• Gsus4
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Yes, but the major factor invoked by think-tanks (which admittedly only care about aviation and car industries) is always that the low-population-density makes track-laying and maintenance unprofitable outside freight, unlike in Europe or Asia, I can get you one example of such a report.

    These cost calculations probably aim for optimising cost and not for CO2 emissions :/ anyway, good explanation with the decentralised and public-private mesh rail network

    • maynarkh
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      the low-population-density makes track-laying and maintenance unprofitable

      Yet no one cares how much municipalities have to keep going into debt to subsidize the creation of those low population areas in the first place.

    • Changetheview@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Valid point, especially as rail is more expensive compared to highway and air. At least on its face without emissions and other hard-to-quantify factors.

      Many moving parts would have to come together for it to be more viable in the US, and there’s still no guarantee it’ll ever be cheaper. Or popular.

      I used to be in a rare situation where I could actually use a light rail to commute and avoid a terrible 45 minute to hour-long drive. I really enjoyed the free time in the train compared to stress in the car. But nearly every one of my coworkers refused the train because it wasn’t massively cheaper and for other relatively-minor reasons. It was eye opening for me.