If almost every freeway was replaced with a train line would you still drive to work?

Question

I personally think it's the best answer to the global warming crisis. Public transportation! There would still be roads even where the freeways used to be.

It would save people money, save the atmosphere, and give us time to read and drink coffee!

Come on folks, there has got to be a better way than our expensive gas guzzlers.

I'm sure someone will get offended by this question and ramble their mumbo jumbo. Just remember that you should at least take all opinions into consideration before making your own decision. No ones perfect, we could all be better.

Answer 1

I would love that!!! my biggest problem with public transport now is that it doesn't go where i need it to.

Answer 2

When there was a rapid station close to the place I worked I enjoyed riding the rapid everyday. Very relaxing and I saved money on gas and parking.

Answer 3

Bah! Who is going to build such an infrastructure? The government?? Can you imagine having to depend on postal workers to get you to and from work? No thank you....

Answer 4

Heck no. I would get rid of my car. No payments, no insurance, no gas, no oil, no repairs, etc, etc.

Answer 5

#1, most roads couldn't withstand the immense weight of the train engine. That goes for the bridges as well, most likely. It costs an immense amount of money for 1 mile of track, like $7,000,000 ? Not sure about asphalt, but that's alot of mullah. So in addition to re-engineering the roadways to hold the trains, you'd have to make them straighter, many of the curves couldn't be passed with current trains radius requirements.

#2, basically, it's a pipe dream, because no amount of trains or track can take each person to their individual destinations, there's not enough flexibility in the systems to do it. In other words, NCE - Not Cost Effective.  Therefore it won't work.

  If you studied railroad history, before WWII, the trains had a monopoly on long-distance service ; they were therefore not inclined towards excellent customer service, were rude to passengers, and charged excessive ( for the time ) prices to travel at all. Many was the complaint about the Railroad's monopoly on transportation, and the attendant attitude problems from management. Automobiles and highways changed all that - it broke the monopoly, and allowed more competition. And passenger service declined and has mostly died out except for Amtrak.

Trams, street cars, etc. all died for the same reason - lax of flexibility in the system - you could only go where the track went, and metal track is EXPENSIVE. Buses took over. But only on profitable routes, they won't go to suburbs where the profit is small or non-existant.

Now, a better idea would be to use multiple bus "nodes" to various regions, that could hold bicycles on them. If you could string enough "nodes" together, by changing buses, you could get close ( in semi-urban areas ) and then bike-ride the rest of the way ( would suck in rain and snow, though! ). Again, lack of flexibility ( and weather/freight considerations) would be a culprit, and the buses would only take the most profitable routes, leaving many people no choice but to drive.  THAT is the biggest down-side to any public transport system. In  European countries, the people live in tight-packed cities, which helps promote PubTrans, but in America with it's wider geography, it begins to break down and lose profitability.  Now, if you could come up with "node car trains", where all automobiles are designed to be hooked together and pulled by a big "tractor engine", and can disengage to go separately once in a specific area, now THAT could work...but even that idea has been thought of, but no practical applications have surfaced, to date.

So unless you can figure out a way to make money at it, honey, it's a "sure loser". Good luck on your dream!

- The Gremlin Guy -