NationStates Jolt Archive

With gas prices spiking, and a perconious supply of oil for the future, is mass transit gonna be more popular? Or more interesting to me is this: will its nature change?
Today's mass transit relies on buses, subways, and railways. Buses can use existing infrastructure, but they are late, often dirty, and a good driver is hard to fiind. Subways are okay, especially those newer ones. They're just so damn expensive to use for all but the densest areas, like New York. Skyrails are great, but they can be confined by physical obstacles like buildings, and are often noisy. This is an urban planner's nightmare.
But here's the reason I have hope: this is the 21st century. The rules are changing, and a very small facet is transportation. In the 20th century, we conquered distance. In the 21st, we'll learn maximum efficiency. That will involve blurring the line between private and mass transportation, and it is already happening. The most expensive privately built mass transit system has been built. It is a monorail connecting casinos on the Las Vegas strip. A car company in Seattle offers a fleat of cars that one rents and parks. The parked car is used by another paying customer that obtains key-like info through his cell phone. This won't be your grandma's mass transit system.
Discuss.

A car company in Seattle offers a fleat of cars that one rents and parks. The parked car is used by another paying customer that obtains key-like info through his cell phone.


Woah, that's awesome! It'll be like that car commercial.

Woah, that's awesome! It'll be like that car commercial.
Can't find a link yet, but I read it in a Time magazine article about a year ago. It's small but growing, and is consistently bringing in profits. While their fleet is not big enough to be feasible (so they said), they plan on a service where you can request a car via your cellphone, and get it in less than 15 minutes. I believe that there are already a few copy-cats in other cities. Only in America.

Only in America.

I've heard of similar systems in several European cities...

I've heard of similar systems in several European cities...
Well that's not what I will solely focus on. You see, there will probably be other innovations now that the government is out of the way, and the car, once liberating, is starting to be confining. I can almost gurantee you, however, that most future innovation will come from the most traffic clogged nation on earth: China. Add a rising middle class with shitty streets and dense populations, and you have 1.3 billion drivers demanding action.

...Discuss.
Glad I don't live where you do.

Glad I don't live where you do.
You afraid of me?

The buses I ride are always clean, on time, and the drivers 99.99% of the time friendly. Austin doesn't have a subway, and we do have a light rail that's supposed to be built at some time soon.

While I'd like a few more routes with the bus system we have, I'd say I'm fairly well off with the mass transit we have and am quite satisified.

The multiple user car idea will probably be killed by the same thing that is causing current problems: high gas prices.

I'll hold out hope for private transit, but it seems that it would be limited to large cities where revenue would be nearly guaranteed.

There is no reason why different rent a car companies can't use the same internet/mobile phone system to allow more cars to be available. If one city successfully sets up such a system it could take off world wide.

Also, we are just about able to build cars that can drive themselves now. It won't be too long before robot cars become an economical possibility. (Maybe at first they'll have flashing lights to warn people and drive annoyingly slowly.)

I found a bicycle and money for trains was all I needed in Japan. If you wanted to get away for the weekend and couldn't take a train you could rent a small car for maybe $30 a day.

Japan has an extremely good public transportation system.
Plus they aren't afraid to ride bikes and scooters.
Too many uptight macho wankers here in the states it seems. ?

Go check it out yourself. *(Japan's systems that is)
Japan Travel Bureau online has tickets available
that are usually 1/3 to 1/2 less than any other travel
agency out there. Plus a lot of tourist info is available
in English and the bigger stations have English readings
of stops as well.


Perhaps the public transportation systems of the furture should
be deseigned by the public. It might give us a sense of ownership.
Have all those city council people go to neighborhood meetings
and along with people there should deseign it from the bottom up.
Not picking one of three preselected choices, but really put
our minds together and do it.

we took a train to the northern island of Hokkaido into the boonies
and the last train we were on was only 2 cars long.

small towns along the way. A couple people would get on or
off. Usually about 5 to 10 people and the stations in these
towns were smaller than a semi trailer. dead serious.
Maybe on other days there were more people riding? I do not know.
But it was fun. Travelling to a ski resort town, but in the middle
of the summer. :)

Hong Kong has a brilliant public transport system. It has three tiers (with a sort of 4th):
1. It has a awesome subway system (called the MTR). The longest I've ever had to wait has been 4 minutes for a train and the cost is bloody cheap (dearest trip I've ever had cost less than $3US and it took 80 minutes - from one end of HK island, changing trains 3 times to the middle of the New Territories).
2. It has a superb bus system which is even cheaper than the MTR (less $1US for most routes). Buses for any route run between 5 - 20 minutes all day.
3. As well as the big buses, it has mini buses (capable of seating 16) than shuttle you round mini areas - like from bus/MTR station to apartment blocks or hospitals or malls. Even cheaper again than buses (like $0.30US)
Finally there's a sort of 4th tier, which are taxi cabs. There's more of them on the road than private cars. Again, very cheap (for a taxi).

As a result, the roads aren't that crowded. Compared to Auckland (NZ) which covers more area but has less than 1/6 the population the roads are very quiet.

Sure it means a huge investment in infrastructure initially, but the long term gains are worth it. HK would have ground to a halt by now if they had had to rely on just private cars taking them everywhere. And I'd think it saves money in the long run. Auckland is having to spend millions on maintaining it's road networks, hundreds of millions on redesigning and expanding the motorways and they still discussing whether to build a second harbour bridge (which will cost close to a billion) to cope with the extra traffic. Yet all that will happen is that in 10 or 15 years time they'll be at full capacity again and have to spend even more money on building more roads.
A decent and co-ordinated public transport system like HKs would solve a lot of problems and cost less in the long run.

Mass transit probably won't catch on in America. Why, because of the Car Culture. Americans from day one have been brought up in the car culture. The car respsent freedom, to go where you want to go, when you want to go, and how you want to go. Mass Transit is very limited, you have to ahere to a schedule, and its dirty, there is drunken bums and alot of people get mugged or raped in the Subway systems. My job requires me to work at night, and in my area the bus don't run at night, and we don't have or need the light rail system. The ligh rail system is a joke, its going to cost the city and taxpayers more money than it will create. Why, because of the car culture. Your going to get more revune out of road building and construction than out of light rail.

However, I would like to see some alternative fuel come onto the market, I think the American public would be more accepting to alternative fuels than to the mass transit idea.

You need to see the HK MTR system. Drunken bums, rapes, muggings, grafitti? Uh-uh. It's so clean and safe. They even have broadband internet terminals free to use in their stations. And as I mentioned, the longest I've ever had to wait is 4 minutes. The average wait time is 2.

You need to see the HK MTR system. Drunken bums, rapes, muggings, grafitti? Uh-uh. It's so clean and safe. They even have broadband internet terminals free to use in their stations. And as I mentioned, the longest I've ever had to wait is 4 minutes. The average wait time is 2.

Ahh but does it run everywhere and 24/7? Thats the problem of Mass Transit. Its so limited to where it can go. Let me give you a scenario. Lets say you have to be at work by 9am. In your car, it takes you eh about 30 minutes so not bad. However the subway isn't near your house, but the Bus is. However the Bus isn't going by your work place, but its going by the Subway system So you get on the Bus, which has to make some other stops along the way. It gets to the Subway station, and there you got to buy a ticket, and wait for the next train to come. You ride the subway etc etc. Then you get off of the subway at your stop, but you got to take another bus. By this time its almost 9am, so your already going to be late. So you take the bus and get to work 30 minutes late.

Whether a car, all you need to do is get into it, start up the engine, and go to work. Bada bing, bada boom.

Like I said, an investment into Alternative fuel would be wiser than an investment in mass transit.

Thanks for the info on HK's.
I just wrote a letter to our mayor about the increases in fees and he's
always threatening cutting services.
NOW is definately not the time to cut the services.
What with gas prices, and the hurricane and an entire city wiped out.

One bus driver told me he saw an increase of about 10% new faces
over the last couple months.



Japan too, little to no crime. A 10 year old girl could ride home
on the trains at 11 at night. Drunken salarymen ride them home
and some even pass out at the station because they missed the last
train.

Actually, if you had an more info on Hong Kong's system,
please do forward it my way.

We definately need to increase public transportation usage.
I don't get why people equate isolation with freedom? Or a "symbol"
of freedom?
Sure it's definately great to go wherever you want when you want.
But if we had decent public transit systems in towns,
we could build passenger systems between towns and across
the country. Japan has this. One can easily get off the plane
at an international airport and travel to practically any where in the
country with relative ease.

Passenger trains. They couldn't be funded soley on ticket sales.
But guess what? No national train system any where on the planet
is run strictly on ticket sales. Imagine the money we could save
if we pooled our money together in the form of taxes and helped
construct passenger trains.

Oil will eventually run out. Peak oil is on the horizon.
10, 20 or 40 years then decline begins. Some analysists
claim we've already hit peak oil.

Alternative fuel sources are also a must.
From what I understand fuel cells just aren't the answer.
Biomass from corn and/or hemp could help.
Wind and/or solar. Tell your politician to increase this.
Why not mandate any new home built must have solar?
Those building brand new homes certainly seem to be the ones who
can afford it. We have building codes for piping, electricity, and wall
thickness. Why not solar panels?

I think we need both alt fuel + increased public transit.
Oh, and we could do something about the increase in poverty
in our country as well. If that's not a (i did not say "the")
major contributor to street crime, I think you are in denial.
Less crime, safer bus and trains.
Look at Japan. Mostly safe. Mostly middle class.

Japan and HK and other places may have great Mas Transit Systems, but there is one they they sure as hell don't have, and Canada and the US do: A hell of a long way between major cities, a hell of a lot more space to civer. People seem to forget that as pect of Mass Transit, which is nearly no-existent over here, except for shitty Grayhound.

Also HK, and Japan subway system isn't so clean. My buddy who worked their for five years tells me that its where the homeless sleep. Homeless can rape and mug people. Also they pack the people on like sardines. If it rain, well you can forget about the train because of the weight and the fact that theres little friction on the rails it won't go in the rain. So while Mass Transit is a nice idea, its not very fesiable. However Alternative fuel is!

Fukuoka, population 1.36 million, subway was clean.

I stayed over night at the train station 2x there just like
the salarymen and the homeless. No problem.
Just because one is homeless, doesn't make one a criminal.
Of course the ground is dirty. But there is virtually no litter anywhere.

I cannot speak for the subway of Tokyo.
One train station in Tokyo - Shinjuku, does have homeless sleep
there at night. But as for trash? no. Japan, even in Shinjuku
a section of Tokyo metropolitan is virtually spotless.
We were amazed. How can this be? With hardly any garbage cans
to be seen any where. This may sound hard to believe, but it is true.

I've ridden the DC metro and the Chicago El. Those are both
dirtier. I cannot say about homeless here.

Rain?
No trains?
How do they run in places with trains now?

Passengers can rape and mug people too.
Actually in Japan there has been a problem with
men groping women in the packed trains.
They have instituted women only cars for certain peak hours.

All I'm saying is what may be right for Japan, may not be right for the United States. I think the United States will be better off with Alternative fuel.

So far I don't see how alt fuel is necessarily better.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for alt fuel.
I just don't see why we can't do both.

I don't get how or why the US wouldl be better off
with only alt fuel.

So far I don't see how alt fuel is necessarily better.

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for alt fuel.
I just don't see why we can't do both.

I don't get how or why the US wouldl be better off
with only alt fuel.

Because we are not on 3 little islands. Our cities are wide and far apart. Heck most Mass tranist don't run 24/7, and like I mention before. I work at night, so I have to use my car to get to my job.

Ok. By increased mass transit I did not mean
making cars illegal or uprooting the majority of roads
or anything. It would not be either or.

If enough people road transit and alt fuels
such as E85 which is 85% ethanol, i.e. corn fuel,
were used, this could help push the price of gasoline
down because there would be less demand.

The first thing you people should do is build your city closer to the centre - or else no public transport will work. Public transport in Hong Kong works brilliantly!

Also HK, and Japan subway system isn't so clean. My buddy who worked their for five years tells me that its where the homeless sleep. Homeless can rape and mug people. Also they pack the people on like sardines. If it rain, well you can forget about the train because of the weight and the fact that theres little friction on the rails it won't go in the rain. So while Mass Transit is a nice idea, its not very fesiable. However Alternative fuel is!
Where the hell do you get that from? HK MTR isn't so clean? I've yet to see any graffitti or rubbish anywhere. Nor have I seen a homeless person in the carriage at any time. I've seen young children travelling on the MTR very late at night (it's one of the strangest things here - when I was 5 I'd have been in bed by 8pm, but here you see parents out with their kids at 10 or 11 at night) by themselves and they seem very relaxed about doing so. Which I assume means it's very safe to do so.

I've travelled the MTR when there's been a Typhoon lvl 8 warning (=severe, lots of wind and rain), as well as heavy rain warning (and rain here can be very heavy) and as yet have never been delayed. Last year it was reported that the MTR system was running at a 99.9% efficiency rate (3 major delays a day on average out of 3000 trips - a major delay is viewed as one where passengers have to wait more than 5 minutes due to a problem), and they spent quite a bit of money trying to improve it. Apparently 99.9% wasn't good enough.

The packing in can be a bit of a pain admittedly, but everyone's pretty polite about it. Still better than all those ppl using cars.

Another cool thing about the HK MTR is that you can check your bags in at the Downtown MTR station and they're forwarded and loaded onto your plane at the airport. Saves the hassle of lugging them all the way there yourself.

The first thing you people should do is build your city closer to the centre - or else no public transport will work. Public transport in Hong Kong works brilliantly!

One thing you must know about America: People with money, for some reason, just HAVE to have houses bigger than fucking life itself. They wouldn't even hear of living in a nice apartment in an urban area. Oh, they have to have at least two cars, too. They wouldn't even think of taking a train with the smelly, low-lifes of the lower classes (that's usually what they think of us).

This country is too large for extensive mass transit to be practical. If anything there should be pressure to buy hybrid cars. I even heard of a hybrid SUV coming out for those who just need something big.

This country is too large for extensive mass transit to be practical. If anything there should be pressure to buy hybrid cars. I even heard of a hybrid SUV coming out for those who just need something big.

China's abou the same size, and they're developing working mass transit systems.

Our country's run by corporations. Do you expect anything less than a shitload of cars, rather than much better train systems?

China's abou the same size, and they're developing working mass transit systems.

Our country's run by corporations. Do you expect anything less than a shitload of cars, rather than much better train systems?

I haven't heard about China but if I had to guess it is mainly for the eastern part of the country where most of the population is. Maybe if it goes into the rural areas then it will be real effective.

Japan and HK and other places may have great Mas Transit Systems, but there is one they they sure as hell don't have, and Canada and the US do: A hell of a long way between major cities, a hell of a lot more space to civer. People seem to forget that as pect of Mass Transit, which is nearly no-existent over here, except for shitty Grayhound.
And that, I believe, is the most intelligent thing I have read on here. You see, N. American cities, especially the newer ones of the American West, are structured as lumps. They have a downtown of various sizes, plus the usual inner-city, industrial district, and transportation hub of some nature ringing that. Then there is a blob of sprawl that only gradually thins. Mass transit is possible in the cities, but only recently (like in the past three or so years) have we seen a gradual trend back to cities. Before hand, the suburb was growing like a weed.
I am arguing, therefore, that we will see the growth of mass transit out of sheer necessity. The cars used to liberate us. Now they are a prison, miring us in hours of traffic commuting, and countless hours of lost productivity. Something will occur, but it won't take traditional form.

The MBTA here in boston I find to be pretty efficient. Sure, luck has it that a bus never comes right away, but they usually run every 10-20 minutes, less frequently after about 10 PM. The subway here isn't that bad and not too dangerous with a few exceptions of some sketchy people on the orange line...And we are also working on (and making much progress) switching to low-emissions busses, and have some fully electric busses.

You know what business I'd start if I had more engineering expertise? I'd think that there should be a rail/car combo. Cars can easily fit onto rails to head to macrodestinations, being from suburb to city, city to city, etc. Speed would be maintained at a high speed, because it would not be propelled by its own motor. Rather, it would be propelled by electrical lines. At any point, however, the car could exit the railway to a microdestination using its own power. Consumers might go for it, but it'd require quite a bit of capital to start. Still, I believe that transit of this nature will emerge in N. America, and especially China. Perhaps "mass transit" is now an obsolete term.

Mass transit probably won't catch on in America. Why, because of the Car Culture. Americans from day one have been brought up in the car culture. The car respsent freedom, to go where you want to go, when you want to go, and how you want to go. Mass Transit is very limited, you have to ahere to a schedule, and its dirty, there is drunken bums and alot of people get mugged or raped in the Subway systems. My job requires me to work at night, and in my area the bus don't run at night, and we don't have or need the light rail system. The ligh rail system is a joke, its going to cost the city and taxpayers more money than it will create. Why, because of the car culture. Your going to get more revune out of road building and construction than out of light rail.

However, I would like to see some alternative fuel come onto the market, I think the American public would be more accepting to alternative fuels than to the mass transit idea.
Cars represent freedom simply because they've been around for so long. I'm starting to find them confining, and a chore. I gave up days out of my life to get a liscense, cart everyone's asses around through heavy traffic and long trips, and then commute through even thicker traffic. I live in my car, but I'd like to get back into my house. You can't exactly get up and walk onto a lawn in your car. Well, maybe they can build it, but it must get real shitty mileage.

Ahh but does it run everywhere and 24/7? Thats the problem of Mass Transit. Its so limited to where it can go. Let me give you a scenario. Lets say you have to be at work by 9am. In your car, it takes you eh about 30 minutes so not bad. However the subway isn't near your house, but the Bus is. However the Bus isn't going by your work place, but its going by the Subway system So you get on the Bus, which has to make some other stops along the way. It gets to the Subway station, and there you got to buy a ticket, and wait for the next train to come. You ride the subway etc etc. Then you get off of the subway at your stop, but you got to take another bus. By this time its almost 9am, so your already going to be late. So you take the bus and get to work 30 minutes late.

Whether a car, all you need to do is get into it, start up the engine, and go to work. Bada bing, bada boom.

Like I said, an investment into Alternative fuel would be wiser than an investment in mass transit.
No, it doesn't run 24 hours a day. It runs from 6am to 1am daily. Outside of that, there's buses, mini buses and taxis.

It takes me about 15 minutes to walk between MTR stations (I live 5 minutes from one). Therefore, you're roughly about 15 minutes walk away from a station most places on Kowloon or north side of HK island. As I mentioned, there's shuttle buses which run every couple of minutes around the suburbs, usually loops to and from the stations. In addition, there's buses that go everywhere and waiting time is at most 20 minutes.
On top of that is the costs. For me to get into HK island costs $10HK (about $1.25US/1 Euro) on the MTR, about $8HK ($1US) on the bus (but takes longer), $100 for a taxi (which also takes longer than the MTR cause the harbour tunnel usually slows things down) and if I did have a car, $20 for the tunnel fee and another $100+ for the carpark + of course the cost of petrol + licencing + registration + maintenance.
So driving makes no sense.

For me personally I have two options to get to work (which is about 25km away), and I live in a pretty non-descript part of town heading to another non-descript part of the New Territories). I can either walk the two minutes to the bus stop and catch a bus which takes me within a <5 minute walk from school. Total time taken = 40 minutes (door to door). Or I can walk 8-10 minutes to the KCR (the MTR train service for the New Territories), catch the train (longest time waiting so far = 3 minutes), change to another rail system after two stops (takes 2 minutes to walk from one platform to another, and longest waiting time so far also 3 minutes) and get off again <5 minutes walk from school. Total time = 35 minutes. I'd wager that you couldn't drive a car in rush hour traffic at 50+ km/hr, which is what you'd have to do in order to get there faster than that.
I'd love to see you get into your car, start up the engine, and go to work. Bada bing, bada boom. In rush hour. The average speed along LA highways during rush hour is 30km/hr. MTR trains travel at around 80 km/hr.

BTW, as for buying a ticket, I don't. Here they have a mind-blowingly fantastic thing called an octopus card. It's sort of like an eftpos card. You put money on it (either at the station or at 7/11s, supermarkets, chemists, pretty much anywhere) and wave it in front of the reader (don't even have to take it out of your wallet or handbag) as you go through the turnstile. As you leave the station, you repeat the gesture and it deducts the cost of your journey. So no waiting to buy a ticket or anything mundane.
What makes it very cool is that you can use it for buses, minibuses, even to buy things at the 7/11, supermarkets, chemists, pay for your carparking, bills. Practically anything. You can even get watches with it built in so you just wave your arm over the reader as you walk through. Man, it's so convenient.

BTW, here's what one of the stations looks like:
http://www.gakei.com/aex/aex05.jpg
Pretty grimy and dirty, eh?

If you want to know how to get mass transit to work in a big city, just ask London.

Using the tube and the bus you can get anywhere in the city quickly. And it's pretty safe.

Mass transit probably won't catch on in America. Why, because of the Car Culture.

This is partly true, but the real reason is lack of efficiency. Mass transit is great for large cities. I was born and raised in Chicago where we could walk to the grocery store or hop on a bus or the "L" (elevated subway system) to get to work. However, the majority of Americans don't live in cities that have this sort of infrastructure. Most live in rural America (by that I mean cities and towns with populations fewer than 100,000) and becuase of the competitive nature of our society we travel great distances to obtain the best deals on the most basic of neccessities. This is why we Americans are portrayed as oil hungry. Who stands to lose the most if every town in america was linked by a mass transit system or if the fuel efficient technologies we do have were implimented in our vehicles and homes? Big Oil. Big Oil has the means to block progress, to hold us at ransom, to cause international strife..... I better stop before I spark the revolution, or then again maybe I should go on.

I am arguing, therefore, that we will see the growth of mass transit out of sheer necessity. The cars used to liberate us. Now they are a prison, miring us in hours of traffic commuting, and countless hours of lost productivity. Something will occur, but it won't take traditional form.

I agree that necessity will spur this growth, but very slowly and in the most populated regions. I can't forsee a national mass transit system in the near future, but as alternatve fuels become more increasingly available and in demand, it would be the best investment this country ever made to the world.

I agree that necessity will spur this growth, but very slowly and in the most populated regions. I can't forsee a national mass transit system in the near future, but as alternatve fuels become more increasingly available and in demand, it would be the best investment this country ever made to the world.
Alternative energy helps the environment, helps the economy, and hopefully, it will help one's wallet. But how does it benefit one at rush hour on the Santa Monica freeway? It doesn't somehow help traffic. And I bet that it will come with a slew of problems. Remember, the car was developed to solve the problems of the horse and buggy, notably the poop and the noise.

Alternative energy helps the environment, helps the economy, and hopefully, it will help one's wallet. But how does it benefit one at rush hour on the Santa Monica freeway? It doesn't somehow help traffic. And I bet that it will come with a slew of problems. Remember, the car was developed to solve the problems of the horse and buggy, notably the poop and the noise.

Alternative energy helps the environment, helps the economy, and hopefully, it will help one's wallet. But how does it benefit one at rush hour on the Santa Monica freeway? It doesn't somehow help traffic. And I bet that it will come with a slew of problems. Remember, the car was developed to solve the problems of the horse and buggy, notably the poop and the noise.

For my theory to work you have to make one BIG assumption, Americans must 1.) demand our government work to decrease our dependency on oil. This is a good start. (http://www.srimedia.com/artman/publish/article_903.shtml) 2.0 expand on the Urban Mass Transportation ACT of 1970 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Mass_Transportation_Act) to allow for rural development.

It will definately be a slow transition, but ultimately as Big Oil begins to see a reduction in revenue from oil production they will, if smart (and they are) invest heavily in the alternative fuels and the infrastructures that produce, transport and sell these fuels. A reduced suply of oil will foster the necessity for alternate and more efficient means of transportation, to include mass transit.
We are at the begining stages of that long transition now. In the 70's, when the "ugly" Japanese cars were introduced as an alternative to our gas gusslers, it was a quick fix. As time passed, they became more attractive and spured great compitition with our own manufacturers. Today, we have hybrids that offer maximum efficiency at the cost of horsepower, therefore, not very good to take on the expressways. The quick fix is to sacrifice maximum efficiency for horsepower and that leaves us with minimal to moderate efficient hybrids. More info on hybrids. (http://www.hybridcars.com/)

I know this is all theory, but I hope I see it in my lifetime.

A car company in Seattle offers a fleat of cars that one rents and parks. The parked car is used by another paying customer that obtains key-like info through his cell phone. This won't be your grandma's mass transit system.
Discuss.My family is involved in exactly such a car-sharing arrangement, except that its a co-op, and is owned by all the participants, not a private company. Its pretty cool. First you pay a few hundred dollars to be part of the co-op (buy your 'share' of the company).
There are about three cars who's pemanent parking places are within a few-block radius of our house. You register the times you need the car online, and pay according to the amount of time, and mileage you use. You are refunded by the co-op for any gas you buy. For us, since we don't drive alot, its much cheaper, and more environmentally sustainable. w00t for car co-ops.

You know what business I'd start if I had more engineering expertise? I'd think that there should be a rail/car combo. Cars can easily fit onto rails to head to macrodestinations, being from suburb to city, city to city, etc. Speed would be maintained at a high speed, because it would not be propelled by its own motor. Rather, it would be propelled by electrical lines. At any point, however, the car could exit the railway to a microdestination using its own power. Consumers might go for it, but it'd require quite a bit of capital to start. Still, I believe that transit of this nature will emerge in N. America, and especially China. Perhaps "mass transit" is now an obsolete term.
I know such things are already being worked on. Unfortunately all I know is it is "somewhere in Europe". It was discussed on some Discovery Channel show. Beyond that nearly useless information, I haven't a clue. But the system discussed was remarkably similar to what you proposed.

My family is involved in exactly such a car-sharing arrangement, except that its a co-op, and is owned by all the participants, not a private company. Its pretty cool. First you pay a few hundred dollars to be part of the co-op (buy your 'share' of the company).
There are about three cars who's pemanent parking places are within a few-block radius of our house. You register the times you need the car online, and pay according to the amount of time, and mileage you use. You are refunded by the co-op for any gas you buy. For us, since we don't drive alot, its much cheaper, and more environmentally sustainable. w00t for car co-ops.
Nice. Now do you live in Vancouver? It seems like an urban North West phenomenon right now.

Nice. Now do you live in Vancouver? It seems like an urban North West phenomenon right now.
Yup, I live in Vancouver. Its extremely well-organized and practical. This is definately an idea worth exporting.
The next step would be to get a fleet of hybrids, smartcars, and electric cars, and we're set.

For my theory to work you have to make one BIG assumption, Americans must 1.) demand our government work to decrease our dependency on oil. This is a good start. (http://www.srimedia.com/artman/publish/article_903.shtml) 2.0 expand on the Urban Mass Transportation ACT of 1970 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_Mass_Transportation_Act) to allow for rural development.

It will definately be a slow transition, but ultimately as Big Oil begins to see a reduction in revenue from oil production they will, if smart (and they are) invest heavily in the alternative fuels and the infrastructures that produce, transport and sell these fuels. A reduced suply of oil will foster the necessity for alternate and more efficient means of transportation, to include mass transit.
We are at the begining stages of that long transition now. In the 70's, when the "ugly" Japanese cars were introduced as an alternative to our gas gusslers, it was a quick fix. As time passed, they became more attractive and spured great compitition with our own manufacturers. Today, we have hybrids that offer maximum efficiency at the cost of horsepower, therefore, not very good to take on the expressways. The quick fix is to sacrifice maximum efficiency for horsepower and that leaves us with minimal to moderate efficient hybrids. More info on hybrids. (http://www.hybridcars.com/)

I know this is all theory, but I hope I see it in my lifetime.

That's great. But I doubt the government needs to get involved, or at least on the federal level. You see, I fear that they will leave no room to innovate, and no room for competition. Amtrak is decades behind the rest of the developed world because it is poorly maintained. There's no incentive.
If the government really wants to help, they should sell Amtrak. There is definitly a big market for rail travel as it is, especially in the Northeast corridor. Why not get a few companies in and make it better?
Oh, and btw, those Acelas, while a huge advancement, mean nothing. They are based on old bullet train technology, and they can't even make some of their runs properly because the railroads aren't upgraded.

I know such things are already being worked on. Unfortunately all I know is it is "somewhere in Europe". It was discussed on some Discovery Channel show. Beyond that nearly useless information, I haven't a clue. But the system discussed was remarkably similar to what you proposed.
Interesting. I actually heard about another system that they want to try in Minneapolis that is somewhat similar, though not quite. They want to build a series of L tracks and street rails with cars on them that drive themselves. You get to set the destination. They're hoping that this gets to be more popular than even the only other mass transit system that can take you to microdestinations, being buses.

Yup, I live in Vancouver. Its extremely well-organized and practical. This is definately an idea worth exporting.
The next step would be to get a fleet of hybrids, smartcars, and electric cars, and we're set.
It's an idea, but still, it depends on what you wanna drive. You'd probably want an eco-friendly car. I bet, however, that there are gonna be companies like this, or perhaps siimilar companies and co-ops, that will have other cars. Perhaps contractors in LA will one day find no need to buy pick ups, but instead rent it from one of these companies. And who'd have thought that the good ole' Ford F-150 could've been an engine of outsourcing?

Subways are okay, especially those newer ones.
First thing, its called a metro, not a subway.

First thing, its called a metro, not a subway.
You call it what you want, and I call it what I want.

You call it what you want, and I call it what I want.
The term "metro" makes more sense then the terms "subway" and "underground", because most metro systems are not entirely below the ground. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with todays mass transit sytems, execpt buses should use a different power source then gasoline, perhaps having electric buses would be a better idea.

The term "metro" makes more sense then the terms "subway" and "underground", because most metro systems are not entirely below the ground. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with todays mass transit sytems, execpt buses should use a different power source then gasoline, perhaps having electric buses would be a better idea.
Well, I've only been on the New York subway, and from what I've seen of it, it is underground. But they do call it the "metro" in DC. I only know about that because my uncle actually worked as an engineer for it when it was being built about fifteen years ago.

Well, I've only been on the New York subway, and from what I've seen of it, it is underground. But they do call it the "metro" in DC. I only know about that because my uncle actually worked as an engineer for it when it was being built about fifteen years ago.
Well, go outside america, you will see that they call it the metro almost everywhere.

Well, go outside america, you will see that they call it the metro almost everywhere.
It's not that I haven't been outside America. I just never use the mass transit systems of anywhere. Though now that I think about it, I may have been on a train in Toronto once. I can't really remember. In any case, I hate trains. Especially public trains. They are always so dirty and crowded. I use airport shuttles all the time, and they are even worse. I mean, they are bad. And I am rambling here.

*snip*
Jesus, that's cleaner then the jewel of the American system, grand central station (which is rather ugly...).

Jesus, that's cleaner then the jewel of the American system, grand central station (which is rather ugly...).
I like Grand Central. They've cleaned it up a lot.

I like Grand Central. They've cleaned it up a lot.
I've found that only the main terminal/the heavily used areas are clean, but the lesser used areas are...well, dirty and spartan. Then again, I haven't been in Grand Central in two or so years, so... (I don't live in NYC, I just some times take the LIRR or amtrak to the city).

I've found that only the main terminal/the heavily used areas are clean, but the lesser used areas are...well, dirty and spartan. Then again, I haven't been in Grand Central in two or so years, so... (I don't live in NYC, I just some times take the LIRR or amtrak to the city).
I was last there a few months ago. It was quite nice. Union Station in DC is absolutely beautifiul, however. Of course, no one goes there to take the trains, but rather to shop and have dinner.

So while Mass Transit is a nice idea, its not very fesiable. However Alternative fuel is!
It seems to be pretty feasible all over Europe. Cars are not that great either. You didn't mention that driving in Tokyo is a nightmare. It is one of the most clogged cities in the world.

It seems to be pretty feasible all over Europe. Cars are not that great either. You didn't mention that driving in Tokyo is a nightmare. It is one of the most clogged cities in the world.
I would think. There's no room to walk there, for crying out loud.

bump

It seems to be pretty feasible all over Europe. Cars are not that great either. You didn't mention that driving in Tokyo is a nightmare. It is one of the most clogged cities in the world.

Tokyo does have, however, the most intensive mass transit system in the world. And the most efficient - it needs to be.

Late running times there are apparently measured in seconds, not minutes.

Reliability is apparently about 99.6%. The .4% is usually due to earthquakes etc.

Mass transit (or, as we call it, Public transport) is a shambles here in Sydney. It's run down due to years of neglect, delays of more than half an hour are NOT unheard of (and 90 minute delays were experienced last year).

The double deck trains we run do not work here (due primarily to loading times). They're fine for the interurban runs, though.

This is despite the fact that our central station has 25 operating platforms (platforms 26 and 27 aren't hooked up to anything yet, they were built when they had to sink 24/25 so far down).

Oh, and by the way, 23 of those platforms are above ground.

Keep in mind: Sydney only has a population of 4.2 million.

Tokyo does have, however, the most intensive mass transit system in the world. And the most efficient - it needs to be.

Late running times there are apparently measured in seconds, not minutes.

Reliability is apparently about 99.6%. The .4% is usually due to earthquakes etc.

Mass transit (or, as we call it, Public transport) is a shambles here in Sydney. It's run down due to years of neglect, delays of more than half an hour are NOT unheard of (and 90 minute delays were experienced last year).

The double deck trains we run do not work here (due primarily to loading times). They're fine for the interurban runs, though.

This is despite the fact that our central station has 25 operating platforms (platforms 26 and 27 aren't hooked up to anything yet, they were built when they had to sink 24/25 so far down).

Oh, and by the way, 23 of those platforms are above ground.

Keep in mind: Sydney only has a population of 4.2 million.
Do a lot of people own cars in Sydney?