The health care bill has passed. Headlines hail Obama as the image of the new America, retracting the country away from the old, Regan years. History has been made…
but what’s next?
Part of this new growing conscious in the country has begun to look at the earth in a new way. No longer is it limitless with resources, no longer something to ignore, or even a safe place to build a home: People are treading with lighter shoes. But at the same time, the economy struggles and Obama’s fate relies on his ability to stimulate the country and create new jobs.
Trains are part of this solution. High speed trains that have flourished in the rest of the modern world can compete with the automobile and airfare. The Obama administration has awarded $8 billion, part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), to the development of the country’s first, national, high speed rail system, connecting several, heavily trafficked cities. The trains on a rail through California will reach speeds of 220 miles per hour, and average a commute time, from L.A. to San Francisco, of about 2 and half hours. Normally, a drive between the two cities is about 6 to 8 hours. Imagine the influx of train travelers. Imagine if similar rails could be opened around the country.
The project will spur the economy with job creation, much of the purpose behind ARRA, but, on an environmental standpoint, is projected to save 12.7 million barrels of oil per year by 2030. Trains require only one third of the amount of energy compared to planes and one fifth of the daily automobile trip. Also, the rails will steer us away from fossil fuels as they are operated with electricity. As our knowledge of renewable energies increases, the pollution trains will save us could be astronomical.
The automobile industry is sinking and right in its wake could be the train. Not only will the environmental impact be great, but perhaps it will counteract the travesties in Detroit. Trains serve as a great metaphor for the green movement. As consumers are looking for the greenest, most sustainable products, a whole new economy will explode with possibilities.
(photos from treehugger.com)
Busses provide a much more cost-effective and efficient way of carrying people around metro areas. Look at the TransMileno system in Bogota and how it has been copied in nuermous metro areas at a fraction of the cost and time as trains. Sure high speed rail sounds sexier, but for the majority of the world, it just isnt going to happen. This includes the US where the sheer cost and capital needed for these projects drastically outweights the projected ridership for many of these proposals.
I agree. A bus is a more realistic way to travel… for short distances. But in terms of long distances, fast speed trains have the potential to replace even planes. Except financially speaking, buses offer little competition with airfare. Would you rather take a bus or a plane to Florida from New York? A plane will end up being cheaper and much faster. Now imagine there were a fast train from New York to Florida. Essentially, with fast speed trains traveling up to 250 mph, the time will be quite similar to planes and will probably cost less. With a carbon counting conscious, you’re going to choose a train over a plane, and in a capitalist world, where there is a demand, the best supply will win. Airfare emits massive amounts of carbon emissions, yet it is still the smartest way to travel, in terms of time and money, because a train ride now takes a long time. But, with faster trains running on electric power, people will start to switch over to trains for their longer destinations. If it is cheaper and faster, why would you say no.