Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: some interesting facts about mass transit commuter rail

  1. #1
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default some interesting facts about mass transit commuter rail

    (snip)"Profits are unlikely. The Government Accountability Office found last November that Amtrak had received more than $30 billion in federal aid since its creation in 1971, but was still in “poor financial condition,” with extensive deferred maintenance.

    When Amtrak began operating 37 years ago, the plan was for it to eventually break even. In 1997, Congress passed a law threatening dire consequences if it did not reach self-sufficiency by 2002.

    But by 2002 the mood had changed, and the appropriations have continued, financing losses of over $1 billion a year [with subsidies paid for with federal taxpayer's money - sic].

    The G.A.O. analysis noted the continued operation of cross-country trains with low ridership and high costs. “The current structure does not appear to effectively target federal funds where they may provide the greatest level of public benefits, such as reduced traffic congestion and pollution,” it said.

    Oil costs hurt Amtrak, too. Fuel is projected to reach 11 percent of Amtrak’s budget this year, up from 6 percent in 2004. The railroad is not radically more energy-efficient than other means of travel. Amtrak can move a passenger a mile with 17.4 percent less fuel than a passenger car can, and about 32.9 percent less than an airline can, according to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

    It does save oil, however, since much of the fuel Amtrak uses is in the form of electricity, made from coal, natural gas and nuclear power.

    Despite its popularity with passengers, the biggest determinant of the railroad’s health is still the federal government, and in Washington, views diverge sharply"(snip)

    from


    more confirmation of the point that mass transit light rail is only 'cost effective' for ticket buyers if 1/2 of the TRUE cost of their ticket is being paid for by the taxes of suburban and rural residents who seldom / never get to ride the train ! If taxpayer funded subsidies were eliminated, and if the amortized costs of equipment maintenance / replacement were also included (versus being paid for by future taxpayers via the sale of transporation authority bonds, as is currently the case) it's likely that the 'break even' price of a mass transit light rail ticket would have to be tripled compared to current gov't regulated ticket prices.

    Also some technical analysis from Oak Ridge National Laboratory that mass transit light rail actually consumes MORE fuel per passenger mile than small high mileage passenger cars - and only saves 17% on fuel versus 'average' mileage passenger cars.

    of course, mass transit light rail does provide thousands of extremely well paid civil service jobs ! It also provides the illusion to certain politicians and voters that money spent to develop and subsidize mass transit light rail is actually a socially and environmentally responsible thing to do.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 06-21-2008 at 07:42 AM.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Joined
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cranberry Country
    Posts
    1,202
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: some interesting facts about mass transit commuter rail

    Mel, I'm gonna call b*llsh*t here as just conservative propaganda without any substance.


    1) The price per fuel per passenger mile from a Commuter rail to subway, to LRV far outweights the price per file per passenger mile of a car.

    2) For the last, what, 100 years the trucking/bus and airline industry have been unfairly been given subsidies over the railroad.

    Lets your airtravel for the 1st example. The airlines pay a small landing fee, lease/buy the aircraft, pay for the airline crew (ground, terminal, air) and pay for fuel.

    Airlines DO NOT have to pay for the airport infrastructure itself, the labor for upkeep, they do not have to pay for Air Traffic Control, or Ground control, all of which is paid for by the government.

    Imagine if airlines had to pay for all of this (before the oil issue), then they would barely be turning a profit in good time.

    Example 2:

    The US Highway system. Oringally the interstate system was built as a defence network, but, since the 50s they have been used by individuals and trucking companies, without having to pay for direct maintenance of the structures.

    In conclusion, while people may not use public transportation, and still are taxed for it, poeple don't drive trucks/use the interstate system, and some don't use airlines and are still taxed for it.

    The biggest problem I have is that Amtrak is poorly funded, and, like any other MAJOR INDUSTRIALIZED country, the public transportation is paid for by the government and does get alot of use. Asking Amtrak to pay for the trains AND the upkeep of part of the rail network puts the other modes at an unfair advantage.

  3. #3
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: some interesting facts about mass transit commuter rail

    Quote Originally Posted by G-Real View Post
    Example 2:

    The US Highway system. Oringally the interstate system was built as a defence network, but, since the 50s they have been used by individuals and trucking companies, without having to pay for direct maintenance of the structures.
    Not true, if they're using the highways, they're paying for them. Its called the federal gas tax. Add in state gas taxes and it averages 47 cents a gallon for gas (18.4 cents federal) and 53.6 cents for diesel (24.4 cents federal) Not only does this money pay for construction and maintenance but it also subsidizes most public transportation projects. And unfortunately too much gets siphoned off for political reasons to buy off the voters back home.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Joined
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Cranberry Country
    Posts
    1,202
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: some interesting facts about mass transit commuter rail

    Quote Originally Posted by DB Cooper View Post
    Not true, if they're using the highways, they're paying for them. Its called the federal gas tax. Add in state gas taxes and it averages 47 cents a gallon for gas (18.4 cents federal) and 53.6 cents for diesel (24.4 cents federal) Not only does this money pay for construction and maintenance but it also subsidizes most public transportation projects. And unfortunately too much gets siphoned off for political reasons to buy off the voters back home.
    No the interstate was a defence network, yes, it is now paid for by both state and federal funds, but, its oringal purpose was for defense. It
    s name is National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, if you ever noticed, on the true interstates (2 digit highways) for each 5 miles of highway, there needs to be a 1-mile straight stretch. This was incase of emergency landings by military aircraft.

    I digress, the point was, that the major modes of transportation get subsidies from the government, public companies don't have to pay specifically for the upkeep. And while there are taxes, the taxes go right back into the highways, and little of it goes to rail transportation.

    As I said before, with, the gas-crunch I feel bad for those cities that had their public-transit destroyed in the 40s-60s and now have to drive everywhere (ie Washington DC).

  5. #5
    God/dess doc-catfish's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    123 Tornado Alley Way, Hooterville USA
    Posts
    6,322
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 36 Times in 30 Posts

    Default Re: some interesting facts about mass transit commuter rail

    Amtrak is a disaster because the inconvenience of using it far outweighs the monetary cost of gasoline (even at $4, $5 or $6/gallon). You can only get on/off Amtrak when and where it stops. If you wanted to come see me for instance, you'd be dropped off here at about 3:30 AM in a not so good part of town. Public buses (all three of them) don't start running until about 6.

    So unless there's a major overhaul in how it works, screw Amtrak. Tell me about the cost effectiveness of the German ICE trains instead. We're going to have to get fuel prices equivalant to Germany's to make intercity rail travel work. There's of course, that whole acquiring infrastructure thing too, which isn't going to be an easy sell to folks obsessed with their property values.
    Former SCJ now in rehab.

  6. #6
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: some interesting facts about mass transit commuter rail

    ^^^ no argument in regard to Airlines also being the recipients of major gov't subsidies. However, in the case of airport security costs, the gov't imposed those regulations / requirements and should therefore pay for them.

    In the case of the claim that trains are more fuel efficient than high mileage small cars, what reason would Oak Ridge National Laboratory have to 'lie' ? Granted that trains do have the option of using electric motors which can be powered by a variety of non-fossil fuel electrical energy sources ... but that doesn't make them any more energy efficient overall.

    In regard to funding for highway maintenance, for a fact the vast majority of this money is collected by road tax on motor fuels - 83 cents per gallon worth where I live. In my home state of New York, lots of interstate highways / bridges / tunnels also collect sizeable tolls.

    If there is a problem with road maintenance budgets in my state, it's the fact that a significant percentage of the road tax and toll money collected is 'reassigned' to subsidize the NYC Subway, to subsidize the NY/NJ port authority etc. !!!

  7. #7
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: some interesting facts about mass transit commuter rail

    Quote Originally Posted by G-Real View Post
    No the interstate was a defence network, yes, it is now paid for by both state and federal funds, but, its oringal purpose was for defense. It
    s name is Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, if you ever noticed, on the true interstates (2 digit highways) for each 5 miles of highway, there needs to be a 1-mile straight stretch. This was incase of emergency landings by military aircraft.

    I digress, the point was, that the major modes of transportation get subsidies from the government, public companies don't have to pay specifically for the upkeep. And while there are taxes, the taxes go right back into the highways, and little of it goes to rail transportation.

    As I said before, with, the gas-crunch I feel bad for those cities that had their public-transit destroyed in the 40s-60s and now have to drive everywhere (ie Washington DC).
    No arguement that the interstates were a defense project. And many of the railroads were built on govt land grants. But to claim that drivers don't pay for using the highways is just not true. And in addition to funding maintenance and construction, gas taxes are also used to fund mass transit systems, few of which could exist without govt subsidies.

    The govt (state and federal) make more money from every gal of fuel sold than the oil companies profit. If that money isn't there the govt will have to make it somewhere else. Cause its not like they're ever going to cut spending. Bread and circuses

  8. #8
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re: some interesting facts about mass transit commuter rail

    So unless there's a major overhaul in how it works, screw Amtrak. Tell me about the cost effectiveness of the German ICE trains instead. We're going to have to get fuel prices equivalant to Germany's to make intercity rail travel work. There's of course, that whole acquiring infrastructure thing too, which isn't going to be an easy sell to folks obsessed with their property values.
    I disagree; Amtrak could be profitable if they were only doing intercity runs and not the money-losing long-distance runs to places out in the middle of nowhere. Problem is, the legislators out in these wastelands don't want Amtrak to stop running to their districts, so Amtrak has to dedicate labor and capital to where it's not really needed and where they can't generate real revenue.

    Look at the Boston-NYC-DC corridor; Amtrak makes money on that line, and could make a lot more if they were given flexibility to invest according to market demand. Hell, I know I've taken the Accela to NYC from Boston because it was faster than flying when I factored in security and NYC's horrific air delays.

    When Amtrak is allowed to serve the markets that will pay real fares, then Amtrak will thrive and not a moment before then.
    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-28-2010, 04:54 PM
  2. What are rail drinks?
    By sexyi86 in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-25-2008, 01:19 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-22-2008, 06:20 AM
  4. Interesting Facts You Learned Today
    By Nicolina in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-10-2008, 07:18 PM
  5. NYC Transit stike over!
    By former_LV_dancer in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-23-2005, 08:24 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •