Re: World's First Fuel Cell-Powered Train Locomotive Slated for 2008

From: Scott A Crosby (scrosby_at_cs.rice.edu)
Date: 08/19/04 

Date: 19 Aug 2004 15:15:09 -0500

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:31:05 -0600, Hatunen <hatuunen@cox.net> writes:

> >And why would things be any different now with HSR, except that now
> >the passenger rail network is in more disrepair, hundreds of miles of
> >high speed track is needed, and airplanes are the entrenched
> >technology? IE: Tell me why history wouldn't repeat itself exactly the
> >same way this time.
>
> Going to Europe can be illuminating. High speed trains are effective
> because they are used for medium distances where six hours is about
> the longest trip that gives a train an attraction over air travel
> (which is growing rapidly inside Europe since low-cost airlines have
> been allowed).

In Europe, the countries are small. Germany is only 360k km^2. France,
540k km^2. With 200km/h trains virtually anyplace you might want to
reach within the country is under 5 hours away. That isn't true about
the US.

Europe also has a much higher population density. Germany and France
combined have half of the population of the US, but only 8% of the
land area, implying any nationwide HSR network is going to require
several times the track milage --- and expense.

The distance between San Diego, CA and San Francisco, CA is
800km. Houston, TX to El Paso, TX is 1300km, and there's not much in
between. How far apart is Nice, France and Brest, France? Or Kiel,
Germany and the Austrian border? Europe and the US have very different
population distributions, both at the large scale --- across the
continent --- and at the small scale --- within a city.

> Another factor is that European governments consider trains and
> local transit a social good and necessity and they are willing to
> subsidize them heavily. One of the reasons for the decline of
> rail in the 1950s (besides the interstate highways and toll roads
> making driving attractive) was the rail service was provided by
> private rail companies that had to make a profit; you can't make
> a profit on passenger service and the rail companies found ways
> to kill off passenger service.

Wasn't passenger rail in the US a private and profitable and a
desireable way to travel before it was outcompeted by airlines? Why
would the outcome be any different today? With enough subsidies, you
could bring back horse&buggy carriages for their lack of pollution and
the valuable horse manure they'd leave on our streets.

Scott

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Worlds First Fuel Cell-Powered Train Locomotive Slated for 2008
    ... > Going to Europe can be illuminating. ... Germany and France ... > making driving attractive) was the rail service was provided by ... Wasn't passenger rail in the US a private and profitable and a ...
    (sci.energy.hydrogen)
  • Re: EWS und DB
    ... the EWS website, and in English and Spanish at the Transfesa website. ... rail freight sector in Europe. ... "The transport and logistics industry is booming. ...
    (uk.railway)
  • Re: The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
    ... Electric trains work in parts of Europe because a long haul there ... US and for local transit such as the Bay Area BART system." ... which you indicated is what would be called "long haul" in Europe.. ... And the population density of California is why there is any rail service ...
    (rec.aviation.piloting)
  • Re: Why Britain doesnt need High Speed Rail
    ... But what works well in France ... High speed rail can certainly have great benefits if built in the ... h train might be ideal for routes like Paris-Lyon or Madrid- ... A 250 km/h train would only be a few minutes ...
    (uk.transport)
  • Re: Eurostars move to St Pancras a success after all
    ... They paid 10 million for each ICE 3M to make it France-compatible, ... But the main differences between France and Germany are: ... rail is much higher. ...
    (uk.railway)