If the stimulus package is to fund more energy efficient infrastructure for a future of dwindling fossil fuel supply, what priorities should be given to POV vis a vis passenger rail?
James Howard Kunstler, author of [i]The Long Emergency[i][/i sees no future in our current reliance upon POVs.
Blind Spot April 21, 2008
I happened to be flying into Minneapolis the very day that Northwest Airlines announced its merger with Delta --Delta to be the more senior (more equal) partner -- in effect, to absorb Northwest and run its operations. Many observers are not optimistic that the merger will rescue these companies in any case, since both airlines are financial basket-cases, but it's a sort of last-ditch effort to save them both.
It was less than great news up around Minneapolis, Northwest's corporate headquarters. A lot of people I talked to were anxious that Delta would cut service to a lot of little cities in the upper Great Lakes and northern prairie region, places like Duluth, Grand Forks, Green Bay, Traverse City and many other towns. Instead of one or two flights a day, they may end up with one or two a week, or none at all, they feared.
The Northwest pilots were none too pleased, either, because Delta was making noises about their own pilots seniority counting for more than Northwest's pilot's seniority in terms of preferred assignments and scheduling. In fact, the Northwest pilots were so pissed off they threatened to scuttle the merger.
That part of the country is a big region of wide open spaces Things are very far apart. You wouldn't want to drive a car from Des Moines to Rapid City, even if gasoline was a good bit less than the $3.50 a gallon it is now. Driving around the prairie is especially tedious -- and dangerous because of the tedium. The landscape is boring. The roads are dead straight and mostly dead flat.
It happened, also, that I got a little guided tour of Minneapolis from the author-shlepping service that my publisher engaged. We rode past the old Minneapolis central train station. He said no trains stop there anymore (there's a dinky afterthought of a station next door in St. Paul). Anyway, the only train that comes through the Twin Cities is the pokey once-a-day Amtrak to Seattle.
In other words, this region of the country has next-to-zero railroad service. Can we pause a moment here to ask: exactly how far does America have its head up its ass? Do you get the picture? Can you connect the dots? The airline industry is dying and absolutely no thought is being given to how people will get around this big country -- except to make the stupid assumption that we can just drive our cars instead. Even during the several days I was around Minneapolis, no news media or politician raised the subject of reviving passenger railroad service.
In point of fact, these are exactly the kind of trips that would be better served by rail, anyway -- the towns that are less than five hundred miles apart. The travel time between trains and planes would be comparable, considering the two hours or so that you have to add to every airplane trip because of all the security crap, not to mention the delays. As a matter of fact, USA today ran a front page story two days after the Delta / Northwest announcement saying "Air Trips Slowest [now than] in Past 20 Years." Subhead: "Trend likely to persist as congestion worsens."
One big reason for the airport congestion, of course, is that the runways are cluttered up with planes making trips of only a few hundred miles. This has been a problem for quite a while. Periodically, it gets so bad that the media gets all excited and sometimes (last summer, for instance) the President makes a statement deploring it. Since the current president is a knucklehead, it apparently hasn't occurred to him to get behind a revival of the passenger rail system. But Mr. Bush is apparently not the only elected knucklehead in this country, because absolutely nobody is talking about this.
Now get this: we are sleepwalking into a transportation crisis. As I already said, the airline industry is dying. The price of petroleum-based aviation fuel is killing it. And forget the fantasies about running it on bio-diesel or used french-fry oil. Driving cars will not be an adequate substitute, either. It's imperative that this country gets serious about restoring the passenger rail system. We can't not talk about it for another year. We must demand that the candidates for president speak to this issue. If you who are reading this are active reporters or editors in the news media, you've got to raise your voices behind this issue.
In his Dec. 28, 2008 Forcast for 2009:
I am especially concerned about an "infrastructure stimulus" project aimed at highway improvement at the expense of public transit. This would be the epitome of a campaign to sustain the unsustainable. We need to begin planning right away for a transition away from automobiles, not in order to be good socialists but because Happy Motoring is at the core of our unsustainability trap. The car system is going to fail in manifold ways whether we like it or not, and it will fail due to circumstances already underway. For one thing, it will cease to be democratic as the remnants of the middle class find it impossible to get car loans, or pay for fuel, or insurance, and that will set in motion a very impressive politics-of-grievance setting apart those who are still able to enjoy motoring and those who have been foreclosed from it. Contrary to what you might make of the the current situation in the oil markets, we are in for a heap of trouble with both the price and supply of petroleum (more on this below). And there is no chance in hell that any techno rescue remedy to keep all the cars running by other means will materialize.
State of Cringe Jan. 26, 2008:
I've been skeptical of the "stimulus" as sketched out so far, aimed at refurbishing the infrastructure of Happy Motoring. To me, this is the epitome of a campaign to sustain the unsustainable -- since car-dependency is absolutely the last thing we need to shore up and promote. I haven't heard any talk so far about promoting walkable communities, or any meaningful plan to get serious about fixing passenger rail and integral public transit.
-- As mentioned above, we have to get passenger rail going again because the airlines are going to die the next time there is an uptick in oil prices, or a spot shortage of oil. Let's not be too grandiose and attempt to build expensive high-speed or mag-lev networks -- certainly not right now -- because they require entirely new track systems. Let's fix those regular tracks already out there, rusting in the rain, or temporarily replaced by bike trails.
Full Version: Econocars or shiny new trains
Common Ground Common Sense > Issues that Affect Our Lives > Energy Independence, Environment, Science and Technology > Energy Independence
jeffmoskin, on the other hand, sees no future in American passenger rail.
Riding Amtrack tends to reinforce this pessimism.
Jeff argues the case for econocars made in the USA.
There was the era of the foot. Man walked from continent to continent. It took generations, but foot was all they had, and they were hunters and gatherers.
It was replaced by the era of the horse, and armies conquered continents in a ruler's lifetime.
It was replaced by the era of the sailing ship, and oceans were crossed in a ruler's lifetime.
It was replaced by the era of the locomotive, and coast to coast movement of goods took a few days.
It was replaced by the era of the car, and America grew into a suburban and exurban country. The jet plane made travel by train undesirable and relegated it to moving cargo, because cargo never complained about the crappy condition of 150 year old track.
So, sure, you can have it BACK, because BACK is the direction you are suggesting.
I suggest going FORWARD, to smaller, more efficient cars, because there is no way on earth that our exurban residents can get to that rail transit without one, and as long as he/she is driving to the station, why not continue to the destination?
Bill Bradley, who would have made a GREAT LEADER, said to Deborah Solomon of NYT:
"...We fought two wars on oil in the last 15 years, and yet we are not willing to fight against oil dependence. If we simply had the same gas-mileage average as Europe does, about 43 miles per gallon, we would import no oil from OPEC. Zero..."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...750C0A9619C8B63
Already happening. Fiat bought a 35% interest in Chrysler. They are going to make Fiats here in Detroit.
GM makes some of the best small cars in the world. But they make them in other countries. Surely they could make them here.
Seriously, rail transport is totally impractical. We have built a road network over the past 100 years, the value of which is incalculable. We no longer live walking distance to the RR station. Those days are gone.
Riding Amtrack tends to reinforce this pessimism.
Jeff argues the case for econocars made in the USA.
QUOTE(jeffmoskin @ Jan 31 2009, 09:14 AM) 
QUOTE(Istoodforu @ Jan 31 2009, 06:26 AM)
Can we have interurban rail transit back?
Yes we can!
Yes we can!
There was the era of the foot. Man walked from continent to continent. It took generations, but foot was all they had, and they were hunters and gatherers.
It was replaced by the era of the horse, and armies conquered continents in a ruler's lifetime.
It was replaced by the era of the sailing ship, and oceans were crossed in a ruler's lifetime.
It was replaced by the era of the locomotive, and coast to coast movement of goods took a few days.
It was replaced by the era of the car, and America grew into a suburban and exurban country. The jet plane made travel by train undesirable and relegated it to moving cargo, because cargo never complained about the crappy condition of 150 year old track.
So, sure, you can have it BACK, because BACK is the direction you are suggesting.
I suggest going FORWARD, to smaller, more efficient cars, because there is no way on earth that our exurban residents can get to that rail transit without one, and as long as he/she is driving to the station, why not continue to the destination?
Bill Bradley, who would have made a GREAT LEADER, said to Deborah Solomon of NYT:
"...We fought two wars on oil in the last 15 years, and yet we are not willing to fight against oil dependence. If we simply had the same gas-mileage average as Europe does, about 43 miles per gallon, we would import no oil from OPEC. Zero..."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...750C0A9619C8B63
QUOTE(jeffmoskin @ Jan 31 2009, 06:38 PM)
QUOTE(Istoodforu @ Jan 31 2009, 12:18 PM)
Do you have any idea how long it would take Detroit to retool its assembly lines from making gas guzzling SUVs, RAM pickups, "minivans," motorhomes, muscle cars, and other sundry Belchfire 88 models to econocars?
Already happening. Fiat bought a 35% interest in Chrysler. They are going to make Fiats here in Detroit.
GM makes some of the best small cars in the world. But they make them in other countries. Surely they could make them here.
Seriously, rail transport is totally impractical. We have built a road network over the past 100 years, the value of which is incalculable. We no longer live walking distance to the RR station. Those days are gone.
ca. $4-5K plus shipping (can haul 200-500 lbs.) plus food
$10,000 to $50,000 plus feed, saddles, gear, stable, caretaking, etc.
$80 plus food
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.