3 ms·
You probably don’t realize this, but you’re just perpetuating misinformation that’s been debunked repeatedly for decades.
by melling 3y ago
You probably don’t realize this, but you’re just perpetuating misinformation that’s been debunked repeatedly for decades.
- jcranmer 3y agoNormally, I'd agree with you, but the Portland-Seattle HSR corridor is around the low end of viable HSR corridors. You're connecting the 17th, 27th, and 28th largest cities in US+Canada, with no realistic prospects to connect anything else approaching a major city--the next largest city is Boise, but that's 350mi away as the crow flies (and mountains means it's quite further in practice), and smaller than even places like Fresno/Bakersfield, which people complain about CAHSR considering to visit. Oh, and one of those three cities is on the other side of an international border, which tends to dampen ridership a fair amount. By contrast, all the other standard HSR candidates anchor regions that involve at least one, and for all but the Midwest two, cities in the top 10, with many more in the top 50.
- jaggederest 3y agoI mean I've been doing the math and looking at ridership, transportation and population density mapping in hopes of justifying it for about two of those decades. Show me a similar area with fewer than 12,000 people per linear kilometer that has HSR and I will be impressed and take notes. I don't know of anywhere on earth that has fast trains and that few people.