California's Rain Slows Construction for Its High-Speed Bullet Train (fresnobee.com) 62
The Fresno Bee newspaper reports that flooding in parts of California "have also ground work to a halt at several key construction sites for California's high-speed rail project."
But while standing water at some locations has prevented work crews from reaching their job sites, the Central Valley director for the Cailfornia High-Speed Rail Authority said it's the prospects for a lengthy summer run of water in local irrigation canals that present a greater potential disruption to construction later this year....
At the Tule River viaduct near Highway 43 and Avenue 144 south of Corcoran, drone video posted to social media on March 22 by the Tulare County Sheriff's Office shows vehicles stranded in floodwaters and support columns for the structure sticking out of the water. "There's a lot of work we can't get to," Garth Fernandez, who heads up the rail agency's Central Valley region, told The Fresno Bee in a telephone interview this week. "So at Tule River and Deer Creek, right now we are not working. ... We don't even have access to that (Deer Creek) site right now because it's all under water." Fernandez added that in the meantime, the rail agency and its contractor have turned their attention to providing what help they can to nearby communities that are being affected by flooding....
While some construction locations are facing delays because of standing flood water, crews have been able to continue working at other sites in Madera, Fresno, Kings and Kern counties — a 119-mile stretch covered by three separate construction contracts.... So far, no significant damage has been reported on any of the high-speed rail structures that have been completed or are in various stages of construction. "From north to south, water is flowing underneath all of our completed structures," Fernandez said. "All of our structures are on piles and deep foundations, so I don't believe we'll have an issue with damage to our structures... We may have some areas of erosion, some embankments washed out in a couple of places, but that minor damage can be resolved rather easily," he added. "But for all of our major structures, the current reporting is that we are holding good."
The rail line has been designed to cope with major floods; viaducts and a railbed that will elevated above the level of the surrounding land are expected to minimize the risk of damage from future floods, Fernandez said. "Our facilities are designed for a 100-year flood, so (the current events are) showing that our design is actually working," he said. "It's designed in a way that even though it's a large system north to south, it's able to convey all the flood water past our embankments and our alignment."
At the Tule River viaduct near Highway 43 and Avenue 144 south of Corcoran, drone video posted to social media on March 22 by the Tulare County Sheriff's Office shows vehicles stranded in floodwaters and support columns for the structure sticking out of the water. "There's a lot of work we can't get to," Garth Fernandez, who heads up the rail agency's Central Valley region, told The Fresno Bee in a telephone interview this week. "So at Tule River and Deer Creek, right now we are not working. ... We don't even have access to that (Deer Creek) site right now because it's all under water." Fernandez added that in the meantime, the rail agency and its contractor have turned their attention to providing what help they can to nearby communities that are being affected by flooding....
While some construction locations are facing delays because of standing flood water, crews have been able to continue working at other sites in Madera, Fresno, Kings and Kern counties — a 119-mile stretch covered by three separate construction contracts.... So far, no significant damage has been reported on any of the high-speed rail structures that have been completed or are in various stages of construction. "From north to south, water is flowing underneath all of our completed structures," Fernandez said. "All of our structures are on piles and deep foundations, so I don't believe we'll have an issue with damage to our structures... We may have some areas of erosion, some embankments washed out in a couple of places, but that minor damage can be resolved rather easily," he added. "But for all of our major structures, the current reporting is that we are holding good."
The rail line has been designed to cope with major floods; viaducts and a railbed that will elevated above the level of the surrounding land are expected to minimize the risk of damage from future floods, Fernandez said. "Our facilities are designed for a 100-year flood, so (the current events are) showing that our design is actually working," he said. "It's designed in a way that even though it's a large system north to south, it's able to convey all the flood water past our embankments and our alignment."
High-speed trains require low-speed construction (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Not the best use of $ (Score:1)
Existing CA roads need lots of help. I'd rather the money be spent on regular roads, but much the funds appear earmarked for high-speed rail due to round-about legislative history, federal and state.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Are you talking about road maintenance or are you talking about adding new capacity? I don't think you appreciate how much new roads cost. A quick google search says its $5-10 million per lane-mile, so adding a new 4 lane road is going to cost 20-40 million per mile. Rail is 50 million per mile. So, even if you took all that money away from the rail line, and dumped it into making new roads, you'd only get a road and a half.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I'd be happy if they'd even do the slightest road maintenance. California literally has the worst roads in the US. It's bad enough that the transportation here sucks balls so much that the only way to get around is with a car, but the roads also have to beat up your car in the process.
Re: (Score:1)
California literally has the worst roads in the US.
That honor belongs to Rhode Island [constructioncoverage.com]. California is only third worst.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
According to https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2020-12-04/these-states-have-the-worst-roads-in-america [slashdot.org]Rhode Island is third and California is in the Number 2 slot, with DC at the top of the list. Either way, the top of the list are States filled with Democrat law makers.
YMMV
Re: Not the best use of $ (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was shocked to see them filling potholes in El Cajon (East county San Diego). I almost stopped to cheer on the workers. Had I been on my bicycle I would of.
Re: (Score:2)
You need to drive in more states then. The roads are reasonable, especially state roads. Municipal roads vary a lot; Milpitas has some catchup to do after the rains caused problems. Potholes on city streets are the city or county's problem.
Re: (Score:2)
California has some really spectacularly bad yet important highways, and even sections of interstates. The 101 is a severe embarrassment. Parts of the 5 aren't much better.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Where are your numbers from?
California says 500 miles will cost between 70 and 100 billion.
That's between 140m and 200m per mile. The fact they can't narrow that range down more is already a huge red flag. And let's remember they originally said the cost was going to be something like 35b. Oopsie! And for a train that pretty much no one will use. Vs fixing up the fucked up roads they currently have.
https://hsr.ca.gov/about/capit... [ca.gov]
"The current cost estimate to deliver the 500-mile system linking San F
Re: (Score:2)
Shocking, big projects are always difficult to estimate and complete on budget.
Re: (Score:2)
Tripling in budget and extending the time to infinity while the rest of the state's infrastructure rots out. Also not shocking for California.
Who said it was shocking? No one. It is stupid and ridiculous and outrageous. But not shocking.m and not ok. Try that shit in the real world where investors and not tax payers are paying and see how far it goes before lawsuits are filed and careers end.
Re: (Score:3)
Like my post said, a quick google search. My stats probably don't include stations, law enforcement, the price per rider of the vehicles, etc, and possibly don't even count the cost of buying easements and right of ways.
Re:Not the best use of $ (Score:4, Informative)
California says 500 miles will cost between 70 and 100 billion. That's between 140m and 200m per mile. The fact they can't narrow that range down more is already a huge red flag. And let's remember they originally said the cost was going to be something like 35b. Oopsie!
Increasing costs for construction is not really a big surprise. It's certainly unpleasant and provides a lot of fodder for opposition. However, any huge construction coming in anywhere close to the estimated price would be a huge surprise. This is especially true with today's inflation and with the ongoing need to secure land rights.
For example [ca.gov], right-of-way acquisition costs in cities are the major price of rail construction in existing cities: "Urban right-of-way is estimated at 90 percent of the costs for the San Francisco to San Jose segment. Suburban right-of-way costs are 67 percent of the San Francisco to San Jose cost. Rural San Francisco to San Jose costs are estimated at 25 percent of the San Francisco to San Jose cost." These huge costs would be true for both rail and highways.
And for a train that pretty much no one will use.
If I want to go from the Bay Area to LA, I have the following options:
Car: $45-70 with 25-40mpg and $4.25/gal gas, 6-8 hours
Plane: ~$300-400, 3 hours including check-in and security
High-speed train: ~$80, 3 hours
Cheap bus: $35-70, 6-8 hours
The train option looks at least competitive, even before considering the much better seats compared to the car and plane. I would at least consider the high-speed train.
"The current cost estimate to deliver the 500-mile system linking San Francisco to Los Angeles/Anaheim via the Central Valley ranges from $69.01 to $99.9 billion."
The costs have gone up still. According to the Feb 16, 2023 report [ca.gov], the cost estimate range is now $88-127 billion.
Re: (Score:2)
The IRS says it costs 65.5 cents per mile to operate a car [irs.gov], so driving the 373 miles from San Jose to Los Angeles will cost you $244.32, 1-way. Unless you drive a beater Toyota, but that comes with its own risks.
Re: (Score:1)
The costs have gone up waaaaaaay more than inflation and had already more than doubled from day one when inflation was below 2%.
I would hope that people bidding on a multi billion dollar project would have the experience to understand things like inflation and cost over runs and so and get a bit closer than bidding 35b on a $130b project. Assuming it even finishes at 130b. There's just no excuse for that sort of error. The error bar is bigger than the number!!! Damn..... I can't imagine turning in numb
Re: (Score:2)
You can't predict future inflation. The $34.9 billion in 2008$ has risen to $71.9 billion in 2019$ which is the same as $60.6 billion in 2008$. So the cost has almost doubled in real dollars, not quadrupled.
Unfortunat
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, I'll accept its "only" double in same year dollars.
That's still an outrage. As a California tax payer I was pissed off they started what most people at the time called a boondoggle and a huge useless joke at the original cost. Doubling it in same dollar terms is inexcusable. If it was 10% off, ok that sucks but fine. Even 20% I'd bite my tongue. 100%? Seriously, wtf? Only government funded projects where no one gets fired and nothing gets cancelled ever get away with no consequences bullshit like
Re: (Score:2)
Btw 71b was the low end figure which is extremely unlikely to happen but I'm rolling with it to make my real point.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think the current cost estimate of $88.5 to $127.9 billion is a boondoggle, then spending $130 to $215 billion for about 4,200 more highway lane-miles, 91 more airport gates and two new airport runways just to move the same number of people back and forth would be even more of a boondoggle!
No more roads and no more airports for a while. We've sunk far too much money into those systems. The states can't even afford to repair their existing roads and bridges without massive federal subsidies! Whateve
Re: (Score:2)
Rail is 50 million per mile. So, even if you took all that money away from the rail line, and dumped it into making new roads, you'd only get a road and a half.
Not in MN. The new SW light rail line from downtown Minneapolis to Eden Prairie is running around 186 million a mile and that's if there are no more cost over runs. And there WILL be more cost over runs.
Re: (Score:2)
Given all the rain, they should be working on reservoirs and water distribution systems.
On the other hand, (Score:3)
Re:On the other hand, (Score:5, Interesting)
The aquifers won't get replenished that well, particularly in areas like Los Angeles. They engineered the LA river to just dump all of the rain water it collects into the ocean. The city only retains some 8% of the storm water. And to make up for that, they pump water from the Colorado river over the mountains and into LA.
Re: On the other hand, (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Just about every river everywhere isn't fully encased in concrete. And most non-California cities direct the storm water into basins, treating it for urban pollutants where needed, where much of it subsequently replenishes the ground water.
Re: (Score:2)
It is, actually, if you want the river to do it in a predictable path that you control. If you don't care where the river flows, then it's easy. If you want to make sure the river doesn't wash out the freeway then it takes quite a bit more engineering to ensure it goes down the way you want it.
Rivers flowing wrongly leads to roads washing out, sinkholes, flooding and damages caused by debris. Th
Re: (Score:2)
> And to make up for that, they pump water from the Colorado river over the mountains and into LA.
Most of LA gets it's water from Lake Oroville. https://oroville.lakesonline.c... [lakesonline.com]
Which is almost full. They've been letting water go so there's enough capacity for when the snow starts to melt.
Re: (Score:1)
Most of LA gets it's water from Lake Oroville
Definitely not true:
https://www.popsci.com/how-la-... [popsci.com]
Which is almost full.
Therein lies the problem. It's only full right now because of the freak weather. It doesn't hold anywhere near enough water to feed this area, and even if it did, the city literally channels most of the natural water sources it gets into the ocean. Where most sane cities use storm basins, LA doesn't. Most of the storm drains in this city channel directly into one of the tributaries of the LA river, if not the LA river itself, all of which are completely
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you think water in 'wet soil' goes? Do you think it just stays there? You do know the water basins like Oroville and the pipes from the CO river aren't the *only* source of water, right?
It drains into underground aquifers and rejoins the water table, or evaporates back into the air to become rain at another time/place. California also taps into the water table with pumps and wells which was the origin of a lot of issues with Nestl
Now it's the rain? (Score:1, Insightful)
We've been hearing about California's high-speed rail plans here on Slashdot FOR OVER 20 YEARS.
https://slashdot.org/story/02/... [slashdot.org]
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Since then it's been failure after failure after billion-dollar overrun after 10 billion-dollar overrun.
https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
When are people going to finally realize they're being scammed so a bunch of politicians and feel-gooders have something unproductive to do at very
Re:Now it's the rain? (Score:4, Informative)
Unfortunately this is not just a California problem but a USA problem as many other nations are building similar infrastructure for factions of the cost in much better timeframes including rail, runnels, bridges, etc.
Thanksfully I recently saw some Senators from both parties discussing that need for changes the NEPA process and how it bogs down infrstructure projects so maybe some agreemant can actually happen here.
Also read this article last year by Jerusalem Desmas who writes a lot on infrstructure which I found fascinating (but unfortunately paywalled): Community Input Is Bad, Actually [theatlantic.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they should outsource it to China, they seem to be throwing long-distance high-speed rail across the country as fast as they can pour the concrete.
Actually, now there's a thought, ban high-speed rail and impose rail sanctions on China, if it works like the War on Some Drugs and Chinese tech sanctions did, most of the US will be covered in high-speed rail in no time.
There is no California High Speed Bullet Train (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, it's a barely creaking white elephant whose only purpose is to fund Brown's (then Newsom's) donors in the guise of consultants. They've already admitted there will be nothing high-speed about it. Newsom briefly said he'd kill it as a complete waste of taxpayer money when he got elected, but then he found out how big the kickbacks are and let it shamble on.
Re: (Score:2)
It'll never be finished. Over budget for two decades and a hoax. What's sad is the California voters actually voted for this albatross.
No, THIS is not what CA voters approved (Score:2)
When the voters voted for "high speed rail" back in 2008 (see Prop 1A) they were told a mountain of lies and they voted for what those lies represented, NOT this boodoggle of political bait-and-switch corruption.
Voters were told they were authorizing an approximately 10Billion dollar bond which would match with federal money and private investor money and they would get trains linking the major cities, including San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles, and San Diego with trains running 220MPH and on regular
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have a link to their report?
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much, yeah. I'm not expecting it to ever actually be completed, and it would never be of any benefit to the public even if by some miracle it was - let alone not be a massive net loss financially.
As you say, it's solely a means to transfer taxpayer money into donor pockets. That part of it has been a great success so far, but it's the *only* part that has or ever will be.
Who needs it? (Score:1)
Aside from politicians and lobbyists commuting to Sacramento, who needs high-speed rail between northern and southern California anyhow?
Re: (Score:2)
> This propaganda, this LIE had one purpose, which was to try and negate the actual worst drought in over a 1000 years, which was during the 1930s, "The Dust Bowl."
I have a doubt as to what you are getting at, since nobody can negate the historical facts.
> Were in CA where I live, we get up to 60" inches of rainfall on an average season
Where you live isn't really relevant. Southern California, is.
https://www.laalmanac.com/imag... [laalmanac.com]
Soon ... (Score:1)
"Rain" delay now? (Score:2)
Haaahahaha, so now it's the "rain" delaying California's HSR project. Funny how every few years there's something new slowing progress, shortening its route and causing new multi billion dollar cost overruns to this boondoggle.
Rain isn't the main problem. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, this is why people will just bypass permits in California, especially in rural areas. About the only thing I haven't seen is a full new build within view of existing houses. Almost anything else is a free-for-all, but this is a somewhat rural area. Whenever wild fires burn people out, a significant number of these illegal structures are revealed. We have laws for a reason, but when they go too far it causes problems and a "what can I get away with?" mentality.
For a rigorous analysis of this effect, google Laffer curve [google.com].
The rain is the problem? Yeah ok (Score:2)
Hyperloo - flushed out? (Score:2)
Oh, hang on - isn't it meant to be an evacuated tube of some sort? So that's going to never leak, because vacuum-filled pipes never leak, even if they're temporarily or permanently below water level.
how slow? (Score:2)
Apparently slowed from tortoise speed to snail speed. Soon, progress will have to be measured in geologic epochs.
'high speed' (Score:2)
High speed in fact that the right people (Diane Feinstein's husband) gets paid right away.