As California State Senators learned on March 28, the state’s high-speed rail project is continuing to disappoint. Expected ridership is declining, costs are rising, and the service inception date is falling back.

Reacting to the new projections, Lou Thompson, Chair of the independent California High-Speed Rail Peer Review Group told legislators:

Given what we know of the project today, and given the financial demands facing the State, the Legislature may want to commission an independent review of the economic and financial justification for the project, including the ability to operate without subsidy as required by Proposition 1A, before recommitting to the full Phase I system.

As a reminder of just how far the situation has deteriorated from what voters were told when they ratified a high-speed rail bond measure back in 2008, we’ve prepared this visualization.

While cost overruns are common in government infrastructure projects, the schedule deterioration is the most frustrating. By now we were expecting a fast trip from the Bay Area to Los Angeles and Anaheim. Instead, no track has been laid and we’re now told to expect service along a third of the original route sometime between 2030 and 2033.

And there are good reasons to believe that service will start much later than 2033, if it starts at all. First, the Legislative Analyst Office has determined that the High Speed Rail Authority will not have enough money to complete the 171-mile initial operating segment even if it obtains the $8 billion in additional federal grants it is seeking. The legislature could fill this gap by continuing to direct 25 percent of California’s cap-and-trade revenue beyond its planned 2030 end date.

But the risks transcend construction funding. Other large rail projects, including Honolulu HART, the San Francisco Central Subway, and the DC Metro Silver Line extension have gotten stuck in the testing phase for multiple years as construction errors and design flaws came to light. A 171-mile system using technology never before employed in the United States could face a much longer shakedown process. With an unprecedented 220mph running speed (70mph higher than Amtrak Acela’s maximum speed), safety challenges for the new system will be much greater than any rail system U.S. regulators have ever seen, and they will have an understandable incentive to impede the start of revenue service until their many concerns are satisfied.

Also, by the early 2030s the High-Speed Rail Authority will have to deal with decade-old infrastructure components that have deteriorated and may no longer be fit for purpose. HSR structures in Fresno have already been vandalized by graffiti artists, and this should continue over the next several years as they remain unused.

The longer the project takes, the more it will cost and the less greenhouse gas emissions savings it will produce. California also plans to ban the sale of new combustion engine cars in 2035. While older gas-powered cars will still be on the road, high-speed rail will replace more and more electric vehicle trips (rather than gasoline-powered vehicle trips) the longer service is delayed. Indeed, GHG savings from high-speed rail may never offset the emissions generated during construction of the system.

Unfortunately, most State Senators asking questions at the hearing showed little interest in these concerns, focusing instead on how the project will create construction jobs and link Central Valley higher educational institutions to the state’s population centers: assuming, of course, that the system is finished.

It looks like the project will continue to limp along for the rest of this decade. Perhaps when current funding sources run dry and expectations have been further managed downward, a new set of state leaders will make the tough decision to radically scale back this project.