This is also one of the reasons that the US can only see a moderate reduction in gas use, no matter what crazy $3 taxes Dook would like to place on gasoline. We still need to travel in many cases long distances for our jobs. We still need to ship over long distances.
Railroads were in place in absence of faster and more convenient modes of transportation. In the early 1800's in Europe there was the steam revolution and traveling by rail was faster, more comfortable and convenient than by horse and buggy. That steam revolution spread out. The ability to carry people all over England, for example, a nation today of about 50 million citizens, with established rail services, is still convenient and fast but not a profit making industry. In a recent trip to London we used the Underground, the tube, the subway, extensively because taxies were bogged down in traffic. The subway in New York City and Boston and Chicago offer these services. But due to the much larger size of the USA land mass, on the east coast are the passenger rail services established enough to be used economically. A car is cheap enough, the roads are extensive and the services provided are superior to any possible rail or bus service. There is "no back to railroads" because this was limited in places to go, the schedules are too infrequent. Also in Europe there are two parallel lines of service much like a roadway. The USA has typically one line. If you wish to go from New York to Chicago via car or plane you have options but time is not a problem. By rail? Just not possible. Too far, too slow and too expensive. Yes, there is economy as to movement of mass. But the mass is not there. The cost structure is not there. This past summer I had a need to attend an auto event 235 miles away. A one day trip. I got up at 5:00 AM, left the house before six and drove the distance to the event arriving just past 11:00 AM. Three hours later I was on my way home. In the USA, rail service has not proven practical in the land of cheap transportation. This works in the crowed east coast in expensive cities for fuel, tolls and parking. Oh, this is the same for car ownership. In New York, it is impossible to drive a car unless you can afford the parking and there is parking. Much cheaper to use taxis or limo services if the subway is not convenient. End of story. Why not ask to return to the horse you depict as your avatar?
The problem with railroads is that they've never been all that profitable and are in constant need of government subsidy to keep them going.
Here in UK the British Rail (State Owned) Network was privatized but it is now far too expensive for most people to use - as was formerly the case.
In Sweden a few years ago they cut their fares by 50% and the people flooded on to the railways.
In the USA Am-Track is a US State Owned enterprise.
But there are railroad companies in the USA who know how to pull in the crowds - unfortunately the Green lobby is not going to be very pleased, not when they see all that smoke billowing out across the plains.
Railroads are a great way to transport people and goods and work very well in Europe and Japan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinkansen
But Keystone XL would use even less energy than trains to get the oil to market.
Chem Flunky
Other than cutbacks in government subsidies, oil and car companies would not have had the power to shut down railroads.
Trains as operated by private companies are very profitable and move a lot of freight across the country. Government operated trains are a complete waste of energy with the exception of the NE corridor. The government should break up the national rail system and sell it off piece meal to the highest bidder.
A better way to pass the time away, all the live long day, than quoting Goebbels.
To understand the demise of the railroads in America, one would need to understand the complexities of why urban rail transport withered from the 1920s through the '50s. Oil and car companies played a role. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ci...
It is a different story for freight: despite massive subsidies given to trucking, rail still has cost advantages, at least for long haul.
Habit, infrastructure, stubbornness, lobbying...
I could be wrong, but I believe a good portion of what lead to the relative demise of railroads was due to pressure and/or action from Big Oil and/or automobile companies, rather than government action. We would need to invest some money in our railroad infrastructure for railroads to replace any significant amount of our freight hauling and/or passenger transit. Particularly for the latter--in order to be a passable substitute for airlines, we'd need high-speed trains along at least major routes, probably including at least one high-speed cross-country line of some sort.
Because the oil, car, and tire companies ripped up all of the intercity tracks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Mot...
freight is profitable.
passenger traffic is profitable when there is enough demand.
the real problem is that with urban sprawl, the inter city rail lines that no longer exist cannot provide the transportation that's needed.
some cities are building tracks, but it's inordinately expensive.
It is a problem with your political system, whereas you have a capitalist system, which I mainly agree with, somethings need to be state owned, If you look at Japan they have a state owned rail system which is super fast, super efficient, much superior to air travel.
This could not be done with purely private enterprise, it needs an efficient government run system to achieve this, an efficient goverment run anything in the U.S. hmm don't make me laugh.
The unions killed the railroads. There was no more expansion of the railroads after the unions took over.
One thing that greenies and true scientists agree on is the use of railroads. By increasing the usage and efficiency of a railroad system there would be less pollution and less fossil fuel consumption. That is unarguable and within the power of the government.
I used to work on the railroad and I saw how efficient that low friction mode of transportation is. For example, on a 300 mile trip with over 100 cars the fuel consumption was less than 50 gallons of diesel.
Yet our government saw fit to regulate them out of business.
You're right the old trolley cars that ran when I was a kid. 5 cents, you could ride all over town, not a mugger in sight either.
Sure but lets advance to Sub Shuttles across the USA and the world .
Car manufacturers wouldn't like it. And people who think the keystone pipeline will affect our gas prices won't like it.
hard to catch a train for my morning commute
you do not seem to want an answer but rather argue.
