As a practical matter, we’d probably get more environmental benefit (and save more wear-and-tear on our roads) from improving our freight rail system, like the abysmal mess in Chicago, than from high speed passenger rail that is very unlikely to carry more than a handful of Americans on any regular basis. . . But this does not attract one eightieth of the interest that you see in HS(P)R. As I understand it, there is finally some actual progress on Chicago, but it’s still bogged down in process, and it’s not clear to me whether it’s really enough. It seems clear to me that switching freight to rail whenever possible should be a policy priority, but it’s the red-headed stepchild of the environmental movement. We need freight cars that look more like pandas.
Megan McArdle, “Rail: It’s Not Just for Passengers”, Asymmetrical Information, 2009-09-03
September 3, 2009
QotD: “The red-headed step-child of the environmental movement”
Comments Off on QotD: “The red-headed step-child of the environmental movement”
No Comments
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
