Sunday Train: California Senate Approves High Speed Rail Construction | 42 comments (42 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: Cal Approves High Speed Rail Construction (none / 0)

I agree with you here:

If a range of alternative sustainable means of transport are available, then it is likely that the trips that are made by car are likely to be the ones for which the car is well suited, rather than being made by car because none of the more efficient and effective alternatives for that kind of trip have been made available.

...but would possibly argue with you on this part--if I were in the mood for arguing...

The basic physical advantages of...trains [over] ...cars...

As you know better than I do, there are a LOT of variables to consider...

by asdf on Fri Jul 13th, 2012 at 12:02:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Cal Approves High Speed Rail Construction (4.00 / 2)

Physically, there is no way for a individual motor vehicle operated on the public right of way to be as energy or materially efficient as a electric train that is able to achieve high load factors.

That is not saying that electric trains are more efficient as a one-size-fits-all solution than electric cars, but that is because expecting any one-size-fits-all solution to be both efficient and effective is silly. One size never fits all and always fits some poorly.

It does say that there are specific tasks in an integrated transport system where the solution that is more efficient than an electric train will be a different, more efficient, electric train.

(1) There are people living at low density because their jobs require them to be engaged in space-intensive activities ~ farmers, wind-farm maintenance workers, park rangers, etc. If they are between locations that justify a rail corridor, then they may have regional rail service at a regional station, but the rail corridor will only be available for local service where it happens to be passing through. That is the original farmer's Model T market for cars, and cars, bikes, electric bikes, neighborhood electric vehicles and regional buses connecting local central places that do not happen to be along a rail corridor are all part of a sustainable transport corridor.

(2) There are occupations that require an ability to go from place to place on demand rather than commute to a workplace on a regular schedule ~ indeed, a reduction in mode-share of automobiles will increase occupations that involve driving such as grocery delivery driver.

However, a majority of trips made by car in the US are trip that could be made more efficiently more some other means of transport is the massive subsidies given to driving did not so effectively suppress the provision of such alternatives.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Fri Jul 13th, 2012 at 01:36:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Cal Approves High Speed Rail Construction (4.00 / 2)

Right, and in a high-density corridor (which is how cities should be laid out), you can get that high load factor for a commuter train during rush hour. I lived in Boston for years in that sort of environment, and it worked great. Although, frankly, standing on a platform in January with freezing rain running down your neck is not as pleasant as getting into your personal car in a heated garage, and then getting out of it in another heated garage.

I'm actually 100% with you on the long term goal, but most trips in the U.S. as it's currently arranged are 15 mile daily commutes, with no particular corridor-based geography, and other short errands where it is very convenient to have a personal vehicle: Grocery store, hardware store, garden store, etc. Yes, ideally these can and should be handled by delivery services, but it's going to be tough to break the current habits.

The incremental cost for me to take a run to the grocery store is minimal; 5 miles @ 50 MPG is 0.1 gallons or about $0.30. That cost is swamped by the $100+ spent on the groceries. So I don't care how efficient the non-existent street car is, I'm going to use my car to get to the grocery store until it costs something like $10 per trip.

And I "can't" get rid of my car completely (actually, I could, and people will when things go to hell here in a few years and reality kicks in) because I "need" it to go on vacation. It will be a long time before there is rail transportation to the campsite I'm going to in the mountains. This ain't Switzerland, it's the colonies.

(Here is a great book about how to go rock climbing if it's 1930 and you don't have a car.
http://www.rockandice.com/articles/how-to-climb/article/212-mountaineering-in-scotland
Basically you take the train to Scotland, then take the bus to the remote hotel, then walk to the base camp, and then you can start your climb. Nowadays, you get in your car and drive to the bottom of the pitch.)

Bottom line is that the effort needs to have two prongs. One is the rail-based infrastructure and the other is the re-organization of society to make better use of scarce transportation resources.

by asdf on Fri Jul 13th, 2012 at 11:54:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Cal Approves High Speed Rail Construction (4.00 / 2)

Two prongs is far from enough ~ that's the point about one-size-fits-all solutions. When we get down to a plausibly sustainable 20%-40% mode share for automobiles, it won't be with 60%-80% mode share for trains, it will be with a 10%-20% mode share for trains, and for trolleybuses, and for circuit buses, and for cycling, and for neighborhood electric vehicles, and for walking.

People who primarily "need a car" to go on vacation don't need to own a car, they need to maintain a driver's license and to be able to rent a car for the vacation. If it really comes down to being in a position to ditch the fixed costs of car ownership ~ car loan payments, insurance payments, registration ~ that covers quite a lot of car rental or share care use with money to spare. If the operating and fixed costs also included all of the present subsidies to driving, which in the worst cases directly increase the cost of alternatives to driving, the financial incentive to ditch the metal anchor would be even higher.

And from that, people who "need" a car for 5 mile trips and also to go on vacation actually either need a car, or else need a driver's license and a neighborhood electric vehicle or longtail ebike.

The strategic role of Express HSR in this is that the in the 0.5 mile to 5 mile trip radius there are multiple already established and mature transport modes available that can be sustainably if we start cutting back on the policy of forcing people to drive. In the 10 to 50 mile trip radius there are fewer but still a variety. In the 200 mile to 500 mile radius, the existing established means of transport that can be sustainably powered drop away to electric rail. And operating that electric rail at Rapid Rail and/or Express HSR speeds increases the farebox recovery, so that on a very large number of corridors presently with subsidized slow passenger rail service or with no passenger rail service at all, the higher speed rail service can operate at a surplus, freeing it from the threat of withdrawal of its operating subsidy in political counter-attacks from the heavily subsidy dependent private motor vehicle support industries.

The leverage of effective local "commuter" rail corridor development really comes when the day long park and ride suburban station parking lot is places an eighth of a mile from the station and the eighth of a mile around the station is higher density mixed use development. That reorganizes the five miles of surrounding suburb from an inchoate mass into the hinterland of a suburban village core, and start collecting the dispersed suburban employment into employment clusters in walking distance to a train station. Ditto if its a park and ride express stop on a trolleybus line.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Fri Jul 13th, 2012 at 12:50:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sunday Train: California Senate Approves High Speed Rail Construction | 42 comments (42 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Top Diaries

A short note on extreme flooding (wonkish)

Catholic Bishops fighting losing battle in Ireland

A shift of sexual mores

Tour of the German offshore wind sector

Record flood on the Danube

Utopian Ideas - Digital Infrastructure

Histories of Neoliberalism?

Woolwich killing: responses

Recent Diaries

Catholic Bishops fighting losing battle in Ireland

A short note on extreme flooding (wonkish)

A shift of sexual mores

Tuesday Open Thread

Utopian Ideas - Digital Infrastructure

Tour of the German offshore wind sector

Record flood on the Danube

Histories of Neoliberalism?

No Desertec for Europe

The metro revolution

Woolwich killing: responses

Methane Cell Phone Sniffers

What price, Irish recovery?

How the "riots" in Stockholm started

One lone paper?

Fiscal and Organizational Capacity of States and Sovereignty

Austrians finally discover hyperinflation - in Diablo III

Rail News Blogging #25

Pentecost steam

Standing on the Shoulders of Giants - Europe and the Mongol...

Occasional Series