Light Rail Isn't the Track to the Future

Express-News ^ | February 9, 2009 | Randal O'Toole

[george76]

As America's largest city without rail transit, some people want San Antonio to “keep up” by building light rail. You need to know only one thing: Light rail is really expensive.

I mean, really, really expensive. The average mile of light-rail line costs two to five times as much as an urban freeway lane-mile. Yet in 2007 the average light-rail line carried less than one-seventh as many people as the average freeway lane-mile in cities with light rail.

Do the math: Light rail costs 14 to 35 times as much to move people as highways.

The Government Accountability Office found that bus-rapid transit—frequent buses with limited stops—provided faster, better service at 2 percent of the capital cost and lower operating costs than light rail.

If light rail is so expensive, why are cities building it? Starting in the 1970s, Congress offered cities hundreds of millions of dollars for transit capital improvements. If they bought buses, they wouldn't have enough money to operate those buses.

So cities like Portland and Sacramento decided to build light rail—because it was expensive. Only light rail would use up all the millions of federal dollars. Other cities that wanted their share of federal pork soon began planning light rail, too.

How successful is light rail? In 1980, before Portland began building light rail, 9.8 percent of the region's commuters took transit to work. Today, it is 7.6 percent.

Light rail is a giant hoax that makes rail contractors rich and taxpayers poor. San Antonio should be proud to be America's largest city that hasn't fallen for this hoax.

[Dilbert San Diego]

The liberals don’t care about cost per mile and all that technical stuff.

The liberals want to encourage use of mass transit. Mass transit works well in some cities, but not in others. But to the liberals, it doesn’t matter if light rail can pay for its operating expenses and building costs. They think that mass transit should be heavily subsidized because of all the usual enviro-extremist reasons. And they are passionate about saving a planet.

On some issues, you just can’t talk about facts and figures to the liberals. The emotion of saving planets and “investing” in our “infrastructure” makes reasoned discussion of issues impossible.

[domenad]

I have some experience in heavy rail, including controls and signalling. I do not understand why light rail is so much more expensive than a freeway, especially when you account for new technologies like concrete ties and in-field replacement and rail grinding. There must be something else at work here.

[tioga]

How successful is light rail? In 1980, before Portland began building light rail, 9.8 percent of the region's commuters took transit to work. Today, it is 7.6 percent.

and this translates to what? how many people rode mass transit then compared to how many now?

while visiting San Jose this spring I made use of the light rail....it was clean and convienent, yet limited....used buses as well....but a car still gets you exactly where you want to go in the shortest amount of time.

[tpmintx]

How much energy does it take to install light rail?

What is the so-called carbon footprint of constructing a light rail system?

How long does it take to re-capture all of that expended energy and/or carbon?

10 years? 100 years? 10,000 years?

No on knows and no one cares. It is the ultimate feel-good technology for flat-earth no-growth uber liberals.

[phoenix07]

Phoenix has a light rail and it has been anything but cost effective. Nobody uses it.

[george76]

In 1980, before Portland began building light rail, 9.8 percent of the region’s commuters took transit to work.

Today, it is 7.6 percent.

[BaylorDad]

...some people want San Antonio to “keep up”...

Houston has a downtown ball park and light rail. Our self esteem is so high we can't feel the heat.

[demshateGod]

But what impact does light rail have on property values. In Denver, a lot of people want to live by the light rail. Not just for commuting to work, but because they just like it. I like the light rail but it’s not going to get people to abandon their cars so the advocates for it should just give that notion up.

[scory]

That light rail is expensive, inefficient and unpopular (based on lack of usage by the citizenry) is not the point. The point is that leftists have a religious mandate to SAVE THE PLANET!!!!!! So what they want to do is force as many people as possible out of all those terrible polluting autos and trucks and into sardine cans on rails. And to do this they do all they can to drive up auto and gasoline/diesel prices so that more and more people are unable to afford to use their vehicles. This also has the effect of forcing yet more into crowded urban areas thus increasing the likelihood they will become more dependant on government and more easily controlled because more concentrated.

[george76]

Kick backs to the DUmmies and over paid /under skilled community organizers who hang out between elections.

[DoughtyOne]

If light rail can pay for itself, then fine.  If it can't, then don't build it.  That's my take on buses too.

If these methods of inner city transportation pay for themselves, fine.  Otherwise spend the funds on expanding our highways, and quit screwing around with people who need to drive to get where they want to go without having to quadruple the time it takes.  Taking gas tax funds to pay for mass transit, or even other state spending needs, is mis-allocation of funds IMO.

                          The following is directed to Freepers who haven't donated or signed up for monthlies yet...

14% is good.  100% is better.  You know you're going to do it.  Pull the trigger!  You don't have to pay it all now.  $5 now, $25 next week, $10 later... keep the ball rolling.

Monthly donorship is a good way for us to avoid having to do the Freepathons.  Besides, it's a great way to pony up in style.
If you're on the verge of becoming a monthly donor or you think you would like to up your monthly donation a bit, has Jim got a deal for you. 
Check this out.  There's an added incentive for a limited time only.  (Always wanted to type that...)

Thanks to Freepers who have been frequenting the Freepathon thread to ham it up with folks over there.  It helps to raise the visibility of the Freepathon.

Jump into the Monthly Donorship special thread too.  There are horderves, hot women with short skirts, and beer too.  Alert, the pizza just showed up!  It's a partaaaee...
Ladies, there were 15 lifeguards over there a few minutes ago.  (I'm beginning to feel a bit guilty... heh heh heh...)

[jagusafr]

Well here’s the problem with his “more buses, fewer stops” argument: I live about 3.5 miles from my office on De Zavala Road. I checked into riding the bus. It would take me 1 hour and 52 minutes and three bus changes through two major VIA terminals to get from my home to my office. What SA needs is better bus routes and more stops out on the northwest side.

Another problem with light rail here in SA is the confluence of geography and temperature: it’s 105 today and I’m just not gonna walk half a mile from a light rail station to my office in triple digit temps on a regular basis. I don’t think I’m alone in this view...

Colonel, USAFR

[george76]

Billions in Highway Taxes Diverted to General Spending.

Only one-third of fees collected by state and local government from motorists go directly to road construction and maintenance.

Motorists gave state and local government $40.3 billion in 2005 for the ability to drive and own a vehicle.

After accounting for administration and overhead, $28.5 billion remained for all fifty states to spend in 2005.

Of this amount, only $13 billion was spent on state and local road construction and maintenance.

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/14/1494.asp

[george76]

Some people say San Antonio should build light rail because Dallas and Houston have light rail.

To paraphrase American mothers, if Dallas and Houston jumped off a cliff, should San Antonio jump as well?

.

[jokyfo]

Get a dedicated railbed system. Light rail is nothing more than a glorified trolly, very slow.

[Jeff Chandler]

If the government elites were truly committed to reducing traffic congestion, they would conduct a study to determine which government jobs could be performed through telecommuting. Then outsource those jobs to India.

[T-Bird45]

Another problem with light rail here in SA is the confluence of geography and temperature: it’s 105 today and I’m just not gonna walk half a mile from a light rail station to my office in triple digit temps on a regular basis. I don’t think I’m alone in this view...

Another vote in agreement with Gen. Phillip Sheridan: "If I owned Hell and Texas I’d rent Texas and live in Hell.”

[DennisR]

So true. What would work is a high-speed monorail - above the ground, not an impediment to traffic, and possibly a better alternative to a car.

Voters around the Seattle area have a love affair with light rail. But when one votes for such a system, I believe they should also certify that they will use it!

[Trod Upon]

It is about transferring tax dollars to minority-owned contracting companies.