To be fair, these countries are geographically minuscule compared to the U.S. and Canada. You could argue that China is a counter-example, but they're obviously in a completely different situation...
France, Germany, Italy, and Spain
To be fair, these countries are geographically minuscule compared to the U.S. and Canada. You could argue that China is a counter-example, but they're obviously in a completely different situation economically, and the federal government has unilateral control over these decisions there. So I don't think it's as simple as pointing to other countries and saying "Why don't you do the same?"
The U.S.?? Hah, Ontario and Canada have issues with building better transportation too. I don't get why 2 large countries consistently refuse to provide better public transportation; there's cash...
The U.S.?? Hah, Ontario and Canada have issues with building better transportation too. I don't get why 2 large countries consistently refuse to provide better public transportation; there's cash for high speed rail, for more light rail, etc.
It's about population density. Canada has 37 million people. Beijing alone has 22 million people. The customer base difference is huge. Another thing to note is that it is entirely possible to...
It's about population density. Canada has 37 million people. Beijing alone has 22 million people. The customer base difference is huge. Another thing to note is that it is entirely possible to live your life in China with only public transport and electric bikes, while in NA a car is a basic necessity of life, so more people are going to take trains in China as opposed to driving. Even with so much people, China's high speed trains often lose money if they don't have full passengers. The whole system is propped up by the government for the economic benefits brought by ease of transportation. So I suppose to maintain a high speed railway in NA would be very expensive. I've also heard that in Europe many train tickets are more expensive than airplane tickets, which I guess is their way of compensating for the cost of running the train.
To be fair, these countries are geographically minuscule compared to the U.S. and Canada. You could argue that China is a counter-example, but they're obviously in a completely different situation economically, and the federal government has unilateral control over these decisions there. So I don't think it's as simple as pointing to other countries and saying "Why don't you do the same?"
What advantages does high speed rail have over air travel for these longer trips?
Similar prices, similar travel time, less CO2... not to mention the extra comfort.
Thats quite an informative link. Thanks. Makes me wish we had good inter city trains in Australia.
The U.S.?? Hah, Ontario and Canada have issues with building better transportation too. I don't get why 2 large countries consistently refuse to provide better public transportation; there's cash for high speed rail, for more light rail, etc.
It's about population density. Canada has 37 million people. Beijing alone has 22 million people. The customer base difference is huge. Another thing to note is that it is entirely possible to live your life in China with only public transport and electric bikes, while in NA a car is a basic necessity of life, so more people are going to take trains in China as opposed to driving. Even with so much people, China's high speed trains often lose money if they don't have full passengers. The whole system is propped up by the government for the economic benefits brought by ease of transportation. So I suppose to maintain a high speed railway in NA would be very expensive. I've also heard that in Europe many train tickets are more expensive than airplane tickets, which I guess is their way of compensating for the cost of running the train.