Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think Obama's high speed rail program will fail. The reason why it will fail is because it is too expensive.
What they should use instead is maglev trains, which currently are MUCH cheaper both to build and maintain. Look at the technology here:
AMT - Clean, Green, Sustainable Mass Transit - Home
This company, American maglev, already has deals with European countries to build very inexpensive maglev trains. There, it is only $2 million per mile of track (compared to like $20 million per mile for Transrapid's German high speed train), and the footprint is very small that it can go alongside the highway or in the middle of the highway. There is much less need for eminent domain. Also, the maintainence fees will be much less as steel on steel rail like Obama's HSR would be expensive to maintain but maglev has no moving parts and it'd be much cheaper. It is elevated too so it has a safe right of way without running into cars or slower trains. I think Atlanta, where this technology is being developed, may be able to do it because they could it is cheap enough to work into it. Atlanta being a sprawling low density type city can still benefit and a good thing is that if American Maglev gets to build there it can change Atlanta into more dense TODs at stations throughout the suburban landscape at 150 mph as a "regional" maglev.
If Atlanta being a sprawling low density city can have maglev be economically viable for it, then so can every city in the US. Not just the Bos-Wash corridor. They may need to build TODs near every station in the suburbs but I think it could work. Then have a fast 300 mph between nearby major cities for the Bos-Wash corridor.
Someone here said HSR would cut into biodiversity and disrupt migratory patterns for animals. But Eisenhower's and other highways, and suburban sprawl housing already do that here and much more so than train tracks do. Those multilane highways that cross over the whole US already do it and it is worse than an elevated maglev would be, especially since land animals can pass under an elevated maglev line.
To answer your question, the US should not build a $3,000,000,000,000 HSR across the country. They should instead use a much cheaper maglev that can go the same speed of 300 mph or more but much cheaper and with less need to use eniment domain.
The days of cheap gas are over. I don't understand why this concept is not hitting on the middle class of this country. It isn't about spending money RIGHT NOW. It's about making an investment FOR LATER because an unavoidable long-term trend is going to strangle us to death.
Food, energy and gas prices keep rising. If you are not a millionaire, this affects you deeply. Think of our current infrastructure as representing a fraction of the cost you pay every time you buy food. Currently that cost is diesel, trucks, tolls, depreciation on trucks, salaries for truck drivers etc. Highways, highway maintenance, relevant taxes, fluctuating oil markets, etc.
The price will never again go down. It's only ever going to go higher, and higher, and higher...
Also, when was the last time anyone here remembers air fare being very afforable, easy and efficient? Do you really believe it's going to decrease ever again? Tell me, when you buy tickets for this holiday season, if you like paying inflated prices. Because that is going to become the norm. And let me know if you see your wages rising soon to match that rise in time.
Three trillion is quite a bit, however. I'm wondering why so much. It's just a frickin' railroad; weren't we building these things in the 1800's? Have we just forgotten how to do it?
Should the United States spend three trillion ($3,000,000,000,000) to build a high speed rail system across the country? And not high speed like, "88 miles per hour", but high speed like "300-400 mph".
But what if it was going to cost 3 times as much as originally anticipated? What if it was going to cost 10 trillion ($10,000,000,000,000)? Would you still have the same feeling towards it?
I bring this up because I have been thinking about the Interstates. In 1956 when the Interstate system was put into motion by President Eisenhower it was given $33 Billion for 41,000 miles of highway. I have a hard time thinking everyone in America thought that was a great way to spend their tax dollars. I would venture to guess that a sizable portion (half??) of the population was against the idea for either: fiscal, political, practical, and/or ideological reasons. Add to that the fact that when it was finally completed, it cost three times as much as originally planned.
I think you would be hard pressed to find 10% of the population that thinks the Interstate system is/was a waste of money after having used it, seen it's benefits, and understanding the importance of the efficient transportation it provides. Without a doubt the Interstates propelled America's economy to the next level.
Essentially, do we think America will ever do a project like this again? Or is sticker shock always going to keep America advancing in baby steps, not the leaps and bounds we were once known for?
Is America's political divide and/or urban/nonurban divide giving Americans the option of buying a Porsche or a Hugo when it comes to public programs like mass transportation?
The US and no country will every build a country wide high speed Rail system , it makes no sense. But along selective corridors like in the Northeast , Midwest , and West Coast it does make sense. There is no high speed train even Maglev that goes 400mph....most Americans are Un-educated on the subject... High Speed Rail is defined as trains going faster then 125mph , most lines are built for 150mph+....
I think Obama's high speed rail program will fail. The reason why it will fail is because it is too expensive.
What they should use instead is maglev trains, which currently are MUCH cheaper both to build and maintain. Look at the technology here:
AMT - Clean, Green, Sustainable Mass Transit - Home
This company, American maglev, already has deals with European countries to build very inexpensive maglev trains. There, it is only $2 million per mile of track (compared to like $20 million per mile for Transrapid's German high speed train), and the footprint is very small that it can go alongside the highway or in the middle of the highway. There is much less need for eminent domain. Also, the maintainence fees will be much less as steel on steel rail like Obama's HSR would be expensive to maintain but maglev has no moving parts and it'd be much cheaper. It is elevated too so it has a safe right of way without running into cars or slower trains. I think Atlanta, where this technology is being developed, may be able to do it because they could it is cheap enough to work into it. Atlanta being a sprawling low density type city can still benefit and a good thing is that if American Maglev gets to build there it can change Atlanta into more dense TODs at stations throughout the suburban landscape at 150 mph as a "regional" maglev.
If Atlanta being a sprawling low density city can have maglev be economically viable for it, then so can every city in the US. Not just the Bos-Wash corridor. They may need to build TODs near every station in the suburbs but I think it could work. Then have a fast 300 mph between nearby major cities for the Bos-Wash corridor.
Someone here said HSR would cut into biodiversity and disrupt migratory patterns for animals. But Eisenhower's and other highways, and suburban sprawl housing already do that here and much more so than train tracks do. Those multilane highways that cross over the whole US already do it and it is worse than an elevated maglev would be, especially since land animals can pass under an elevated maglev line.
To answer your question, the US should not build a $3,000,000,000,000 HSR across the country. They should instead use a much cheaper maglev that can go the same speed of 300 mph or more but much cheaper and with less need to use eniment domain.
Maglev trains are a joke and very expensive to build , Japan is building there line in 4 segments over the next 4 decades.... Why would the US do something larger then what Japan is doing?
Um, there are animals a higher density of animals ect on the ground, so if your train is going at 350mph a mouse hitting the train is an immense force.
Um, there are animals a higher density of animals ect on the ground, so if your train is going at 350mph a mouse hitting the train is an immense force.
I don't understand those people who are opposed because "when I get to a car-centric city, I won't be able to get anywhere." Really?
The same rules apply to air travel. Rent a car and get around that way.
I believe we got in to our predicament by working too locally and not thinking regionally or nationally enough. We need to fix this problem by having some sort of alternative to air and interstate travel. High speed is the path to the future.
Think of the children!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
