Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p>[quote user="zinker"]</p> <p> <blockquote> <div><img src="/trccs/Themes/trc/images/icon-quote.gif" /> <strong>Bucyrus:</strong></div> <div></div> <p> </p> <blockquote> <div><img src="/trccs/Themes/trc/images/icon-quote.gif" /> <b>zinker:</b></div> <div> <p> </p> <p> </p> <blockquote> <div><img src="/trccs/Themes/trc/images/icon-quote.gif" /> <b>YoHo1975:</b></div> <div></div> <p>So the argument is based on usage. That is I suppose valid, but then the next question I ask is, what percentage of users need to benefit to justify the cost? Is there a hard number? Seems kinda wishy washy to me. </p> <p>...</p> <p>I would also argue there are Social benefits to the nation as a whole that come from a HSR system and every portion of the system built applies to those benefits. So, I'd argue that people will benefit indirectly from projects built not int heir district or locale. </p> <div style="clear:both;"></div> <p> </p> </blockquote> <p> </p> <p>Even the people who would not use an HSR system would benefit from it, at least indirectly. How will highway users benefit from HSR? The people who are using HSR will not be on the roads, clogging them with more traffic, creating more wear and tear on them, spewing more pollution, and burning precious fossil fuels.</p> <p>Based on that, a subsidy for HSR may well be justified since we will all benefit from it in some way.</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div> <p> </p> </div> </blockquote> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-bidi-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;">That would indeed be a benefit to everybody who uses roads even if they do not use HSR.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes;">  </span>But the question is, how much benefit for how much cost?<span style="mso-spacerun:yes;">  </span>Certainly, a $500-billion HSR system will reduce the use of highways, and thus lower their cost of maintenance and construction.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes;">  </span>But, what would be the result if we took the $500-billion and put it into better roads?</span></p> <p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-bidi-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;"></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-bidi-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;"></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-bidi-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;">For that matter, we could pay people to not drive in order to encourage less use of the roads.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes;">  </span>There is plenty of driving that is not essential, and could therefore be eliminated.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes;">  </span>I suspect that paying people to not use the roads would do more to reduce the road maintenance cost and congestion than building an HSR system to accomplish the same thing.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-bidi-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;"></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-bidi-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;"></span></p> <p><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-bidi-font-family:'Times New Roman';mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA;">And when you mention the benefit of HSR reducing the use of fossil fuel, that won’t happen unless the power comes from renewable energy sources.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes;">  </span>Otherwise, HSR will be coal-fired trains for the most part.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes;">  </span></span></p> <div style="clear:both;"></div> <p> </p> </blockquote> </p> <p>I would venture that a single coal-fired HSR train would produce less carbon than all the automobiles it could remove from the highways. And that doesn't consider the possibility of powering those trains from other sources. </p> <div style="clear:both;"></div> <p>[/quote]</p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Well that may be the case, depending on how many automobiles a single coal-fired HSR train might remove from the highways.  And it also depends on the speed of the HSR train.  But what about my main point about the cost/benefit of using HSR to lower highway cost as opposed to spending the HSR money on other methods to help highways?</span></span></p>
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag