transportation

New California High Speed Rail Exaggeration

Wendell Cox — Fri, 05 Dec 2025 22:47:31 -0500

The just released Environmental Impact Statement for the California High Speed Rail Phase I Los Angeles to Anaheim segment assumes a population of 44 million in 2049. In fact, the official state population projection, produced by the California Department of Finance (DOF) is just 40,800,000, according to September 30, 2025 data. Moreover, by 2070, the state is projected by DOF to have a population of 39.5 million residents, virtually the same as reported in the 2020 US census.

For decades, high speed rail aficionados have been claiming that it is necessary to handle California’s population growth. There is none. What decade are they living in?

There is a considerable body of literature documenting the overly optimistic ridership projections associated with high speed rail. There are also the cost overruns, which California and the United Kingdom (the HS2 project) seem to be trying to outspend one another, with little hope of ever completing extensions to Sacramento, Riverside-San Bernardino and San Diego (much less San Francisco, Los Angeles and Anaheim). Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield have similarly been put on the “back burner.”

When the wrong numbers are used, it is not surprising when projects fail to deliver on their advertised performance. The California High Speed Rail line has been on this track for some time.

Train derailment through the wall at Paris Montparnasse Station, 1897.

Wendell Cox is principal of Demographia, an international public policy firm located in the St. Louis metropolitan area. He is a Senior Fellow with Unleash Prosperity in Washington and the Frontier Centre for Public Policy in Winnipeg and a member of the Advisory Board of the Center for Demographics and Policy at Chapman University in Orange, California. He has served as a visiting professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers in Paris. His principal interests are economics, poverty alleviation, demographics, urban policy and transport. He is author of the annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey and author of Demographia World Urban Areas.

Mayor Tom Bradley appointed him to three terms on the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (1977-1985), which was a predecessor agency to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich appointed him to the Amtrak Reform Council, to complete the unexpired term of New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman (1999-2002). He is author of War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life and Toward More Prosperous Cities: A Framing Essay on Urban Areas, Transport, Planning and the Dimensions of Sustainability.

Newsom, the Legislature, and $20 Billion for Doubtful High-speed Rail

Wendell Cox — Mon, 15 Sep 2025 12:04:26 -0400

It is reported that California governor Gavin Newsom and the state legislature have agreed to provide $20 billion in funding ($1 billion annually) from the state’s cap and trade program. The California High Speed Rail Authority indicates that the total cost of the Gilroy to Palmdale segment would be $87 billion and would be completed by 2038.

There is still a considerable funding gap for the Gilroy to Merced (or Madera) segment. This portion of the route includes expensive tunneling through Pacheco Pass. Then there is the Bakersfield to Palmdale segment over Tehachapi Pass which is probably even more challenging.

If the present plan works out (and no one would be more surprised at that than me), a passenger getting on the train in San Francisco might wait up to three hours for the last part of the trip to Los Angeles. Of course, CHSRA could substitute bus connection service for anything they don’t finish, like the Amtrak San Joaquin’s do already on the Bakersfield to Los Angeles segment.

CHSRA indicated that this agreement “resolves all identified funding gaps for the Early Operating Segment (Merced to Palmdale).” I doubt it. The scaled back project could take many more years and many billions more.

Work Access: Major Metropolitan Areas: 2023

Wendell Cox — Tue, 08 Oct 2024 17:50:51 -0400

The latest work access data (journey to work and work at home) has been released. In 2023, transit commuting remained 30% below its 2019 pre-pandemic level, at 3.5%. This is an improvement from 3.1% in 2022. Driving alone was also below the pre-pandemic level, at 69.2%, compared to 75.9%. This was largely the result of the hybrid work revolution, which drove the work from home level to 13.8%, up more than 240% from the pre-pandemic level. The 2023 figure is below the 15.2% level of 2022.

The strongest transit markets were New York, at 23.8% of commuters. No other major transit market exceeded a 10% market share. Before the pandemic, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston, Washington and Seattle typically exceeded 10% shares.

Some transit markets in which there were major capital expenditures for rail systems now have shares of 1.0% or less, including Austin, Charlotte, Dallas-Fort Worth and Virginia Beach-Norfolk.

The table below shows data for the 56 major metropolitan areas and national data.

Wendell Cox is principal of Demographia, an international public policy firm located in the St. Louis metropolitan area. He is a Senior Fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy in Winnipeg and a member of the Advisory Board of the Center for Demographics and Policy at Chapman University in Orange, California. He has served as a visiting professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers in Paris. His principal interests are economics, poverty alleviation, demographics, urban policy and transport. He is co-author of the annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey and author of Demographia World Urban Areas.

Mayor Tom Bradley appointed him to three terms on the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (1977-1985) and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich appointed him to the Amtrak Reform Council, to complete the unexpired term of New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman (1999-2002). He is author of War on the Dream: How Anti-Sprawl Policy Threatens the Quality of Life and Toward More Prosperous Cities: A Framing Essay on Urban Areas, Transport, Planning and the Dimensions of Sustainability.

Feudal Future Podcast: The Future of Cars — Hybrid and Electric Insights

Joel Kotkin and Marshall Toplansky — Fri, 19 Jul 2024 19:27:55 -0400

Can electric vehicle mandates really deliver the green future we’re promised, or are we speeding towards unintended roadblocks? Join us as we dissect the real implications of EV adoption with our insightful guests, Jamie Farley from Performance Brokerage Services and Mark Mills from the National Center for Energy Analytics. Jamie reveals the surprising disconnect between the fast-paced push for EVs and the actual consumer demand, while Mark digs into the physical and material hurdles that make this transition more challenging than it appears.

Listen on Apple Podcast
More podcast episodes & show notes at JoelKotkin.com

Watch this Episode

Support Our Work

The Center for Demographics and Policy focuses on research and analysis of global, national, and regional demographic trends and explores policies that might produce favorable demographic results over time. It involves Chapman students in demographic research under the supervision of the Center’s senior staff.

Students work with the Center’s director and engage in research that will serve them well as they look to develop their careers in business, the social sciences, and the arts. Students also have access to our advisory board, which includes distinguished Chapman faculty and major demographic scholars from across the country and the world.

For additional information, please contact Mahnaz Asghari, sponsored project analyst for the Office of Research, at (714) 744-7635 or asghari@chapman.edu.

Tweet thoughts: @joelkotkin, @mtoplansky, #FeudalFuture #BeyondFeudalism

Learn more about Joel’s book ‘The Coming of Neo-Feudalism‘

This show is presented by the Chapman Center for Demographics and Policy, which focuses on research and analysis of global, national and regional demographic trends and explores policies that might produce favorable demographic results over time.

No Parking Downtown Austin Apartment Building Foreclosure due to Insufficient Demand

Wendell Cox — Thu, 12 Oct 2023 19:58:45 -0400

According to Urbanize Austin:

“An apartment complex marketed to middle-income downtown workers, especially those interested in reducing or eliminating their personal vehicle use, has been repossessed. Capitol Quarters was returned to its lender due to a low occupancy rate that made it unsustainable, developer Weaver Buildings announced this week. The property at 1108 Nueces Street underwent a deed-in-lieu transfer to North Carolina's Churchill Real Estate Holdings.”

Wendell Cox is principal of Demographia, an international public policy firm located in the St. Louis metropolitan area. He is a founding senior fellow at the Urban Reform Institute, Houston, a Senior Fellow with the Frontier Centre for Public Policy in Winnipeg and a member of the Advisory Board of the Center for Demographics and Policy at Chapman University in Orange, California. He has served as a visiting professor at the Conservatoire National des Arts et Metiers in Paris. His principal interests are economics, poverty alleviation, demographics, urban policy and transport. He is co-author of the annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey and author of Demographia World Urban Areas.

California High Speed Rail Greatest Infrastructure Failure in US History: Hoover Institution Economist

Wendell Cox — Mon, 13 Mar 2023 20:15:55 -0400

In “California’s High-Speed Rail Was A Fantasy From Its Inception,” economist Lee Ohanion says that: “California’s HSR is perhaps the greatest infrastructure failure in the history of the country. And the reason it failed is because of a gross failure of state governance, one on such a grand scale that it is nothing short of a betrayal of Californians.”

Ohanion notes that the cost of the present Bakersfield to Merced line, for which the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) does not even have the money, is already more costly that the original projections for the 800-mile system, which was to connect San Diego, Los Angeles, the Bay Area and Sacramento. This 170-mile stub is on the flat land in the middle of the San Joaquin Valley, by far the easiest portion of the system to build. CHSRA hasn’t turned the first shovel on the Pacheco Pass tunnel, the Tehachapi or the San Gabriel Mountains tunnel that would be required just to complete the San Francisco to Los Angeles segment. The San Diego and Sacramento extensions have barely been mentioned for years.

Ohanion concludes:

“There is no path to completion for the fantasy rail system that was falsely sold to voters 15 years ago. Finishing the Bakersfield-Merced route, which will cost in excess of $35 billion, and which won’t be operative for ten years, doesn’t come close to penciling out. The only reasonable decision is to end a project that should never have begun.”

My former colleague on the Amtrak Reform Council, Joseph Vranich and I authored reports on the California High Speed Rail Line, including The California High Speed Rail Proposal: A Due Diligence Report, California High Speed Rail: An Updated Due Diligence Report, and with Adrian Moore California High Speed Rail Project Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions: A Dynamic Impact and Cost Analysis.

New Toronto to London (ON) Train Ridership Half that of a Bus

Wendell Cox — Tue, 07 Dec 2021 16:32:33 -0500

The Toronto Star reports that the new Toronto to London, Ontario “GO” Transit commuter train is carrying far fewer passengers than the average transit bus. (see: GO’s new London-Toronto train is moving fewer passengers than a half-full TTC bus). During the week of November 15, ticket sales were only 32 per scheduled train.

The service, according to the Star, is operated with trains with six cars each, with a capacity of 162 passengers. This means is operating at three percent of capacity (that assumes all riders travel the entire distance from London to Union Station in downtown Toronto).

According to The Star, the GO trip takes nearly four hours each way between Toronto and London. VIA Rail, Canada, the national passenger rail system operates services between the two terminals in 2:10.

Metrolinx, which operates the GO train system across the Greater Golden Horseshoe, indicates that ridership remains about 75% less than normal, due to the pandemic. Even if the new London service were to attract four times the ridership (which returning to normal would accomplish over the entire network), less than 15% of the capacity would be utilized. This is a patronage level that could be easily handled by a few buses, which would also permit provision of trips throughout the day.

On the assumption that the public purpose of this service is serving people, the least expensive option should be provided --- that which attracts the highest number of passengers for the least cost. It is inconceivable that this could involve six car trains, and not even one-car trains.

This is not intended to criticize Metrolinx or GO trains, since similar decisions have been made by governments and transit operators virtually around the world, favoring trains, regardless of the cost. There are obviously places where rail transit is justified, but regrettably, not in many of the places it has been built in recent decades. The result has been to provide considerably less transit service and fewer rides than would have been the case if more efficient alternatives were adopted --- and alternatives that are time competitive with the car.

The University of Toronto’s Professor Shoshanna Saxe “hit the nail on the head,” noting “It’s very hard to attract people to transit when it’s slower than driving,” The problem not limited to the London to Toronto service. For example, international research found that within the Toronto CMA, cars provide 4.5 times the 30-minute job access as transit, despite the fact that it is hard to find a better transit system in North America.

Employment access should be the principal driver of transit policy, with emphasis on obtaining the largest increases among lower-income households that have less automobile access. That would lead to less poverty, an improved economy and more jobs.

The issue is not cars, trains or buses, it is outcomes for people. Transit’s potential can only be achieved if available resources are committed to maximizing ridership, especially to work, which is the most important trip.

Note: As a matter of interest, Metrolinx made a pre-pandemic-pandemic map of ridership by train line available (April to September 2020).

Ontario Premier Doug Ford Supports New Highway

Wendell Cox — Thu, 11 Nov 2021 11:56:59 -0500

Ontario’s premier Doug Ford indicated strong support for the new 60 kilometer (more than 35 miles) Highway 413 across the northwest suburbs of metropolitan Toronto. The highway would connect Vaughn, in York region with Milton, connective with Highway 401 west of Toronto International Airport. Highway 401, the MacDonald Cartier Freeway is one of the world’s busiest and widest highway, especially as it traverses within the northern city limits of Toronto, with from 12 to 14 lanes (see map at Toronto CTV News).

According to the Toronto Star, Ford “dismissed critics as downtown Toronto ideologues.” Ford told the Star: ““Just sitting there and telling people, ‘hop on your bicycle or get behind a horse and buggy and start driving,’ it doesn’t cut it.” The premier added “That’s the ideology of a lot of people that are from downtown Toronto making their comments about up here.”

California High Speed Rail: More Cost Overruns & Delays? (Los Angeles Times)

Wendell Cox — Mon, 11 Oct 2021 11:21:33 -0400

According to Los Angeles Times reporter Ralph Vartabedian (see: Cost overruns hit California bullet train again amid a new financial crunch, October 8), the troubled California high speed rail system could face additional cost overruns. According to Vartabedian, “The California bullet train is facing at least another billion dollars of proposed cost increases from its contractors, following a history of sharp cost growth on construction work over the last eight years, The Times has learned.”

The already much delayed start of service could be delayed further: “The current plan would start train operations by 2030, but officials working on the project say privately that it appears difficult, if not impossible, to meet that timetable.” At the time of the 2008, when voters approved Proposition 1-A to authorize $10 billion in bonds, the Los Angeles (Anaheim) to San Francisco (Transbay Terminal) line was to have cost $33 billion and entire route was to have opened in 2020. Current cost estimates are in the area of $100 billion, though that is after scaling the project back significantly and sharing conventional commuter rail tracks in the Los Angeles and San Francisco metropolitan areas.

Joseph Vranich and I authored a report on the system in 2008 (see: The California High Speed Rail Project: A Due Diligence Report). In that report we projected cost overruns of 30% to 60% for the entire system, which was to have included spurs to Sacramento and San Diego. Our projections were embarrassingly low, with the much more modest system now likely to cost more than the full promised system with its Sacramento and San Diego branches, little of which appears likely to be opened even 10 years late.

High-speed rail advocates tout a 0.008% reduction in pollution

Todd Myers — Tue, 28 Sep 2021 16:14:20 -0400

A recent op-ed in The Seattle Times written by transit activists claims a high-speed railroad from Portland to Vancouver B.C. would reduce air pollution. Although the piece doesn’t provide a source, it claims the project would “prevent 960 metric tons of harmful pollutants such as particulate matter and carbon monoxide from entering our atmosphere over the first 40 years of operation.”

Although that sounds like a lot, it is an absolutely minuscule amount. It shows how high-speed rail advocates must grasp at arguments to justify the tens of billions of dollars the project would cost to build.

The authors didn’t cite a study, but mentioned two particular pollutants: particulate matter and carbon monoxide (not carbon dioxide which is a greenhouse gas). They claim a reduction of 960 metric tons of pollutants over 40 years, which amounts to 24 metric tons a year.

How much is that? About 0.0008% of the state’s annual particulate matter and carbon monoxide emissions.

Rail-based transit yields infinitesimal environmental benefits despite the massive cost. Advocates throw in the numbers, and multiply them by 40 years, in the hopes that people won’t check to see if they are meaningful.

This is a consistent pattern from transit activists.

In 2015, members of Sound Transit’s board justified spending billions on extending light rail to Lynwood saying it would reduce CO2 emissions. As we noted at the time, the same amount of emissions could be reduced for about $1 million a year - far less than the cost of constructing, let alone operating, the light rail extension.

The following year transit activist Shefali Ranganathan and the Transportation Choices Coalition implied the third phase of Sound Transit (ST3) would reduce 793,000 metric tons of CO2 annually. The real number was much smaller - only about 130,000 MT. After initially denying it, they were forced to add a footnote to an e-mail (an odd way to correct the record) acknowledging they were misleading.

Transit and environmental activists like to claim their projects will help reduce pollution. A look at the data shows that environmental benefits are little more than marketing afterthoughts, rather than sincere efforts at environmental policy.

This piece first appeared at Washington Policy Center.

Todd Myers is the Director of the Center for the Environment at Washington Policy Center. He is one of the nation's leading experts on free-market environmental policy. Todd is the author of the landmark 2011 book Eco-Fads: How the Rise of Trendy Environmentalism Is Harming the Environment and was a Wall Street Journal Expert Panelist for energy and the environment.