China's High-Speed Trains Coming Off the Rails 347
Hugh Pickens writes "The Washington Post reports that China's expanding network of ultramodern high-speed trains is coming under growing scrutiny over costs and because of concerns that builders ignored safety standards in the quest to build faster trains in record time as new leadership at the Railways Ministry announced that to enhance safety, the top speed of all trains was being decreased from about 218 mph to 186. Without elaborating, the ministry called the safety situation 'severe' and said it was launching safety checks along the entire network of tracks. Meanwhile China's Finance Ministry announced that the Railways Ministry continues to lose money as the ministry's debt stands at $276 billion, almost all borrowed from Chinese banks. 'In China, we will have a debt crisis — a high-speed rail debt crisis,' says Zhao Jian, a professor at Beijing Jiaotong University and longtime critic of high-speed rail who worries that the cost of the project might have created a hidden debt bomb that threatens China's banking system. 'I think it is more serious than your subprime mortgage crisis. You can always leave a house or use it. The rail system is there. It's a burden. You must operate the rail system, and when you operate it, the cost is very high.'"
Safety Standards? (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh really? You mean there are existing safety standards for new technology?
And here I thought it was just the engineer's conservative estimates...
Re:Safety Standards? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Safety Standards? (Score:5, Funny)
Well, that would depend. A maglev train that didn't fly off the rails would be kinda useless.
Re:Safety Standards? (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh really? You mean there are existing safety standards for new technology?
And here I thought it was just the engineer's conservative estimates...
Well since the train designs are stolen^H^H^H similar to the Japanese and German high speed trains, there must be relevent safety standards.
Those who steal rarely do it right (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at Chinese cars. Very much clones of Honda and other Japanese brands yet youtube is replete with them failing European crash tests, some spectacularly. Very much a product of a society where all the appearances are there but the substance is not. Why? Most likely because for the most part there is little chance the blame will land on those who are mostly responsible.
Poor steel quality, copying only to the point of necessity, and an uninspired workforce, will all catch up to China soon.
Like North Korea, the real money and quality is only ensured when it comes to the military.
Re:Those who steal rarely do it right (Score:4, Insightful)
authoritarian government, it isn't too concerned about consumer safety.
Are you sure what the joke is? (Score:4, Insightful)
The joke is that there are no competent Chinese engineers to fix it. They'll have to hire German, Japanese, or French engineers from the firms that produced the plans they stole to build these lines in the first place and then pay them to fix the mistakes the incompetent Chinese "engineers" made "adapting" them.
I'm not sure the joke is what you are thinking. Its not that the new guys have to turn to the old guys for help, its that the old guys are willing to train their competitors/replacements.
Re: (Score:2)
The joke is that there are no competent Chinese engineers to fix it. They'll have to hire German, Japanese, or French engineers from the firms that produced the plans they stole to build these lines in the first place and then pay them to fix the mistakes the incompetent Chinese "engineers" made "adapting" them.
I'm not sure the joke is what you are thinking. Its not that the new guys have to turn to the old guys for help, its that the old guys are willing to train their competitors/replacements.
If the price is right, why not? I mean, assume a group of 3-5 persons hired 10 times the rate the original employer would pay them... I think it will still be cheaper for the Chinese to do it and the "consultants" can retire after 2-3 years of teaching/working for the Chinese.
Re: (Score:2)
China screw your whole company - affected every employees. However, that's ok because a few of them will be able to retire. There is no more reason to complain about this than against the Banker destroying the economy or corps buying laws - the price was right for them. (and just in case you wonder, I would go 2-3 years in China train them if that bought me and my family financial security for the rest of my life, life taught me that food on the table is a be
Re:Are you sure what the joke is? (Score:4, Insightful)
This one's kinda hard to develop conscience problems over.
China wants to modernize and become the next superpower; not just militarily, but in all aspects, especially technologically and economically (in fact, their military funding seems to be quite small compared to, for instance, the USA, and they seem much more interested in doing things like building world-class dams, trains, and other infrastructure projects than in building world-class fighter jets and aircraft carriers, which is the opposite of the USA where they build the most advanced military hardware and let the infrastructure decay).
Part of this strategy in becoming a world leader in tech is learning how to do everything themselves (self-sufficiency), rather than outsourcing everything. Since doing everything by themselves would take a long time, they "partner" with Western firms to learn how to do stuff quickly, paying handsomely for these firms' services, but they very quickly copy everything they can so that in 5 years they don't need the Western firms any more.
From a nationalistic POV, it makes perfect sense. Why would you want your country's infrastructure to be dependent on foreign companies? It's the same reason they adopted Linux and created their own government distro (Red Flag).
The USA has a similar demand for self-sufficiency with its military/defense contracting sector, but that's it (it's stupid to rely on potential enemies for critical military components, for obvious reasons). The USA has been self-sufficient for things like building bridges and roads and airplanes, and simply doesn't bother with high-speed rail (they just talk about it a lot but never do anything), so they don't have a lot of the same problems the Chinese have that way, but if there were more profit in having foreign companies build bridges and dams here, they'd happily do it just like they outsource everything else nowadays.
But for a company doing work in China, it's kinda hard to fault them for it. It's good business--the Chinese pay them well--and a lot of these companies probably aren't getting that much business at home (how many HSR lines are being installed in the USA or Europe)? Plus, if company A doesn't do it, then their competitor company B will, so company A might as well make some money while they can, which 1) keeps employees employed, and 2) brings money back to their own country from China rather than the other way around, even if it's short-term.
The thing to realize is that the Chinese motivations are totally different from Western companies'. In China, everything is about working for the good of the nation, not yourself or your company. Large companies there are state-controlled, so they have the same viewpoint; they'll pick a course of action that's better in the long term for the nation than something that's good in the short-term for their CEO and largest stockholders. In the West, it's the opposite; companies exist purely to make money for themselves and shareholders (and most of all, executives), and that's it. The national good doesn't come into the equation at all. I don't think it's hard to imagine which approach is going to do better in the next 50-100 years.
Re: (Score:3)
they seem much more interested in doing things like building world-class dams, trains, and other infrastructure projects than in building world-class fighter jets and aircraft carriers, which is the opposite of the USA where they build the most advanced military hardware and let the infrastructure decay).
China invests in prestige projects that look good to the wealthy members of the populace and the outside world, meanwhile they ignore long-standing environmental and infrastructure problems, not to mention human-rights issues.
Don't get me wrong, there are some very clever and forward-thinking people in Chinese government and industry, but there are also a lot of people who will do anything to look good or make a quick buck.
Just like everywhere else, I guess...
Re:Are you sure what the joke is? (Score:4, Informative)
The thing to realize is that the Chinese motivations are totally different from Western companies'. In China, everything is about working for the good of the nation, not yourself or your company.
Chinese American here, that's some highly romanticized weaboo-esque delusions there.
Re:Are you sure what the joke is? (Score:4, Informative)
It doesn't matter. His terminology may not be used in the way you think of it, but his central premise is correct.
China doesn't have people "working for the good of the nation", it has a market economy with significant input from the State. The people on the market side of it are just as corrupt and without regard for long-term consequences as the people in the US. The difference is that this is China's "Gilded Age" or close to it. Infrastructure needs to be built and they are building it. The downside of it is that you have the sweatshops, the corruption, and the political patronage you had in the US and elsewhere.
The State does own large enterprises, but it is fairly hands off with them, at least from the political side. What it does provide is a walled off environment with lax enough enforcement of things like patents and copyright so that their people can get a leg up by either buying, borrowing or stealing tech from other countries.
I'm not passing judgment on China here, the US had a lax IP regime before it became a top-level economic power as well. China is basically trying to be the US of 100 years ago today, and with their growth, demand for fuel and raw materials, and pollution levels, I would say they are succeeding.
The best way of looking at China today is much like a fascist state of the past, insofar as the State is taking a "coordinating" and "partner" role with a bunch of loosely controlled private businesses, and there is a significant nationalistic stance. That label is not an exact fit, of course, but the parallels are there.
The major difference is that China is not as aggressively expansionist, although again, it is not clear if this is simply a result of their current military backwardness.
Re:Are you sure what the joke is? (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess you perfectly illustrated the GP point.
China screw your whole company - affected every employees. However, that's ok because a few of them will be able to retire. There is no more reason to complain about this than against the Banker destroying the economy or corps buying laws - the price was right for them.
After some 20 years of US teaching the rest of the world that profit is the only measure of success (screw the ethics and consequences), is it a wonder China learns the lesson and overshadows the teacher?
Really? First off, how is the US the only country "teaching" the rest world about greed? And secondly, since when has greed only been a problem for just a mere 20 years?
China wants power, and just happens to be smarter about it than the average power hungry developing nation. But pretty much everyone wants power, and this isn't because the US told them power is good. Nations and empires have been fighting based on greed since there have been nations and empires.
That said, while the economic collapse may have been spurred by US banks and bad US laws, if the US had tighter bank regulations it wouldn't have made a difference. The economic collapse didn't cause the problems in Europe, it EXPOSED them. Countries like Greece and Ireland that borrowed their way into prosperity. Ireland and Greece aren't victims of American policy. The collapse could have been caused by Europe instead of the US, but the collapse was inevitable.
You will never unlearn greed. The only thing you can do is try to legislate it in order to minimise its impacts, but it isn't going anywhere and will continue to be a driving force for all things you enjoy in your day to day life.
Re: (Score:3)
It isn't as simple as China copying and then undercutting Japanese and German companies.
Look at it from say Siemen's point of view. China wants a large high speed rail system. They can take on this massive and lucrative contract or pass on it because they are worried that the Chinese will learn from and then copy their system. Of course this is a concern in every country they do projects, but in the past their experience and history of success has prevented other companies from winning by submitting a lower
Re:Safety Standards? (Score:4, Interesting)
Depends on which train we're talking about.
One is a clone of the German Siemens Velaro train models while the other one is a Japanese design developed for their Shinkansen network.
Not sure about French designs but IIRC the Chinese also have some Italian Pendolino trains somewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Only 300km/h! That slow!
In other news, in Germany Deutsche Bahn ordered 300 new high speed trains (to replace all existing trains) with a maximum speed of 249km/h (to have the trains fall into a lower, i.e. cheaper, regulation class).
Re:Safety Standards? (Score:5, Informative)
Oh really? You mean there are existing safety standards for new technology? And here I thought it was just the engineer's conservative estimates...
What new technology? High speed rail is over a hundred years old. The billion passenger mark was hit in the 1970s. I think there is sufficient track record to establish standards.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
"I think there is sufficient track record..."
Heh....
Yes, safety standards. (Score:5, Insightful)
There exist not only standards, but also products you can compare your solution against. For example, the Shinkansen has a safety record that is hard to believe -- no dead, only a few hurt, and only one derailment during a rather strong earthquake. There is a reason it has taken all countries with successful high-speed train networks years and huge investment to get where there are. Engineering isn't simple, and problems aren't readily solved by party directives.
I, for one, have made the point about safety biting the Chinese fast train in the ass just after they start the service many times. I think it is a very good thing that they are reacting the good way -- by slowing the rail, and looking into the trouble, instead of, you know, just running the trains at full speed and collecting the bodies.
Re:Yes, safety standards. (Score:5, Informative)
TGV Accidents [wikipedia.org]
Germany's ICE, however, had a bad accident with 101 fatalities (details here [wikipedia.org]), which was caused by a series of issues, but most notably by a faulty wheel design.
Nevertheless, high speed rail on a global scale has an exceptional safety record.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting -- and it has to be mentioned that (if I am not mistaken) the speed trains in Europe are operated both on high and low speed tracks -- which is probably making both engineering and management issues harder. Probably one consequence of that operation is a more complex wheel design.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? They aren't different sizes, you just can't go as fast on the slow rated tracks. After all, it's possible to go at zero velocity on a high speed track - it tends to make it easier for passengers to get on and off.
Re:Yes, safety standards. (Score:4, Informative)
The Eschede accident did happen on normal tracks, but the faulty wheel design would have affected a train only travelling on high speed tracks as well... they replaced the wheels with a design that had a rubber buffer between the "tread" and the hub. The idea was that it would be quieter and more comfortable. It was quieter, but what they didn't count on was that the rubber would deform as it got hot, and it created a sort of wobble on the wheel tread. After enough kilometers, that wobble created enough fatigue in the wheel that it failed catastrophically, causing the derailment and accident.
The mistake was in using a wheel type that was originally designed for the Paris subway, and was never designed for the kinds of speeds that a high speed train, or even a normal above-ground train travels. Since then, they've gone back to solid wheels, and focused on improving the suspension in the cars in order to improve ride comfort. It's telling that Eschede was the only major accident in the world with the high speed train network, though, and that nothing like it has happened since. :) (well, yet, thanks to China....)
Re: (Score:2)
Makes me happy to hear that somebody knows how to do it properly. I'd love to see high speed trains come to the US if it could be done well.
Oh, yeah... After Wall Mart, the railway system can benefit from Chinese exports as well.
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory (Score:4, Interesting)
How do you get severe cost overruns on *rail*?
Trains can carry an entire ton of cargo 500 miles while expending a single gallon of diesel fuel. Because of the extremely steady load, train engines routinely pull a million miles or more (with an overhaul every few hundred thou) before needing replacement.
Further, train tracks cost much less to maintain per mile than roads.
Now, I do realize that I'm referring partially to cargo rail common in the USA, rather than the higher speed passenger trains, but even so, the costs per passenger mile for any train should be dramatically less than car, bus, or plane.
Sounds like corruption at work, if you ask me. (Same as the USA loan crisis)
Re: (Score:2)
It's very simple. This is what did in the JR before they were privatized.
Option #1, is what tends to happen is that bribery and such result in the building of lines that will not eventually be profitable. Bribery can result in train services to areas without sufficient population density to maintain the trains and tracks that run it.
Option #2, is that they're building faster than they're acquiring revenue from the areas that they service, resulting in a giant debt bubble who's interest can actually end up s
Re: (Score:3)
High speed rail is significantly more expensive than ordinary rail. While slightly warped track or loose overhead lines are not problem at 130kph when you get up to 300kph+ they are. That means building to a higher spec in the first place, then spending more on checking and maintenance. Some countries allow crossings on high speed lines but Japan does not, meaning that the track has to be grade separated (raised) where it passes roads. Since the tracks can't have tight turns they can't avoid buying up expen
Re:Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory (Score:4, Insightful)
Rail in a free society will be more expensive than planes for a simple reason. Airplanes fly in the air. It doesn't cost anything to build or maintain air. You don't have to buy property rights to lay down your air tracks. But each foot of track requires 50-100 lbs of steel depending on the profile. A 10 mile track requires 2.5-5 million pounds of steel. All an airplane needs is an airport to take off from and land at.
Also look at the system like a network. If you want to build a new train station you have to buy (unless you are communist) a continuous strip of land from the nearest line to your station and design and build all of the crossings without affecting other traffic. Then you also have to make sure the line you are connecting to has the capacity to handle the traffic you are adding . An airport just requires a large enough plot of land. You are instantly connected to every other airport within range of the aircraft that your airport can service.
Re: (Score:3)
How do you get severe cost overruns on *rail*?
Errm, in this case mostly by still building the tracks. For some weird reason that only costs money without generating any revenue. Supposedly costs go down when the tracks are laid, and revenue up when you got paying passengers.
You get what you incentivize/reward ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You get what you incentivize/reward ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeeeees, but you've got to be careful with that. You will get EXACTLY what you actually ask for, no more and no less, which is almost never what you really meant or want.
If you reward students for high grades in exams, you'll get just that. High grades. Not understanding of the subject, just high grades. If you reward bankers for making profits, you'll get just that. High profits. Not financial stability, just high profits.
The problem with incentives is that exceedingly few people are capable of setting them correctly. And not a single one of them will use "incentivize" as a word.
"must operate" (Score:5, Insightful)
No, you actually do not HAVE to operate the expensive rail system you built, if you cannot afford to.
The world is full of rusting hulks of things people once thought they had to have, like wind turbines in Hawaii and California... monuments to people who once thought they had to have something, that it turned out they could do without after all.
Would dropping some of the train lines hurt China economically? Without doubt, but then so does spending far more than you take in.
Re:"must operate" (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the point was more along the lines that the system doesn't have any value at all unless you run it. Yet when you run it the cost is high.
Houses on the other hand you can simply stop building so many and the ones you have go up in value eventually.
Not true (Score:5, Insightful)
Houses on the other hand you can simply stop building so many and the ones you have go up in value eventually.
There are lots of examples of houses being built and after being abandoned, never being bought and eventually fall into ruin. Detroit has a ton of examples of properties where this is true. Anything you let lie fallow falls apart eventually.. a rail system seems much the same to me, if you stop running it you can either maintain the rails hoping they will have future value, or just totally abandon the system and let it fall into ruin.
I agree though it's a worse position they are in.
Re: (Score:2)
Since we are talking about China (Score:2)
Forget about Detroit, the Chinese built entire cities that nobody uses:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1339536/Ghost-towns-China-Satellite-images-cities-lying-completely-deserted.html [dailymail.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
I think the point was more along the lines that the system doesn't have any value at all unless you run it. Yet when you run it the cost is high.
Houses on the other hand you can simply stop building so many and the ones you have go up in value eventually.
That's a myth. Houses only go up in value while there's demand. That demand goes to 0 as the price goes up because people can no longer afford them. If they are unaffordable yet you stop building anyway, you end up with a slum with people cramming into less buildings so that they can afford them, squatting or being homeless. Those few who can afford nice houses move away or move into gated communities. You're talking about replacing one bubble with another, only this bubble leaves people poor and destitute.
Re: (Score:2)
Houses on the other hand you can simply stop building so many and the ones you have go up in value eventually.
Seems the Chinese also build about 64 million houses they didn't need... whole cities in fact.
Amazing Satellite Images Of The Ghost Cities Of China [businessinsider.com]
Re:"must operate" (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Ironic how history repeats itself. The early railways in the United States were built "fast and loose" almost 150 years ago...
"The original track had often been laid as fast as possible with only secondary attention to maintenance and longevity. "
From wikipedia entry on the first transcontinental railroad:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Transcontinental_Railroad#Railroad_developments [wikipedia.org]
Whoopee??? (Score:2)
Are we supposed to be cheering at the knowledge that we're not the only ones that f**ked up our money management?
Re:Whoopee??? (Score:4, Insightful)
Are we supposed to be cheering at the knowledge that we're not the only ones that f**ked up our money management?
No, I would say sighing at the fact the up and coming world governments haven't learned from the fallen, and the fact that we as well have chosen not to learn from failed predecessors either. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and I feel the greed-driven will speed the entire global-economy off the rails in the coming years. When the big financial meltdown comes, I hope you're all ready. Inflationary capitalistic expansion will have its cost, and it will most likely end in human lives of those getting the trickle down from the top.
All those marketers, all those hedge-fund managers, all those financial instruments, the money printing, the interest rate hikes, the depletion of old-guard natural energy resources, the cost-cutting, the parasitic leeches of banks and speculative investment..they will kill the host before they kill themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
With the public already this annoyed with our 'elite', I don't think the host will have to worry much as the body will turn against the parasites soon enough.
I think I will live to see the day when managers dangle from trees, strung up with their own neckties.
Disclaimer: I am NOT advocating the killing of people. I am just saying I expect it to happen.
Quote W B Yeats (Score:3)
A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot
Hurrah for revolution, and cannon come again
The beggars have changed places, but the lash goes on.
Re:Whoopee??? (Score:5, Insightful)
More so, you should be sighing at the fact that if China goes through a significant recession, they will likely bring every other country down with them, with differing levels of effect. Though, countries like Australia, will be hit extremely hard.
The funniest thing about this post...
'I think it is more serious than your subprime mortgage crisis. You can always leave a house or use it. The rail system is there. It's a burden. You must operate the rail system, and when you operate it, the cost is very high.'
It may be more serious than the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis, but what about China's own housing crisis, which is like the U.S. but way more extreme as it's pushed through by their Government.
Also, your rant is the least insightful post I've seen. "Inflationary capitalistic expansion", done by a communist country? An obscure reference to Reganomics in a country where it doesn't apply in the slightest?
The up and coming haven't learnt? I think they have, if China hadn't made in roads towards providing their citizens with freer markets, China would have gone the way of Russia, quite some time ago.
All those marketers, all those hedge-fund managers, all those financial instruments, the money printing, the interest rate hikes, the depletion of old-guard natural energy resources, the cost-cutting, the parasitic leeches of banks and speculative investment..they will kill the host before they kill themselves.
Okay, now you're just listing random things which people infer bad things about. More so, you're listing contradictory "bad ideas".
"the money printing" is the OPPOSITE of "the interest rate hikes" which is counteracted by "all those financial instruments" but increases "speculative investment" .
"All those marketers, all those hedge-fund managers" okay, you need to say something more than this?
I don't even know what the fuck "the parasitic leeches of banks" is referring to.
I immediately thought you were an arts student, because this is the most retarded, least well thought out shit I've read in a long time. But then I notice that your writing is exceptionally bad, and it's hard to understand what you're actually trying to say. So, I'm guessing you're NOT an arts student then.
Save us some time, and please stick to... whatever you specialize in.
Sincerely,
Society
Don't think I will take a trains herein the USA (Score:2, Interesting)
either. When I go to Europe, I see them continuously replacing the ties with new ones, I guess the rails themselves along with it. Concrete ties are not uncommon.
Last year, in my area, the traffic signal for a train came down and I had to wait 10 minutes for this slow movng freight train. When it finally was within sight, the rail jumped up 24 inches, along with these half-rotten ties (they must have been ancient), completely out of the ground! It was nuts. Then as the train was going over it, any time
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why not get a video of it and send it to a local news station?
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, that doesn't shock me. There are way too many accidents [wikipedia.org] in the US rail system that have no business being possible. Of course, there's been a fair few in other countries - Britain has an unenviable record for avoidable fatal rail accidents. One of the worst disasters of all times, the Eschede train disaster, was perhaps the most extreme example of politics and rulebooks causing fatalities when prudence would have been the wiser choice. I have noticed, however, that prudence is unpopular in any enviro
Re: (Score:2)
To be clear: Eschede was not a British disaster, but a German one.
Does Eschede sound like an English name to you? (Score:2)
Europe is made up of several different countries. England is one country. Germany is another. France is still another. Sort of like your states but probably more autonomous.
Having said that, the UK has had rail accidents and you can find what seems to be a comprehensive list on Wikipedia. Potters Bar is a recent example. I'm not sure whether it fits your thesis, however.
You have to invest in the infrastructure (Score:2)
As other posters have noted, you have to keep investing in the infrastructure. If you don't it falls apart through use and lack of maintenance. Same for roads, houses, bridges. Railways are no different. That's why we're working on our railways all the time in Europe, keeping them up to date and replacing older worn out parts. Any house owner will tell you there's always a little job to be done on maintaining their house as well, got to check all is good after each winter, etc.
It's always surprised me how l
You won't take them in the US since they are slow (Score:5, Interesting)
The US is almost entirely a heavy rail system, made for freight. It is an extremely efficient way of moving lots of cargo, costs 0.5-1% of what it does by truck energy wise. It is also heavily used. It isn't like only a little stuff goes by rail, tons does. In Flagstaff, AZ which is bisected by a major east-west rail line you have a large train go through about once every 15-20 minutes, 24 hours a day.
You'll notice that there are not catastrophes involving trains all the time. Accidents happen, but they are not that common. The rules for what works with a train weighing thousands of tons and traveling at 20-70mph depending on the area are different than one weighing on a couple hundred and traveling at 100+mph.
The US system is not designed for high speed passenger transit, but it works great for moving freight.
Look ahead, or not. (Score:2, Insightful)
I believe China is not so stupid to believe that Oil will always be there, otherwise they would not be the world leader in installed renewable energy. On the other hand, communist heads of government in the country really need to deal with the corruption, but the build it faster will always come at reduced quality where humans are the builders. Quality work needs time, but the other problem is that as Oil costs go up so does the costs to build these green transport systems.
Reducing dependence on oil and u
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
They already have. It's called bio-diesel. And the hemp version doesn't require all the fertilizers and prime crop land that some bio sources do. But it does require a shift to diesel engines from gasoline engines, something the Europeans are way ahead of North America on doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No one really believes we won't run out.
That may be so, but some politicians, analysts and CEOs are then very good at pretending they do believe oil won't run out in a century and/or alternatives will be found fast. Anyways, the IEA recently acknowledged that peak of conventional (easy, cheap) oil had happened already http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2010-11-11/iea-acknowledges-peak-oil [energybulletin.net] . We may find alternatives, but economic growth is heavily dependent on cheap oil, which is becoming scarce fast. I guess nuclear power plants are going to s
Wishfull thinking for USA (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wishfull thinking for USA (Score:5, Informative)
Melamine in baby formula and animal feed to spike low protein counts (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1856168,00.html)
Coal mine accidents in disproportionate amounts when you compare China's coal production to that of other countries (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-11/13/content_391242.htm)
Melted down anything remotely resembling metal in the late 50s (The Great Leap Forward) to try to match the United Kingdom in steel production - an arbitrary goal set by Mao Zedong - naturally, the product was useless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backyard_furnace)
China has come a long way since the end of Republican Era but has also consistently cut corners whenever possible. This isn't an issue of sour grapes, simply one of history.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious about this, in the US we've been doing that recently, is the difference really as simple as at what point the corners began to be cut? Or is there something more going on here to suggest where we're likely to end up.
Re: (Score:3)
The reason a lot of us are interested in this story is because we thought it was really cool when China started building high speed railroads. We wanted some here, too. But it's really depressing how it turned out.
This ties in with China's false economy... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
You've really got no idea.
First of all, you're quoting one government departments debt, where as the GP is refering to the entire countries, which is estimated at around $7 trillion by some.
Second of all, you're relying on numbers produced by the Chinese government, which are often largely fiction. Many estimate that there is up to $1.5 trillion of debt hidden in local investment vehicles.
Lastly, you're forgetting that the amount of debt doesn't matter, it's your ability to service that debt, that matters.
Bubbles in China (Score:5, Informative)
Unfortunately, that apparently isn't the only bubble in China:
How Big Is the Chinese Property Bubble? [seekingalpha.com]
China's credit bubble on borrowed time as inflation bites [telegraph.co.uk]
China: the coming costs of a superbubble [csmonitor.com]
It seems likely that the world has a few more financial tremors coming.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not good, because we're counting on them to buy our bonds to continue funding our government's operation over at least the next decade or so.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly (Score:2)
Government-created debt crises (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, China is about due. Japan and the USA (along with Greece, Ireland, Spain, and others) ignored basic economic principles and are paying the price. (I'm NOT talking about the Tsunami tragedy in Japan, but the stagnation of the economy.) "Stimulus" money has to come from the places where it's produced, and is a by-product of productivity. If you loan money to people or projects, those recipients need to have the means to pay it back. Governments do not produce anything, so they must get their money from those who are productive. To "stimulate" the economy, they are taking it from productive projects (Exports), skimming expenses off the top and then sending it back as "stimulus" funds. The other alternative is to create money out of thin air, which causes inflation. Either way, the so-called "stimulus" loses its effectiveness the more often it is used. Japan's last big stimulus attempts created almost no movement in their economy; not even short-term.
China's rail problem is not the cause of the bank problems: The cause is that banks were forced to loan money to unsound projects at unrealistic rates. China has huge amounts of "Sovereign Wealth" due to their absolute and competitive advantages over their Western customers, but they have no place to put it, internal to China. Distributing it to unsound projects wastes resources and unbalances the internal economy. Some infrastructure development could bolster the economy (like toll roads in the USA). However, the implication derived from the banker's statements is that the "tolls" from operating the railway are not sufficient to service the debts. Banks don't get their money back and the government gets to subsidize a losing project. (Sound familiar?)
Re: (Score:2)
Governments do not produce anything
That's a matter of definition, if services like water, road networks, mail delivery, scientific research and defense are not products, then companies like Google don't produce anything either.
Also there are plenty of state-owned companies all over the place - whether governments produce specific things or not is a choice.
Re: (Score:3)
problem is that the governments around the world are getting fatter and many many people employed on taxpayer's expense don't do anything of value. They pass shitloads of meaningless regulations so they get to do anything like rubberstamping piles of paper to justify their existence. USA fared well when all levels of administration were worth 5% of gdp, now the govt is involved in 40+% if i am not mistaken.
In Poland there was like 150k bureaucrats in 1989 - we are talking about a socialist state that laughe
Re: (Score:3)
Governments do not produce anything
This is, of course, wrong just from the example of the story. The Chinese government produced a high rail system. Instead, the angle is that government involvement introduces vast opportunity costs. Sometimes it still can generate a profit. More often, it's just another monument to incompetence and hubris. Whatever the case, it is still production. Please think about that.
Another reason to understand this point is that someone with a sufficiently screwed up belief system may well value the passengers far
Re: (Score:3)
If you loan money to people or projects, those recipients need to have the means to pay it back. Governments do not produce anything, so they must get their money from those who are productive. To "stimulate" the economy, they are taking it from productive projects (Exports), skimming expenses off the top and then sending it back as "stimulus" funds.
That's an ultra-libertarian view of government, and it's not entirely accurate. Don't get me wrong....capitalism is great at steering money and resources towards where it's useful. However, capitalism also has some very significant shortcomings too. For example, many corporations today are not investing for long-term sustainability, but rather short-term profits. The almighty buck is all that's important. The environment, product safety, employees, etc... are all hindrances to the bottom line. And unb
Dang... (Score:3, Funny)
If China gets into a debt crisis, who's going to loan us money to cover our debt crisis?
The rail is the debt bomb? (Score:3)
Hardly. Their debt bomb is the ghost cities, and hyper inflated housing prices. With the average wage under $3k/usd a year, and hosing prices fast approaching half a million, there's going to be some serious really fast.
Re: (Score:2)
Their debt bomb is the ghost cities...
China doesn't have a debt bomb. The $276G is about 1/4 of their US Treasury holdings; they could build more than four more rail networks with what they've invested in US debt. At worst, $276G is a nice, healthy Chinese scale boondoggle. Anyone calculating how much `freeway' building they've offset?
On the other hand, $276G is a mere two months of US federal deficit spending; 1/6th of the projected 2011 deficit. Every 60 days we overspend that amount to buy various dependent constituencies, as opposed t
Re: (Score:2)
More proof of a pissing contest (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And what's your point? It's a developing nation's version of the US' space programme and trying to get to moon.. but probably has more benefits.
The name's Lan-Lei. Lao Lan-Lei. (Score:2)
I've built high-speed trains to Zhengzhou, Wuhou, and North Shenyang, and by gum it put them on the map!
Huh.... (Score:2)
$276 billion is... (Score:3)
17.6% of the annual deficit of the united states. About 1550 hours worth of new debt.
"Change" is coming. One way or the other...
Not yet the worst of it... (Score:3)
The story I'm hearing here in China is that the majority of the "Specially trained, highly skilled, highly experienced and professional" construction workers used their extra salaries to hire regular labor off the farms and streets to sign in and do their work for them, paid them the normal construction rates, and then stayed home on the other 80% of the salary.
This is why USA should NOT do the standard approac (Score:3)
This is but ONE of China's bubbles (Score:3)
US propaganda. (Score:2)
So in China, a minister complained about his (government) institution having too much debt (handled by the government) to local banks (almost completely controlled by the government) in local currency (completely manipulated by the same government), and Americans are trying to present it as a failure of a wildly successful infrastructure development project, and making headlines that suggest some actual disasters happening?
Someone here still argues that American journalism is anything other than propaganda,
Should have stolen French trains... (Score:3)
... rather than German ones.
Always better to be in a TGV rather than an ICE when it comes off the rails.
The Washington Post? (Score:2)
Seriously, Slashdot is linking to the Washington Post? [exiledonline.com] As if it were a reputable news source?
Let me put it this way, does Bat Boy have any comment on China's High Speed trains? [wikipedia.org]
Central Planning Fails. Film at 11 (Score:3)
Wow you mean a centrally planned economy isn't working? No kidding. Who would have thought. When China collapses it will be just as shocking to the talking heads as when the Soviet Union collapsed or when we do. Central Planning cannot work. It is an impossibility.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be more worried about having a population who doesn't know the difference between departments and debts.
Re: (Score:2)
The lever you have pulled brakes is out of service (Score:3)
The lever you have pulled brakes is out of service please make a note of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong place.
The monorail (German Transrapid maglev train) is supposed to be built in Shanghai.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mao's Great Leap Forward did cause millions of deaths, but that was when China was communist. It hasn't been for at least 20 years, starting with Xiaoping.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Tell your local truckdriver that from now on he has to build his own roads and lets see how long he stays competitive.
No way am I telling that to the hairy, smelly truckdriver. Or her husband.
Slight difference in the scenarios: we pay collectively for our roads via rego and petrol taxes*, and we pay individually to purchase cars and keep them running. Rail users' fares do not pay for the capital costs of the track and only cover 25% of the running costs.
*(My federal government introduced a special tax years ago to make our fuel as expensive as everyone else's and they promised that the tax collected would fund 100% major r
Really? Steam nut exaggeration (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
km/h is not an SI unit.
You'd be looking for ms-1 (Sorry about the lack of superscript).