Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
Transit
»
Light Rail really working in America?
Edit post
Edit your reply below.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="Phoebe Vet"] <P><FONT color=#990000>BRT still uses diesel fuel.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#990000>Unless it is in a dedicated busway, it doesn't solve any traffic problems, and in fact hinders traffic with it's frequent stops.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#990000>If it IS in a dedicated busway then station, road, and bridge construction and maintenance Become part of the cost and much of the cost benefit illusion vanishes. Cost comparisons of rail vs bus always include rail & ROW costs, and the roads that the buses use are invisible in a different budget.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#990000>Light Rail vehicles last longer than a buses.</FONT></P> <P><FONT color=#990000>While it varies by city, here in Charlotte, one two car train with one driver can move more than 400 people per trip. That would take 10 or more buses, each with a driver. </FONT>[/quote]</P> <P mce_keep="true">BRT can also run on compressed natural gas, which is the game plan for Austin's rapid technology buses. They can also be hybrids. Moreover, given the developing technology, totally electric buses are just around the corner. When I was in Denver last week, I rode the electric buses that operate on the 16th street transit mall. They are very comfortable. They are not ready for longer routes, but they will be in the not too distant future. </P> <P>Electric rail systems get their electric energy from electric power companies. Approximately 50 per cent of the power in the U.S. is generated by coal, including the power generated by Duke Energy in the Charlotte area. I don't know where the Charlotte Transit System gets the power for its light rail system, but I suspect that it is from Duke. Coal is the dirtiest power generation fuel and emits more pollution than any other major generating fuel. Admittedly, it does not acerbate our oil important problem, but it creates its own set of problems. </P> <P mce_keep="true">The buses will run in dedicated bus lanes. The operators will be able to control the traffic lights at key points along the route, thereby reducing the amount of down time that would otherwise be incurred. The buses will stop only at designated passenger stations, where passengers will buy their tickets in advance, just like they do for the commuter rail system, and board the buses through quick access doors. They will run on 6 to 8 minute intervals during rush hours and 15 to 20 minute intervals during off peak hours.</P> <P mce_keep="true">The cost to implement rapid bus technology as compared to commuter and light rail in the Austin area is shown in my response to Henry6's comments. The cost includes the stations, lane construction, traffic signals, etc. It also includes the cost of the equipment. </P> <P mce_keep="true">The Leander to Austin commuter rail system runs on the Austin & Western, which is a freight railroad owned by Capital Metro. If the railroad did not exist, the community could never have afforded commuter rail. The "shared" cost advantage attributed to rapid bus technology, i.e. being able to share city streets, also applies to most commuter and light rail systems. Moreover, many light rail systems, including Dallas, were able to use abandoned rail lines or run on the rights of ways of freight railroad. Had this not been the case, Dallas could not have afforded the light rail system. </P> <P mce_keep="true">Light rail vehicles do last longer than buses, which mean that they are not able to take advantage of developing technologies as rapidly as buses. In other words, one have made the decision to go with light rail, a transit agency is locked into it for a very long period of time. </P> <P mce_keep="true">Several studies by the U.S. Department of Transportation, as well as the Texas Transportation Institute, have shown that implementing rapid bus technology can be considerably cheaper than commuter rail or light rail. This is one of the reasons the Mass Transit Agency is taking a hard look at the various proposals for light rail. </P> <P>The key point Mr. Rogoff made is that light rail is not always the optimum solution for transit and, in fact, may be the best solution in only a relatively small number of cases. </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
Update Reply
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy