Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
It sounds a bit like the roads are both cheaper to build and maintain, and are of course easier for short- and medium-distance transport of goods. There’s a lot of time, effort, and efficiency wasted if you load a truck at the factory, drive to a train station, load a train with the goods, drive 100 miles by train, then unload the train unto a different truck to deliver the goods to the stores.
indeed, much easier to set up a train line that arrives directly into the factory at a similar or lower cost than road…
How do you figure that?
Rail costs many times per km/mile what roadway does. There’s 250k km of rail in Europe, but 5.2 million km of road… meanwhile, roads in aggregate only cost 1.7x what rail did.
And, the crazy thing is… if you were somehow able to eliminate the impact of shipping from roads by eliminating freight, the cost would be many, many times less. EVs aside, passenger vehicle roads have very little cost or upkeep required. It’s when you start driving heavy things over them they need to be thicker and reinforced.
It’s also worth noting that while Denmark gets called out for spending more than average on rail maintenance, the result is a mess of delays, cancellations, and general unreliability for the next multiple years while the railways are being serviced.
The most expensive roadways cost roughly what the cheapest railways cost, per length of distance. The most expensive roads are a factor more expensive than typical roads. The least expensive roadway is, likewise, a factor less expensive than expensive high speed commuter rail.
Rail is often hundreds of times more expensive, for both construction and maintenance, than roadway.
You’re counting price per unit of distance.
Now do price per passenger mile traveled.
It costs significantly more to build rail from A to B, but the rail can carry dramatically more people, or cargo, or what have you.
It turns out to be cheaper any time you have high utilization, and not when you don’t. So obviously it makes sense in some cases and not in others.
However, cost can not be allowed to be the only factor considered. That is literally destroying our societies.
You’re also missing that the distribution hubs are… distributed. They’re not going from point A to point B, they’re going from point {a…z} to {a..z}.
Railroad tracks are not cheap to maintain, and they can only be used by the trains, they are not at all helpful for general traffic.
Four miles east of me the track of an abandoned railroad is still visible even though the rails and ties were salvaged. West of me another rail line was abandoned, I’m amazed they ever dilute that one. It’s terminus was Mansfield Washington. If you look on Google earth or even Apple’s map in satellite view you can track it backwards to Withrow, then Douglas, down the creek, to
There used to be a lot of industrial rail that has mostly been replaced by roads and trucks. For instance, my home town used to have a whole network of railroads that were used for short distance transport of crops grown on the local farms, mostly sugar beets being taken to the local sugar factory. They were built in the early 20th Century, when trucks either weren’t available yet or weren’t a practical way of moving that much stuff. The track stayed in service for a long time because it was already paid
Save your breath; Silvergun expects everyone to gather in one single megalopolis where everything you’ll ever need is always within walking distance.
Seriously, there’s no reason we can’t have rail go to every little town in a country; many countries did exactly that at the turn of the 20th Century.
Seriously, there’s no reason we can’t have rail go to every little town in a country; many countries did exactly that at the turn of the 20th Century.
Which country? Tell me so that I can go find two small towns, put them in Google Maps, and have it tell me how I can talk 10 minutes total to make it from any point A-B via train.
It sounds a bit like the roads are both cheaper to build and maintain, and are of course easier for short- and medium-distance transport of goods. There’s a lot of time, effort, and efficiency wasted if you load a truck at the factory, drive to a train station, load a train with the goods, drive 100 miles by train, then unload the train unto a different truck to deliver the goods to the stores.
It sounds a bit like the roads are both cheaper to build and maintain, and are of course easier for short- and medium-distance transport of goods. There’s a lot of time, effort, and efficiency wasted if you load a truck at the factory, drive to a train station, load a train with the goods, drive 100 miles by train, then unload the train unto a different truck to deliver the goods to the stores.
In the US large-scale shipping business it is well known that trucks are the most economical form of goods transport when those goods have to travel 400 miles (about 643 km, for our metric readers) or less.
Consider where the major Western US ports are located – Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland, Seattle with smaller ports scattered along the coastline.
Now ask yourself why goods that need to move Inter-State in the USA are generally placed on trains and not trucks or airlines.
Cost is a major factor. Distance is another major factor. Sometimes the nature of the goods being moved requires a truck not a train or plane.
Distance in the USA tends to blow the minds of most Europeans; the US is bigger than they imagine. And once goods are loaded into “train friendly” loads (hopper or tank or whatever cars, or shipping cans) those goods can move almost anywhere in the US rail system.
Granted, trucks are not as GREEN as trains, but EV technologies could change that. And the EU countries might be willing to accept the cost of developing much better GREEN trucks for their economic region; some current GREEN trucks are more like “wishful thinking”.
As for trains moving goods (like 16,000 tons of feed grain from Mid-USA to California cattle & chicken farms, or 12,000+ tons of imported goods from Long Beach to Chicago), and having visited the major railroad corridor out of Los Angeles to the East many times, I can assure you that trains are the only way to move massive quantities of goods over long distances in an economical manner.
And the diesel fumes from those locomotives are not as bad as you think; you have to stand on top of them to smell them and exhaust plumes of a properly maintained locomotive are next to nil. That success is thanks to the advent of Tier 4 locomotives slowly replacing older Tiers, but that replacement needs to happen at a faster rate.
The reason there are more new roads is because when new towns and suburbs are built they put in roads, but not new rail tracks. In the UK there often aren’t bus stops either.
Roads are not great for freight either, as the weight causes them to need a lot more maintenance. Typically the cost of whatever licence they need doesn’t fully cover that.
Mostly true, but don’t forget the inland waterways [wikipedia.org].
Looks like they’re comparing capital costs of building roads to capital + operating cost of building and maintaining railways.
The article then goes on to bemoan closing of rail stations. Wow. Way to encourage car usage!
Well, how else would you compare it? Until I can park my own private train in my driveway, that’s the only apt comparison. Trains are centrally controlled and managed, by the nature of serial track lines.
I suspect that, for the UK, (which somehow appears in both lists above) most of the rail spending is on HS2, which may never go into service and, even if the southern part does go into service, it’s not clear that the northern part will.
Much more likely to crash and die or kill someone when driving a car though
I’m always skeptical of a report like this that says “since 1995 they did something”. Maybe there is a reason they picked that year.
Maybe for the previous 50 years roads were underfunded and needed repairs and expansions had been delayed until they reached a critical point.
As for the closed lines, the report says for most of them they don’t know why. For the ones they could get information on, they were closed because people had moved away and they were not being utilized.
Things change. Maintaining tracks and running trains with no riders is just a waste of money.
I’m always skeptical of a report like this that says “since 1995 they did something”.
I’m always skeptical of a report like this that says “since 1995 they did something”.
Why? It’s not like going back further will have any impact on the reality of the current trajectory. They looked at a nice round quarter of a century. If we looked at just the last 10 years the conclusion is the same. If you look at the last 5 years the conclusion is the same. We’re interested in the current trajectory, and how long we’ve been on it. There’s no benefit to looking back further unless… are you suggesting we keep looking back until the we reach some preconceived conclusion you are trying to
Can you look at raw spending and actually think they are shrinking one to expend the other?
Maybe maintaining rail is cheaper so the expense level is just lower. Maybe they are cutting routes that no longer make sense.
What is the basis of comparison. France, for instance, invested heavily from the 60s to mid 90s. For instance, the Paris-London train opened in 1994. If the basis for comparison is the year of a massive investment, then the numbers will look upside down.
What about road investment. If there wer
Look, unlike most of the USA, Europe’s rail infrastructure is still mostly intact. They don’t need to build out more _conventional_ rail.
But high-speed rail of over 200 km/h speed, that may be a different story. I believe that in many European countries, construction has started or in late planning stages. I believe SNCF has already budgeted money to expand TGV lines, especially in southern France.
Is the European railroad pickpocketing situation getting that bad these days?
Even from TFA summary, without looking at the absolute kilometers of railway and roadway, it’s pretty clearly obvious that roads are far more economical than railway.
Railway: centralized, linear, and expensive.
Roads: cheaper, by a lot.
Looking quickly at the total number of roads and rail in Europe (based on what ChatGPT says) –
Rail – 250,000 km
Roads – 5,200,000 km
Just a slight difference of scale there.
So by the numbers: roads are funded at a much lower rate than rail, in all actuality, if you’re looking at
In the USA the federal government realized the need to get people places quickly in case of another war. Like so much of the things we have today there was a big change in our roads because of World War Two.
Europe has been living in the Cold War like we have been in the USA. Many of the things done to fight the Cold War were things started out of lessons learned from World War Two. A train and the track it runs on is a big investment, and therefore a big target for any opposing force. Large roads, bridg
Yeah, this car fad will go away soon I’m sure. Who needs transportation when we can just be in VR.
He’s a huge fan of trains and is always saying he’s moving to Europe to get away from the US and our love of cars…..
Can’t wait to see his comments on all this.
You’ll see a lot of: Trains (lovely trains)
If he is an American he’s not going to find it terribly easy to emigrate to the EU. I explored it once, not because of trains (lovely trains) mind you, and it’s a very tall hill to climb. I had a platonic Finnish friend that seriously suggested we get married, she desperately wanted to live in the US and I in the EU, but for some weird reason she lost interest in moving to the US in late 2016. Not sure what changed, lol, one day I’ll ask her, but in all seriousness that was the only realistic way either of us found to pull it off. Unless you have a mountain of money, a very rare skill, or equally rare postgraduate degree, good luck. My trade (IT) is over represented in the EU, so no employer is apt to sponsor me, and hers (nursing) has licenses and educational requirements that differ across international borders, she’d be starting from scratch even if she found an employer willing to sponsor her.
There are a few EU countries that will give you a passport under jus sanguinis, right of blood, but none of them are in my familial/genetic background.
One day humanity will do away with borders. Right after the nuclear holocaust and Vulcan first contact at the rate we’re going. Too bad transporters will negate the need for trains (lovely trains)
Yep, Czech Republic is pretty much ideal
I’m opposite to you
“Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the UK”. Other than the UK, I have a list of EU countries where I’d want to live. Austria is pretty sweet and I have close family there.
Also, a good system that’s 6.5% shorter is still better than the shitty system that the US is cursed with.
US Median is $31k. I don’t see how you afford that on that salary. You can buy used, but higher prices on cars mean higher used prices and more people holding onto “beaters” so less supply.
It’s not sustainable. The cost of car ownership, even with how much of those costs we externalize, it getting too high for the amount of money Americans make.
US Median is $31k. I don’t see how you afford that on that salary. You can buy used, but higher prices on cars mean higher used prices and more people holding onto “beaters” so less supply.
It’s not sustainable. The cost of car ownership, even with how much of those costs we externalize, it getting too high for the amount of money Americans make.
The US median household after-tax income is around $64k [census.gov], although that ranges [worldpopul…review.com] from $49k in Mississippi to $90k in Maryland. However, many people earn less than the median. Individual (pre-tax) income [bls.gov] is $57k at the median, $38k at the 25th percentile, and $30k at the 10th percentile. Buying a used car every few years at the median income is doable, but there are many people who earn much less than the median. Used cars at the very low end start at $2-3k. Not good cars, but drivable.
Americans will still
“The US median household after-tax income is around $64k [census.gov],”
Which means that its 32K per individual (assuming 2 people make up a household.)
I dunno, there’s lots and lots of single people. I don’t think you can divide by 2 like that.
“If youÃ(TM)re making 31k, which means amongst other things almost every (base healthcare, housing, food, communications) expense is paid for by the state, and you still canÃ(TM)t afford a semi-decent used car, your priorities are a bit off.”
Bro you can’t even afford a decent browser.
Jokes aside you have not even one single solitary clue. At 31k/year you aren’t getting housing, you aren’t getting enough food to live on…
My one totaled vehicle was a tree falling on it in the middle of the night, nothing to do with driving ability. Luckily I had comprehensive.
I’ve also lucked out at least 4 times barely being missed by people running stop signs, each a couple of seconds or less away from getting t-boned. Being a good driver only helps so far with some of the idiots on the road.
So stupid. There is no way we can continue to use cars. This will never work as we see every day.
Why?
It has worked my entire life.
I don’t see if faltering in any fashion presently….
So stupid. There is no way we can continue to use cars. This will never work as we see every day.
So stupid. There is no way we can continue to use cars. This will never work as we see every day.
You can stop driving if you like. The rest of us will go on with our lives just fine
Experience suggests that when a German says “Take a trip on my train,” it’s too late to start running in the other direction. You’ll want a car then. A fast one.
There is no way we can continue to use cars.
There is no way we can continue to use cars.
Do you mean this cannot continue for lack of petroleum fuel? There’s a solution to that, synthesized hydrocarbon fuels.
The US Navy has been experimenting with producing hydrocarbon fuels at sea using energy from a nuclear fission reactor (like on an aircraft carrier) and raw material out of the sea, the hydrogen from H2O and carbon from CO2 dissolved in the water. They claim to be able to produce JP-5 at a price competitive with what it takes to ship it to the fleet now. What they gain is no longer needi
Induced demand only applies in growing cities. Yiu can easily build enough where population has stagnantated like in most of Europe.
Stil dumb though. Somehow building roads isn’t counted as subsidizing drivers but railways need to turn a profit
because as population declines people still concentrate in the big cities where the work and amenities are
I keep reading more and more about with WFH, crime, etc..that people are moving OUT of this big/urban cities for a better life where you have some elbow room.
OK, so in your scenario we have a city that at the same time has enough people to fill 20 lane road network, and yet, can easily fit in a “walking distance”-radius circle?
OK, so in your scenario we have a city that at the same time has enough people to fill 20 lane road network, and yet, can easily fit in a “walking distance”-radius circle?
People can certainly live like that, but nobody says they will be happy about it.
There’s been planned cities with people living within walking distance of some kind of rail system as the center of moving people long distances. Some plans have been more successful than others. Even then there’s still roads for cars, trucks, and buses to keep people happy (or at least try to keep them happy) for when the train can’t take people and goods where they want to go and when they want to get there.
I just laugh to
Subsidizing employers shouldn’t be the goal of city planning. If your employer needs to have people available to fix a router or capture a prisoner, then they should have someone there 24/7. Don’t push the burden of your business model onto your neighbors.
Induced demand only applies in growing cities.
It applies to congested cities growing or not.
Induced demand only applies in growing cities. Yiu can easily build enough where population has stagnantated like in most of Europe.
Induced demand only applies in growing cities. Yiu can easily build enough where population has stagnantated like in most of Europe.
Many European cities and/or their suburbs are growing, at the expense of more rural places if not due to reproduction. One of the reasons housing is going through the fucking roof.
Today, population growth is occurring in the largest or capital cities at the expense of second- and third-tier cities. From 2002 to 2012, the total EU28 population increased by 3%, but population growth in the capital metro regions was 7%. Although this pattern is not universal, it is particularly noticeable in geographically larger European countries, where international distances are greater. For example, it is highly pronounced in the case of London, Stockholm, Paris and Warsaw.
Today, population growth is occurring in the largest or capital cities at the expense of second- and third-tier cities. From 2002 to 2012, the total EU28 population increased by 3%, but population growth in the capital metro regions was 7%. Although this pattern is not universal, it is particularly noticeable in geographically larger European countries, where international distances are greater. For example, it is highly pronounced in the case of London, Stockholm, Paris and Warsaw.
https://www.eib.org/en/essays/… [eib.org]
But yeah it sucks that trains aren’t getting the necessary investments. There are routes where theyr’e working great but cross-country trips can still be a huge pain in the ass and some routes are just not well covered.
Just this weekend a friend and I did a ~350km trip (each way) and just drove by
Stil dumb though. Somehow building roads isn’t counted as subsidizing drivers but railways need to turn a profit
Hmm…roads paid for by fuel taxes, and other property taxes on your cars, fees, etc….
The other problem is that in the US, “fast” trains seem to be about 70mph, whereas where I live in the UK, the slow trains are 110mph and the fast trains are 140mph.
and probably because of bribes from the Auto Industry. Look up some videos on YouTube from “Adam Something” about induced demand. You can’t build enough roads for the demand. You can never build enough roads for the demand. So you always end up with massive traffic jams. Individual cars are just a terrible way to move people around. And that’s before we talk about giving up 1/3 of our cities to parking lots or the smog from tire particles let alone the issues with global warming.
and probably because of bribes from the Auto Industry. Look up some videos on YouTube from “Adam Something” about induced demand. You can’t build enough roads for the demand. You can never build enough roads for the demand. So you always end up with massive traffic jams. Individual cars are just a terrible way to move people around. And that’s before we talk about giving up 1/3 of our cities to parking lots or the smog from tire particles let alone the issues with global warming.
I don’t know that you can say bribes are inherently necessary in a situation like this. There’s a LOT of profit in the auto industry and a TON of profit for government in the taxation of the auto industry. Trains are almost considered sunk-cost infrastructure with no return. Europe is catching up to America when it comes to letting profits drive decisions and giving up an easy give as they begin to look at better ways to increase profits, consequences be damned. It may take a while, but look for other avenu
Trains are for students, elderly, city center daytrips and cargo.
Trains are for students, elderly, city center daytrips and cargo.
Given a choice between flying and a train, I’ll take a train any time. Flying maybe cheaper and faster than flying but I can get my own private room and I don’t have to deal with the fatguy next to me shitting himself because of turbulence. Come to think of it, I would rather drive than fly.
Hmm. How do you feel about boats?
Hmm. How do you feel about boats?
Not a fan of getting out on the water, I don’t float and that concerns me perhaps more than it should. I’m not a fan of flying either. I have a bit of claustrophobia, likely due in large part to my above average height making seating on most any public transport uncomfortable. I’ve been pleased in taking a bus, the seating I’ve had on those weren’t so bad. The short hop turboprop planes often aren’t that bad, they don’t have the same kind of overhead bins to bang my head against like jets do. I really
.
The US has abysmal public transit and urban design. So you are FORCED into car ownership and all that it entails, just to do simple things like groceries.
Id love to know why being forced into car ownership is freedom.
.
The US has abysmal public transit and urban design. So you are FORCED into car ownership and all that it entails, just to do simple things like groceries.
Id love to know why being forced into car ownership is freedom.
.
The US has abysmal public transit and urban design. So you are FORCED into car ownership and all that it entails, just to do simple things like groceries.
Id love to know why being forced into car ownership is freedom.
Profits. It’s profitable for the owner class for the under classes to require cars to survive. There need be no further reason.
Having lived in the suburbs I have no idea why anyone choses to do so. It is a special kind of hell. Full of traffic because everyone needs to drive for every single thing imaginable.
I live in a medium density place. My flat is large. Have balconies on both sides. Many parks, one that spans 10km along a river. Everything I need on a daily basis is a short walk away. And there is culture and entertainment and life. The tallest building is just four stories so the sun isn’t blotted out like it is in the city center.
I value a life of convenience and comfort. The suburbs are antithetical to both.
Now I’m not one to say no one should own a car. But I am against forced car ownership as that is also the opposite of freedom
Having lived in the suburbs I have no idea why anyone choses to do so. It is a special kind of hell. Full of traffic because everyone needs to drive for every single thing imaginable.
I live in a medium density place. My flat is large. Have balconies on both sides. Many parks, one that spans 10km along a river. Everything I need on a daily basis is a short walk away. And there is culture and entertainment and life. The tallest building is just four stories so the sun isn’t blotted out like it is in the cit
Tell me you are from the US without even saying so. I also suspect you havenâ(TM)t spent much time outside of North America?
Tell me you are from the US without even saying so. I also suspect you havenâ(TM)t spent much time outside of North America?
The problem for us North Americans – besides the shitty attitude of the person you were replying to – is the chicken & egg. I live in a moderate size city. 200,000 people. If my wife wants to visit a friend who happens to live on the other side of town, she’d have at least a two hour trip with three transfers to go between bus routes, plus a 15 minute walk from the final stop to the house. Same for the return trip. Or… I could just drive her and I’d be back home in about 35 minutes.
That happens
You guys also somehow managed to make anyone using public transport get regarded as being poor. And the appearance of the public transport followed suite.
Here, I met (the local equivalent of) senators and congressmen on the tram, going to work. The billionaire (local currency) founder of the company I work for takes public transport. Then VC came in, we got some American C-levels, and they’re completely baffled in our late HQ’s city.
Using public transport has to be “the norm” socially.
it’s a function of population density mainly, NYC’s subway system is used by all classes of people (aside from those rich enough for a private helicopter, but that’s kind of rare). in most of our cities it’s been cheaper to build outward than upward, so you get sprawly abominations that don’t lend themselves to mass transit.
Then there’s the social aspect, but i’m wagering most european cities will catch up to the US on that front soon enough, and then you’ll understand
You guys also somehow managed to make anyone using public transport get regarded as being poor. And the appearance of the public transport followed suite. Here, I met (the local equivalent of) senators and congressmen on the tram, going to work. The billionaire (local currency) founder of the company I work for takes public transport. Then VC came in, we got some American C-levels, and they’re completely baffled in our late HQ’s city.
Using public transport has to be “the norm” socially.
You guys also somehow managed to make anyone using public transport get regarded as being poor. And the appearance of the public transport followed suite. Here, I met (the local equivalent of) senators and congressmen on the tram, going to work. The billionaire (local currency) founder of the company I work for takes public transport. Then VC came in, we got some American C-levels, and they’re completely baffled in our late HQ’s city.
Using public transport has to be “the norm” socially.
Somehow?
It’s no mystery. Those who are poor can’t afford cars. Those who aren’t poor can, and usually do because of the example I gave you where the options are: bus and nearly five hours in transit, or car and just over one hour in transit.
The problem I’m pointing out to you is that as long as the public transit system is shitty and can be circumvented by throwing money at a car, it will continue to be shitty. Yes, people with money here avoid public transit because it’s “low class”, but more import
I remember Austin, Texas having a bit of a fight over a proposed light rail system. I don’t know how it turned out and I might look it up later, but the general point stands regardless.
Austin had plans for a new rail line that just baffled people because it didn’t stop at where people were most likely to go. There was then a relatively new airport on the edge of the city with a road to it that was not yet up to carrying the traffic this created. In the middle of the city was all the government buildings
Yeah this is the hard part in the US, also the issue of once you take a train or bus to a city, how do you get around if it doesnt have public transport itself?
I will say though that the perception of trains versus busses is pretty strong in that people have a much better perception of trains on the whole and they usually have much better amenities and a lack of traffic
It certainly doesn’t make sense anywhere but in the US there are a bunch of routes that we service by plane or cars that are perfect fits fo
It’s not solely a chicken and egg thing my friend, although, I painfully sympathize with your struggle in a medium sized city. Just big enough to have traffic and parking struggles but not big enough to have a good transit network. That said….
New York City has one of the best transit systems in the world and even there it frequently cannot compete with a car on time from Point A to Point B. Most any trip between boroughs is gonna be faster by car. Many routes within Manhattan (the densest/best tr
New Orleans has a shitty transit system, especially if you canâ(TM)t afford to live in the city proper (if you canâ(TM)t afford a car you probably canâ(TM)t afford rent in Orleans Parish, thereâ(TM)s a real chicken and egg problem!) but I still used it a lot, mostly for events and nightlife. $1.25 streetcar/bus ride + 10 block walk beats the hell out of $40 for parking at the Dome, or $30 in the FQ, and not being able to drink. I traded the extra time and miserable sweaty walk for the fr
I lived in Mid-City about three blocks from the Canal line, so, I was throughly spoiled with that. It’s also a fairly bikable city, although, you’re taking your life into your hands with the way people drive there.
I got away from the ride-sharing concept after the third time a driver rolled up drunker than me. That happened on both Uber and Lyft in New Orleans. Neither company did a damn thing except promise not to match me with them again. Uber wouldn’t even refund my money (Lyft at least did) and ban
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Intel Unveils Meteor Lake Architecture
Microsoft’s Next Xbox, Coming 2028, Envisions Hybrid Computing
It is impossible to enjoy idling thoroughly unless one has plenty of work to do. — Jerome Klapka Jerome
