Post by Blue Lives MatterOn Fri, 10 Jan 2025 18:52:49 -0500, Frank Krygowski
Post by Frank KrygowskiPost by AMuziPost by potheadPost by Frank Krygowski... the other high speed rail projects didn't do much
"Case Study V: California High-Speed Rail"
<https://uta.pressbooks.pub/oertgreentransport/chapter/chapter-7-
case-study-v-california-high-speed-rail/>
<https://uta.pressbooks.pub/app/uploads/sites/131/2022/09/Tbl3-
e1664395162274.png>
I haven't checked, but methinks that a large percentage of the time
"High Speed Rail Litigation"
<https://www.planetizen.com/tag/high-speed-rail-litigation>
I'm wondering how other countries have done this. We rode the TGV in
France. It was very impressive. I've talked to folks who used Japan's
high speed rail and were very impressed.
I've rode the TGV and it was quite impressive. The rail system in Europe
is so far superior to the antiquated crap we have here in US it's not even
in the same league.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/vehicles-per-capita-by-country/
which present a chicken-egg problem.
Interesting data. I see that France is really not far behind the U.S. in
cars-per-capita. I had wondered if they had far lower car ownership and
were thus more amenable to tax dollars going to rail, but that doesn't
seem to be the case.
Anyway, other countries are doing rail pretty well. It's sort of a shame
we can't. I'm pretty much forced to do a lot of freeway driving these
days. I'd prefer a choice.
It's not that we can't do that in the USA, it's just that there aren't
enough people choosing to ride trains to make it profitable.
That's not it either.
The trains go places that are no longer attractive to travel to in the
USA. Would you intentionally take your family on a train ride to
Atlanta or Chicago? No you wouldn't because to get anywhere from the
point of deboarding you have to take a fairly long ride using other
transportation that passes through ghettos with frequent stops.
Taking a train to Oakland, San Francisco or Walnut is virtually the same
scenario, while Santa Barbara to San Diego and most points in between is
pleasant and safe.
The US is too spread out for trains to be effective for passenger
service except in dense areas. There are exceptions where people use
trains to commute to a lot where a company van is parked for example.
COVID put a big hammer to that though. San Diego has expanded trolley
services, but again, COVID reduced ridership.
Sweden gets positive marks for passenger rail and pedestrian or bike
safety. Sweden has trains that serve popular busy areas. Japan also
plans well in this way.
Sweden smartly engineers pedestrians and cyclists out of contention with
motor vehicles for the most part. Instead of traffic impeding
crosswalks, they have paths that cross under or over roads that are wide
enough for walkers and cyclists. In the case of extremely wide roads or
train tracks, they have bridges, or bridges with elevators that go up
30-40 feet to an enclosed walkway over the objects. They are heated in
the winter time too.
California is not very smart when it comes to density and traffic
design. It's stupid to place crosswalks on streets with 6 to 8 lanes,
yet they do it. They also place bike riders in the position of
competing with automobiles and trucks on roads, while reducing lanes to
create bike lanes that are 99.9% unused, causing delays and congestion.
That's stupid. Even worse, now there's the idiots on ebikes problem.