California megaregion for high-speed rail?

High-speed rail has the potential to disrupt air travel within a two-hour radius.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_innovation#Examples

In almost every market where high speed rail with journey times of two hours or less was introduced in competition with an air service, the air service was either greatly reduced within a few years or ceased entirely. Even in markets with longer rail travel times, airlines have reduced the amount of flights on offer and passenger numbers have gone down. Examples include the Barcelona-Madrid high speed railway, the Cologne Frankfurt high speed railway (where no direct flights are available as of 2016) or the Paris-London connection after the opening of High Speed 1. For medium-distance trips, like between Beijing & Shanghai, the high speed rail and airlines often end up in extremely stiff competition.

California's high-speed rail project would link San Francisco and Los Angeles in a 2 hour, 40 minute ride.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail

That might be just a bit too far for a successfully disruptive system.

In any case, the project has been cancelled because of cost overruns and delays.

On February 12, 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom in his first State of the State address announced that, while work would continue on the 171-mile (275 km)^[9] Central Valley segment from Bakersfield to Merced, the rest of the system would be indefinitely postponed, citing cost overruns and delays.^[10] Project costs have escalated significantly from an initial estimate of $33.6 billion in 2008^[11] for the Anaheim to San Francisco section according to the 2008 business plan, and a $40 billion total figure given to voters whose approval was sought in 2008.^[12][13] The 2008 business plan proposed a 2028 completion date for Phase 1 and a one-way fare of $55 from Los Angeles to San Francisco.^[14] In 2012 the Authority re-estimated the project's cost at $53.4 billion ($2011) or $68.4 billion (YOE).

There might be an underlying problem.

San Francisco and Los Angeles comprise two distinct megaregions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaregions_of_the_United_States

In one map, California seems to have three megaregions.

https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/02/global-megaregions-economic-powerhouse-megalopolis/583729/

High-speed rail might only make sense in the kind of long high-density corridor that one finds in the northeastern USA.

This introduces the chicken-or-egg causality dilemma.

If high-density rail is built, will it help promote mega-development that would eventually justify the cost of such a system?

It might not in California.

California is simply not dedicated to high-density development the way the east coast is.

Even parts of Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean have greater population densities than California.

https://2oqz471sa19h3vbwa53m33yj-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/north-america.jpg

That is the tragedy of California.

California should be one solid megaregion not only from San Francisco to Los Angeles, but from San Francisco to Reno and from Los Angeles to Las Vegas.

Fresno and Bakersfield ideally would be cities of the size and stature of Los Angeles and San Francisco.


That would justify California's high-speed rail dreams.