

The Largest Infrastructure Project in History: Chinese High-Speed Rail to Europe - limist
http://cleantechnica.com/2010/03/13/china-wants-to-connect-its-high-speed-rail-to-europe-largest-infrastructure-project-in-history/

======
jacquesm
Once it's done I'll travel that thing, what a unique perspective on the world
it must be to see the landscape and the culture change like that.

It's a perspective that no airplane ride will ever give you.

~~~
stingraycharles
Well, you can already do something like that, just a little slower (which
gives you more time to appreciate the landscape changing):

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Siberian_Railway>

It essentially connects Vladivostok with Europe, going through countries like
North Korea and China, making the railway even larger than the railway
proposed in this article.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
You can do it virtually via Google:

<http://www.google.ru/intl/ru/landing/transsib/en.html>

~~~
jacquesm
We have more senses than just our eyes, but I can see how this would appeal to
people that are constrained in time and funds.

But it seems like it is no substitute for the real thing.

An item for the 'bucket list'.

------
portman
The largest PROPOSED infrastructure project in history would be the
Transatlantic Tunnel.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_tunnel>

[http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2004-04/trans-
atlantic...](http://www.popsci.com/scitech/article/2004-04/trans-atlantic-
maglev)

~~~
fnid2
I shook my head when I read this part:

    
    
      Cost: $88 billion to $175 billion
    

Why on earth hasn't this project been started yet? We spend that in a few
months in Iraq. We write checks for that and just _give_ them to AIG, GS, and
MS.

Seriously, what is going on? Why is our country like this?? When is it going
to change? Is it going to change?

Should I just move to china? Seriously. I've considered it. Or India. Or even
south america. I continue to ask myself, why do I _choose_ to live in the
U.S.? Because I was born here? Is that a good enough reason?

~~~
mseebach
Considering that none of the key technologies exist yet, I find that the cost
is very optimistic. The "øresund" bridge linking Denmark and Sweden opened in
2000 at a cost of ~5.5 bln USD. It's 15.9 km = 9.9 miles, or $555 mio/mile.
This was a successful project, using very well understood technology by people
who just finished building a similar project 150 miles away, finished roughly
on time.

A transatlantic tunnel would be 3500 miles, that's 350 times longer. Its
completely unknown technology - no-one has ever submerged a vacuum tunnel, and
no-one has build a mag-lev that actually goes 4000mph. And they're telling us
it can be done for $50 mio/mile, less than a tenth of a regular bridge? I know
it doesn't scale linearly, but I'd expect such a tunnel to be more, not less,
expensive pr. mile. At the same mile-cost as a bridge, it'd cost $1942 bln.

I did a back-of-an-envelope calculation when this came out a while ago, that
if all plane passengers from London to New York (can't remember the number
now) were to switch to such a train, tickets would have to cost an average
$10.000, one way, to cover 5% maintenance, interest and ROI.

------
CapitalistCartr
This is not a big deal as an engineering project. It's a lot of expensive
track-laying, but the obstacles are not as bad as some already conquered
elsewhere.

Politically, it's basically impossible.

~~~
fnid2
In the U.S. it'd be politically impossible, but not in other countries,
especially not in China. All the other countries have to say is "yes" and they
very likely will because it'll be cheaper to transport goods and people
between their markets. The Eurail pass will take you nearly anywhere you want
to go in Europe for 6 months and $2k. They love trains.

This project and this vision is another nail in the U.S. hegemony coffin.

~~~
heresy
It would be possible in the U.S. because the U.S. does not think long term any
more.

Everything is short term, and a failure if not successful within a very
tightly compressed timeframe.

There is no vision or ambition in the U.S. any more when it comes to
infrastructural projects like this.

~~~
olefoo
And that is one of the most worrisome aspects of modern american political
culture. What happened to the country that put a man on the moon, that built
the interstate freeway system, that made universal telephone and electric
service available from sea to sea?

None of those projects could be done today, they require planning horizons of
ten years or longer and even if the vision were there would become mired in
petty politics and shortsighted penny-wise pound-foolishness.

Done right infrastructure projects create far more economic value than they
cost over their lifetime.

~~~
fnid2
Those projects were all before the invasion of the Military Industrial Complex
Eisenhower prophetically warned us about. Plus, stocks are traded by
households now and are focused on quarterly earnings. Prior to the 50's that
was only true just before the great depression and look where we are now...

------
limist
Wow, didn't expect such interest from HN. Seems everyone loves trains. :)

Tangentially, what is it about trains anyway? Seems to me they hit the natural
sweet-spot of "comprehensible speed" or speed at a near-human scale: not so
fast and distant as to be alien like jets, but fast enough to be interesting.
Oh, and stress-free compared to driving.

~~~
fnid2
Have you traveled on trains? It's so much nicer than planes. No security
check, no long waits, no cattle herding.

Plus, they are more efficient. They are transportation of the future. The
world is going to be going backwards in time as energy becomes more expensive.
This means leaving planes and going to trains and wind powered ships. It's
already happening.

Plus, it is a national recognition that long term thinking is beneficial.
China in this case is a visionary example for the world. I hope the U.S. wakes
up soon.

~~~
yosh
> No security check, no long waits, no cattle herding.

Not all trains. With Eurostar (Paris<->London) there's a security checkpoint
with an x-ray and metal detector, along with passport control.

~~~
illumen
yeah, and in china all trains have such checks - but no passport control.

However, the eurostar is nicer compared to many airports. Airports are
shopping centers, where they want people to stay and buy things. The longer
you stay at airports the more you spend. That is an incentive to have you at
airports longer. Whereas many train stations do not have that set-up (although
that is changing!). The eurostar used to be easier, because the station at the
london end did not have a long way to walk past lots of shops. Now, at the new
station there are lots of shops to walk past before you can leave. Still quite
nice though in comparison to flying out of gatwick on easy jet ;)

I love trains. Been on them from 30 hour trips across Australia, to the bullet
trains in Japan, ones across Germany, France, the Netherlands, China and ones
across the UK. Always wanted to do some long trips across china, russia and
india... guess I better hurry up before those trains are replaced!

It will be great when the fast networks of europe are joined to the fast
networks of asia.

------
fbu
Any map so far ? They have to go through Iran, Russia or a myriad of ex-ussr
countries, I can't see how that's gonna work out ...

~~~
gn
I've personally been to Iran, Russia, and a handful of other ex-USSR
countries, and I can't see any real obstacles here. Even those countries in
this region that suck at stable government tend to be fairly good at reliable
infrastructure; California-style rolling brownouts or Manhattan-type shitty
metro cars would be more or less unthinkable here. I'm pretty certain people
and politicians alike are ready to embrace this project. In the former Soviet
block and in the Middle East alike, especially in Turkey, rail networks still
symbolize progress and prosperity like nothing else.

~~~
mseebach
One word: Visas. As it now, you need a transit-visa just to change planes in
Moscow. Travelling through, what, 11 countries, each one insisting on
confirming the identity of each person entering the country and making sure
they exit again? The alternative is sealing people inside the cars, which is
what they do on the Kaliningrad-Moscow train that passes through Lithuania and
Belarus, but that's logistically problematic, when there are stops in more
than two countries.

There are _very_ real political problems to this, and while some of them can
be resolved easily, I'd like to remind people that the TGV rail system in
France is frequently brought to a halt by protesting farmers who park a
tractor on the track. And that's just _one_ country (two if you ask the angry
farmers - Paris and the 'real people').

~~~
gn
You do have a point there; trains are a lot easier to stop than planes or
ships and the visa thing can be a pain here, even with a very good passport.
Consider, however, that most countries in this region have a +lot+ of
experience with commercial land passenger vehicles going across multiple
borders.

I'm in Sofia, Bulgaria right now. There is a daily direct bus connection from
here to Tehran. It does take 48 hours but it's safe, it's clean, and it gets
me there.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, yes, there will be problems and setbacks,
but more likely than not they will find a way eventually.

------
drats
"Its main connection to Europe would likely go through India, Pakistan and the
Middle East. Although, exact routes are not yet determined."

Can anyone say "IED derailment at 200kph+"?

~~~
fnid2
Wow, why all the negativity? This is an awesome project and lots of rational
reasons it should go through, but you and other commenters are being so
irrationally negative. People in the old days said, "International plane
flights will never work. People won't trust flying over the ocean."

This project will happen. It's inevitable. It's the only way people will be
able to move between countries when planes are too expensive to fuel.

~~~
drats
It's not negativity, it's a dream that I hope one day will be established;
people living in peace and traveling to each others countries to learn and
trade, enriching and improving each other's lives.

I am being a realist, there are terrorist attacks almost daily in some ME
countries and Pakistan. A train packed with tourists and businesspeople is
pretty much the same target value to a terrorist as a plane, except you can
attack it from the outside much more easily. The prevalence of IEDs and people
willing to use them, highly mobile suicide car bombs and the doctrine of
certain radical Muslims which allows for moral permissibility of killing
fellow Muslims who are "dealing with the enemy" (strains of Wahhabi and
Qutbism thinking like Bin Laden's) would make such an attack inevitable.

This "negative" attitude of mine is part of the economic damage that is done
to the moderate Muslims of these countries by the extremists. How many
tourists have decided not to take a trip to many of these countries? How many
businesses haven't been set up? How many skilled workers have fled? It's a
massive economic damage these people are inflicting beyond the scope of their
deplorable murders.

~~~
bh23ha
I think the terrorism threat is overblown. This is going to sound horrible but
very few people are killed by terrorists compared to pretty much every other
cause of death.

And a lot of the discourse in countries like Pakistan is not pure terrorism
but actually the deeper struggles of any authoritarian regime.

Call me a dreamer but I really do hope and think this will happen.

~~~
Qz
Thank you for saying that. I say the same thing all the time on various
websites -- I mean I wouldn't be surprised if you're more likely to be struck
by lightning than killed in a terrorist accident. I'm more afraid of getting
on the highway.

~~~
techiferous
Fear sells news and news is as much about money as it is journalism.

~~~
Qz
I realize the news agencies will spout that kind of stuff, but the commenters
don't have to go along with it.

------
thingie
Hm, this doesn't really seems to be an attempt to divert passenger traffic
from using the planes to some cross-continental HSR. On the other hand, it'd
allow China to export much much more goods and much much faster than nowadays
with ships [1]. And of course, it would also very much strengthen China's
influence in the Middle east and around, as in this area, HSR travel times
would be very interesting and provide (in comparison) wonderful connection
with China.

You wouldn't travel from China to Europe by train even with this, of course. I
wonder what would the Russian response be, as they are quite expected to
maintain their strong influence in this region, and this isn't exactly going
to support that.

[1] This is already being done, in a rather small scale.

------
sman
Hard to make it happen politically. India tried something similar, to get gas
from Iran in a pipeline.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Pakistan%E2%80%93I...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Pakistan%E2%80%93India_gas_pipeline)
The project has been gestating for the last 20 years with no real movement in
the progress meter. And similar to what happened with the pipeline, I expect
the US to spring roadblocks all over the place. Even if it cannot convince
every country, it will convince enough to ensure gaps in the rail line
undermining its usefulness.

~~~
fnid2
_In January 2010, the United States asked Pakistan to ... abandon its plan ...
in order to isolate Iran._

What is an American to think of this? Am I suppose to like it because I'm an
American or despise it because it is holding up a better life for humanity?

~~~
Qz
Nationalism is overrated, so I vote for despise it.

------
zol
With China's minimum wage being around US 60c an hour (<http://bit.ly/6mDBYz>)
they are in a much better position to undertake such a labour intensive job as
the West.

It is a smart move to receive payment in the form of natural resources as some
of the countries involved in the network are economically poor but resource
rich. It is likely the countries participating will end up paying a lot more
in resources than they would have in cash.

It's my opinion that people are mistaken when viewing the proposal in terms of
personal transport. It's not. It's a system designed to fuel China's growing
demand for resources, which cannot be transported via air. In the other
direction will come a high speed flow of manufactured goods.

~~~
erikstarck
For that kind of project it would make sense to develop robotics and other
technology that could lower the cost dramatically.

Also, you can't just take the minimum wage from China and multiply with the
number of workers, there are many costs added to having that many people in
different countries. Food and housing in Germany, for example, are expensive.

------
ojbyrne
A trans-North America high speed rail route would be pretty cool. This seems
analogous to the way sputnik ignited the space race.

~~~
chancho
Except that sputnik was a proxy for a nuclear weapon. "Look what we can put up
above your heads, and there's not a thing you can do about it." High-speed
rail doesn't have the same overtones.

Also, connecting 1.5 billion to 700 million is a lot more lucrative than
connecting, what, 150 million to 50 million? Nevermind the fact that there are
existing high-speed networks to connect with in Europe and China. What a
fucking bummer it would be to take a 6 hour train trip from NY to LA then a 6
hour bus from LA to SF.

~~~
Xichekolas
To get from NY to LA in 6 hours would require a train that averages 410mph.

This is exactly the type of route that trains will not take from planes any
time soon. The fastest train in the world is China's maglev that does almost
270mph.

But a trip from LA to SF, or St. Louis to Chicago, or NY to DC, or between any
major city in Texas and any other one... that is the kind of route that rail
would excel at, provided we had the motivation to build it.

All that said, I don't see the motivation to take a two day train trip from
China to London when you could fly it in much less time. I understand the
comfort factors and all, but when you are talking that length of time, I think
the customer demand is going to be very limited (unless it's significantly
cheaper than airfare).

------
martythemaniak
With all the flack airlines and air transport is getting now because of
climate change, maybe China can try and sell this is action on that front?
Trains are more efficient than airplanes, are they not? (not a rhetorical
question)

Even so, I doubt this will happen in 10 years.

------
danw
Any mention of what the route would be? And what's the anticipated travel time
from London to China?

~~~
limist
From the article:

"...China’s new goal is to continue on with a HSR revolution internationally
in order to create two-day HSR trip times between Beijing and London."

~~~
waterlesscloud
A 48 hr trip would have to average just over 100mph. Maybe, if it's got some
pretty limited stops.

~~~
noilly
London to Beijing takes about 9-10 days as of right now. You could easily get
that to 5-7 days if you cut out stops (especially between Moscow and Beijing)
and if you tripled the average speed of the trains from ~30-40 mph to 90-120
mph... there you go, although the latter part is what requires so much money
and engineering.

