Should it be More Expensive To Travel By Train Rather Than Car

mikey72

robt wrote: »

I'm quite aware of how both technologies work, I work with them every single day. I was pointing out that it is so elementary that it is something readily available on Wikipedia.

My figures were quite clear in that it differentiated between what does and what doesn't use regen brakes. Maybe I could have phrased it better to what does and what doesn't use regen brakes if available.

Incidentally, the post was for interest only, it was not being used as an argument that it would bring down fares . We all know it won't do that. Just as 'eco driving' on diesel stock won't.

Oddly enough, so did I once upon a time.
And just because the train has regen brakes, doesn't mean the system can't be dynamic if regen isn't available. Just doesn't sound as good on the pr if all your regen brakes are doing is heating the countryside.

robt_2

mikey72 wrote: »

Oddly enough, so did I once upon a time.
And just because the train has regen brakes, doesn't mean the system can't be dynamic if regen isn't available. Just doesn't sound as good on the pr if all your regen brakes are doing is heating the countryside.

But just about everywhere that uses trains with regen brakes can now accept the power. All you have offered is 'they were still trialling some areas last year'.

I think that is enough of the topic for me - it is now wildly off topic. Apologies to the OP.

mikey72

I think it was vaguely on topic, as it addresses the savings that could be make, of up to 8% in energy, and the corresponding reduction in emissions.
The cost compared to car use will never be cheaper with the present structure though.
I need to go to a specific place, not a nearby town or village Trains don't do it.
They only work in dense urban areas.
I haven't got a station near me. Local station is a drive away, main line station is a long drive away.
What I need is a mass transit system designed for a single user, not a system to take a large group from one specific area to another.
The future system needs to be a small vehicle that can be used individually on the road, driven to a station, then hooked into a rail system that transports you in your vehicle to a get off point to finish your journey. I don't mean a channel tunnel type system, I mean where the vehicle is the carriage. I could use that.
I can't use the present system, so it's got to make it profits, and pay shareholders by milking the people who can, or have to use it. The car will always be cheaper, even with taxes, purely on volume. Even when fossil fuel becomes too expensive, alternatives will still be more cost effective than mass transport, apart from very dense urban areas, without a radical change somewhere.