@ andrew.stegmaier – the primary objective of this project is to provide transportation capacity based on renewable electricity. Any reductions in GHG emissions are icing on the cake.

My point is that ballot initiatives are no place for big projects like this (especially when they’re passed as an ammendment to the constitution, what an abuse!). They require much more careful thinking, especially regarding budgets. So sorry, but we don’t live in a direct democracy.

Though it remains a possibility that, all things considered, this will prove a worthwhile investment, the critics are dead right that it an absurdly inefficient way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes that, considering all the different ways of reducing CO2 emissions, a reasonable price ceiling for society to pay per ton of CO2 removed is between $20 and $50. Depending on which estimate we use (all of the estimates come from the High Speed Rail Authority itself), the cost per ton of CO2 removed by high speed rail would be between $1950 and $10,050. Thats 39 to 201 time higher than it would cost to reduce CO2 by other means. Not a good investment from an environmental perspective.