English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Alternative = something that isn't an automobile.
yes ,I am an american I live in Georgia.
Why don't the goverments support high speed rail, commute rail, water taxis, etc ??
too much traffic, too much pollution.

2007-04-15 13:08:49 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Cars & Transportation Commuting

4 answers

I am the change I want to see in the world: I ride my bike to work.

I've been commuting by bike off and on in Atlanta since 1979 and am finding conditions are steadily improving. I've started counting the number of bike commuters I see each day to document the increase I'm seeing.

And bikes work great in combination with trains.

It is better to remove one automobile than to curse the traffic. ;-).

2007-04-19 14:32:49 · answer #1 · answered by marksjett 2 · 0 0

heh, upgrading railroads is actually not a problem, in fact America is a master of the incremental upgrade. We run 150 mph trains on old freight lines that have been hopped up bit by bit.

Transit tends to get much better fuel economy than any car.

Main problem is, Americans are capricious, indulgent and poorly disciplined, we love being able to "go whenever we wanna" rather than having the discipline to go when the train runs. And we're totally OK with spending our time being our own "bus driver" when we could get something productive done if someone else was driving.

The American Dream isn't home ownership. It's CAR ownership. Schwarzenegger is right about this: Conservation by self-deprivation will never work. We grew up with cars, we are spoiled and we CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT THEM. Best we can hope for is change the fuel they run on.

Fortunately we happen to be the best technologists in the world, so we can figure out how to do that.

2007-04-15 16:55:05 · answer #2 · answered by Wolf Harper 6 · 0 0

Because the USA is a very large country, and our cities are generally spread out pretty widely. By that I mean a major metropolitan area spreads out over a lot of distance. Mass transit just isn't very practical except in high density cities. The only city in California with a decent mass transit system is San Francisco.

If I could use mass transit in my area that gets me where I need to go in even twice the time it takes me to drive, I'd use it. But here it always takes about 4 times as long.

2007-04-16 10:23:16 · answer #3 · answered by Uncle Pennybags 7 · 0 0

because its largely impractical. rail doesnt go right to the store or work.plus have to replace many of the rails themselves because theyre highspeed incompatible.a bullet train would have to limit itself to 85 tops versus the 150 plus its capable.a freight train can achieve 85 in a long straight section of track.water canals would require alot of digging,which will require tearing up all the streets,and existing sewer systems.and to tear up the streets you need earthmoving equipment.which gets horrible fuel mileage. plus on a canal ya run the risk of during an accident,the people might drown.frankly i wouldnt call ya an american,cause your obviously an liberal. theres already 2 alternative trans system alternatives readily availble already,perhaps ya should try em, theyre walking an riding a bike

2007-04-15 14:05:17 · answer #4 · answered by yankeegray_99 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers