[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FairMaiden', 'T')wo points: the automobile isn't the reason the tram died in the city - Ford and GM plotted to buy up all the tram lines and rip them up to force folks to purchase vehicles. They were later fined $5 for it. Also, the city's industry was dirty and smelly so the rich started the "suburbs" to get away from it.

Also, the Ford Explorer brand new gets 18 mpg...the '02 version will get 13 mpg (I'm getting these numbers from their site)...and thats assuming the vehicle has had regular maintenance to keep it in OPTIMAL working order...something I seriously doubt for most vehicles.

[cube]

I never did like the conspiracy theory of how the auto industry killed public rail transit in America.

I still remember one of my engineering professors from college who was infamous for his "Irish" temper. He went off on a tangent in the middle of class one time and explained that he was sick and tired of students comming to his office with some "new" idea on how to produce energy. Of course these ideas were pathetic.

The professor would usually reply by saying:

"READ YOUR BOOK AND YOU WILL UNDERSTAND WHY YOUR IDEA WILL NOT WORK."

ahhhh yes Thermodynamics.....not my favorite subject in college but definitely a very important one.

BTW something tells me my civil engineering and environmetal engineering professors probably had a lot more "quiet time" during their office hours. Conspiracy theorists rarely come up with new ideas to improve waste water treatment or steel reinforced concrete structures.


Where were we again? ohh yes the economics of commuting. I think the problem MOST people have is they overwhelmingly concentrate on the cost of the vehicle when thinking about commuting. People never think about the civil engineering aspects of a system....it ALWAYS about energy that's on people's minds.

In an effort to promote the significance of civil engineering here's a quote that can be debated:

"Suburbia will die when governments can no longer afford to maintain freeways and not because people could no longer afford cars."

[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')Suburbia will die when governments can no longer afford to maintain freeways and not because people could no longer afford cars."

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')Suburbia will die when governments can no longer afford to maintain freeways and not because people could no longer afford cars."

[gwmss15]

a long commute is more manageable if you just take an INTERURBAN train into the city each day for work. Its quick relaxing and you can even get food or drinks on some trains and price is cheaper than owning a car.

IF more people took a train live would be better

have a look at this www.vline.com.au good interurban commuter system up to 200km from melbourne all DMU trains some loco hauled trains reasonable price very good for commuting

or http://www.railway.co.th/railwaythai.asp good intercity system trains up to 1200km from bangkok plus DMU metro system cheap price and easy to use

if people just give the train a go alot of the problems of long commutes will be reduced.

[pup55]

Update from hardcore suburbia:

a. There were about 600 home foreclosures in the real estate section in my county this month. This is about double what it was last year for December.

45 are in my zip code, or the one next to us. Of these, a dozen or so were taken out in the early 2005 time frame. This means that the people paid on them for a year or so and then stopped this summer when gas prices got high. Two of the 45 are for mortgages over $500,000.

Also, about 10% of the foreclosures county-wide are for $50,000 or less, meaning that people took out home equity loans, and then did not pay them back.


b. We know of at least two families who now own 5 cars, even though there are only 4 drivers in the family. In both of the cases, there are two commuting adults, and two college age kids, and the kids' cars were bought used a few years back and are wearing out. The "extra car" is a spare in case one of the cars dies, so that everyone can make their daily auto trek while it is in the shop.

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gwmss15', 'a') long commute is more manageable if you just take an INTERURBAN train into the city each day for work. Its quick relaxing and you can even get food or drinks on some trains and price is cheaper than owning a car.

IF more people took a train live would be better

have a look at this www.vline.com.au good interurban commuter system up to 200km from melbourne all DMU trains some loco hauled trains reasonable price very good for commuting

or http://www.railway.co.th/railwaythai.asp good intercity system trains up to 1200km from bangkok plus DMU metro system cheap price and easy to use

if people just give the train a go alot of the problems of long commutes will be reduced.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', '.')..I prefer to live closer to my work and to walk, but still it is lot less stressful than commuting by auto, and then the infrastructure is there post peak oil.
...

[MrBill]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', '.')..I prefer to live closer to my work and to walk, but still it is lot less stressful than commuting by auto, and then the infrastructure is there post peak oil.
...

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'B')ut so long as we produce an agricultural surplus as the cost of labor falls we can substitute more labor for energy.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', '.')...
So therefore it is incorrect to state that railways will stop running as soon as we can no longer afford them. The reverse is true. In the face of scarce energy we will need rail more than ever. Of course, it takes less energy to maintain the track and rolling stock that is already in place rather than build it from scratch, especially if energy is very expensive and/or unavailable. This is where much of Europe has an economical advantage over parts of the USA and many other countries.
....

[pup55]

The train system in Europe is indeed quite reasonable, cheap, clean and efficient, but I also think they receive bountiful subsidies from the national governments to keep prices low. Mr. Bill can probably fill us in on the details of this. I am not saying this is necessarily bad, and in fact it may be in the public interest to do such a thing, but the system would be marginally operable without either outright government ownership of the line or assistance from the taxpayer.

Based on some light reading about the system in Japan, the system over there is now "privatized" and weaned off of most subsidies, but the fixed expense of roadbed has been in place for awhile. The difference is that it is so expensive and difficult to own a car in Japan, no one minds taking the train.

Both of these cases have the further advantage of having to be completely rebuilt in the 1946-1950 time frame with plenty of aid from the people that wrecked it in the first place.

The US rail system reached its peak in 1930 at 430,000 miles of track. It is now running at about half of that (223,000). The original system in the US was built with plenty of help from the government, so you can make the argument that to rebuild it, as Kunstler and others suggest, also cannot be done without massive government participation. This also goes for the commuter lines that would have to run from the suburbs to somewhere that people would want to go.

As an aside, I calculate based on the sources below that to refurbish the existing track in the US would take about $51 billion, and to rebuild the old track from the roadbed up would take on the order of $800 billion. So, it could, indeed, be accomplished with the amount of money we spent on Iraq. Also, at 267 tons of steel per mile, it would take 55 million tons of steel, or about 6 months worth of the national output of steel to do this job, and that's without any of the rolling stock. My guess is that we would have to start importing steel in order to accomplish this. But, I think technically it is do-able.

But the question is, in a land where two of its three tallest buildings and one of its most famous and major cities cannot be rebuilt in a timely fashion after a disaster, do we have the organizational ability or national unity to do such a project? I think it is clear we do not. "The Government", at least at the national level, appears to be ineffective and unable to do it, and I am in great doubt as to the ability of the local level governments to do it either. Time appears to be limited. The job will have to be done while we still have something that resembles a tax structure to get the money from.

So if the onset and depth of the crisis is such that it happens before we can get our act together on this issue, a lot of people are going to end up walking to work, if they have work. The project is technically do-able, but as in many cases as they apply to PO, impossible to execute with the current structure in place.

BTS

FRA

Answers dot com

[url=http://tacnet.missouri.org/history/railroads/rrcosts.html]
Tacnet Missouri dot org[/url]

AdaptedTech


Findarticles

[nero]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', 'M')y view of public transit in a PO world is where half the routes are taken off-line because the taxpayers ran out of money to subsidize unpopular routes but overall there's more people taking public transit.

[mommy22]

I'm no expert on these things, but having lived in Europe and in the states, I have a bit of perspective. I think that the reason that Europe has such wonderful rail systems and public transit options is that (aside from the gas taxes and other subsidies) they have not dumped so much money into their militaries, and thus, have more money available to spend on things that people actually use everyday, as opposed to the latest bomb technology. Perhaps if this whole Iraq mess gets decided in a few years (decades?) then we may want to use our servicepeople as developers of new rail/transit lines all over the US. By that time, people may start to see the value of public transit and governments may follow.
As I said, I'm no expert....just a mom.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pup55', '.')..
But the question is, in a land where two of its three tallest buildings and one of its most famous and major cities cannot be rebuilt in a timely fashion after a disaster, do we have the organizational ability or national unity to do such a project?
...

[emersonbiggins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pup55', ' ')The original system in the US was built with plenty of help from the government, so you can make the argument that to rebuild it, as Kunstler and others suggest, also cannot be done without massive government participation.

[joewp]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pup55', '
')But the question is, in a land where two of its three tallest buildings and one of its most famous and major cities cannot be rebuilt in a timely fashion after a disaster, do we have the organizational ability or national unity to do such a project? I think it is clear we do not. "The Government", at least at the national level, appears to be ineffective and unable to do it, and I am in great doubt as to the ability of the local level governments to do it either. Time appears to be limited. The job will have to be done while we still have something that resembles a tax structure to get the money from.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('emersonbiggins', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pup55', ' ')The original system in the US was built with plenty of help from the government, so you can make the argument that to rebuild it, as Kunstler and others suggest, also cannot be done without massive government participation.

[pup55]

The government's fingerprints were all over this, at least as it applies to the transcontinental railroad. They borrowed the money, hired the contractors with a sleazy contract system, and in the classic tradition, the money was recycled through the political system:

Transcontinental RR

PBS.org


Credit Mobilier

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') think that the reason that Europe has such wonderful rail systems and public transit options is that (aside from the gas taxes and other subsidies) they have not dumped so much money into their militaries, and thus, have more money available to spend on things that people actually use everyday

[emersonbiggins]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '
')I'm quite sure it must of been a very cheap war by today's standards even when adjusted for inflation but still...the tax payers footed that bill, not the railroad companies. I'd call that a subsidy.