in the Central Valley be included in the route.
Had they used the direct route along the I-5, they would've been able to avoid most of the major problems the project has faced and it would've been able to be built much faster and cheaper, but you would end up with a far useful train line that only serves the two major coastal areas while completely bypassing the Central Valley region, which has a larger population than most states but has been completely economically stagnant for decades.
The fact is that with infrastructure, you get what you pay for, and in this case California chose to be a lot more ambitious instead of taking the easy way out. We can debate whether or not the tradeoff is worth it, but the fact is the lack of an easy, direct route was never the problem
@@davidjackson7281the chosen route will serve many more long neglected communities in the central valley. It's the better choice for connecting much more of the state. Another express HSR line from LA to SF can be built along the 5 later.
@@Chario_very well said.
The US actually carries more rail freight than any other country.
And China carries more passengers on high speed rail than any other country.
And yet, the freight infrastructure is still horribly overburdened and garbage.
@bobbinsthethird AND China has a massive debt problem on its passenger rail. They built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
@@electrictroy2010Nice over and over again comment cut and paste job many numerous times. Sort of redundant and somewhat boring.
I voted for a high speed railway system in Florida several elections ago because not only would it bring much needed jobs to the area, but it would simplify travel within the state. I understand it was defeated by the Senior Citizens who claimed the trains did not accommodate Senior Citizen’s needs which would’ve been relatively simple to make. I am for this 100% as it would force the country to look into public transportation as a viable alternative to rising gas prices and rising air travel costs.
I would Brightline last week from Orlando to West Palm, and I saw at least a fourth of the train and more or Senior citizens.
Meant to write, I rode Brightline
TRAINS COST MORE. China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
It's cool to see high speed rail in Florida. I'm not gonna use it, cause I can take a Greyhound for half the price, and the bus is only an hour longer.
I hope to see more HSP rather than highways in the US.
I took the Amtrak from St. Louis to Chicago today. Didn't surpass 70 mph and we were being passed by drivers in the right lane on the parallel highway. We can do better.
Greyhound/Flixbus charges $25-$55 ($25 if super advanced) from MCO to downtown Miami with a timetable of 5 hours. Far slower than Brightline. I don't even need to get into the amenities, comfort, or even the bathroom comparison. 😷
It's worth comparing the estimated costs of building high speed rail to what it would cost to build the equivalent freeway and airport expansions to meet the same capacity. In California's case, WSP, a construction management firm, did cost estimates for both, and found the latter to be about 1.5 times the estimated cost of high speed rail. Not to mention that both freeways and air travel are also subsidized.
They underestimated as it turns out. And why is anyone entitled to anything being expanded at all at tax expense?
@@MilwaukeeF40C the 2006 estimate by CAHSR was about $45 billion (unclear if that was just for SF-Anaheim or that includes Phase 2), according to the 2008 CA state voter guide for Prop 1A (I don’t know where the $33 billion often cited by news media and critics comes from, as that amount was never mentioned in Prop 1A). It’s accurate that early estimate didn’t account for environmental clearances or final design, or how much opposition the project would face.
The 2022 base estimate for Phase 1 was at $93-94 billion, just over twice that early estimate, compared to a base estimate of $153 billion for the equivalent highway/airport capacity. The current (2023) base estimate is now at $106 billion for HSR, but just as that cost has risen due to inflation, so too will the cost of highways and airports.
To meet California’s future travel needs, either the current modes (driving and flying) need more capacity or we need an alternative. Over 40 million people are expected to live in California, and many of them will want to travel between NorCal and SoCal. Highways are funded with public tax dollars, as are to an extent airports.
We can either continue the status quo, or try something else. HSR is a proven alternative to driving and flying, faster than the former over 100 miles and competitive with the latter up to 500 miles. Compared to more driving and flying, which will still face things like traffic and delays regardless of what’s powering them, HSR remains the better long term investment.
@@MilwaukeeF40C Underestimate cost and Overestimate ridership as custom with Rail Projects.
TRAINS COST MORE. China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
ROADS have a surplus. Both the states & federal government collect more in gasoline/diesel taxes than they spend on maintenance. Roads aren’t subsidized
there is a big error around the 6 minute mark. The north eastern US has more people in a smaller area than France or the UK, but has significantly worse rail. There are multiple areas and standalone city pairs in the US that demographically beat out most other areas.
HSR is a great goal to strive for, but just building out a unified intercontinental passenger system should be the current goal. Many people would ride trains even if they took slight longer, they just want a way to get to certain locations without having to put much effort into it like navigating an airport or driving a car.
Exactly. And I think this is precisely where Brightline won. Brightline isn't high speed rail, not even close, yet they still managed to bring the passenger numbers they did, which shows that people aren't looking exclusively to HSR, but rather looking towards mostly fast, convenient travel completely car-free. It's a model that Amtrak and other states could learn from to improve passenger trains in the US. Just a long, vast network of 110-125mph trains that comes frequently and at good prices would transform the US into something great.
200 km/h aka 125 mph is fast enough for most trips and slightly faster than an Amtrak train at high speeds... It may be the absolute minimum for HSR but it is still fast enough to be a game changer. At this speed you can also get away with level grade crossings as long as proper barrier gates exist. Any speed higher than that involves much more expensive engineering aka the California solution. If you want 350 kmh service you need straight level tracks with no crossings and to get that you need to build huge trenches, tunnels, embankments and bridges which cost 3-4X per mile or km to build on average.. Hence why a California HSR went from $20B to $120B when you include inflation, delays, redesigns, etc.
Instead of aiming for lower speeds and services, it may be better to study the reasons why infrastructure costs are so overinflated compared to other developed countries.
Then act on it to reduce the crazy inefficiency and go for the true high-speed and better service, better value.
France and Spain build high grade high-speed lines operated at 320kph or 300kph for a tiny fraction of the cost.
One of the latest French high-speed lines is a 300+ kilometer long extension with all the environmental bells and whistles you could think of, and double footprint land preservation for "rewilding".
It is operated at 320kph / 200mph but was rated for at least 360kph as, by definition, lines in France must be capable of smoothly handling the commercial speed goal plus 10%, which is 352kph.
This HSL, called LGV SEA, cost less than 8 billion euros, including everything from the environmental mitigation features (like a myriad of wildlife over/underpass, "frog tunnels" or "forrest habitat continuity bridges", etc.), double footprint land acquisition and the nature preservation of this "shadow double", the rebedding of rivers and creeks, the restoration of wetland natural habitat, dozens of kilometers of access tracks, stations overhaul, and provisions for environmental monitoring.
7.7 billions, to be exact !
200kph / 125mph is just not enough in many cases to trigger enough modal shift and make it truly successful. That's conventional train speed in certain countries, not high-speed.
Developed countries that have successfully changed the modal share towards the train have true high-speed, not just "higher speed".
200kph / 125mph is the speed of the conventional *regional* train in the tri-border region of Alsace in France, where is located Strasbourg, seat of the European Parliament, Council of Europe and European Court of Human Rights.
Lowering the goal and the service to save on cost instead of addressing the cost overinflation issue is like giving up and accepting to never really improve things. I think America deserves better.
By only aiming for 200kphv/ 125mph, you get something that is still way overpriced.
If countries with higher taxes on labor, higher energy prices and stringent environmental regulations can develop infrastructure for an acceptable cost, how come the US can't?
This was recently highlighted, if I recall correctly, by a NYT article and a NYU study called project infrastructure cost or something like that.
It pressed on the monumental cost difference of 2nd Avenue subway and Grand Central East Side Access versus Paris' "Grand Paris Express" mass transit expansion project currently being built, plus a few other European transit developments.
Zero reason for a unified system in North America.
I still think you're getting too far ahead of yourself. The real current goal is what Brightline is doing. Proving and showing to the US public, with Brightline's model, that passenger trains can be a viable travel option and financially successful. If Brightline is successful, it will peak the interest of more people and create more demand for passenger rail. This then could in turn possibly create more private companies to create and build new lines which could lead to HSR.
Car travel and air travel also only work with massive government subsidies, just less direct then rail travel. Airports are heavily subsidized, while the interstate highway system is entirely government-run and funded at massive cost.
I live in Florida now, but I noticed what used to be countryside and only one laying on either side is now being constructed to be practically an expressway with two no three lanes each way there’s very much building and construction going on in Florida. !!! don’t know how much all this cost going on in many places in Florida widening the highways probably many millions !!
FALSE. roads are funded by gas/diesel taxes (indirect tolls). Both the states & federal governments collect more tolls than they spend on road maintenance. Therefore, roads have a surplus and don’t need subsidies . TRAIN REALITY: China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
I wish for a day when we have HSR across the country
I wish for a day with no taxes.
You're not being entirely fair to Amtrak as the main issue Amtrak has is that they have to operate on track owned by freight companies. Even in places that Amtrak owns the right of way they operate on infrastructure that is not equipped for High Speed Rail and is in terrible condition.
Amtrak does get subsidies from the federal government but so do planes and cars (airports and highways). Additionally, Planes and cars get ASTRONOMICALLY more. Pre-covid Amtrak was actually doing pretty well for itself as it was financially healthier than ever. The Northeast Corridor has always been profitable and state supported services, pre-Covid, recovered the vast majority of their expenses back. The main issue has been the long distance trains that are huge money pits. However, Amtrak can't get rid of them because politicians who represent rural districts, the same ones who complain about the federal government subsidizing Amtrak, don't let Amtrak do so.
Brightline is a great company and I'm glad they're finding success, but they also required huge subsidies from the government as well. Truthfully it's crazy how much people complain about the government subsidizing passenger rail when they subsidize every other form of transportation. At least passenger rail can make up some money back and is environmentally friendlier. Additionally the idea that the the US does not have corridors where high speed rail is viable is just not true. There are a ton of corridors within the US where HSR is suitable and viable.
I typically agree with a lot of Libertarian ideas but the whole libertarian agenda against passenger rail and public transit is ridiculous considering how expensive car infrastructure and widening highways is.
FALSE. roads are funded by gas/diesel taxes (indirect tolls). Both the states & federal governments collect more of these fuel tolls than they spend on road maintenance. Therefore, roads have a surplus and don’t need subsidies . TRAIN REALITY: China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
@@electrictroy2010Oh really?
I sincerely hope Brightline West will be a success. The California HSR is just a joke of a money pit. San Francisco to LA or San Diego? Maybe in 20 years....
Hopefully no more than 30-40 years.
I hate subsidies but I have to say that for a fair comparison you should also include the highway creation/maintenance costs as well as airport/FAA costs to paint a balanced picture. Of course the california high-speed one seems like a total grift on any scale, but the las vegas la one appears reasonable when putting it into perspective
Railroads were given millions of acres of free land in the late 1800s/early 1900s. Also direct monetary handouts. Subsidized. ROADS have a surplus. Both the states & federal government collect more in gasoline/diesel taxes than they spend on maintenance.
Roads aren’t subsidized
TRAINS ARE EXPENSIVE. China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
While I do think this news is something to celebrate, there is a lot of misleading information. Brightline will take 3-1/2 hours to get to from Miami to Orlando; not under 3 hrs. California has made many funding and managing mistakes but it shouldn't be given up. Unlike Brightline, the California High Speed rail trains will be significantly faster. That's going to require brand new tracks. I do think what's happening in Florida is good news. Brightline has plans for a real high speed rail from southern California to Vegas, and another connecting Dallas to Houston. Let's see if they can deliver.
Literally Atlas shrugged.
Ayn Rand loves private Brightline.
$80 Bucks per person seems like a lot to me but when Amtrak is charging $40 but takes at least twice as long to get there I can see why they choose that price point.
I bought a November special of $39 when I saw it on Brightline from Orlando to West Palm and just came back last week. Very smooth ride. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
And now I saw a Black Friday special, and I bought that too, snapped it up. Love to explore from Orlando. !!!
Brightline's Florida project is NOT HSR. However, their proposed Vegas to California project would be their first HSR line. And guess what? They can't do it with only private funding which is why they are asking the federal government for $3.75 billion. So much for Brightline's private only funding paradigm.
Brightline's $6 Billion Florida project, per Banks Rail, received about $800 Million mostly from FDOT. That's 13.3%. $3.75 B of a $12 B Brightline West Project is 31.3%. Government subsidizes many various forms of corporate 'welfare' in America. Think of the Transcontinental Railroad. For a century Southern Pacific was the largest private landowner in California.
@@davidjackson7281 Indeed, but my point is that many people are holding up Brightline as an example of how a private company is the way to go for modern future passenger rail service. It's obviously not. As you sat, even their Florida project got some federal funding unbeknownst to many people who thought it was fully privately funded.
@@mrxman581What I was trying to say was that a private company such as a passenger rail service being partially funded by tax-payer funded government start-up grants is a very successful American free enterprise captalism approach, now and historically. We are probably saying the same thing with different words. Believe we are in accord that there is enough money if the will is there.
@@davidjackson7281 Yup. We are saying the same thing. I just want to slap down all these people holding up Brightline as the savior of passenger rail service because they are a private company doing it with no government funding which is false. Brightline is getting funding from the government too. Just want to make that very clear. We should promote public/private partnerships where it makes sense.
@@mrxman581Care to speculate which system will begin to operate revenue service first: CAHSR, BLW or perhaps TC? Atlanta to Charlotte? Spoiler: BLW may jumpstart at Victorville before extending to Rancho Cucamonga.
Hey Brightline, hurry up and connect Tampa to Orlando!
that depends on your governers and legislators.
Japan has a huge train network, and it's mostly privately built and owned (outside of some metro subways)
Wrong, it was publicly built and funded until the late 80s when Japan privatized it. Since then the overall network has shrunk and Japan still subsidizes some of it in ways.
Incorrect
I live in Japan.
It was built by the government.
It was built by the government, and was turned private in the 80s. JR, the company that owns it, is heavily overseen by the government through regulations, basically Social Democracy.
Shinkansen was government subsidized (and original debts still being paid off). Several commuter lines were not subsidized.
When my Dad traveled by rail through Japan, there were no nasty buildings in the way to build new rail lines. For that matter, where wasn't much at all.
The running time between Miami and Orlando Airport is not “under 3 hours.” It’s 3 hours, 38 minutes.
Under three hours, I believe it’s two hours and 15 minutes to West Palm, did it last week
People always tout Brightline like it's going to solve the transit issue in this country. It's a boutique, private, for-profit enterprise. There's a reason Amtrak loses money on its long-distance services, those cities need to be connected regardless of profit. That's the difference between ACTUAL public transit and a dainty little vanity project. That's not to say Brightline doesn't have a place in American rail, it certainly does, just don't pretend it's going to replace the need for PROPER transit. We live in this weird era where everyone likes to shit on California for actually being progressive and attempting the difficult first step of true high-speed rail while praising Florida for painting the same turd a fancy color.
I don't care how and when it gets built just that it does... The faster the better though and frankly the higher speed of HSR probably isn't worth the increased engineering costs and time. Having said that California contains as many people as Canada at around 40 million and its network will stretch much further... So yeah... Trains good. Buses and cars? Not so much. The end...
Where and why has the crazy ideology that trains should be profitable while we incentify roads!?
That's not the libertarian ideology, which Reason represents.
Brightline drops you off at Terminal C at MCO airport. Doubt many traveling from Miami want to end up at a Orlando airport as their final destination.
I believe a planned extension to Tampa will include an additional stop in Orlando to serve the touristy areas.
Just take a taxi or rent a car.
Two million riders can't be wrong.
interesting take (subbed for a year and came from youtube video sidebar recommend)
I would love to get on a train and travel more. But with the closest station to me being around 4 hours, the cost being greater then that of renting a car and the time it takes to get there being about twice what it takes to drive. The economics are just not there. Yes, I live in a very rural area. However that just means that if you bring such a service here more people well use it.
I loved train travel but then I lived in a town with a railroad station.
4:34 that’s called burying the lead. Brightline is not profitable because of its rail service but because of its real estate holdings that investors believe would be profitable retail spaces in the future.
Brightline is already successful , even without going to Orlando until Friday!
it has a successful PR campaign but not as a railroad lol
196,120 in 6 months, which is a 78 % increase in passengers and a 129% increase in revenues is only a PR campaign?@@chromebomb
@@chromebombTwo million riders in 2023 and three million riders in 2024 is not chopped liver.
@@chromebomb They started making profit earlier in the year. PR only gets you so far, the service itself is great.
@@davidjackson7281let him cope.
Doe's it come with battery's?
I love trains, even since I was a little kid but it makes no sense. Flight from Orlando to Miami is like 32 dollars, if you have precheck you could just browse through TSA. Flight time is 1 hour. Brightline train cost 79 dollars from Orlando to Miami with less availability and travel time is 3 hours. It takes 3 times longer and almost 3 times more expensive.
Post the link for these $32 flights from MCO to FLL or MIA. There are cheap flights via Spirit ( members discount ) but when everything else is added up it doesn't come out that cheap.
@@c22tch spirit offers cheap flights for non members but they don't offer bags if you want bags delta offer 100 dollars flights
If you don't like Brightline, just DON'T RIDE IT. Use a donkey for your next Miami-Orlando journey. it's really cheap and more environmentally friendly. And there's no need to precheck with TSA.
There are 18 trains a day (with 14 I believe traveling the whole route; the first two and last two do not), one every hour from early in the morning to late at night. Frequency is not an issue; in fact, I kind of wonder if they will be able to fill them all up.
@michaeljones7927 TRAIN REALITY: China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
What I will never understand about rich cronies is why they still need our money.
Real estate development as a funding mechanism is CRITICAL.
Hey Brightline Birmingham to Atlanta, Atlanta to Chattanooga, Chattanooga to Nashville (would help with traffic too), and Atlanta to Macon/Savannah. Desperately needed and would rival or pass the New York to Boston and New England routes.
Maybe Detroit- Cleveland or St. Louis- Kansas City.
Yes, Atlanta should be a railroad passenger hub. Surprised you did not mention perhaps the best route: Atlanta to Charlotte.
Living in Florida, and seeing the practice trains daily (the Orlando Miami route has not actually started passengers yet), it will be intersting. I am just glad that our state is not paying, because 95% of Florideans will never use it (including myself who lives half way between Orlando and Miami). And the Orlando to Tamps section is dead right now becaus Disney pulled out, and Universal wants a stop. Unfortunately for Universal, they are smack dab in a very busy area with infastructure that would make thiz way too expensive. The Orlando/Orange county boards have been a huge headache for Brightline. There biggest hinderance is the government.
I hope the Orlando to Tampa section is eventually completed. It seems Disney pulled out because they expected Brightline to pay for the privilege of having a stop on Disney property. Also it appears that Universal is willing to invest their own money into the project because they see value in having the station near their attractions. I think the target for a Universal Station is nearer to the new park they are building. But I agree that it's going to be a challenge to get a line from the Airport to where Universal.is building its new park.
If they can get there. Then they could run the rest of the line to Tampa in between the East and Westbound lanes of I-4 for most if not all of the remaining miles.
@@joelrodriguez9661 I think they should just skip parks and go directly from OIA to Tampa. If Universal/I Drive want a train, it needs to probably be the sunrail. That route is not feasible for a high speed train.
Does the Reedy Creek station location have any merit?
@@charlafrederick1245 you are probably right. It would be way easier to do as you suggest.
@@fredm.7145Brightline has shut down and filed for bankruptcy. That is true like everything you said.
Short trips will be their best bet between cities.
I plan to one day ride it from Orlando to Miami. Just have to decide where I want to stay and whether I want to rent a car or take a Lyft.
Great to see high speed rail getting built and operated in the US. Just wish it could be done economically without public subsidies. I also think they need to develop the ability to bring your car with you. The reasons people drive are so often related to the first and last miles they drive. High speed railway might save on the trip but you either have to pay for transportation for the first and last miles at uneconomical or inconvenient rates. Or park at your starting point and rent at your destination. Even if parking were free someone is paying for it and rental is also an added cost. Since North America is so spread out in our living spaces mass transit will always be limited by the first and last miles. You need to solve that problem in able to use solution for longer distances.
Amtrak already has the Auto Train, running from Lorton, VA to Sanford, FL. It is an overnight trip, so passengers can get rest in the sleeping cars.
@@danielcobbins8861 Yes but it’s use is limited to only one route. I have pondered using it to travel to Florida but since I’m starting in Central New York State it still requires a significant drive and the cost is as prohibitive as any other Amtrak ticket. 😂
The economics of HSR are, what I would argue, the same of Highways. At least from my point of view (Living in Portugal) The Interstate Highway System had an undeniable impact on American Lives. HSR, from examples around the world, and if done properly, can lead to a positive economic impact, even if it looses money. Highways do to, but I'm guessing no one questions that, because no one would be willing to increse tolls so highways can "pay for themselves" if it meant a drastic increase in price in consumer goods.
The question then remains, however, HOW do you build it effectively. People tend to overlook HSR sometimes. When you look at Europe, it's true they have a large network of High Speed Trains, but also a vastly larger networks of conventional rail. This is by design, you also wouldn't want to build a massive highway network without local roads and streets.
HSR is a complicated subject, and needs to be looked at more. The way I see it, you'll always need some degree of Federal Support for any sort of infrastructure project. Maybe not full support, but partial. Brightline is using techniques from around the world, paring that with some federal grants and the lower regulations of the private sector, its no wonder they have been able to do so well.
Sorry if this reply is confusing. Had a tiring day
There are no private HSR rails, there’s a few operators in Europe but they piggyback off of government owned infrastructure.
On the topic of bringing your car with you, I used to think that but now I am a strong believer that bikes, ebikes, or some other human scale transportation solution-not a 1 ton space inefficient death trap to those that are not inside of it-is the answer if we are looking at a long-term happier, healthier future imo
I always hear the train people come up and make excuses for the failure of most US train systems. “Look at Europe” is not a business case. The distance from Buffalo the NYC is the same as London to Berlin. Distance and density is the reason that nearly all trains don’t work (business wise) for commuters in the US.
Savannah to Atlanta. Please.
Extend it all the way
Atlanta - Savannah - Jacksonville - Orlando.
So why does Amtrak train that long
What is happening to fix this
Public or private, more systems is good. It brings in more domestic experience and ultimately will lower the cost for future developments.
Channel compares apples to oranges. Florida trains will top out at 125 mph. California line is building out to sustain speeds between stations of 220 mph. Florida line “upgraded”, not built with scores of grade crossings. NBC News 6 reports 85 car and pedestrian collisions on Brightline from 2018 to June 2022. California line will be 100% grade separated on the whole high speed main trunk over 300 miles from Merced to Bakersfield.
As for Cali, our 2008 ballot initiative promised SF to LA highspeed rail. The governor is now saying 2040 for that full route to open.
Ridiculous. Brightline might “only” be 125 but it’s still operating 20 years ahead of when SF-LA will finally work
SF to BFD will someday (2040?) be a 340 mile route. Merced to BFD is 172 miles, not 300.
What is often overlooked and horrible about the now 100 deaths (probably a lot are suicide) is not only the inconvenience to the riders or the damage to the train but think about the mental anguish that has been invoked upon the poor engineer and staff who have to live with such a painful and tragic experience. Just saying. The crossings may be made safer over the decades so unfortunately there may be more accidents.
Calling a 110mph train an HSR
What lack of research does to a mf
(Also, f offlibertarians, infrastructure is for the people, not the profit, Brightline trains also loose money)
Problem is when you get there you still need a car, so there's the added cost and hassle of renting one.
If I could travel by rail and bring my motorcycle I probably would use rail.
What about an E-bike?
@davidjackson7281 e bikes are slow and short-ranged. If travel by rail, it's to get to a state I want to explore without needing to ride the whole way. When I'm there, I probably won't be staying in a city for long, so I will need a highway capable bike.
Orlando to Miami is 3.5 h on Brightline. I know, because I rode Brightline. There’s a lot of things this vid omits or gets wrong. 🧐
Brightline has 315 level crossings and a massive number of deaths.
It is not high speed.
I pray to god SW Florida gets some rails, forget car centric cities
20th century communism (subsidized roads) eliminated the profitable, private railroads in southwest Florida. Naples used to have a railroad right through the middle of town, all the way to Everglades City. The stations are still there.
USA has ta fund alot on military , but Europe does not . The difference might be the cost of new railways here and there .
"Do Californians want to do this? My answer is yes. I hope their answer is yes."....But we didn't really ask.
Florida didn't beat them because brightline is straight up not high speed rail. it's cheaper because they've cut massive corners.
As for Cali, our 2008 ballot initiative promised SF to LA highspeed rail. The governor is now saying 2040 for that full route to open.
Ridiculous. Brightline might “only” be 125 but it’s still operating 20 years ahead of when SF-LA will finally work
Brightline just worked smarter, not harder. Get more money (and hence more passengers on the trains) by making a route that actually makes sense.
Its a start but brightline is hardly "high speed"
Japan also works on the land + rail model. Though it was highly subsided at the start (as the rail was built by the government at the start) it doesn't subsedise that part of the rail anymore.
Plus, US highway is also a huge, economically unviable subsedie - hence why its crumbling and begging for renewal. You are banking too hard on autonomous cars, and by proxy on continued public support for cars. If bright line succeeds, highways will die out slowly. Making Autonomous cars the scarce and rare alternative, active mostly in cities, where you can (theoretically) upkeep a well lit, and well marked road.
FALSE. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.). Let’s not copy them. China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
@@electrictroy2010 JR is state owned" - no, JR is a private company, with 50% of its shares owned by the government, while freight is government owned. It's not "state owned", but its not exactly 100% private.
"JR is in debt" - idk where you got your numbers but the best i found for long term debt was $180B
here are other companies long term debt figures:
Google - $13B
GM - $80B
Amazon - $61B
AT&T - $126.701B
Should we dismiss these companies as unproductive because they have debt? Obviously not, companies acquire debt to invest in future endeavors
JR is a profitable business, utilizing the property plus rail model - it offers a service, without costing the government a dime
"China and France" - who cares? China built its rail to bolster GDP numbers, and the consequences of this stunt are going to hit them like a slow moving ton of bricks, with ballooning upkeep costs. The French SNFC isnt privately owned - its constantly bleeding money, and unlike JR that makes money and pays off its debts, SNFC needs government cash injections constantly.
"Non of the lines [in china] are covering operations" - that's because tickets dont pay for rail upkeep, real-estate does. Thats how JR are profitable. This isnt even getting into how misguided the entire Chinese building spree was, in an economic sense, where they connected villages with rail, that barely see any traffic, and a dirt road would make much more sense.
"Rail is old" - I didn't know maglev (what powers Japans and Chinas rails) is 17th century tec, did they also have moters that can reach 200miles/h?
Yes the idea of putting a locomotive on metal rails is 200 years old, but by that standard roads are much older and putting a car with weels pulled by some sort of "engine" in most cases up until the 18th century it was a horse - was used all the way back roman empire, and we should stop using them, because rail is a newer technology. This isn't a convincing argument, and if anything you judge a technology by how effective it is, not how old it is.
When you refer to "new technology" i assume you talk about self-driving cars - even if you can get AI driving well in all environments you are stuck with the following:
- Traffic jams are still going to be a thing, because cars are inefficient space wise, and no amount of coding can create more road and "just add another lane" is demonstrably not a viable solution
- US highways are one of the most expensive and decrepit pieces of infrastructure on the planet, the US is supposed to spend billions just on upkeep.
Trains are able to transfer people much more effectively between city centres which works for most people, and capacity issues are solved with more train cars - which is a much cheaper solution than adding another lane. And that's not even talking about how much better it is than plane travel in most cases.
"Rail loses money and is a bad investment" - by what standard exactly? Because if the bottom line is your standard, as i mentioned the US highway system is also a "bad investment" and im waiting for you to call for us to abandon the US highway system. If its the economic benefits, then trains are much better than roads as they don't waste peoples time in 2-3 hour long traffic jams - making the economy lose millions of dollars, because people are just waiting around to get to work. Sure rail post the 1930s, with waves of nationalizations across the world - condemned rail to inefficient government control and subsequent privatizations have been incomplete, causing rail to be dependent on government cash injections - that doesn't mean its a bad investment, because there are profitable examples out there, like Floridas Brightline.
@@electrictroy2010Profound.
Linear motor car rail will soon be future if rail going about 400 pmh
Another small reason it works well in Florida is that Florida is as flat as a piece of paper.
Honestly, I was expecting this video to be worse, but it surprised me. I still find certain aspects and comparisons a bit weird due to some historical context or other pieces of data I've found, but it's overall well made. Congrats!
What I think is funny is people who natter about subsidies for railroads don't bat an eyelash about even larger subsidies for highways.
Bright line is not high speed rail. It tops out at 125 mph.
It isn't true high speed rail until it has grade seperation the entire line and high speeds without killing someone at a crossing.
REALLY? Europe has many 150+ mph trains that are at grade. I guess they’ve been lying about their high speed rail all this time
DB and SNCF has grade crossings, not the insane amount the usa has though but still, confirm your logic the german ICE and french TGV are not true highspeed rail. You made my day, you have some good humor
reasontv be like:
Brightline has pointy nosed trains = brightline high speed
Very true. Marketing images work very effectively don't they?
@@davidjackson7281 Yeah but really to be fair, brightline markets themselves almost like hsr.
@@m--aYes, perhaps somewhat almost high speed. lt could be accurately called faster speed or higher speed or semi-high speed though. l don't live in Florida but l have not heard a Brightline spokesperson refer to Brightline as high speed rail. Nor have l heard of advertising or publicity professing such. Rather Brightline says it is for travel to places too far to drive and too close to fly.
The high speed connotation comes from the hyped-up media coverage. Of course Brightline does not go out of its way to clarify. Besides to me frequency and average speed are more important than the top speed and Brightline excels at both. Heck technically the Acela's top speed is 5 mph short of hsr. And Brightline's average speed is faster north of NYC and slightly slower southward.
Brightline is cool but it’s not high speed. That’s a marketing lie. I can drive from Miami to Orlando in 3.5-4 hours. According to Brightline the train takes 3.5 hours. (Provided it doesn’t hit someone.) It’s not worth it. Have to buy tickets and rent a car in Orlando since there is no subway. Also it only goes 125 mph for a small portion of the track.
Truth be told, Florida is lucky to have a decent stretch that was upgradable to higher speed rail. The new stretch to Orlando just uses the highway alignment, which limits speed. If Brightline continues to be more and more successful, it's likely they might have to either build an actual line between Miami and Cocoa or fully grade separate the existing one to allow for higher speeds and for safety. Plus, Florida is flat, California isn't, so no tunnels. California is using upgraded infrastructure too though, in the apporach to SF. Not an ideal solution, but one to lower costs. Brightline isn't even electrified, because in America, only turning a profit matters, not lowering the carbon footprint. Still, Brightline opens a way for good passenger rail to be a thing in the states which is definitely welcome.
A diesel locomotive built to current EPA standards is as clean as an electric train. (Remember electricity comes primarily from burning fossil fuels.)
TRAINS ARE EXPENSIVE: China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
@@electrictroy2010 Instinct tells me that's bs, but I'd love to be proven wrong if you could provide the data! :) I mean, with a diesel loco, you're stuck burning fuel, whereas electricity can come from cleaner sources. Electric train with overhead wire are also much lighter which contributes to better acceleration.
@@electrictroy2010 Highways are heavily subsidised all around the world, or heavily tolled too. Turning a profit is not really the point of a high speed rail system. Only stuff like metros could realistically turn a measurable profit (and does so in places such as Hong Kong).
HS systems help remove planes from the air and cars from the road and bring cities and economies closer together. As an example, commerce, tourism and overall relationships between Barcelona and Madrid have been strengthened as a consequence of the high speed line. A city on the French TGV network is a city that has access to the whole country.
Railways are far from obsolete mate. Sure, cars are more flexible, and planes are faster, but railways offer higher capacity and high speed rail is faster between 300km-1000km than both cars and planes.
The funniest thing is, if you are a car maniac (not saying you are!), the best thing you could do is advocate for more trains, because it's the only thing that will genuinely remove cars from roads hahaha
@@paupadroslt's a bot.
The big problem with this headline and comparison is that Brightline is not High speed rail (250 km/h and upwards),. It's not electrified and it's mainly reconstructed existing rail. It is packed with dangerous street crossings which also lowers the average speed..
That said, Brightline is still a great accomplishment..
As for Cali, our 2008 ballot initiative promised SF to LA highspeed rail. The governor is now saying 2040 for that full route to open.
Ridiculous. Brightline might “only” be 125 but it’s still operating 20 years ahead of when SF-LA will finally work
Florida need to continue Orlando's sun rail south/west then west through davenport, Auburndale, lakekand, plant city and then to Tampa so people can take the train to work, Florida is way behind calofornia in public transportation
I hope it works for brightline
California is closer to The Gambia than the PRC when it comes to infrastructure 😂
lol Brightline has received millions in government grants
I love how the majority of comments to this video are about how the creator is being extremely casual with the facts of the case (when not outright ignoring them altogether) so that it fits their desired political narrative.
Has everyone forgotten that Amtrak carries a majority of non auto traffic in the NEC and all the aging infrastructure is being rebuilt?
They don't care, for them, it's always government bad.
GOVERNMENT REALITY: China has built more miles of high‐speed rail than any other country with $800 billion debt. None of its lines are covering operating costs. (As a result, China is shifting to building more roads.)
France’s rail has debts of $70+ billion and has been repeatedly bailed out by the government. SPAIN built its system with a public‐private partnership. It is $90 billion in debt. The state‐owned Japanese National Railways has a debt of $550 billion. (Japan also has Highest debt to GDP of 300%.)
Railroads are an OLD 1700s technology that is obsoleted by faster, more flexible travel technologies. High-speed rail loses tons of money & is a bad investment.
5:38
- the federal interstate network is chock full of subsidies, both in construction and maintenance.
- no, the gas tax is NOT enough to cover maintenance costs, since the 1980s.
- believe it or not, gas acrosss the US is heavily subsidized to keep prices low, because if it was not, prices will be already at $8 per gallon, at par with Europe.
No it would not be anywhere near $8 a gallon. Maybe $4. The Federal Gas Tax is only 24 cents per gallon. If you tripled that tax, it would be like 72 cents a gallon.
@@righteousmammon9011 thanks for that. Still, time to increase the gas tax. It has been long overdue.
Europe costs $8 a gallon because they charge $5/gallon in gas tax. NO WAY will the US & state governments go above the current rate (about $1/gallon)
250 miles is too far to drive? I've done longer daytrips with absolutely no issues.
You've done so because you've had to.
Boston NYC DC would be amazing but never done i dont think
That’s the northeast corridor though, the easiest and most regular of any Amtrak route
@@evan12697and that is with using the old alignments. Imagine if it had a much straighter alignment like most HSR lines.
@@ianhomerpura8937 if only they thought of that in 1910 lol
@@evan12697 or at least back in 1970
Ok.
Brightline isn't even high-speed rail! It's higher-speed rail at best, and slow at worst. We've even had 110 Mph Amtrak outside of the NEC for over a decade now!
Plus:
1. Brightline is already owned by the FECR, allowing it to use its already existing infrastructure.
2. Brightline had to construct 40 miles of singletrack, non electrified railroad for 125 mph operation.
And no Reason, it is not 125 mph between Miami and Orlando. Only on a 20 mile stretch between Meridian Park and the St. Johns River!
California has to construct 520 miles of double-track, electrified railroad allowing for 220 mph operation.
3. Florida is flat. Like super frickin' flat. California is not. While the Central Valley Segment is flat, the rest is not.
4. CAHSR requires HUGE, FRICKIN MASSIVE TUNNELS. Tunnels that subsequently also run under fault lines.
5. Brightline had to upgrade and double-track some of the lines along the FEC. And the project cost slightly less than 2 billion$.
But CA also has to upgrade its infrastructure like electrification in the Bay Area, which is now done. And improvements in SoCal like LA Union Station.
6. CAHSR Requires massive stations for much longer trains. Up to 2x the length. And the station in SF has to be underground under one of the most expensive cities in the US.
7. Brightline can run on an already existing track or next to the highway. CAHSR cannot. And property acquisition has slowed the project down massively.
8. CAHSR is more than twice the length of Brightline from Orlando to Miami.
9. CAHSR is publicly funded, meaning conservatives like ReasonTV and Republicans will always be against it and constantly trying to end it.
Making it much more difficult to ever complete.
10. CAHSR capacity is 10x that of Brightline. Brightline expects 4.3 million riders. CAHSR: 10x that. And you see why. Brightline runs from the outskirts of Orlando,
only connecting with its airport down to Miami. CAHSR is going between two of the largest cities in the US.
Brightline has cost 1.75 billion USD. CAHSR requires 10x the amount of infrastructure. That would be 17.5 billion USD.
CAHSR goes through much more difficult terrain. Probably 36 billion USD. It's electrified 40 Billion. Goes at 3x THE FRICKIN AVERAGE SPEED!!! 60 Billion.
Property aquisistion 80 Billion. Going through the most expensive places on earth including new mega-stations 90 Billion. Longer electric trains 92 Billion.
Opposition, lawsuits, bureaucracy 100 billion United states dollars.
Plus time, inflation, and more realistic cost estimates 128 billion.
Do I even have to begin? I have nothing against Brighline, good luck to them.
However, the mission and parameters of CAHSR are completely different from Brightline.
The CHSRA as also massibly reformed itself since Kopp left. No longer relying on expensive private Consulting Businesses. Something that Quentin Kopp is partially responsible for!
As for Cali, our 2008 ballot initiative promised SF to LA highspeed rail. The governor is now saying 2040 for that full route to open.
Ridiculous. Brightline might “only” be 125 but it’s still operating 20 years ahead of when SF-LA will finally work
That's a nice mostly accurate list of comments. Just saying here may be some fact checks:
1. Brightline cost $6 Billion.
2. BL had 2 million riders in 2023. Perhaps 4 million when it connects to Tampa.
3. CAHSR's ridership projections have decreased from around 30 million to around 24 million which is still unrealistically high since the advent of remote work and the stagnation of population.
4. May be 3-4 decades before CAHSR reaches LA due to funding issues and 55 miles of tunnels.
5. CAHSR with closely spaced station stops and 125 miles of slower blended track may average up to 125 mph. BL averages 77 mph between West Palm and Orlando. Not even close to twice the average speed.
l am totally for CAHSR, BLW, TC, PNW Cascadia hsr systems and of course semi-high speed BL.
Roads are not profitable, highways are not profitable, stroads never turn a profit… but a passenger rail service that must lease rail lines is tasked with being profitable?
We could have had high speed rail operational in Florida a decade ago, but Fifth Amendment Rick Scott canceled the project even though it was shovel ready. Of course, in true Florida Republican fashion, Fifth Amendment Rick was already invested in the parent company of Brightline when he canceled the state funded project.
Overlaying a fluttering film sprocket hole onto a still photo is cheesy and passé. Cropping the top and the bottom of a 4:3 frame to fit it into a 16:9 frame is visual mutilation.
Brightline is awesome but calling it HSR is a stretch. Maybe for the USA but not for the world.
Brightline is not high speed rail what are you talking about
What about High Speed Buses? Much cheaper and faster to implement!
They don't exist.
Plan which had no chance of being enacted. Who made money on the California failed train?
With about 20 miles of 125mph, nowhere else in the world considers Brightline Florida HSR. It is, however, a decent Regional Rail line that can be made much better. Adjacent real estate helps but the the state of Florida needs to build 50-60 roadway overpasses/street closures for Brightline Floridasafety, speed & more frequency. BTW, every piece of great infrastructure requires taxpayer support. Don't complain about taxpayer support HSR & Regional trains without complaining about airports and highways.
Brightline florida is not a high speed rail, it doesn't reach 220mph which CAHSR is designed to do
When’s that?
The top speed of California will likely be 0.
As a FL resident, I would not call this rail project commercially viable. A one-way ticket from Orlando to Miami (otherwise a 4-5 hour drive and two tanks of gas) is $300 per person. You might as well just fly those rates. I don't know anyone in central FL who is enthused about using it. It's not like real rail systems that SAVE people money. The point of a rail line is to reduce costs, not increase them.
$298 roundtrip premium. $158 roundtrip standard. $78 roundtrip child. $398 roundtrip family of four.
"We took paradise and turned it into hell. It was very hard to destroy California, it's got huge amounts of timber minerals, oil, natural gas. So it was very hard to destroy that inheritance but we did. We have the highest gasoline process in the United States. We have almost half of the nation's homeless people. We have one-third of the nation welfare recipients. We have the highest income tax, it's sad." ~Victor Davis Hanson
On the other hand: No inheritance tax and very few toll roads. Different states do it different ways.
Utopia
"No inheritance tax"
Just wait.
@danielcarroll3358 NO inheritance tax isn’t anything special. 46 states have that. I’m more impressed by No income tax like Nevada, Tennessee, Delaware, etc. That saves me money *every* year not just end of life
.
Portland to Seattle Yessss