China approves construction of high-speed rail lines

[zardoz]

From the Monday 3/13 Trains news wire:
BEIJING - China announced a $22 billion plan Monday to build two new high-speed railway lines linking Shanghai with Beijing and another city, including one using magnetic levitation technology that can reach speeds of 260 mph, according to an Associated Press story.....The 820-mile Beijing-Shanghai link will run at speeds up to 220 mph, according to an announcement by the Cabinet's National Reform and Development Commission.....The second project, a 110-mile maglev line from Shanghai to Hangzhou, is to be completed by 2010 at a cost of $4.3 billion, Xinhua reported.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Warning: [soapbox] ahead!

So here we are, in the once-great, former industrial giant of a country, debating on whether we can afford to provide toast to passengers on our few remaining trains. In the meantime, the rest of the industrialized world continues to develop and build modern high-speed rail lines.

The older of us can remember when the phrase "Made In Japan" translated into "cheaply made POS". But eventually "Made In Japan" became synonymous with high-quality electronics, and most people knew of the speed and efficiency of the Bullet Trains.

By the time Japan emerged as a world player, "Made In China" meant what "Made In Japan" used to mean. But now China on the move in a big way, and it is becoming rare to find a different country of origin on products.


I wonder if (or rather when) "Made In USA" will be looked upon by much of the world as representing shoddy products, mis-managed corporations, overpaid managers and CEO's, and gross inefficiencies.

Supposedly this country is transitioning from 'manufacturing' to 'service', but if any of you have spent an inordinate amount of time on hold waiting to talk to someone on a "customer service" line ("for quality assurance, this call may be monitored or taped"), you can't help but wonder when this change is going to take place (and half the time when you finally get through, the person on the other end can barely speak English).

So perhaps we should wave to China as they pass us by, on their way to becoming the world leaders, while at the same time the US slinks behind its borders, filled with nothing but paranoa and hate and jealousy of the rest of the world.

I'll get off my soapbox now. Whew!

[Anonymous]

Wow, that hybrid "Capitalistic Communism" political system really gets things done! And here all this time we thought Representative Democracy was evolutionary pinnacle of political systems![;)]

What I would question is what if any extent these proposals will have on China's GDP, or whether they are in fact "window dressing" to show off to the rest of the world.

My stand: If either or both of these lines are used primarily to haul freight, then I would say they are on to something higher up on the evolutionary scale. But if it is strictly for passenger services, then it is in fact a social regression being represented.

Remember, individual transportation systems are higher up on the evolutionary chain than mass transit systems. Mass transit systems are the stuff of the "Metropolis" remakes.

[Modelcar]

Regardless of what it is....hauling people or freight they are doing it for themselves, we are too busy over here spending our money thinking we will change the face of the middle east and what ever else and going broke trying to do it....Perhaps we should redirect our resourses to modernizing our infrastructure so we at least have something to carry us forward to whatever we're going to be doing.....

[Anonymous]

China will build a system and make it work.

The United States continues to lag behind in debates and money along with all the other baggage that weighs us down. By the time we get anything actually built and running we will find ourselves left at the old tyme station while the rest of the world enjoys mobility.

I think there are small systems in place around the USA but too little too late.

[andrewjonathon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

Remember, individual transportation systems are higher up on the evolutionary chain than mass transit systems. Mass transit systems are the stuff of the "Metropolis" remakes.

China is not just building mass transportation systems. They are also very busy building freeways. Of course with over 1 billion residents they will need a significant number of both.

People maybe surprised to know that China already has the world's second largest network of freeways. By the end of 2004, their network of freeways extended over 34,200 km (~21,000 miles) and they were building an additional 4,000 -5,000 km per year. Predictions are the total length of their freeway system will surpass the US sometime during the 21st century.

The potential size of the Chinese economy is incredible to think about. Even if only 25% of the Chinese population managed to reach the middle class, they would have as many middle class citizens as the US. That is a lot of purchasing power.

[eastside]

I'd hardly call China the exemplar to emulate. If maglev trains are such a good idea, why aren't they being used in Germany, where China bought its system, or Japan, which has been developing one for over the past two decades? Both have a long history of heavily supporting passenger train transportation. I'd say it's because Germany and Japan realize they cannot afford such a wildly uneconomic mode of transportation, whereas China's bureaucrats can make such decisions because they work for an unaccountable, totalitarian government. Among other things, they have total control over land and access rights that permits them to build such projects without being concerned about the lives of those who might live along the way. In the U.S., even improving an existing line often has to go through a whole series of environmental studies. So far, Shanghai's maglev line to its airport is a white elephant.

[Anonymous]

Yea it took 10 years before the Woodrow Wilson bridge started pouring concrete to replace the crumbling I-495 bridge partly because there are like 5 governments having to work out all the issues related to a new bridge to replace what everyone agreed was a failing bridge.

Put the high speed railroads onto the map in the United States, it will place compete with regional airtravel on the ground. Imagine Little Rock to Baltimore in under 6 hours by maglev or similar which is usally the amount of time from leaving the house, flying and landing at Baltimore.

The problem is we would have to work out literally every inch of each line thru backyards, properties, evironmental opposition and political reluctance to spend money along with all the other things too numerous to list in today's society.

China has the ability and probably the will to do it. We should do the same.

[Anonymous]

So, the question I have then is this: Are China's environmental laws superior to ours (on an economic basis)?

I have avered in the past that our ecolaws seem to be based on feelgoodism more so than science, let alone a consensus approach to the environmental/economic interaction.

Do we really need a separate EIS for every single development project we propose, or is it reasonable to instead have a template set of regs to follow? Using the template approach could take years off some of our project completion times.

[eastside]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

So, the question I have then is this: Are China's environmental laws superior to ours (on an economic basis)?

What few environmental laws China has on its books are largely ignored or not enforced, but that's besides the point. If China weren't a one-party totalitarian state and had a functioning legal system, we might be able to compare laws. As it is administrative fiat not the law rules. What you really want to compare is the political systems. So I would say yes, if you want to get projects through with a minimal amount of unpleasantness from the citizenry, a totalitarian state is far more efficient than a democratic state.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by eastside

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

So, the question I have then is this: Are China's environmental laws superior to ours (on an economic basis)?

What few environmental laws China has on its books are largely ignored or not enforced, but that's besides the point. If China weren't a one-party totalitarian state and had a functioning legal system, we might be able to compare laws. As it is administrative fiat not the law rules. What you really want to compare is the political systems. So I would say yes, if you want to get projects through with a minimal amount of unpleasantness from the citizenry, a totalitarian state is far more efficient than a democratic state.

Well, in theory anyway a representative democracy should also be able to get projects through with a minimal amout of obfuscation/litigation from an extreme minority, but that's exactly what has happened to our system. I guess that's one area where totalitarianism has it's selling points! Maybe we should try communal anarchy[%-)].

[Murphy Siding]

Well, since China is a Communist Dictatorship form of government, they're pretty much free to do as they please. I predict this endeavor will be a great success, because they get to decide what is *great* and what is *successfull*. Since they have no reality-based need to make this pan out, in any kind of economic sense, the numbers can be whatever they say they are. Heck, they can pretty much do anything they wish, and call it any way thaey wish. It wouldn't surprise me, if they called it open access, and proclaimed it a huge success.[;)]

[TomDiehl]

ATTENTION WAL-MART SHOPPERS:

See what your purchases are financing.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

ATTENTION WAL-MART SHOPPERS:

See what your purchases are financing.

ATTENTION CLASS I RAILROADS:

See whom your monopolistic pricing policies are subsidizing.

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by eastside

I'd hardly call China the exemplar to emulate. If maglev trains are such a good idea, why aren't they being used in Germany, where China bought its system, or Japan, which has been developing one for over the past two decades?

It was reported in the magazine "Modern Railways" that China's Ministry of Technology wanted both high speed lines to be maglev, but its Transport Ministry wanted both lines to be conventional high speed rail lines, so thay trains using them could continue onwards to further destinations, as French TGV's do. Sounds like they've made a compromise. Good to know that they too have problems with different govt. departments singing from different sonh sheets.

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal
[My stand: If either or both of these lines are used primarily to haul freight, then I would say they are on to something higher up on the evolutionary scale. But if it is strictly for passenger services, then it is in fact a social regression being represented.

Why? Railways are best suited to moving goods or people in bulk. High Speed rail lines are also more environmentally friendly than air. Even before the first stage of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link opened the Eurostar train had taken the lions share of the market for travel between London and Paris; currently it has 67% overall and 80% of the business markets. In addition, business travellers have the added benefit that they can use laptops and mobile phones on the train, which they cant on the plane. The CTRL phase 2 and other HSL being built in Europe will enable rail to be competitive against air. Open Access will also benefit as Eurostar who own the CTRL will be obliged to make spare paths available to OA operators. Some sections are/will be 4 track to accomodate freight trains too.

Another point you seem to overlook in your "car good, train bad" attitude to passenger transport is that while there may be room for everyone to drive into cities in a country like the USA with a relatively low population density and where towns and cities are spread out, in countries in Europe and Japan where the population density is much higher, there simply would not be room for all the cars. As long ago as the 1960's the authorities in London, England realised there would not be room for everyone who worked there to drive into the city by car. If everyone were to attempt to do so it would gridlock the whole of SE England!

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

QUOTE: Originally posted by TomDiehl

ATTENTION WAL-MART SHOPPERS:

See what your purchases are financing.

ATTENTION CLASS I RAILROADS:

See whom your monopolistic pricing policies are subsidizing.

Taking the easy way out again Dave? It's easy to point the finger at the big bad railroads, but if nobody here was buying the products from China, there'd be no reason (or profit) in shipping them, by boat, truck, or rail.

So, what did you find around your house in that little "Made In" exercise I recommended?

[vsmith]

I've said it before..

We're England, its 1900, looking uneasily westward across the ocean.

[zardoz]

From the April 7 Train News Wire:

SHANGHAI - China plans to build a 7,500-mile passenger railway network to connect provincial capitals and other main cities, according to a story from the China news agency Xinhua.

The plan includes four north-south routes, four east-west routes and three regional inner-city networks, with the speed of the trains exceeding 125 mph, said Su Shunhu, deputy director of the Transportation Bureau with the Ministry of Railways.

China is also planning to build another 10,000 miles of railways, mainly to expand the railway network in the west.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And in this fine country, a pig-headed senator from Mississippi (Lott) wants to tear up CSX's line through his state and replace it with a highway (April 6 Trains News Wire).

What do the Chinese know that those of us from the US do not?

Other than their foresight and willingness to invest in the future.

In so many ways, our elected leaders are heading our country deeper into decline, one which our children will be hard-pressed to recover from.

[rvos1979]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

And in this fine country, a pig-headed senator from Mississippi (Lott) wants to tear up CSX's line through his state and replace it with a highway (April 6 Trains News Wire).

What do the Chinese know that those of us from the US do not?

Other than their foresight and willingness to invest in the future.

In so many ways, our elected leaders are heading our country deeper into decline, one which our children will be hard-pressed to recover from.

Sadly, I'm one of those young people, and the way this country is heading, I'd probably have better luck trying to dig a hole in the middle of the ocean by myself than fixing this country's problems.[8][8][:(]

[zardoz]

QUOTE: Originally posted by rvos1979Sadly, I'm one of those young people, and the way this country is heading, I'd probably have better luck trying to dig a hole in the middle of the ocean by myself than fixing this country's problems.[8][8][:(]

Digging a hole in the ocean. I love it. What a nicely phrased comment that if you catch it, provides a wonderful paradoxical situation. Congratulations. Nicely weird.

And probably quite accurate.

[eastside]

QUOTE: Originally posted by andrewjonathon
People maybe surprised to know that China already has the world's second largest network of freeways.

That's partly because China is so large. It has about the same land area as the U.S. When it comes to km of road per square km of land, however, it's not even in the top 30. (BTW, neither is the U.S.)

QUOTE: By the end of 2004, their network of freeways extended over 34,200 km (~21,000 miles) and they were building an additional 4,000 -5,000 km per year. Predictions are the total length of their freeway system will surpass the US sometime during the 21st century.

They have a long way to go to match system length. As of 2002 the U.S. road system was 6,348,227 km whereas China was 1,210,000 km. Moreover, there's little prospect of substantial additions to the U.S. road system because of environmental concerns, limited local capacity, maturity of the economy etc. The same goes for the rail systems. As of 2002 the U.S. had about 234,000 km of track whereas China had only 67,400 km. The rail business in the U.S. is also mature, i.e. it will grow only in line with the economy.

Rather than being impressed, I would expect China to build a lot of rails and roads because it's a fast-growing, underdeveloped country. The fact that they would seriously consider showy, uneconomic projects such as maglev, indicates to me a lack of judgment typical of command economies.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

And in this fine country, a pig-headed senator from Mississippi (Lott) wants to tear up CSX's line through his state and replace it with a highway (April 6 Trains News Wire).

To be fair, what a bi-partisan coalition of Gulf Coast politicians want is for CSX to shift their Gulf line farther inland, thus allowing the coastal ROW to be used for a badly needed roadway. Remember, most of the coast is now residential between the major cities, so a road makes more sense than a freight railroad at this point in time.

[Anonymous]

As for China's need for more mass transit, you have to remember that in under modern-day Chinese communism, once you are funneled into a job track, you are for the most part in that track for life. Thus, it is easier for the central planners to fit mass transportation systems into their economy without worry of low usage.

Don't forget, in the US if you are tired of working at the chemical plant after 10 years and want to follow your dream of taking up fish farming or selling insurance, or you have a yen to spend the next few years hiking around the Rockies, the only thing stopping you is you. The government cannot stop you from changing jobs or exiting the workforce for a spell.

In China, if you want to change to a different job, you have to get permission from the government overlords. And "feelings of burnout" or "following my dream" are not acceptable reasons.

[zardoz]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

As for China's need for more mass transit, you have to remember that in under modern-day Chinese communism, once you are funneled into a job track, you are for the most part in that track for life. Thus, it is easier for the central planners to fit mass transportation systems into their economy without worry of low usage.

Don't forget, in the US if you are tired of working at the chemical plant after 10 years and want to follow your dream of taking up fish farming or selling insurance, or you have a yen to spend the next few years hiking around the Rockies, the only thing stopping you is you. The government cannot stop you from changing jobs or exiting the workforce for a spell.

In China, if you want to change to a different job, you have to get permission from the government overlords. And "feelings of burnout" or "following my dream" are not acceptable reasons.

Very interesting!! I did not know that. So "job security" is a rather mixed blessing.

Regarding the highway thing: since the tracks are already in place, and if the government is already willing to build a new highway, would it not be both cheaper and easier to just build the new highway wherever it is they wanted to relocate the railroad?

[bobwilcox]

QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal

As for China's need for more mass transit, you have to remember that in under modern-day Chinese communism, once you are funneled into a job track, you are for the most part in that track for life.

The Iron Rice Bowl and other social safety net died shortly after Mao and the Gang of Four being hauled off to jail. As an example if you want health care it is cash upfront. If you don't have the ca***hats just too bad. If you want an update on China suggest you check out the profile done by The Economist within the last month.