We must be careful about HSR
Original post made by Kevin Crispie on Aug 9, 2009
Something that would be bad in this area would be a crash. There was a large crash in Italy about a month ago that injured and I think killed some people. That would be disastrous for our area. It may be better to have the train go to San Jose for now, and when funding comes up, we can have a tunnel up the Bay Area.
HSR will be great for the Bay Area, but we must be very careful how we do it. There must be forethought so no huge accident happens that could jeopardize HSR all around the United States. Now that would be REALLY bad.
on Aug 9, 2009 at 8:54 am
oh, another misspelling, actually, it kind of makes it more visible
on Aug 9, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Kevin, why do you think any more people would travel between the L.A. area and the San Francisco Bay Area than today? There are plenty of affordable ways to get back and forth between the two areas right now.
on Aug 11, 2009 at 11:39 am
"There are plenty of affordable ways to get back and forth between the two areas right now."
Right now, yes. And when oil goes back up to $150/barrel, then what?
20 years from now, California will have another 15 or 20 million people than it has today. How well do you think the freeways are going to work to drive between SF and LA? We can't expand SF, OAK or San Jose airports. No room. Airport capacity is going to be a serious issue. There are over 300 flights a day between the Bay Area and the LA area. Expending the fuel required to get a plane five miles up in the air, and then fly only 250 or 300 miles before landing, is incredibly wasteful and inefficient.
HSR isn't about right now. It's about planning ahead so that things work in the future. Just because oil is cheap now doesn't mean it will be that way forever.