4 ms·
When I hear Ohio and trains I immediately think of the huge federal grants for building a higher speed rail line from Cleveland over Columbus to Cincinnati that
by lynguist 4y ago
When I hear Ohio and trains I immediately think of the huge federal grants for building a higher speed rail line from Cleveland over Columbus to Cincinnati that were already granted.
The same was granted for Wisconsin and Florida.
And one by one their governors refused to use these grants to build the infrastructure, and one by one the federal grants were reassigned, until in the end Florida got 2.3 billion dollars for building a high-speed rail line Miami-Orlando-Tampa. That was also sabotaged by its governor.
But because such a rail line is so incredibly economically effective a private company started to build it anyhow, just at lower speeds.
I’m still flabbergasted about this.
- enriquec 4y agoso... the grants were unnecessary? Also, how can someone see this catastrophe and still want to go with trains -- 200+ year old tech that is clearly environmentally destructive, doesn't solve last-mile, and can't be parallelized or re-routed, or even rescheduled easily
- manuelabeledo 4y ago> Also, how can someone see this catastrophe and still want to go with trains Perhaps because most of the industrialised world run tens of thousands of freight and passenger trains every day. What happened in Ohio is not an inherent issue with trains.
- dieortin 4y agoIt’s not more environmentally destructive than any of the alternatives, quite the opposite actually. And it’s the most efficient way to transport cargo and passengers across land.