China Buys 80 Very High Speed Trains (236 mph) for $4 Billion
bombardier.com
bombardier.com
For about a decade, Germany has been trying to sell the 'Transrapid' mag-lev trains and tech to China. Transrapid was sponsored by various German governments (both federal and state) for well over two decades, with the occasional state PM or federal minister turning it into their pet project (e.g. to link an airport to a city, or to link two big cities), etc. The Transrapid patent is from 1934 and the first test track was completed in Germany in 1987, almost twenty years after planning first started.
Unfortunately (for the Transrapid guys), 'normal' train technology started catching up, and the technological hurdles to implementing long-distance mag-lev trains remain prohibitively expensive, despite vast sums being sunk into it by the German government (not only is the actual technology quite sensitive, but the tranches that need to be built tend to be elevated and very straight - which doesn't work well in densely populated areas like Europe).
In the late 90s and early 00s, the only way forward seemed to be selling it to a place needing fast trains and having no scruples about building the tranches wherever they damn well please. Enter China. A few years ago, a German-Chinese joint venture built a single 19-mile track to connect Shanghai to its airport.
The real kicker? The German companies behind Transrapid continue to allege that the Chinese are stealing the technology and implementation details from the German side of the joint-venture so they can build their own -- much cheaper. Or as China Daily reported, the State Council is 'encouraging engineers to "learn and absorb foreign advanced technologies while making further innovations."'
The cost for the aforementioned 19-mile Transrapid track was $1.4 billion dollars. The cost of 80 high-speed Bombardier trains (running on presumably standard rail lines)? $4 billion.
Given the number of dedicated, high speed rail lines in the U.S. (uhm, 0? as far as I know...), it looks like China could beat us.
Note: Not advocating communism or anything here, it just makes me angry that rail transit is so crappy in this country. It's a great way to travel, at least in Europe.
The only thing that would come close to making trains economical in the US is a massive firebombing campaign of every city you hope they're going to run through, and even that would be pushing it, since even with cheap right-of-ways you'd still have to string them across the country.
See, in general, http://green.venturebeat.com/2008/04/11/why-the-california-h...
+ If you priced US high speed rail like Japan prices the shinkansen, it would cost you about $250 for a round-trip ticket from New York to Boston. I do the Nagoya to Tokyo circuit every once in a while for work. The system is one of the wonders of the modern world but, holy cow, is it expensive. (Its expensive to ride, its expensive to subsidize, and HOLY COW was it expensive to build. Shinkansen-related debt hit nearly 30 trillion yen -- that's in the general vicinity of $300 billion, folks. And that is for a country that would fit in California, with room to spare.)
Is it any cheaper to raze down more buildings, to open more lanes. 101, and 280 in SF are already 5 lanes and full of traffic (101 is becoming like a parking lot, even in recession).
The Bay Bridge is already 5 lanes each way, and always chocked. It is pretty clear that the highway system is not scaling well. Spending billions of dollars for more lanes, just wont work.
And everytime me and you ride the highway, are are not paying for the full cost of it. Or gas taxes are just a mere fraction of the real cost.
Just saying. And the projection of the SF to LA ticket cost, are about $55-60.
Please no more FUD.
I am also very biased towards a well developed rail system, because I hate flying/driving. Being from India, I have traveled in train system, a lot, even though its not a high speed rail system. I loved it. I have been to europe a lot and am a fan of it. I know its a huge investment, and probably wont be profitable any time soon, but IMO, it will benefit in a very long term.
High-speed trains would do well where conventional trains are too slow and regional jets are too expensive. (Example, Chicago-Madison).
I also see high-speed trains as being useful for city/airport links. Oslo has a high speed train between its central station and the airport, which effectively abstracts away the fact that the airport is in the Middle Of Fucking Nowhere. (Tokyo suffers from this problem, as well. While flying from HKG to NRT recently, the thought crossed my mind that landing in KIX and taking the train to downtown Tokyo might actually be faster...)
Even in cities like Chicago where the airport is close to downtown, conventional trains are too slow. (It takes me at least 45 minutes to get from Clark/Lake to O'Hare. A high-speed train could do that in 6 minutes! I would gladly pay a premium for this convenience.)
Finally, cost is not an issue as infrastructure is never profitable. The interstate system is not making money, the airlines are not making money, and conventional trains are not making money. Society needs the infrastructure regardless, which is why we pay taxes.
Too much hot air. How about some real numbers from historical data?
From "Sustainable Energy - without the hot air" by David McKay, p.121. http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/mackay/Books.html
Energy consumption
(kWh per 100 p-km)
------------------
Car 68
Bus 19
Rail 6
Air 51
Sea 57
------------------
Table 20.8. Overall transport efficiencies of transport modes in Japan (1999).
I admit I haven't researched this more, but someone just mentioned that there's talks about a cross country high speed rail being built; it would go through MI and that's how I came into contact with the topic. I'd love to see something like that happen...stop building 2/10 bombs and build a few trains/bridges :)
We'll see what happens when there is a real hiccup in the system. They've enjoyed huge growth for so many years.
Note that I'm saying you're wrong, and people will tolerate political oppression while they have increasing material wealth. When things go bad, they might go really bad.
It is actually Authoritarianism.
That said . . .
Yes, it is very efficient.
(I'm not saying all government projects are failures; if you thought I said that, read more carefully please.)
And not that funny; I know of heavy manufacturing companies that multiply their selling prices by 10 for equipment that is destined for China just for that reason.
That's pretty much analogous to people copying music because they've been ripped off for so long.
They will have ample opportunity for the technology transfer required to do the next 800 on their own. And Bombardier will have their opportunity to compete on the next project. But the pessimist in me also believes that Bombardier will do their best to prevent that technology transfer! Sad, but it seems to be the path of least resistance in business these days.
Bombardier Transportation announced today that its Chinese joint venture, Bombardier Sifang (Qingdao) Transportation Ltd., has been selected by the Chinese Ministry of Railways ...
I imagine that the cars will be manufactured in China and the joint venture company will gain a lot of experience from the effort.
The Mag-Lev from Pudong Airport cost what ... 1.5 Billion. It only goes about 20 miles into Shanghai. They are getting 80 of these trains for 4 Billion.
Stealing a new fangled industrial adhesive might be profitable, and useful in your construction projects. But if you are going to build it the regular way . . .
it just doesn't pay to steal a nail.