Jan wrote: For the cost of electrification the distance between cities is of no concern,
certainly the 10% (+/-) loss in long distance energy transmission may not be a major stumbling block. adding the third rail or overhead transmision line is a considerable concern, as is the added production and transmision of electicity to power them.
it can't happen fast enough for me either jan.
Jan wrote: only the total amount of tracks
of which we may have too few, or as yet inadequately scheduled and utilized.
since the interstate highway project after wwII, our system has been neglected, lines have been shut down and scavenged for rail and scrap, largely due to flexible, low overhead long haul trucking.
Jan wrote: The benefits, on the other hand, regard energy costs and the environment
absolutely, as i have said myself, but only after massive restructure and realignment of our present cross country system.
Jan wrote: the tracks and the trains are there either way: diesel or electricity. The benefits are higher when tracks are used frequently,
absolutely, it is our long distant, low traffic tracks that will be the last to convert.
Jan wrote: when oil is expensive, and when we have to address pollution problems.
uh , yeah, thats what i said.