Shifting Tectonic Plates

Posted on by

The American continent is about to get its first high-speed train. Where?

Argentina.

Argentina on Tuesday signed a contract with a consortium led by Alstom of France to build the first high-speed train in the Americas, linking Buenos Aires with the cities of Rosario and Córdoba in three hours, nearly a fifth of the current journey time.

Patrick Kron, Alstom’s chairman and chief executive, said construction would start before the end of the year and last for four years. Alstom, which designed and built France’s TGV, Spain’s AVE and South Korea’s KTX, is providing the rolling stock, signalling and maintenance to the Veloxia consortium, which also includes Iecsa and Emepa of Argentina and Spain’s Isolux Corsan.

The total project, financed by French bank Natixis, will cost some $3.7bn and Argentina will issue 30-year debt. Alstom’s share of the project is worth around $1.7bn. The project is five to eight times cheaper than similar ones in France or Spain, Alstom says.

How long before Sarko shows up to offer them a nuclear power station? Alstom and Areva: two great French quasi-state industries that taste great together. And Argentine railway bonds – now there’s Edwardian for you…

16 thoughts on “Shifting Tectonic Plates”

  1. Pingback: Heh

  2. OTOH, Argentina was in the forefront of train development in the 1940s-60s: check out a guy called L. D. Porta.

  6. Why is it 5 to 8 times cheaper in Argentina than in Spain or France? I understand it is cheaper because land and labour is cheaper but is it so muc cheaper?

  7. I would think it’s closer to a green-field deployment; also, I don’t think there’s much to bridge over or tunnel through on that route.

  8. John: No, it counts as being a British train like we had in 1976, 25 years later.

  11. Department of picked nits: Are Europe and Asia separate continents? If so, then surely North and South America are…

  12. Surely the above isn’t Doug Muir?

    Everywhere south of the Rio Bravo, “America” refers to the entire continent, north and south both. That’s the aversion Alex was making, I’m sure. Right, Alex?

    So there’s no nit to pick. Unless you want to question the whole idea of the “continent.” Which is fine with me. But kind of pointless.

    Kind of like Argentine HST project.

    http://hdtd.typepad.com/hdtd/2008/05/observatorio-ar.html

    Counterarguments are desired.

  13. Merrill, not Muir.

    And the point is that the number of continents is one of those funny, socially constructed things.

    I’ll have to cross-check to make sure my memory hasn’t flaked, but I seem to remember being told by a German that there are five continents: America, Europe, Asia, Africa and Australia. As I recall, my answer was well what about Antarctica. And the reply was, well what about Antarctica?

    I’m willing to grant that North and South America are essentially one land mass. But then: Eurasia. Or is there an argument for separating those two that I’m missing? (And that doesn’t apply similarly to, say, India?)

    (Parenthetically, something I’m sure you’re better placed than I am to estimate is how generally Norteamericano (or whatever the correct spelling is) is used in Spanish…)

  14. What your German friend told you is what Mexicans learn in school.

    As for “norteamericano,” its use is waning. Frex, the Mexican president regularly uses “americano” in public appearances and nobody corrects him.

    On the other hand, the country to the north is always referred to as “Estados Unidos,” no definite article necessary. That’s not a grammatical quirk of Spanish, but a Mexican thing: “I’m going to United States, United States is north of here, Pasadena is in United States?”

    I’m sure there’s a sociological message there, but I’ll be damned if I know what it is.

  15. I’d like to say that 1) we traditionally learn 5 continents in Spain: Europe, Asia, Africa, America and Oceania. 2) The correct way to refer to US people is not norteamericano, which would also embrace Mexicans and Canadians, but estadounidense. 3) The continent thing is indeed a bit arbitrary.

  16. Hi, David,

    In Mexico, nobody takes “norteamericano” to include them. At times, you’ll hear people using the term to include Mexico either as a joke or when talking about the country’s investment rating. I’ve been to Spain several times, and the same is true there, even if as you say Mexico is technically in North America.

    “Estadounidense” is used, but some (only some) consider it pedantic. I use it all the time, but I have been teased about it.

    Besides which, Mexico is also officially a group of “estados unidos,” as in the Estados Unidos Mexicanos.

    In general, though, nobody really cares about any of this, which I think might hold some lessons for parts of the Old World.

    http://hdtd.typepad.com/hdtd/2008/03/sabidura-del-oc.html

    and

    http://hdtd.typepad.com/hdtd/2008/04/mas-sabidura-de.html

Comments are closed.