3 ms·
> The justification for it, however, is not "WA is just like Germany". Of course not, they're not the same. But we are still talking about a region of about 8-
by genocidicbunny 3y ago
> The justification for it, however, is not "WA is just like Germany".
Of course not, they're not the same. But we are still talking about a region of about 8-10 million people. It's also a region that has grown by 2 or so million people in a decade. Washington alone has had a pretty steady 14-20% growth per decade since the 60's. Oregon is fairly close in its decadal growth as well. So by the 2030's we might be talking more like 12-13 million people in the region.
That's plenty sufficient density to start investigating if an HSR is economically feasible and advisable.
(Edit: Just for self elucidation, I looked at the number of people that live in the Hamburg - Frankfurt corridor, since that's about the same distance as Portland to Vancouver, BC. Just going off the 'megaregions' that are crossed, its about 20 or so million, give or take a couple. That's only 2x the density of the cascadia region. Berlin - Essen also seems to be about the same distance, and also about 20 million people.)
> Yeah fine, I fully believe in the Vancouver->Vancouver (cough) train line.
At that point, just extend it. Put a bridge over the river and have a train terminal somewhere near PDX. The further continuation into Salem and Eugene is a little iffy, that I will concede, but Vancouver WA to Portland is practically spitting distance.
- PaulDavisThe1st 3y agoSure I mostly agree. And the (cough) after V->V was a silly way for me to say "I mean PDX, of course"). However, I will also note that factors are 2 are far larger than the ones that often make or break social or economic plans. So saying "that's only 2x the density of Cascadia" is not necessarily very encouraging.
- genocidicbunny 3y agoYeah but Germany also didn't start developing it's rail network at the current density did it? Good pubic transportation enables density.