USA Will Invest in High-Speed ​​Train to Fight Climate Change::The USA Will Invest in High-Speed ​​Train to Fight Climate Change - US President Joe Biden announced in a speech on December 9, 2023 that they are carrying out the first high-speed train projects in US history. These projects are across America

    • Colonel Sanders@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Even then it’ll probably just be from one town to another very close by thus really only useable for a small subset of people. We need trans continental high speed railways not puddle jumpers

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        No, really not. It would be great for those of us who prefer that solution but let’s pick the right tool for the job. I believe the current rule of thumb is high speed rail beats flying for cities up to 500 miles apart. Let’s focus on those. Hopefully we end up with an interconnected system as the preferred way to travel between those cities and so some of us can do long distance rail, but there will always be a threshold where flying is cheaper, easier, faster

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    These projects are part of an $10 billion investment

    California’s HSR system come in at $80 billion for 520 miles, or $154 million per mile. Amtrak estimates that it would cost $500 million per mile to turn its Northeast Corridor route into a true high-speed system. source

    For $10 billion, we are talking an additional 20 to 65 miles of high speed rail to be built. This is basically nothing…

    • qooqie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Drop in the bucket, I’m curious how much it would take to make most of the US/NA traversable by high speed rail

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Depends on what you mean by most.

        • most of the population is quite achievable. Send a little time at https://www.ushsr.com/
        • most of the geography, trillions, and we couldn’t afford to keep it operating

        I really think that confusing this is a common mistake. People claim high speed rail is impossible in the US because we’re big (and ignoring China, eu), but we have plenty of cities, and most of them are clustered. High speed rail is great for cities within a few hundred miles of each other. We got those, and that’s most of the population

        It’s specious to take scenarios high speed rail doesn’t do well at and claiming that it means it can’t work. Let’s apply a little intelligence here’d and use the right technology for the right scenario

    • dezmd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Jacksonville FL to Mobile AL is not included even though old rail and established railway right of way is already in place. Its an incomplete plan out of the gate before even looking at the realities of the funding equating to near goddamn nothing. We need real Trillion dollar funding plans at this point for high speed rail on a national level, use the long range east west/north south interstate cooridors to build over/under to connect coasts and Mexico to Canada on 4 or 5 major lines each.

    • ChillPenguin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Thank you for this. Looked up all the proposed changes for my state. I really hope these get implemented. In MN I’ve been waiting for a twin cities to Duluth train connection.

  • onlinepersona@programming.devBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 years ago

    I wish them all the best! May this decision carry through administrations and the USA embrace fast, public transport once again.

    • ieightpi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      The way the US shows more progress is if the Democrats can stay in power for a long enough period of time. But the last time Dems had that kind of power was as far back as 2008. It makes you wonder if the only way Democrats can ever get into power is when a recession hits.

      • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but with climate change in front of us, we actually don’t have time.

        I’m incredibly nihilistic right now.

        • Kage520@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 years ago

          Eh, it was predicted we would die because the population growth was exceeding our ability to farm food, but then out of necessity the industrial revolution happened.

          I think we are predicting we will die but out of necessity we will make the necessary changes to save ourselves just in time. Not just stopping emissions (this will only help slow the worsening, since we might be past the point of no return by the time we do this), but also carbon capture to remove the CO2, while simultaneously seeding extra clouds with something like the salt water canons running on cargo ships, and other such tech to reflect the sun while we get to work on CO2 capture.

          The CO2 will have to be sequestered back in the ground, so a method will have to be made to liquify and pump it back in, but it’s theoretically possible.

          • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            The CO2 will have to be sequestered back in the ground, so a method will have to be made to liquify and pump it back in, but it’s theoretically possible.

            Not theoretical, they’re doing this as proof of concept at cement plants in Norway, they’re planning on pumping it into an aquifer under the artic ocean

          • Goodtoknow@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            We’re not undoing the atmospheric carbon or methane, and sequestration won’t stop the climate change done that will cause issues for 10s of thousands of years. That being said we will figure out survival and a path forward to not make it worse.

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Until the Republicans shoot it down and instead use that budget to give their rich chums more tax breaks

  • nutsack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 years ago

    United States will never be able to achieve something like this because tiny ass governments of little weird counties all across the country will complain about having tracks run through their stupid shit hole

  • Oaksey@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Hasn’t this happened yet because of issues getting enough land in a relatively straight path between destinations? If the curves are too great either the G forces are too high for the passengers or the train isn’t able to travel at a high speed. Elon had his boring machine but I’m guessing the lack of news around that means it isn’t progressing as hoped?

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      Just an excuse.

      Yes, it is more time consuming and expensive to acquire land than would be ideal, but protecting property owner rights is also important.

      However most of the land needed was protected by freight rail and Amtrak. We already have most of the track right of way needed, at least in the Northeast and Midwest, and the expensive part is mainly little bits of land to straighten out curves. It could be worse

  • grayman@lemmy.worldBanned from community
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Anyone that’s been on am amtrak knows exactly how well this will go.

  • nutsack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    as soon as the Republicans are elected with a full house they can shut this down and throw away all of the money that was put into it

      • Barack_Embalmer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The Japanese SCMaglev only has the cooling stuff on the train, not along the entire length of the track.

        And I think there is a “high-temperature SC Maglev” in development in China too.

  • ChrislyBear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    What about rails? You need rails first. Who is providing the land where rails will be built on?

    But yeah, trains it is!

    • dezmd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      We already have rails and rail right of way established all over tgw country. Push comes to shove, build is as a layer on the Interstate highway system.