59
China has built the world’s largest bullet-train network (www.economist.com)
submitted 2 days ago by InevitableList@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
15 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] InevitableList@beehaw.org 18 points 2 days ago

A somewhat shallow look at China's HSR network that nevertheless provides some insights into how new lines are transforming some regions.

I don't understand why western media is so reluctant to acknowledge the broader social, economic and political benefits these lines are intended to provide. Failing to consider such questions means they will never understand China.

[-] jabjoe@feddit.uk 9 points 2 days ago

The car is king is the problem. Which is dumb. Also, in densely populated Europe at least, with private property right, and hundreds, if not thousands, of years of legacy, environmental regulations, it's hard to build train lines and stations. Also, the rich own so much of the country's wealth and power, and they just fly, so don't care.

[-] flora_explora@beehaw.org 9 points 2 days ago

I doubt it would be hard to actually have better train infrastructure in Europe (and some countries do). For example, as a German, my perspective on this is that our government just doesn't care to invest in most infrastructure because it isn't seen as prestigious enough. The only projects that do get build are some shiny new additions that no one needs, like a new train station in Stuttgart that has been in planning for over 3 decades, will cost many billions and has seen huge protests against it from the start till today. But any project that is just basic maintenance, be it for cars or trains, just gets ignored and postponed. The German Autobahn is just as defunct and on the brink of collapse in many parts of Germany as its train network. And our infrastructure ministers have been corrupt and utterly incompetent for many decades now.

[-] jabjoe@feddit.uk 3 points 2 days ago

Not sure if you mean in the UK, but in the UK, I think it is hard. We had the politically lead Beeching cuts that messed up what we had. Then those lines had homes and shops built on them. So there a numerous places in the UK cut off from rail that are hard to reconnect without causing a lot of upset. Building new lines is very hard, see HS2 debacle. However, HS2 should have been focused on join up the north, not linking it to London. Also, there is a lot of improvement possible on existing lines. Though won't get us to bullet trains.

[-] Egonallanon@feddit.uk 1 points 2 days ago

The annoying thing about HS2 is that is was focused in the north. The link from Birmingham to London was somewhat tacked on to make of more politically palpable to those folk seeming allergic to spending any money outside of the south east. Now the project has been so messed up in its current state it'll probably make transportation north of Birmingham worse than it currently is.

[-] jabjoe@feddit.uk 1 points 2 days ago

The north wasn't set to join up the Northern cities. Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, New Castle all needs better connection. Going by rail East/West is terrible. Birmingham to London wasn't even going to be much faster.

[-] sculd@beehaw.org 7 points 2 days ago

Why do we have to consider public transport "a waste of money" when they are not being run as a business????

China considers HSR a public good! They are meant to give convenient transport to everyone!

Also, do people realize road maintenance takes a lot of money too? Should governments stop doing that because they don't make money?

FXXK this everything has to make money attitude of neoliberliasm!

[-] rafoix@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago

Not only does it have to make money but it must make at least 10% more than last year.

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 3 points 2 days ago

Why do we have to consider public transport "a waste of money" when they are not being run as a business.

Because, even if it isn't being run as a business, it is still being run as a government service. Since no country has infinite money, there is still a cost benefit ratio that should be looked into. There are a lot of government projects or there which are bad investments and should be deprioritozed over other better investments.

This ties into use. A lot of Chinese still use low speed rail because they can't afford the high speed rail tickets. There may be some lines where it is better to fund and and expand low speed rail because the demand isn't there for high speed.

[-] sculd@beehaw.org 3 points 2 days ago

(I just realize that the link posted by OP is a 2017 article)

Of course. I agree that cost benefit ratio needs to be considered. I also agree that in some cases low speed rail already suffice, but is it the argument they are making? I can't read the article despite I want to because there is a paywall.

[-] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 2 days ago

For longer lines with more than 100m passengers a year and travel times of five hours or less—such as the one between Beijing and Shanghai—the more expensive type may be justifiable.

It is less so for journeys between commuter towns, during which trains only briefly accelerate to top speeds. For longer journeys serving sparse populations—a description that fits many of the lines in western and northern China—high-speed rail is prohibitively expensive.

...

But the network expansion now under way is even bolder than Mr Liu had envisaged. China has a four-by-four grid at present: four big north-south and east-west lines. Its new plan is to construct an eight-by-eight grid by 2035. The ultimate goal is to have 45,000km of high-speed track. Zhao Jian of Beijing Jiaotong University, who has long criticised the high-speed push, reckons that only 5,000km of this will be in areas with enough people to justify the cost. “With each new line, the losses will get bigger,” he says.

It appears to be the argument that the Economist is making. High Speed rail is a good technology that should be implemented, just not at the scale China implemented it at.

[-] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 days ago

are a lot of government projects or there which are bad investments and should be deprioritozed over other better investments.

Like cars and roads

[-] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 1 points 2 days ago

Congrats (¬`‸´¬)

Happy for you ( •̀⤙•́ )

Nice ( ` ᴖ ´ )

[-] InevitableList@beehaw.org 3 points 2 days ago

12 foot ladder- https://archive.ph/XRppG

this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2025
59 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

39967 readers
79 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org