by Plantagenet » Mon 10 Jun 2019, 00:02:09
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', '
')I’m not going to nit pick your math, close enough. What I will ask is what problem is this fixing?
I already listed some things that building out HSR in the USA would accomplish. Here's another list:
1. HSR is part of the transportation infrastructure in the rest of the developed world. Improving infrastructure has big paybacks in the economy-----thats why the government builds and maintains infrastructure in the first place.
2. A major HSR initiative in the US would put a lot of people to work, and it would provide business for a lot US manufacturers and factories.
3. HSR runs on electricity. Putting people on trains would reduce US CO2 emissions.
4. A commitment to HSR also means a commitment to cities. HSR trains run from downtown terminal to downtown terminal. Instead of gutting our cities and moving everything into the suburbs, a commitment to HSR means a commitment to rebuild the cities.
5. We avoided peak oil problems 10 years ago thanks to fracking. But oil remains a finite resource. Having means of transportation other then ICE cars is just common sense.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', '.').... any project today should show a life cycle that it reduces the overall carbon footprint. That means high ridership rates. And most of the time that argument means folks are arguing the increased convenience will increase the number of folks traveling.
When we finally introduce a carbon tax to reduce oil and NG use, cars will become increasingly expensive to run. At that time we will need alternative mass transit, like HSR. And a carbon tax and restrictions on oil and gas are coming......
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'N')ot saying HSR would not be a nice perk, is it something our environment can afford?