Friday, February 29, 2008
1-minute Angst: high-speed trains
Summary for Feb. 25-29
Could high-speed trains work in the U.S. or is it too big? Railroad man Craig Burroughs says at 250 mph we could get from Chicago to LA in less than 10 hours. High-speed freight trains would take lots of heavy trucks off the roads, making highway expansion unnecessary and dramatically reducing expensive maintenance of truck-damaged roads.
House OKs renewable-energy tax credits, again, but Senate could balk at money coming from Big Oil. And White House threatens to veto. One hope: add it to budget reconciliation bill … McCain gets zero from League of Conservation Voters for 2007 non-votes.
Freight trains compete with trucks to carry Asian imports from ports, getting more investment … efficiency best way to cut energy demand, study says … nuke developers go to South despite excess capacity there.
Water supply for Southern California, in Lake Mead, could be gone by 2021, because of drought and reduced snowpack … Chile suffers worst drought in decades, while ocean water must be pumped to Andes.
For full text, see below.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Trans-continental train service is the tip of preserving icebergs. Massive reductions in air, auto and truck travel could be achieved with an intense high speed rail system in the eastern third of North America. West of the Rockies is also fertile soil for programs that would attack global warming and provide meaningful employment for workers constructing roadbeds, building engines, cars, rails and other needed equipment; Put middle America back to work and save the planer. We need advocates in Congress and the White House.
Post a Comment