China To Connect Its High-Speed Rail To Europe 691
Posted
by
kdawson
from the time-for-several-murders dept.
from the time-for-several-murders dept.
MikeChino sends in this excerpt from Inhabitat: "China already has the most advanced and extensive high-speed rail lines in the world, and soon that network will be connected all the way to Europe and the UK. With initial negotiations and surveys already complete, China is now making plans to connect its HSR line through 17 other countries in Asia and Eastern Europe in order to connect to the existing infrastructure in the EU. Additional rail lines will also be built into South East Asia as well as Russia, in what will likely become the largest infrastructure project in history." They hope to get it done within 10 years, with China providing the financing in exchange for raw materials, in some cases.
That is just really cool. (Score:4, Interesting)
Track width (Score:4, Interesting)
I wonder how the track width across different countries is going to work. If I remember correctly, that was a similar problem when connecting the UK to Europe. On the other hand, if this becomes cheap enough for car travel (which it probably already is), Eurasia might become a unified economic powerhouse over the next half century while the US will become a third world country (unless the US decides to invest in itself).
Re:US is in trouble (Score:3, Interesting)
This would be big (Score:4, Interesting)
This would be big, but in practice how efficiently can it run with stops in every country desired by the host country?. I think they could build this, and potentially there are a lot of benefits from doing so. Certainly the Chinese have done well with rail in China by many measures. Fundamentally, this story is more about navigating bureaucracy (a triumph of it's own right) than any particular technical challenge.
I think the bigger news would be if they started work on a railway from China to the US. That would only need to pass through Russia on the way to the US (with Canada if they want direct to the lower 48). The number of negotiations would be much lower, and the ability to safely send cargo through a rail tunnel under the sea would be worth untold billions. Tunneling under the Bering Straight is technically feasible, just look at the Chunnel and other such projects. It's slashdot, give us technical challenges, not bureaucratic ones!
Re:Track width (Score:3, Interesting)
Invest in our infrastructure? That would be communism! You're not a communist, are you?
And yes, standard gauge is 4'8.5". US, UK, Australia, Canada, and China all use standard gauge, as well as most of Western Europe. Russia's gauge is 3" wider.
So they'd have a job on their hands to connect up with Europe. They may run a third rail through Russia that matches with one existing rail to form standard gauge (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_gauge [wikipedia.org]). Or they could just not connect to the Russian rail network and run all new tracks (maybe necessary for high-speed anyway).
They have quite a job on their hands, that's for sure.
Re:A high speed railway (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:A high speed railway (Score:4, Interesting)
More trade, which then possibly leads to more stability.
No, you didn't read the article, did you? This isn't about trade. China is accepting raw materials from your country in exchange for being hooked up to this rail service. Consider it a giant straw through which China will suck up Asia and Europe's raw materials. China has been doing a lot of this bartering lately - avoiding paying cash for things in exchange for construction, trade contracts, or goods. Goodness knows they have the manpower.
Re:A high speed railway (Score:5, Interesting)
putting hateful words in the mouths of others is something only an asshole would do.
Re:Track width (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't worry, the most expensive rail project in US history is well underway. New York City, with some help from the Federal government, is spending $18 billion to build an 8-mile subway line which does not even leave Manhattan. That $18 billion does not include the cost of initial planning which began about 80 years ago (seriously) nor the construction which began about 40 years ago (which was abandoned).
Jesus Christ we're screwed.
Re:US is in trouble (Score:5, Interesting)
Sorry to say, your economy has already gone down the tubes, spent some time in the sewer, and is now resisting any attempt to scrub it clean by any means necessary. You have a sizable population against bank reform, even more against providing basic health care, insane unemployment, an entity composed of a slew of political parties too busy trying to resolve internal conflicts to notice the huge problems, and another political party so spoiled by a decade of near absolute power and focused on the short term that they do not see the huge wall as the nation hurls towards it like... Well... A train on high speed rail. Something that, as you pointed out, is also being resisted tooth and nail.
So no, the US is not in trouble. Unless something major changes pretty soon, the US is totally and completely screwed
Re:A high speed railway (Score:4, Interesting)
The other bonus, globally, is that this is going to halve the cost of high speed rail (if you buy Chinese) for the rest of the world. China is already #1 in green energy production technology (and particularly! capacity) and just catapulted themselves to #1 in high speed rail technology, and they'll soon have more (2x) experience building high speed rail than all other countries and companies combined.
Re:This would be big (Score:4, Interesting)
Three words: great, circle, route...
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=PEK-SEA&MS=wls&PC=red&RC=navy&DU=mi [gcmap.com]
Not that this will actually happen anytime in the near future, but it isn't really too far off the direct route if you are only talking about being too far off the direct route being an issue. Of course trains are much slower than airplanes, but even planes arc past Sarah's place on such a journey.
In the recent past, it was easier to hug the coastline than to try to navigate the great circle route, but nowdays, airplanes have enough navigational safeguards to avoid tracing the coast. Of course in the past tracing the coast had other hazzards [wikipedia.org]...
Telecom cables, too (Score:3, Interesting)
There have been a number of proposals for doing telecom cables along rail lines across Asia, providing shorter alternatives to the undersea cables. They often get into trouble with either financing or right-of-way across South-West Asia, but if they're building a new railroad, it's easy to add conduits full of fiber at the same time. Earthquakes, landslides, and train wrecks do create risks, but shorter distance really helps latency, and it's usually a lot easier to patch fiber around a section of railroad track than undersea.
On the other hand, you do need signs saying "Hey, Bubba, Don't Dig Here" in many more languages....
Re:US is in trouble (Score:2, Interesting)
And are Europe and Russia, literally dying out, doing any better? Or China with massive internal problems not to mention ringed with hostile rivals? India with corruption so deep-set and intractable that even buying a TV usually involves multiple pay-offs?
America's been through worse and I'm confident that she'll come out all right in the end. God help us if I'm wrong.
Re:That's what they said about the USSR (Score:3, Interesting)
I disagree. Centralized planning really does lend itself to grand, long-term ambitions; the problem is, all too often the plans are misguided! Just as in our economy, where most new businesses fail after a short while, except without the economic mechanism to weed them out.
Look at Stalin's railway plans for Northern Siberia [gaurc.us]. Of course, the analogy with China's new plan fails unless you can equate Europe with Northern Siberia, but still there's no guarantee China's new East-to-West trade route will be economically viable given the alternatives already in place.
Re:US is in trouble (Score:3, Interesting)
These are BS numbers anyway. No one's flying from LA to NYC in 3 hours; it's more like 6-8, plus an extra 2-3 hours minimum for going through security, sitting around the airport, etc. Interestingly, this trip used to be faster back in the 70s-80s, but it's gotten slower because airlines are flying their planes slower than they used to, in order to conserve fuel and cut costs.
If they built a maglev train across the USA, and made it cost-competitive with planes (or better yet cheaper), and made the cabins very comfortable with nice large seats, TONS of people would take these trains instead of planes, even if it added 50% to their travel time. Businesspeople in a big hurry would stick with the planes, but lots of others would go with the trains so they don't have such a miserable travel experience.
Re:US is in trouble (Score:2, Interesting)
How many lines are you going to build to handle the volume?
A quick look on Expedia shows 28 non-stops between LAX and JFK. Say they are all wide-body and 200 passengers a flight, thats 5600 people alone right there on non-stops and 8 more one-stops, for another 1600.
About the Shanghai maglev line.
The Shanghai maglev cost 9.93 billion yuan to build. This total includes infrastructure capital costs such as manufacturing and construction facilities, and operational training. At 50 yuan per passenger and the current 7,000 passengers per day, income from the system is incapable of recouping the capital costs (including interest on financing) over the expected lifetime of the system, even ignoring operating costs[citation needed]. This changes if capacity utilization increases from the current 20%.
It runs four times an hour fifteen hours a day, so it can carry about 120 people a load.
So to replace one 777 from LAX to JFK its going to take two Shanghai maglevs. The LA to LV Maglev would cost $40 billion. So scale that to cross the US, how much would it cost to replace one 777 flight a day?
Re:US is in trouble (Score:4, Interesting)
Some interesting points. Europe is quite certainly in a lot of trouble, due in no small part to Russia, or more specifically the former Soviet Union nations. I am curious whether their system can work in any sort of long term. At least they try to mix things up a bit more than the US, so a few points for that. A few of the EU nations seem to be aware of the troubles brewing, and we shall see if they can respond in time, or if they will fall into the same traps that are strangling the US.
For Russia the issue is that they have already fallen so far that it is hard to imagine them going down much further. Even now they are significantly worse off than the US. The one thing going for them is that they have had a very strong leader in charge for a while. If the leadership can get the country back on track, and then loosen the reigns there may be hope. Otherwise we may just see the past century play itself out again.
So yes, Europe and Russia are pretty damn screwed too, though I will admit that there are still a few glimmers of hope across the pond.
Looking at China, I don't see how that system could survive. The old revolutionary leaders are getting to the age where they might start dying off any day now, and if the power games that will inevitably follow do not rip the country to shreds I will be very amazed.
I really know next to nothing about India, so I'll trust your judgement there.
Most interesting is that the fate of these regions is inevitably linked to the fate of the US. If that system collapses then all hell will break loose. If it survives, then I'm sure they will survive too, and prosper in the end.
And for the US, I'll grant that it's not completely hopeless. That said, changes need to start happening soon, and they need start happening fast. Worst that could happen now is the health care bill getting defeated. In that case we will likely see the Democrats lose any semblance of respect in the eyes of the voters, followed by a return to the good, new Republican values that created the crisis in the first place (Oh what I wouldn't do to see traditional Republican values back in place). At that point I'm pretty sure even God would shrug and get the popcorn.
So despite the tone of my original message you are correct, the US is not in as much trouble as some other regions of the world. In fact, they have a very good chance of getting out of the hole created by the antiquated systems. However, that needs swift and decisive action, which is exactly what the US system is designed to prevent. I am holding out in the hope that Obama can get his act and his party together. If not... Well, I'll be with that God fellow reaching for the popcorn, since there's won't be many places in the world with viable alternatives.
Re:US is in trouble (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:High speed rail is for poor people. (Score:3, Interesting)
Even though it's phrased trollishly, you've summed up some differences pretty well. In practice, people drive a heck of a lot in Europe too but the roads here are perhaps harder work to do long distances on. But the thing about planes being the fastest way to get around long distance points to another difference. In Europe in particular countries are closer together, as is the perception of a "long" trip. The time cost of travel to airport, waiting around for the plane, collecting bags at the other end, etc starts to dominate the journey pretty quickly and even for international trips it can quickly get to be more hassle than just hopping on a train. Plane travel between European countries is super cheap, though, so it's still often worth doing.
Re:What unstable countries ? (Score:2, Interesting)
China is also extending the rail networks in Tibet, and possibly the most serious threat to China's internal stability came from the riots in Xinjiang province last year. Tensions in both Tibet and Xinjiang are still simmering, largely because the non-Han residents feel left out of the equation every time jobs and wealth opportunities appear in their areas.
There is also a credible threat (well, depending on who you choose to get your news from, but hey)from the resident Chinese Muslim population, many of whom live in Xinjiang province, and who identify more with Pakistan, Khazakhstan and Turkmenistan than they do with the Middle Kingdom.
I'm wondering if the routing of the railway line has something to do with this, to give idle hands some work and some access to cash in these areas, and to extend influence into neighbouring countries so that if something happens in the future, China has some real leveraging tools to get things going in the direction that they like. Hell, it could even be used as a reason for a pre-emptive invasion: " Well , we had to go in, it was clear for all to see that country X was not able to safeguard a vital international asset that all of Asia and Europe uses. But no need to thank us for the invasion, we were only doing what any country would have done."
Re:A high speed railway (Score:3, Interesting)
unfortunately the rest of the world is willing to purchase products made with poor environmental, labor and safety levels :/
As cold as it may sound, while I don't like their environmental policies as I see it having a negative impact on the world, I don't see any impact when it comes down to their unsafe workplaces or their use labor force. As far as a species goes, there are far too many of us on this planet as is.
Re:That is just really cool. (Score:3, Interesting)
you'd be on that train for about 39 hours. Air France can do it in 11.
And I really don't care if Air France can do it in 5 hours. Its such an impossible position to argue, but being able to slow down and appreciate the journey has merits that being airlifted to your destination in a flying hermetically sealed container tramples all over. The Airplane is an invention for people that hate the act of traveling. You're so impatient to get there, you don't realise that there is anything in between! How many times do you have get to travel in your life, and why choose specifically to get the whole dirty buisness over with as quickly as possible so you can get back to whatever dull existence you have back home?
I've been lucky enough to be introduced to sailing in my lifetime, and let me tell you, when you spend 3 months in a tin can travelling from Ecuador to Brisbane (thats about 8000 miles at jogging pace, incidentally), and really see everything in between, you really learn to appreciate just how vast the world is, and how every other form of transport trivialises the distance.
By all means, enjoy your buisness class 'convenience' travel and the smug feeling of comfort it gives you, but its not for me! It's for the same philosophical reason I stick with a bicycle when all the other people in my town punish themselves day in day out with parking, petrol prices and standstill traffic. Have fun with that is all I'm saying! I can't think of anything more boring!
Chinese age is a fiction (Score:3, Interesting)
China is one of the oldest civilizations on Earth, and yet it's just now climbing out of a third world status that it's been in for centuries.
China likes to present and view itself that way but that's a fiction, starting with the notion that something like a continuous Chinese civilization has even existed over the past two millennia. Generally, the societies and civilizations that have existed in the area of modern China have been significantly behind Europe and far behind the Middle Eastern civilizations on major developments (bronze, iron, writing, etc.), and in many ways even behind the Maya. For example, the Middle East had writing 2000 years before China had even a rudimentary writing system. The oldest writing systems still in use today are Greek and Latin, predating (in the case of Greek) the development of the current Chinese writing system by more than 1500 years. Entire civilizations came, flourished for millennia, and perished in the Mediterranean before China even appeared on the scene.
It's probably best to view Chinese civilization as analogous to Northern Europe, in both age and history, really taking off only during the first millennium. And it remains to be seen how much of Chinese civilization developed independently and how much was derivative from the Middle East.
Re:That is just really cool. (Score:3, Interesting)
First of all, it's about time Eurasia got its own Transcontinental Railroad. Second of all,
Even if it's high speed, I don't think that anyone will want to take the train from China to Europe.
From my read of the article this rail will be primarily used for manufacturing materials.
I, for one, would absolutely love to take that trip. Especially if I could make stops along the way and catch the train again the day after next.
Re:A high speed railway (Score:3, Interesting)
unfortunately the rest of the world is willing to purchase products made with poor environmental, labor and safety levels :/
"But there were other mass murderers that got away with it! Stalin killed many millions, died in his bed, well done there; Pol Pot killed 1.7 million Cambodians, died under house arrest at age 72, well done indeed! And the reason we let them get away with it is because they killed their own people, and we're sort of fine with that. “Ah, help yourself,” you know? “We've been trying to kill you for ages!” So kill your own people, right on there!"
--Eddie Izzard, Dressed to Kill
Re:US is in trouble (Score:4, Interesting)
For full disclosure. I am in fact Russian, and as such am quite familiar with what you mean. I do think Russia is at, or at least near the bottom of the slope, but I as I mentioned, there is some light. However, Russia is inherently tied to the stability of the Chinese and the European markets, which are in turn very closely tied to the US. Right now everyone is going through hard times, and if even one of these markets is screwed, than the others would follow like dominoes.
As for the western world, it's well past due for a major paradigm shift, which are wont to happen every few hundred years. As you pointed out, the current system has simply lived its course, though I disagree that the western world thinks itself strong and virile. Most educated people know that it can't hold out much longer. The brainwashed masses are what need to change, and yes, the wolves are closing in. Quite fast I might add.
Re:...not a fair analogy because... (Score:3, Interesting)
Some are, but a great number are not. They live in crummy little two-room cinder block houses in hideously depressing desert-edge towns. And in a society where productivity is anathema, a massive number depend on government largesse which further erodes their sense of participation in the economy.
Re:Never leaves manhattan... (Score:3, Interesting)
No clue, I'd agree. You need to at least see New York before you make guesses about what works there. The density is not like anything anywhere else in the country. There is no room at street level for anything new. The subway system carries almost eight million people every day. If those people were in cars by themselves, as is typical in other American cities, the parking lot would take up most of northern New Jersey. Subways are the only answer. It is in the public interest to facilitate the rapid movement of people to their jobs. New York City produces a vast economic surplus which goes out to the rest of the country; it makes sense to spend public money on making that work more smoothly.
Re:...not a fair analogy because... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, because Saudi Arabia is an Oasis of secular humanism now. The very model of a modern enlightenment.
Saudi Arabia has lots of money, but it's not distributed very broadly or fairly. Only a few Saudis are actually wealthy.
So they don't really have either prosperity or equality or enlightenment in that part of the world.
That is actually not true. The Gini coefficient (measure of economic in-equality, lower is more equal) is approximately 32 for Saudi Arabia and 40.8 for the USA. So it seems like your theory about economic equality and enlightenment is down the drain.
Re:A high speed railway (Score:5, Interesting)
If it's such a good idea, you go first. No, actually, if culling is so humane, I'd like to see you do it with your bare hands.
I'm sorry to inform you that you appear to be an extremist lunatic. It's OK, I once had some similar opinions about population control, and about "engineering-style" solutions to geopolitical problems.
When I realised that I wouldn't be able to bring myself to actually implement those ideas myself, but rather prefer to stand at the side cheering "Way to go, guys!" I realised I was an opinionated coward.
So, before you go publicly recommending death, starvation and natural disasters on hundreds of thousands of people, you may want to go stand in front of a mirror and repeat "Who the fuck do I think I am?". Don't take this personally, I am frightened of the short step between "this would be a great solution" and "Yes, Sir, we'll get right on it".
Re:A high speed railway (Score:5, Interesting)
Of all the countries suited for High Speed rail, the USA should be one of them. You guys have the land and capabilities. You guys should be showing us (europeans) how to do it, not the other way round. And no, it doesnt have to be all 200mph trains to make a huge difference.
Lets take my country, poor old battered UK, with aging victorian infrastructure that is heavily critisised, in my opinion, rather unfairly.
We have "local" lines running at 50/70mph. Sub-Main lines running at 100mph, Main lines running at 125mph, and now the High Speed 1 line running at 183mph.
Even with this motley selection of lines, we find Train can often be faster than car. Remember our highest speed roads (the motoways) are max 70mph, and suffer from traffic jams. Even the 100mph lines are faster, and even when you take into account stations, they can still be faster than a motoway at 70mph especially during heavy traffic when at times the average speed can drop to less than 30mph.
Last year, me and my wife when to Brighton from London, on the Brighton express it took just 45 mins to get there on a 100mph line with 2 intermeadiate stops, a journey that would easily take about 1 hour 30 mins by car. the cost was £4.50 each one way, total £18, MUCH cheaper than car (fuel/parking costs, etc). And we were toally relaxed and enjoyed the trip, enjoying alcohol/etc.
The best part is when we travel parrallel to a motoway, and we roll past all the drivers in their jams. Even when there is light traffic, the 100mph trains easily roll past cars going at 70mph (30mph relative speed)
Its even more pronouced going on the Eurostar to paris at 180mph, its crazy when the train runs parrallel to a motoway. The cars, going at 70mph look like they are at a standstill (the train is travelling 110mph faster than the car, over twice the speed).
Dont get me wrong, I do own a car, a BMW, which is nice to drive, etc. But sometimes you just cannot beat the train for sheer comfort.
The USA could be BETTER than us for railways, as you guys have land, etc.
Re:A high speed railway (Score:5, Interesting)
Not everyone in China is subject to the one-child policy. It's a little over a third, IIRC. It depends where you live, for example.
It's also important to remember that international trade is about exchange - you can't just compare prices. When you say 'cheap' what you mean is 'The Chinese economy will give us lots of their stuff in exchange for relatively little of our stuff'. Then you need to add 'The Chinese economy is also giving us lots of their stuff in exchange for a promise of some of our stuff in the future, a promise which the Chinese have so far been refusing to call in'. ie, they are lending to us.
If you want to think in terms of pricing you have to consider exchange rates too. There's no need for general deflation in the US for 'lots of stuff in exchange for a little stuff' to become 'quite a bit of stuff in exchange for less stuff', all that must happen is for the (real) exchange rate to change. Most especially, they need to stop lending so much and we need to stop borrowing so much.
Remember: long term, we can't import stuff from China if we don't export stuff in return. No-one can borrow (or sell assets) for ever (and it'd be immoral to live off the unrewarded labour of a relatively poor country anyway). There will be no means to pay for the imports if we don't export. The more we import, the more must be exported. The presence of trade like that can devastate particular industries in the relatively disadvantaged country, but in the end all that demand sooner or later has to pop up as demand for your country's exports. China must stop manipulating its exchange rate and let that happen.
China's economy won't be able to produce as much output per person as western economies for as long as, for example, there is state control over banking. Want to start a business? Joining the party and knowing the right people is as important as having a sane business idea. China will still reduce western living standards, though. They won't do it by undercutting labour and throwing western workers our of work. They'll do it by being able to compete with us on international raw materials markets. Suddenly, the west are not the only people able to hand cars, electronics, or whatever to oil or mineral producing countries....we'll have to start handing over more of our stuff in exchange for the same oil or minerals, and more of those materials will go to China for their own consumption. The most important thing for the west (and the whole world) to do is to use those resources more efficiently, and to search for alternative energy sources.