3 ms·

The US used to be littered with railroad. Density isn't a problem Here is a map from 189X[0] Auto supremacy was and still is a choice. [0]https://digital-col

The US used to be littered with railroad. Density isn't a problem Here is a map from 189X[0] Auto supremacy was and still is a choice. [0]https://digital-collections.columbuslibrary.org/digital/api/singleitem/image/maps/2048/default.jpg https://digital-collections.columbuslibrary.org/digital/api/...

nine_k 4y ago
The US is still littered with railroads, and rail carries a large amount of cargo. It's still not not as dense as UK, Germany, or Netherlands, and cannot be, outside areas like North-East. What makes sense around places like NYC, Chicago, or Seattle, may not work equally well in Nebraska. Building a road and running trucks on it is just more affordable. Also, rail is optimized to have ridiculously high throughput at the expense of latency. Rail is great at hauling grain, huge hunks of steel, wood, etc, but is too slow for time-sensitive stuff like flowers or that birthday present you ordered at a last minute with express delivery. This is why relatively long-haul trucking exist in the US, despite the presence of a large and busy rail system, to the best of my knowledge. (Passenger rail vs cars is another kettle of fish entirely.)
- diordiderot 4y ago
  > The US is still littered with railroads Far far fewer than there used to be > Building a road and running trucks on it is just more affordable. Only if you discount negative externalities. And you can't even know that for sure. The cost of operating rail is easy to calculate. Too many independent agents to accurately price automobile GDP (for lack of a better word). > is too slow for time-sensitive stuff Not if you have more trains running more frequently. Its a case of induced demand[0] 0.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand#:~:text=Induced%20demand%20is%20demand%20that,%2Dup%22%20as%20latent%20demand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand#:~:text=Induced....
- Symbiote 4y ago
  On the European rail networks with good passenger service — not the high speed lines, but conventional lines — the tracks are good enough to support fast freight trains carrying parcels and so on. That also means they can run during the day without disrupting passenger trains. Perishable food and parcels are commonly carried by rail, although there is still a lot by road. Container trains in Britain can travel at 75mph on such tracks. That's faster than a truck is allowed to drive (60mph). Checking my numbers, I found this [1] which is interesting: > There are many other examples where people are utilising rail in new ways. For example - hot slab steel shipped from the furnace to arrive warm enough to be rolled into sheets. http://freightfilter.com/uk-rail-freight-guide/ http://freightfilter.com/uk-rail-freight-guide/

nine_k 4y ago

The US is still littered with railroads, and rail carries a large amount of cargo. It's still not not as dense as UK, Germany, or Netherlands, and cannot be, outside areas like North-East. What makes sense around places like NYC, Chicago, or Seattle, may not work equally well in Nebraska. Building a road and running trucks on it is just more affordable. Also, rail is optimized to have ridiculously high throughput at the expense of latency. Rail is great at hauling grain, huge hunks of steel, wood, etc, but is too slow for time-sensitive stuff like flowers or that birthday present you ordered at a last minute with express delivery. This is why relatively long-haul trucking exist in the US, despite the presence of a large and busy rail system, to the best of my knowledge. (Passenger rail vs cars is another kettle of fish entirely.)

diordiderot 4y ago
> The US is still littered with railroads Far far fewer than there used to be > Building a road and running trucks on it is just more affordable. Only if you discount negative externalities. And you can't even know that for sure. The cost of operating rail is easy to calculate. Too many independent agents to accurately price automobile GDP (for lack of a better word). > is too slow for time-sensitive stuff Not if you have more trains running more frequently. Its a case of induced demand[0] 0.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand#:~:text=Induced%20demand%20is%20demand%20that,%2Dup%22%20as%20latent%20demand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand#:~:text=Induced....
Symbiote 4y ago
On the European rail networks with good passenger service — not the high speed lines, but conventional lines — the tracks are good enough to support fast freight trains carrying parcels and so on. That also means they can run during the day without disrupting passenger trains. Perishable food and parcels are commonly carried by rail, although there is still a lot by road. Container trains in Britain can travel at 75mph on such tracks. That's faster than a truck is allowed to drive (60mph). Checking my numbers, I found this [1] which is interesting: > There are many other examples where people are utilising rail in new ways. For example - hot slab steel shipped from the furnace to arrive warm enough to be rolled into sheets. http://freightfilter.com/uk-rail-freight-guide/ http://freightfilter.com/uk-rail-freight-guide/