Governor Moonbeam's hobby train, the Brown Streak, is a particular fascination of mine. It doesn't work from any angle: not financing, transportation, best alternative; nothing.
And yet, we're committed to it. $68 billion is about 1/3 the cost, if ever. Look around the country - Boston's Big Dig, Seattle's Alaskan Way Viaduct - the estimates to get the projects approved were classic bait-and-switch. Same with the High Speed/Low Speed Rail. They haven't figured out how to go 220 mph through the Tejon Pass yet. And they don't have a schedule for tunneling through the fracture zones in California's ever-moving geology. Property condemnation litigation alone will hold it up for 15 to 20 years.
If Brown wants a legacy project, this ain't the one.

And of course we ignore things like 4K video conferencing - and other things that mean that for administrative jobs, we really, really, really do not have to drive in to work, other than to satisfy some middle-level functionary he has power over someone.

As Canvasback said AVs don't change the numbers on the Brown Streak. Just like the expensive bus terminal in NY these projects are pure vanity and embezzlement. They are meant to transfer money from the government to specific individuals. And they are somewhat efficient at accomplishing that goal. Autonomous vehicles don't change that.

They are meant to transfer money from the government to specific individuals.

Mostly labor unions.

So they can contribute back to certain politicians campaigns.

But don't call that corruption or money laundering.

Yes, AVs will change much. What they won't change is the
unfavorable amount of energy usage per passenger mile compared to
the train. They also won't cure traffic jams.

In the Northeast corridor (Boston - DC), trains remain popular
despite the fact that buses for the same route are cheaper.

A balanced report should have at least mentioned these points.

84 mpg, very low price:

http://www.eliomotors.com

I suspect energy use will be another thing that will change.

They probably don't have to carry liability insurance in Nepal...

As for traffic jams in the age of autonomous vehicles. And that's just for an intersection. I can imagine that AVs transiting a freeway will have no, nada, zero snarls. Unless someone hacks the system, in which case it'll be pandalirium!

Also, all trains require subsidies, even in high-density locations in Europe, Japan or the NE corridor.

Also, for the $68 billion that the Brown Streak is guaranteed to take - don't forget to factor in inflation, cost over runs, oh, and new construction and engineering techniques needed contend with the fracture zones.

I think when all is said and done, the Brown Streak will come in at a cool $250 billion. Which will give the unscrupulous plenty of opportunities for graft.

One difference that I see seldom addressed...
The move to cars, was individuals making a market based decision. NOT a govt. Mandate, no tax kickbacks, etc.
It is not clear to me that AV will be that.
I don't wish to personally own one, as I like to drive.
But, currently the main issues with AV crashes, is the other car, and it's human driver. People are somewhat unpredictable. But other people are often not too bad at anticipating the behavior... so in the millions of miles travelled per day, it isn't really chaos.

OTOH... the easiest way to make sure that there aren't AV/non-AV car accidents, is either to build separate roads, or more likely... simply to ban individually driven cars.
Because: "safety, insurance rates, and you are evil if you don't conform."
It will happen.
Many people will gladly give up their autonomy, because they don't like to drive anyway. They won't care that yet ANOTHER entity will know every movement they make.

If you've never seen this happen before, it works like this. Large Corp. Has 20 separate business units, all of them with their own systems, health ins., email systems, and compensation packages. One day in an effort to streamline operations, they decide to consolidate all. It takes some years, but since the powers that be want it, everything becomes one.
And suddenly, the insurance that used to be part of your compensation pkg. is now something you pay extra for, perks have gone away, and you move from a shared office, to a cubfarm.
Things in the public sector can also work that way. New laws are very difficult to roll back... especially when the PTB are invested in taking your ability to choose away.

On the road trucks, and no need to train drivers... it's a load of horsehockey. If anything the training will increase. The autonomous may take the boring job of driving I80 for 1500 miles... but once you get to Chicago... an individual will have to drive that last mile, and put it in a dock in a 100 year old building never designed for a 53' trailer. Or control the truck as you are winched into position in the gas fields of The Navajo Nation, with a load of gas pipe. Every variable you can imagine comes into play in that last mile. In my mis-spent youth, I drove many of them. Even in the multi modal world (ship/train/truck) that last part is done by truck, because of the size of the load going to one store. It's not near a railhead.

Finally, Raddy's assertion of working from home is a good point. I wonder what # of esp. IT people could work from home, instantaneously removing those people from driving to work every day. This idea has very few opportunity costs in comparison. The housing market in SanFransisco is ugly... but most of those people could work from somewhere else, say Reno, or Gila Bend, and it wouldn't be an issue. In this the titans of Silicon Valley are abject failures, because of their need to control their employees.

I take it you don't know much about the brown streak Ron. It is a classic government boondoggle. If I recall correctly even the government's numbers show it would be faster and cheaper for it's passengers to fly than to take this train. Being against it is no more anti-train than being against the bridge to nowhere is anti-car or anti-bridge.

And while I'm all for trains (I'm eagerly anticipating the light rail link between Dallas and Houston) it is time to separate Amtrak from the federal government. Outside of the NE Amtrak is slow, expensive, and wasteful. It is faster to hitchhike and cheaper to fly from Dallas to Oklahoma City. There is no reason for midwest states to fund this service. I fully recognize the benefits Amtrak brings to the NE states. And since you are the only ones getting any benefit from them you guys should be the only ones paying for it.

Governor Moonbeam's hobby train, the Brown Streak, is a particular fascination of mine.

That one's getting around. A caller into the local talk radio station dubbed it that on Friday morning, referencing Silver Streak.

Never trust a government cost estimate. The Bay Bridge was promised to cost $1.1 million (only about $500K over retrofitting the original bridge, so the government decided to go for it). Currently, it's actual cost is estimated at $12-13 billion (when financing is included) and it's survivability in an earthquake is in doubt (the whole reason for replacing the old bridge was earthquake survivability).

This kind of shift is why transportation infrastructure should ultimately be left up to the private sector, which can respond most nimbly -- when it's not in bed with government -- to the demands created by changes in how we get around.

A good start would be the Transportation Freedom act, which knocks the federal gas tax down to 3.7 cents per gallon and leaves most transportation decisions to the states. But of course, that would make too much sense for big government advocates to follow.

What commenters like Canvasback seem to forget is that it wasn't Jerry Brown that foisted this boondoggle upon the citizens of California. Rather it was the citizens of California that foisted it upon themselves through the initiative process. And when their taxes go up to pay for it all I can do is recall what my niece used to love to say:

Oh well, too bad, so sad, sucks to be you.

I don't know much about the particular train. I generally like trains. I recently took the train home from my parent's home...actual time just over 5 hours....cost 25.50. Estimated time flying would be around 7 hours. (if I could have timed it better with local bus service I could 30 minutes off of both those). I think that does highlight one of the problems...almost half my travel time is just getting to the station or airport. And there is no good overnight parking near the train station. Taking a cab is around $60. And travel time can become a problem. I liked so I check another trip I was looking at...only 1 train a day and I leave at 2:30pm and get in 7am. Round trip is only $50 but if I a seat that makes into a bed that is $600 (that is a mini-room good for up 2 people).

I don't see telecommuting taking off...were I am working I see them (sorta) moving away from it. I got to a main office every work day but the rest of my team is other main offices. Frankly it just does not work well. Maybe it would be better if we were all remote. RIght now about 75% of the people are in one location and the learn about stuff over the cubical wall where us remotes don't. In virtual meetings you don't tend to get the energy going that you do all in one room around a white board. I don't see this changing for quite some time.

Ben: "... these projects are pure vanity and embezzlement. They are meant to transfer money from the government to specific individuals... Autonomous vehicles don't change that."

That's exactly right. If, as the LA times says, autonomous vehicles "are just around the corner", that only increases the urgency of politicians, contractors and labor unions to get the project started.

"transportation infrastructure should ultimately be left up to the private sector"

LOL that is hilarious!

I really won't be holding my breath about "AVs" becoming the norm in my lifetime (I'm 42). Sure, technically they're possible, but you just wait.. the first time there's an accident that can be shown to be even partially due to a coding bug or failure in said AV and the company will be sued out of business. The way lawyers work and the massively sue-happy way we've become will simply make the liability far too costly, I think. I seriously doubt we'd have been able to ever transition to cars if the legal system were as bad then as it is now.

As for the mentions above about freedom vs control.. that just bugs me too. It's really the driving reason for many that want to try to lower the use of cars and force people into public transportation. Cars mean freedom to live and work wherever you want (within reason). When you can't simply pick up and go where you want, people have a lot more control over you and can steer large swaths of the populace into living where they'd prefer and limit where they can work and when.

The whole telecommuting thing is annoying too. I work in IT (I'm a Unix Sysadmin) for a company who's deep in telecom and "The Internet of Everything" stuff. I'm driven nuts sometimes about the two-faced, "We're international, so it doesn't really matter where someone sits," saying used to justify more bodies in places like India. Followed by, "We need you here in the office," in the next line when I can do my job completely from home. Most of us work from home now and then, and nearly universally find we get more done there, since we're not continually interrupted by people trying to pawn off their work or being yanked into (quite often useless) meetings.