View Single Post
  #106  
Old 02-13-2019, 12:48 PM
k9bfriender is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddleglum View Post
That seems crazily optimistic for the cost. The Silver Line in the DC metro completed an extension several years ago at a cost of 300 million per mile. The second avenue subway project in NYC is projected to cost 2.5 billion per mile. The 82 million per mile in California comes from a time when they were projecting the total cost at only 33 billion instead of the 90 billion dollar total cost of the last estimate. That would mean a 240 million per mile cost.
You are comparing underground subways to overground rail lines. And you are comparing these through very, very dense urban areas to the comparatively wide open expanses between cities in California.

The most recent estimate for this project that I see claims 82 per mile, do you have a more recent cite?
Quote:
Some might say that the California cost is inflated because of the mountains but the land cost in the east coast would likely be much higher because the population density in the east coast is much higher. High speed rail would need to purchase land in the most expensive part of the country or go underground in an area where tunnel diggers make over $100 per hour. I think a better estimate of the NYC to LA line would be at least a trillion dollars.
Most of that span is across very open and flat areas, can even co-locate right next to existing rail lines for easier infrastructure for much of the way.