4 ms·

For the most part I agree. Transportation investment is key and much wiser than trying to deal with NIMBYs. But: $0.03 per passenger mile?! Even subsidized HSR

• michaelochurch 15y ago
  Here's why $0.03 per passenger mile is not unreasonable. The automobile is one of the most energy-inefficient modes of transportation out there and it costs about $0.40 per mile, per vehicle. That's $0.10 per passenger mile for a family of four. On the most expensive, dangerous, environmentally costly common mode of transportation out there. There's no good reason why trains should be less efficient than the car. None at all. That gives us a starting point, which should be easy to beat, of $0.10 per passenger per mile for a 75 mph train. Now, most costs in transportation are labor costs, so it stands to reason (below the sound barrier) that what things "should" cost (excluding fuel) can be measured on a per-hour basis. Travel at 300 mph should be cheaper, for this reason-- perhaps not 4 times cheaper because energy costs increase, but definitely 3. That's what's counter-intuitive here: slow travel is more expensive, in terms of what it actually costs the provider, than fast travel because it sucks up more employee time. Realistically, $0.05 per passenger mile would be a substantial accomplishment. I would be happy to see that. The Category 5 embarrassment is that we're not even trying.