by cube » Sat 11 Oct 2008, 23:32:09
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', 'I') dunno; one the one hand, it IS a lot of money. On the other hand, the rails themselves might have a useful life of 100+ years, making the inflation-adjusted cost seem pretty minimal. It's a gamble, and they took it. Unfortunately, they took it at a highly inopportune time for building infrastructure in general, in years where material cost doubling times were measured in months, not years.
Speaking of an "inopportune time".......The South Koreans got slammed pretty hard during the 1997 Asia economic crisis so that obviously didn't help either.
However even if hypothetically the original ridership projections were met (200,000) once you nickel and dime all costs (capital + operational) it's still too expensive.
Running at 170mph means you have to replace wheels and rails continuously to keep the system properly maintained.
That starts to add up $$$ real quick.
//
I remember MonteQuest once mentioning that HSR is for nerds who read Popular Mechanics and has no place in a PO world. At first I disagreed with him but as I fell deeper into the PO doomsday scenario, my opinion has changed.
I think HSR is just another thing amongst a very long list of things that will go out the window once cheap oil dries up.
//
If we go back to the late Victorian Times transportation projects were "reactive" never "pro-active".
It was based on a pay as you go system. It was next to impossible to borrow money because that assumes greater future wealth which does not exist in a steady state economy.
For example if a street car was filled with standing room only passengers rubbing shoulders such that the system paid for itself then (and only then) a 2nd streetcar would be added.
And if that gets filled then a 3rd would be added.
And if that gets filled such that a 4th car is impossible to add because there is not enough space on the surface streets then we end up with the first subway trains.
That's my vision of post PO transportation.