l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 The Worst of Both: The Rise of High-Cost, Low-Capacity Rail Transit
By Randal O'Toole
June 3, 2014
Most new rail transit lines in the United States and around the world are
either light rail, including lines that sometimes run in or cross city
streets, or heavy rail, which are built in exclusive rights of way, usually
elevated or in subways. Heavy rail costs far more to build than light rail,
but the capacity of light rail to move people is far lower than heavy rail.
In fact, the terms light and heavy refer to people-moving capacities, not
the actual weight of the equipment.
Recently, a number of cities in the United States and elsewhere have built
or are building a hybrid form of rail transit that can best be described as
the worst of both, combining the cost-disadvantages of heavy rail with the
capacity limits of light rail. Seattle is building a three-mile subway that
costs nearly six times as much per mile as the average light-rail line.
Honolulu is building a 20-mile elevated rail line that costs well over twice
as much as the average light rail. Yet those lines will be limited to
little (or no) more than light-rail capacities. This seems to be a worldwide
trend, as new, high-cost, low-capacity rail systems have recently opened in
Mumbai, India; Panama City, Panama; Fortaleza, Brazil; and several other
Asian and Latin American cities. A small number of French, German, Italian,
and Spanish contractors and railcar manufacturers seem to be involved with
building and supplying many of those lines.
Rail lines built at light-rail costs are questionable enough, as in nearly
every case buses can move more people just as comfortably (if not more so),
just as fast (if not faster), and at a far lower cost. Buses share
infrastructure with cars and trucks, reducing their cost, while the use of
high-occupancy vehicle or high-occupancy toll lanes would allow buses to
avoid congestion during even the busiest times of day.
The willingness of many rail advocates to support high-cost, low-capacity
rail lines calls into question the entire rail agenda. Supporters of low-
capacity lines are not truly interested in transportation; supporters of
high-cost lines are not truly interested in urban efficiencies. If they are
not willing to draw the line against such projects, then there is little
reason to believe their claims about the benefits of other rail projects. | m********8
发帖数: 7463 | 2 盐铁矿山事宜，官督商办沿袭已久，是为祖制。兹事体大，多方争利，交通斡旋其间甚
为复杂
故多有天潢贵胄千克骚人居于中枢，奔走多方以致妥善，事前事后阴纳微薄车马茶俸，
敢问有何不妥？
擦，既然你们地富反坏右要民煮不要卤煮，就不要唧唧哇哇的每天抱怨
这些工程本来就是要哇个坑然后利益集团一起瓜分之，你们有本事去造反，要不你们也
凑点钱养点票蛆，也弄的大工程吃一票，既然既没本事造反，又没本事在游戏规则内玩
，那就不要每天叫亚叫的。
usually
,
.
【在 l****z 的大作中提到】
: The Worst of Both: The Rise of High-Cost, Low-Capacity Rail Transit
: By Randal O'Toole
: June 3, 2014
: Most new rail transit lines in the United States and around the world are
: either light rail, including lines that sometimes run in or cross city
: streets, or heavy rail, which are built in exclusive rights of way, usually
: elevated or in subways. Heavy rail costs far more to build than light rail,
: but the capacity of light rail to move people is far lower than heavy rail.
: In fact, the terms light and heavy refer to people-moving capacities, not
: the actual weight of the equipment.
|
|
