Trevtassie

It's like you Americans think the world is never going to change and you can just keep doing the same stuff you've always done. Like climate change ain't happening and oil is an infinite resource. Actually, that's pretty well what is happening. Thinking about how your current lifestyle will affect the future is an infringement of your constitutional rights. We've got the same problem here in Australia, one of the most urbanised countries in the world where most of the population live in two cities with the capital midway between them. They've been arguing about high speed rail for years, because politicians only give a crap about the next election, planning for the future means admitting things won't always stay the same and telling the constituents that they can't keep doing the same things. Meanwhile, in Japan, they announced last year the Shinkansen train to Sapporo is now ahead of schedule and will be finished before 2030 having started some 13 years ago. It includes a 32km long tunnel that descends to 240m below sea level.

KraneXL

Florida is famous for that. Or should I say infamous? Now you're talking politics. Whenever the government starts throwing that kind of money around they come out of the word work. Everybody wants a piece of the action.Perhaps you didn't get the part about all our eggs in one basket? Besides, there are a great number of people (myself included) that for whatever reasons, don't want to fly.

tandempower

That's why reforestation is important, among other reasons.

tandempower

Those three states are the most populous, so they have the biggest car/fuel/insurance/infrastructure potential. Investors everywhere have an interest in keeping them driving-dependent, so they will put resources into blocking alternative transportation. The politicians/governments are not strong enough to resist business influence, so it is up to the people to make the right choice, but they have to struggle against corporate media, business/peer pressures, etc.

If they want to move somewhere with less traffic, they can always sell-out and move there with the money they make on all the automotive business. As long as they can keep the economic fire burning in these high-population areas by maintaining the automotive economy, they can tap it for investment returns, which can be used to fund life in other areas.

Until that kind of economic politics stops, it is unlikely that HSR will gain any ground. They might launch projects and continue for a while, to dole out money; but then the projects will stop short of offering a real alternative for mass-driving, lest people spend less on driving/fuel/insurance/maintenance/infrastructure/etc. that stimulate the economy.

Lemond1985

Maybe people just prefer driving their own cars to riding public transport, I know I do. Here is California, the politicians are deliberately letting the roads crumble, and refusing to widen them to accommodate increased usage, while raising gas taxes(!?). I guess this is a (well-intentioned?) effort to get cars off the road and people onto public transport, but as far as i can see it's only wasting money and angering people, who would prefer that the money they are taxed for roads get used in the manner intended.

Mobile 155

No, I got the eggs and basket part. Today you can Fly, drive or take the train or bus from Houston to Dallas if you use Amtrak. The rails are already down and the route are already established. So people don’t have to fly. In all cases once you get from point A to point B you have to arrange transportation yourself.

All you get get when you have a HSR is an expensive new ROW with new track that only HSR can use. Because if you don’t want to fly now you don’t have to.

KraneXL

I suspected as much but didn't know the details. However the other side can also profit although the naturally would need the backing of the public the break the grip of the present status quo.California is the nation's # 1 car state. As are the other two. If you can coax them out of their cars in CA, you can do it anywhere.There are many different levels of HSR as you likely know. Some may use conventional tracks but if you use a more modern system, I suggest they be run alongside preexisting rail system. That way the environmental impact is much less significant since the foundation of the system is already present.

Mobile 155

And as you already know the HSR is effectively stopped in California and people have decided to keep their cars. And while the HSR is being suspended several road projects are approved and on track. https://www.ocregister.com/2018/01/2...rn-california/


Like I said, people even in California realize that we have lots of airports for high speed travel and lots of roads for slower travel. We even have a several ways to go places by train in California. One or two of them can go where the HSR was supposed to go but couldn't get ROW or pass the environmental impact study. Amtrak Routes From/Through Los Angeles, California I think it is safe to say HSR will not get people out of their cars in California don't you?

Lemond1985

"The tribe has spoken." Now rebuild the freakin' roads, with some honest paving companies, not like these crooks they have now that close lanes and off ramps for weeks, do nothing, then open them back up again in the same or worse shape.

KraneXL

Will these airports still be viable for a growing population in the future? What about 20 years for now? 30? Ever have your flight delayed due to a storm? Even the weather can shut down an airport for hours that would have little to no effect on rail scheduling.

But the point isn't to have anyone give up their cars. I'm referring to an alternative means transportation means other than air travel. Anyway, that resolve doesn't fix the inherent "one basket" problem. The duty of the politician is to plan for the future. What does this status quo future look like to you?So we can have nice smooth roads to sit in traffic while we ponder our lives away? Not the "solution" I was hoping for.

burnthesheep

I'm going to give you some perspective here.....

My dad is not a unique fellow. He's pretty traditionally evangelical conservative.

Here's as close to the quote as I can get.....this was real.......

"Well, don't you think God gave us the dinosaurs so that we could have oil? Who are we to deny God's gift by not using it."

Meanwhile, I'm standing there listening to this while I'm bathed in the sunlight and the wind..........that God gave us.

How much is a 3-lane interstate per mile? $7 million per mile plus maintenance? Medium speed rail (think typical Euro stuff) is more along the lines of $2.5 million per mile.

We don't flinch and even moan and complain about needing more interstate capacity everywhere, but forbid we want a couple rail projects.

Ignore the cost per mile of crazy and "actual" high speed rail like Japan/China/California where the cost per mile is silly expensive.

Rollfast

Did you ever think I have 3 Schwinns. 3 Rollfasts, a Sears and a Shelby?

Lemond1985

Is this?



I will confess to never envying that guy's commute, and people were still somewhat polite in public back then. Would not mind being married to Suzanne Pleshette though.

But geez, don't blame the pointlessness of life and commuting long distances back and forth to work on cars, that blame seems a little misplaced to me. It's pointless time spent whether it's on a train or behind the wheel, no getting around that.

diphthong

the nation essentially had a 35 year window or so (1950-1985) to do these big interstate/intrastate projects before the
age of nimbyism, environmental impact reports, population boom and chronic litigation syndrome shut down/drastically modified or
outright killed big picture projects like bullet trains. is there a justifiable reason why we don't have a bullet train network
in the western us stretching from san diego up to seattle, over to boise, down to denver then into dallas/houston/san antonio,
then across to albuquerque, tucson, phoenix and back to san diego with slc, carson city/reno, las vegas and grand junction
as central connecting hubs? how many billions did the government spend on rescuing various american automotive and airline companies
in the last nearly four decades along with all the various subsidies? high-speed rail seems to work just fine elsewhere in the world but we'd
rather fly cramped and deal with the indignities of airplane travel because it's faster. really? for a regional flight? between the check-in, boarding,
unboarding (and if applicable, waiting at the baggage carousel), that's, at least, the better part of two hours. or...we'd rather drive and complain about the
freeway traffic between la/orange county/san diego, san francisco/san jose/oakland, seattle, houston/dallas, phoenix/tucson and anywhere.
if there was anywhere in america that was supremely suited for high-speed rail, it was the western us. and we killed it. congrats.

tandempower

All I know for certain is that the effects of widespread driving aren't going to suddenly be beneficial, no matter how much or how many people wish it or pretend or ignore critiques or whatever they do to whitewash it in their minds. EVs can reduce emissions, but they can't reduce pavement and sprawl.

Coaxing doesn't work. People who are hell-bent on protecting driving and car-ownership for various reasons want to be 'coaxed' because that means 1) the burden is shifted away from them for reform, and 2) they might receive some incentives while ultimately being able to walk away with the incentive and still not give up driving.

I think it's better to improve long-distance bus/coach transit on existing highways. Congestion on highways needs to be reduced to avert further highway expansion and sprawl, so shifting the traffic from cars to buses would reduce the total number of vehicles on the roads.

fietsbob

Dangerous to be un protected by a cage of steel on the mean streets of such a divided country..

cooker

On a train you can read, text, surf the internet or sleep.

KraneXL

When I took the train to school I used the trip time to do all my reading assignments. No time wasted.

tandempower

And you can stand up, walk around, stretch your legs, and use the bathroom without stopping.

Mobile 155

Because you can’t use any of the several bathrooms on a plane? You do know the have airplane mode on smart phones? So the only thing a train can do better is take more time to get from point A to point B. Plus if something happens a plane can divert to a different point B. With a car point A or B can change whenever you want.

So it still comes down to what someone likes more.

cooker

Trains are way better than flying, for short distances. The ride is very soothing, the seats are spacious, so far the security is way less intrusive (although that may change), there are no restricted segments, like after take off or before landing, where you have to power down computers, remove head sets put your seat upright and remain in it, and so on. In my case the train station is much closer to home than an airport and much easier to access, and that will be true for a lot of Houston or Dallas residents although of course not for all. Obviously it depends where you are going, but in my case, when I travel to Montreal or Ottawa, I am going to a downtown hotel or conference centre so the train station is better located and saves me a lot of money on airport limos or cabs. So if the train is 2 hours longer, an hour of that is paid back in reduced ground travel time, and the other hour is paid back in being relaxed and non-stressed when I arrive and a bit more money in my pocket.

It's true that trains can be late or delayed, but air delays and diversion happen all the time as well. Certainly the Japanese bullet trains havd a remarkable record of sticking to their schedule. I don't know what will happen in Texas or California.

KraneXL

All things being equal a plane will always be faster than any train for obvious reason. But as stated above, trains are virtually unaffected by weather which you can't say about planes. They can be delayed for hours or days.



Don't forget Florida. Its hundreds of miles of a whole lot of nothing save some backwater towns in between the big cities. The most boring route in the nation.

Mobile 155

Well for now California nor Texas has to worry about a HSR. And with Amtrak's 61 percent on time rating we might be excused for being skeptical how it would work with the state running HSR. But I am glad it works for you. I wouldn't want to risk my tax money it would work for us. As long as we have the votes we are free.

tandempower

I don't think air traffic can accommodate anywhere close to the volume of travel that trains could. You can link dozens of train cars together in a single run, which also means you can move a lot more passengers/freight with much less wind resistance. Using regenerative braking, electric trains would use very little energy.

The benefit of planes of trains is they can fly over undeveloped land instead of causing deforestation of rail corridors. The ideal would be to put passenger rails within existing highway corridors to reduce auto congestion within those corridors, but since trains are usually more expensive than driving, it makes it harder for the masses to choose them.

Flying, like driving, is really limited in terms the levels of population growth it can accommodate. Maintaining those modes as the predominant form of transportation while other alternatives are defunded and obstructed before their ridership can grow is a practical guarantee that the masses will have to fight for space on congested highways in a century where environmental protection has already been pushed far beyond the limits of comfort and sustainability for those of us who have enough sense to care about the environment and its role in the future of humanity.

tandempower

Free to partake in congestion and fiery crashes on overcrowded highways while you enjoy the lovely highway-expansion construction scenery on the side of the road.