Is California High-Speed Rail Still a Long Way from Reality?

This year’s edition of Global Mobility Call took place in Madrid, Spain from 19-21 November, bringing together industry leaders to discuss the future of sustainable transport.

The event explored a range of relevant topics for mobility in and across Europe, including the liberalisation of rail networks, variances in bus fares, and increased demands for air travel.

In addition, the international conference delved into transportation issues elsewhere in the world. For example, Peter Brown, General Manager at Oceano Community Services District, presented insights into California’s transport system, including the future California High-Speed Rail (HSR) network.

California’s Transportation Landscape

During the conference, Brown highlighted the state’s success in lowering emissions from transport. However, he stressed that this is due to improved fuel efficiency and the adoption of electric vehicles, rather than a modal shift away from private cars, as the number of vehicle miles travelled (VMT) continues to grow. In fact, VMT in California has risen by 15% since 2000, while fuel consumption has seen a 6% reduction.

Meanwhile, public transit ridership across the state is yet to recover from the Covid-19 pandemic. Brown presented figures demonstrating that in Los Angeles, transit ridership has recovered to 75% of pre-Covid levels, while in San Francisco, ridership levels have only recovered by 50%. Instead, people are now remotely working or choosing to travel by car.

The Promise and Perils of High-Speed Rail

Significant investments in additional mass transit systems, such as the California High-Speed Rail network, may seem misplaced when existing systems are not yet being used to their true potential. The project was envisioned as a solution to many of the state’s mobility challenges, offering a fast, sustainable alternative to road and air travel. However, its path has been fraught with obstacles, from funding shortfalls to questions about its design and implementation.

The initial phase, a 171-mile stretch between Merced and Bakersfield, has drawn criticism for its limited reach. Brown argued that while this segment was selected as the “path of least resistance,” it lacks in population density and travel demand. This decision, while practical for early construction, has raised concerns about the project’s ability to attract riders and deliver meaningful connectivity.

What’s more, the staggering costs add to the project’s challenges. The initial segment is projected to cost 40 billion USD, with estimates for completing the entire San Francisco–Los Angeles route adding a further 100 billion USD. As a result of the current funding shortfall, Brown indicated that a high-speed network providing true connectivity in the state can not yet be delivered.

This funding issue is scaled by high costs in the US compared to high-speed networks elsewhere in the world. Brown highlighted that Spain’s 4,000 km high-speed rail network has cost 17.7 million USD per kilometre, while in California, it is costing 180 million USD per kilometre. This issue was discussed in detail by Paul Lewis, Principal at DB E.C.O. North America during a recent webinar with the High-Speed Rail Alliance. Lewis explored global best practices in the industry that could help US agencies complete projects at a lower cost and to a more efficient timeline. Arguably, current practices in the US need to be altered for future high-speed rail projects to become financially viable. As a trailblazing project for the nation, the California High-Speed Rail project thus plays a pivotal role in demonstrating relevant successes and challenges to learn from.

Meanwhile, while the public continues to favour driving, costly rail projects may be seen as an undesirable use of funding. However, it is important to note that equivalent projects to expand highways or airport runways to meet the same capacity demands can cost twice as much and deliver none of the greenhouse gas emission benefits. Indeed, in the past 20 years, the US Federal Government has spent 1.3 trillion USD on highway investment, and this figure will keep rising if the nation does not reduce its reliance on road transport, as continued car usage will increase the need for additional maintenance and capacity upgrades.

In a previous discussion, Jim Mathews, President and CEO of the National Association of Railroad Passengers, argued that this potential highlights “the cost of doing nothing”, as not pursuing high-speed rail projects would also be expensive. This approach would still require billions of dollars to be spent, with funds instead spent on augmented issues such as congestion and road fatalities, while delivering none of the benefits of rail.

Driving a Modal Shift

To maximise the impact of California’s future rail network, an integrated approach is essential. At Global Mobility Call, Brown stressed that upon completion, the California High-Speed Rail network will still bring first and last-mile travel issues for passengers connecting to and from the stations. If passengers need a car at either end of their journey, it may seem easier to simply drive the entire journey.

The high-speed rail network therefore needs to form part of a larger, integrated transport network that is attractive for passengers to use. Alongside local public transport networks, this could include services such as autonomous cars.

Indeed, during his presentation, Brown acknowledged the potential role of autonomous ride-hailing vehicles to help reduce reliance on privately owned cars. Robotaxi companies such as Waymo, which already operates in California, can provide a convenient and sustainable solution to help households shed a car, transitioning from a two-car household to a one-car household, or even a 1-car household to a car-free household, without sacrificing the flexibility of travelling by car.

Brown also highlighted that investments in existing public transport networks can play a positive role in delivering a more sustainable transportation future. For example, the Caltrain network in the San Francisco Peninsula and Santa Clara Valley has recently undergone a significant electrification programme. This transformation cost 2.44 billion USD but has removed direct emissions from Caltrain’s services. It has also improved performance and expanded network capacity, therefore taking more cars off the road.

In the first month of its electric train service, Caltrain served over 753,000 passengers, marking a 54% increase from October 2023. This success demonstrates that targeted investments in rail infrastructure can yield significant environmental and operational benefits, even in car-centric regions like California.

Overall, Brown emphasised that California’s approach to transport is progressive compared to other US states, positioning itself as a leader in sustainable practices. However, he concluded that true transportation sustainability is still a long way off, with citizens continuing to favour their own vehicles.

California’s High-Speed Rail project represents a bold step forward in sustainable transportation, facilitating a shift towards greener and more efficient mobility solutions. However, in comparison to Europe, where high-speed rail networks are extensive, cost-effective, and widely used, California has a lot of catching up to do.

While the project moves in the right direction, significant challenges remain in making it both successful and worthwhile. High construction costs, limited initial connectivity, and ongoing reliance on cars undermine its transformative potential. For HSR to become a viable and attractive alternative to private vehicles, California must address these issues by leveraging lessons from international best practices, improving integration with other modes of transport, and ensuring the system meets passenger needs.