Focus On Fuel-friendly Cars, Not Rail

[♦ nivek ♦]

Focus on fuel-friendly cars, not rail

Cato Institute

by Randal O'Toole

 

“Driven by higher gas prices, America’s auto fleet today is almost 40 percent more fuel-efficient than in 1979. In contrast, the energy efficiency of both bus and rail transit has declined as transit has reached into distant suburbs where few people use it. Despite investing hundreds of billions of dollars in transit improvements, the share of urban travel served by transit has actually declined from just under 3 percent in 1979 to well under 2 percent today. Buses today consume as much energy and emit more greenhouse gases, per passenger mile, than the average SUV. Most light-rail systems also consume as much as or more energy per passenger mile than SUVs, and 40 percent emit more greenhouse gases per passenger mile than the average car.” (05/01/08)

 

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9373

[woodsmoke]

While I'm not opposed to public transportation*, that article really hits the nail on the head. Regardless of whether public transit is cheaper or more efficient than driving, the fact remains the vast majority of people simply aren't going to use it.

 

Given my own experience with it here in Utah, I can hardly blame them. When I still lived with my parents in Tooele I would have to get up 3 hours before I actually needed to be to class in order to catch the bus because the ride out would last 2 of those. On mornings I drove I got to sleep in for an extra hour and a half and spend only 45 minutes commuting.

 

Now I actually live in the Salt Lake valley, but the situation is the same. Riding the bus to work means waking up at 9 and leaving the house at ten to 11 in order to arrive at the college by noon, whereas driving I get to sleep in 'til 10 and leave the house at 11:30.

 

Plus, I'll admit I'm kind of selfish about it. I hate depending on someone else for transportation. I always have. For whatever reason, I'm usually ready to go home or move on at least several hours (and sometimes a day or more) before most other people, and having ownership of my own ability to get around quickly has been a godsend for that. I realize it's purely anecdotal, but most of the people I know are the same way, at least in relation to the first couple sentences.

 

All that being the case, it just makes more sense to focus on improving the medium of the masses, whether it's a more appealing prospect or not.

 

*Quite the contrary, if I'm just going out for a night on the town I actually prefer to take public transit--when it's designed and operated efficiently. Portland, Seattle, New York--these places have efficient public transit which I would love to make liberal use of. Once again, however, Utah's public transit is neither of these things. There are only two Trax lines in the entire Salt Lake valley, and most of the buses only run until 9pm or so. Add to this the state's laws against public drunkenness (so taking the train to/from a bar and walking home that night isn't really an option) and the damn near extortionary rates charged by what few taxis we have out here, and it's no surprise most people (myself included) once again decide against public transit.

[Vomit Comet]

We Americans wrote the book on urban sprawl. It's a shitty book. Many are now speculating that we're going to see the decline of the suburban age.

[RankStranger]

Probably depends on where you are. Some areas, especially on the coasts and the eastern U.S. have/will eventually run out of room to 'sprawl'. But there are lots of places in the midwest and west that could continue to sprawl for the next three centuries and never run out of room.