this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
1272 points (99.3% liked)
Microblog Memes
9797 readers
1727 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Edit: Unfortunately despite everyone's bitching, including a very helpful friendly neighborhood train autist, we still have no better answers for how much it would cost with regular google providing wildly different answers, so good chance the below listed information is still correct given the relatively okay, but not robust sauce.
Per ChatGPT how much would it cost to interconnect all major cities with high speed rail in the usa:
Good question ā thereās no single authoritative number, but based on past studies and real U.S. projects we can make some rough-order estimates of what it might cost to āinterconnect all major U.S. citiesā with a true high-speed rail (HSR) network ā and the result tends to be in the hundreds of billions to low-trillions of dollars. Hereās how one might arrive at such a figure, with major caveats.
š What we know already: cost per mile is very high
So the cost per mile can vary by more than an order of magnitude ā depending on whether the rail is new vs upgraded, terrain, urban vs rural, tunneling/bridges, land acquisition cost, station infrastructure, electrification, signaling, etc.
š What āconnect all major citiesā might mean ā and how much track that could require
Estimating a U.S.-wide high-speed network depends a great deal on how one defines āmajor citiesā and the level of connectivity (hub-and-spoke? dense mesh?). But even a modest network that connects perhaps 30ā50 of the largest metropolitan areas would likely require tens of thousands of route-miles of new or upgraded track.
Past proposals give some sense of scale:
š” What a plausible ballpark cost looks like today
Because of all the variation, any large-scale estimate must come with wide error bounds. But a rough range:
Indeed, some conservative projections see ~US$1 trillion as a realistic floor for a comprehensive U.S. HSR system. (BLE-T)
ā ļø Why the uncertainty is so large ā and what could drive cost up or down
šÆ Bottom line: Itās possible ā but very expensive
If the U.S. decided to connect all major cities with a modern high-speed rail network (dedicated tracks, fast speeds, nationwide coverage), a realistic cost estimate is likely in the range of several hundred billion to over a trillion dollars (in todayās dollars).
If you like, I can run a rough āback-of-envelopeā estimate: pick, say, the 50 biggest U.S. metro areas, lay out hypothetical direct HSR connections, and compute a total cost estimate ā to show you concretely what āmajor-city-wide national HSRā might cost under different assumptions (cheap upgrades vs full build). Do you want me to build that estimate now?
Heh in true AI fashion it said a lot of words to give very little actual information, references the highest profile new rail infrastructure project but then conflates that with a proposed plan to simply add passenger trains to existing freight corridors (and of course upgrade existing infrastructure as needed in the process)
The best part is, if you wanted a realistic plan for improving North American passenger rail network all you have to do is ask your friendly neighborhood train autist and you'd get a far more informative answer than whatever the heck this is.
Hey, here's that informative answer from a friendly neighborhood train autist: the biggest barrier to passenger rail (and any actual improvements to the rail network for that matter) is the freight railroads, and the biggest thing freight railroads hate it's investing in infrastructure. If we're making talking ambitious the very first thing that needs to be done is nationalizing the entire rail network. Remove the freight railroads from the equation because they can and do quarrel with passenger service providers regularly because a freight train carrying raw materials for a factory in Albuquerque had to pull into a siding to let today's Cardinal passed (a 3 times a week train!) so take away their control so passenger trains can be correctly prioritized.
Its also worth noting railroad law is based on so many dusty old 19th century laws paid for by the Robber Barrons of the day that are somehow still on the books and painfully difficult to work through in a legal manner, so having a strong federal government ready to legally smack down the freight railroads is critical to such an endeavor.
Next, an analysis needs to be performed of what cities are currently connected to the rail network that can easily have a station opened and regain passenger service, creating many new routes on the existing rails. While those stations are being built/refurbished an order needs to be placed with a major manufacturer of rolling stock for new passenger cars. It needs to be structured to ensure enough business for the rolling stock manufacturer that they can maintain a production facility indefinitely. Make it easy for regional, local and private operators to also order rolling stock, maybe even develop 2-3 standard cars that all new passenger stock can be based on to keep things simple and cheap, occasionally refreshing the design as needed to maintain modernity
Finally, as those new passenger services over existing freight trackage are being stood up, new passenger corridors for new trackage needs to be identified so that ground can break and work can begin. Again, being federally owned rails this cuts past a ton of red tape and makes this process much easier.
With this process, most of the country can be connected to passenger service within a decade just by using existing rails and patching up the biggest barriers to passenger service. The freight railroads will kick and screen because how dare Union Pacific be expected to let BNSF or heaven forbid CPKC have any trackage rights through Moffat Tunnel for example, and all will want to hang onto their key passes and not allow any other railroad to use them to maintain their local monopolies. That's a game of politics beyond the scope of this comment. But importantly, nationalizing the network will make any blocking freight railroads try to do completely impotent, and building up a proper national passenger equipment pool will ensure the the network can run the passenger services it wants and needs to run without the limitations of finding equipment to run it
Thanks friendly neighborhood train autist!
Now going back on track... huehuehue, did you have any solid sauce on actual costs estimates? The initial google was wildly different, with anywhere from 10 million to 500 million per mile. Which to a layperson like me, seems vastly inflated, but top sources and AI was able to more or less verify, and might even be giving even lower numbers than actual.
https://www.reddit.com/r/transit/comments/hpaq1r/average_cost_per_km_of_high_speed_rail/
https://www.hsrail.org/blog/why-transit-projects-cost-more-in-the-u-s-than-almost-anywhere-else-and-what-we-can-do-about-it/
https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1mej6ix/cmv_it_is_not_cost_effective_to_biuld_high_speed/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_the_United_States