Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (857777)	5/17/2015 11:46:39 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574616

Which is faster? 1 hour travel time to SFO, 1 hour for check in, 1 hour delay, one hour flight to LAX, and 1 hour to LA, or 3 hours downtown to downtown by rail?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (857777)	5/17/2015 11:58:37 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574616

Or $20M/mile less. "Extremely unlikely" is putting it way too mildly. Actually your source isn't even claiming that. Its taking the price for a specific 7 mile section in LA. That's going to be much higher than the cost to build lanes in the less congested spaces between LA and SF, which would probably be under a quarter as expensive, possibly a tenth (in a lower cost area than CA less than a tenth). Also even that $228m per mile is likely to cost less than the cost of HSR in CA. The current estimate is several years old, a new estimate now would be higher, and the actual cost to build higher yet (perhaps multiple of the current estimate). - See costs for Arkansas - Six lane freeway in an urban area cost per mile $12,750,000. arkansashighways.com Sure CA will be more expensive, but most of the route isn't urban which will bring the cost down. Going from two to five lanes for an existing highway was about $4mil per mile. Even if its going to cost 5 times as much in CA that's $20mil per mile, not $228mil.