<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Stimulus spending going to roads?]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by hapa http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 09:00:20 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/1 "if"?

didn't we just have it shoved down our throats how few rational actors with perfect information are out there?

how much pressure (and reward) there is to stick to conventional wisdom?

there will be pain and punishment for seeking alternatives before they're easy as breathing. we're not brave people. the first risk that needs averting is loss of market share. then we can talk about "change."

]]> "if"?

didn't we just have it shoved down our throats how few rational actors with perfect information are out there?

how much pressure (and reward) there is to stick to conventional wisdom?

there will be pain and punishment for seeking alternatives before they're easy as breathing. we're not brave people. the first risk that needs averting is loss of market share. then we can talk about "change."

]]> Comment #2 by wesrolley http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:45:50 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/2 Ask Robert Byrd what he wants.

I understand that the West Virginia request for the stimulus package is to invest in CCS so that they can keep the economy going.  

I don't think that a Senate with Robert Byrd and James Inhofe will allow much to happen without a filibuster and Obama does not have the votes to break on unless we provide them.  Pressure on elected as the new Congress takes its seats.

Wes

Wes Rolley CoChair - EcoAction Committee Green Party US

]]> Ask Robert Byrd what he wants.

I understand that the West Virginia request for the stimulus package is to invest in CCS so that they can keep the economy going.  

I don't think that a Senate with Robert Byrd and James Inhofe will allow much to happen without a filibuster and Obama does not have the votes to break on unless we provide them.  Pressure on elected as the new Congress takes its seats.

Wes

Wes Rolley CoChair - EcoAction Committee Green Party US

]]> Comment #3 by Jon Rynn http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 14:39:08 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/3 That might not be the worst part...

also in that article:    Rep. James L. Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, has circulated a 41-page memo seeking $85 billion worth of projects over the next two years. The largest chunk of that money, more than $30.2 billion, would go toward highway funds, while $12 billion would go to local public transportation funds. An additional $14.3 billion would go toward "environmental infrastructure," with most going to a clean-water fund.

So out of 850 billion dollars (perhaps) over two years, only 85 billion for infrastructure, of which 30 for roads and only 12 for transit?  Hope not.

]]> That might not be the worst part...

also in that article:    Rep. James L. Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, has circulated a 41-page memo seeking $85 billion worth of projects over the next two years. The largest chunk of that money, more than $30.2 billion, would go toward highway funds, while $12 billion would go to local public transportation funds. An additional $14.3 billion would go toward "environmental infrastructure," with most going to a clean-water fund.

So out of 850 billion dollars (perhaps) over two years, only 85 billion for infrastructure, of which 30 for roads and only 12 for transit?  Hope not.

]]> Comment #4 by ce1907 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 15:24:02 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/4 be specific, Jon

gross numbers are meaningless

1.  purpose of stimulus is immediate shock to economy by producing jobs and purchase power (by immediately employed)

immediate -- means immediate

road and bridge fixing is already planned, easiest to do.  Also easiest to PASS immediately because it has existing constituencies everywhere (including rural states which, by the way, have two senators each -- brush off your math)

2.  how much money could be spent wisely and IMMEDIATELY on mass transit

what?  where?

if you find the specifics, and it is more than 12 billion in two years (Schumer wants 20 billion) then great
-- say what the good stuff is, and argue for it

not the amount, but the good stuff.  make that the focus

otherwise, no meaningful discussion

just a lot of mindless chest thumping

]]> be specific, Jon

gross numbers are meaningless

1.  purpose of stimulus is immediate shock to economy by producing jobs and purchase power (by immediately employed)

immediate -- means immediate

road and bridge fixing is already planned, easiest to do.  Also easiest to PASS immediately because it has existing constituencies everywhere (including rural states which, by the way, have two senators each -- brush off your math)

2.  how much money could be spent wisely and IMMEDIATELY on mass transit

what?  where?

if you find the specifics, and it is more than 12 billion in two years (Schumer wants 20 billion) then great
-- say what the good stuff is, and argue for it

not the amount, but the good stuff.  make that the focus

otherwise, no meaningful discussion

just a lot of mindless chest thumping

]]> Comment #5 by Pangolin http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:06:04 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/5 Stimulus is a hole....

into which we throw money. Once we get past the bridge repairs and levee rebuilds we're into waste. Highway spending is a hole into which money can be poured forever with guaranteed diminishing returns. Check out Craigslist and look at some of the used car prices on offer. People can't sell unwanted vehicles for 80% of their value just a few months ago; and dropping.

Until it gets into the thick heads of Congressmen that cars, coal, suburbs and stripmalls are dead ends economically we are going to be stuck in futile cycling. Fixing the highways doesn't do squat if the offramp dumps your freight onto a gravel road or worse. Your county's broke and doesn't have the scratch to patch or pave what your daddy drove as smooth asphalt.

Meanwhile investments that have proven returns, in efficiency and dollars are neglected because the don't have a few spare million to bribe congress with. Every town in the US has single-paned windows, ancient furnaces, calcified water heaters, decrepit refrigerators, halogen area lighting, schools with temporary buildings and thermal profiles like a thin tent.

Swap those out for most-efficient equipment and suddenly dollar bills appear in in consumers hands that were going to coal, petroleum and gas giants. (sorry, gotta be losers somewhere)

Pull vehicles off the roads and convert them to short-range, plug-in hybrids. Lots of vehicles currently sporting 200 hp. engines could do just fine with 50 horsepower, a wad of ultra-caps and some batteries. The gas money saved is available to the rest of the economy instead of leaving the country to cover oil imports.

Stimulus, as we know it, burns wealth. The value of the money is destroyed on futile projects at least half the time. Conservation creates lasting value that frees resources, financial and physical, for use elsewhere. As far as elsewhere the US has to lay some track if it's going to get it's goods where they need to go. The roads are looking more like thin patchwork every day and I don't see the funds for replacements showing up anytime soon.

Put the Carbon Back

]]> Stimulus is a hole....

into which we throw money. Once we get past the bridge repairs and levee rebuilds we're into waste. Highway spending is a hole into which money can be poured forever with guaranteed diminishing returns. Check out Craigslist and look at some of the used car prices on offer. People can't sell unwanted vehicles for 80% of their value just a few months ago; and dropping.

Until it gets into the thick heads of Congressmen that cars, coal, suburbs and stripmalls are dead ends economically we are going to be stuck in futile cycling. Fixing the highways doesn't do squat if the offramp dumps your freight onto a gravel road or worse. Your county's broke and doesn't have the scratch to patch or pave what your daddy drove as smooth asphalt.

Meanwhile investments that have proven returns, in efficiency and dollars are neglected because the don't have a few spare million to bribe congress with. Every town in the US has single-paned windows, ancient furnaces, calcified water heaters, decrepit refrigerators, halogen area lighting, schools with temporary buildings and thermal profiles like a thin tent.

Swap those out for most-efficient equipment and suddenly dollar bills appear in in consumers hands that were going to coal, petroleum and gas giants. (sorry, gotta be losers somewhere)

Pull vehicles off the roads and convert them to short-range, plug-in hybrids. Lots of vehicles currently sporting 200 hp. engines could do just fine with 50 horsepower, a wad of ultra-caps and some batteries. The gas money saved is available to the rest of the economy instead of leaving the country to cover oil imports.

Stimulus, as we know it, burns wealth. The value of the money is destroyed on futile projects at least half the time. Conservation creates lasting value that frees resources, financial and physical, for use elsewhere. As far as elsewhere the US has to lay some track if it's going to get it's goods where they need to go. The roads are looking more like thin patchwork every day and I don't see the funds for replacements showing up anytime soon.

Put the Carbon Back

]]> Comment #6 by ce1907 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 22:53:11 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/6 Pangolin, your vision is simplistic

I share your goals, generally

but the problem is not simply bribes to Congressmen

the public does not agree.  it does not want to pay for "private" improvements for people.  it does want roads and cars

so your vision is missing quite a few important steps along the way

prioritize:  what is most important first?

how can we get it?

what can we trade?

how can we influence the slovenly cowardly press?

outside of appointing Pangolin emperor tomorrow, there is no direct path to your goals

I am all for your elevation, of course.  But I suggest the need for a Plan B

]]> Pangolin, your vision is simplistic

I share your goals, generally

but the problem is not simply bribes to Congressmen

the public does not agree.  it does not want to pay for "private" improvements for people.  it does want roads and cars

so your vision is missing quite a few important steps along the way

prioritize:  what is most important first?

how can we get it?

what can we trade?

how can we influence the slovenly cowardly press?

outside of appointing Pangolin emperor tomorrow, there is no direct path to your goals

I am all for your elevation, of course.  But I suggest the need for a Plan B

]]> Comment #7 by cneal http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 23:13:18 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/7 T4America

You guys should look into - and direct your readers to - the T4America coalition. They're an outgrowth of Smart Growth America with big foundation backing to make sure that the stimulus - and the subsequent Transportation Bill reauthorization - go in more progressive directions.

Their website is also equipped with action alerts. It's important for legislators to hear from their constituents about these issues - a few letters, phone calls, or e-mails can make a big difference.

http://t4america.org/

vigorousnorth.blogspot.com A field guide to the wilderness areas of American inner cities.

]]> T4America

You guys should look into - and direct your readers to - the T4America coalition. They're an outgrowth of Smart Growth America with big foundation backing to make sure that the stimulus - and the subsequent Transportation Bill reauthorization - go in more progressive directions.

Their website is also equipped with action alerts. It's important for legislators to hear from their constituents about these issues - a few letters, phone calls, or e-mails can make a big difference.

http://t4america.org/

vigorousnorth.blogspot.com A field guide to the wilderness areas of American inner cities.

]]> Comment #8 by Jon Rynn http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Mon, 29 Dec 2008 23:50:49 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/8 There's much more than roads

If you look at the Infrastructure Report Card put out by the American Society of Civil Engineers, they call for spending of 1.6 billion dollars to get the infrastructure to an "adequate" level, and most of that is not roads -- water, electricity, ports and airports, school buildings -- there's a lot to be done.  Apparently the Civil Engineers are the most radical "infrastructionists", because they're calling for more money than anyone else (the projects are even broken down state-by-state, ce1907).

]]> There's much more than roads

If you look at the Infrastructure Report Card put out by the American Society of Civil Engineers, they call for spending of 1.6 billion dollars to get the infrastructure to an "adequate" level, and most of that is not roads -- water, electricity, ports and airports, school buildings -- there's a lot to be done.  Apparently the Civil Engineers are the most radical "infrastructionists", because they're calling for more money than anyone else (the projects are even broken down state-by-state, ce1907).

]]> Comment #9 by JMG http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Tue, 30 Dec 2008 04:29:19 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/9 That's billion with a T right, Jon?

Because only 1.6 billion with a B wouldn't get Portland's infrastructure up to "adequate," much less Oregon's ...

The 5% Project Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay.

]]> That's billion with a T right, Jon?

Because only 1.6 billion with a B wouldn't get Portland's infrastructure up to "adequate," much less Oregon's ...

The 5% Project Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay.

]]> Comment #10 by Jon Rynn http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Tue, 30 Dec 2008 04:45:15 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/10 oops, yep, T, 1.6 trillion

]]> oops, yep, T, 1.6 trillion

]]> Comment #11 by Pompey Road http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Tue, 30 Dec 2008 09:56:09 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/11 Mass Transit's share of the pie:

Mass transit should be a large part of the infrastructure mix. Rail, Trolley, Subway Systems and inner city bus if natural gas is used. I know that is still a carbon fuel but it is still a cleaner bridge fuel until some other alternative becomes viable. I do agree with some other poster's on the negative effect of new roads or at least as some say limited or dimenishing returns.

Mass transit has been ignored for years and would do more for energy conservation and energy independance than any of the clean coal projects they are talking about. I see an environmental benifit for every citizen you take out of an automobile and out on a passenger train or natural gas bus.

The eons of time and nature was good to us down here. It was not until we become civilized that destroying our habitat become fathomable or fashionable.

]]> Mass Transit's share of the pie:

Mass transit should be a large part of the infrastructure mix. Rail, Trolley, Subway Systems and inner city bus if natural gas is used. I know that is still a carbon fuel but it is still a cleaner bridge fuel until some other alternative becomes viable. I do agree with some other poster's on the negative effect of new roads or at least as some say limited or dimenishing returns.

Mass transit has been ignored for years and would do more for energy conservation and energy independance than any of the clean coal projects they are talking about. I see an environmental benifit for every citizen you take out of an automobile and out on a passenger train or natural gas bus.

The eons of time and nature was good to us down here. It was not until we become civilized that destroying our habitat become fathomable or fashionable.

]]> Comment #12 by tlaskawy http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Tue, 30 Dec 2008 10:07:20 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/12 Obama has hinted there will be strings

I have the full quote here, but when Obama appeared on Meet the Press a few weeks ago he talked specifically about not giving states a blank check from the stimulus pot for infrastructure.  Just because a state makes a wishlist, it doesn't mean it will get funding for every item.

I would also point out that Obama is on the record in support of a National Infrastructure Bank that would take the project-related decisions out of politicians hands (though this is more of a long-term solution).  I believe Chris Dodd just introduced a new version of an NIB bill that could be tied into the stimulus.

Beyond Green http://weaversway.coop/blog/

]]> Obama has hinted there will be strings

I have the full quote here, but when Obama appeared on Meet the Press a few weeks ago he talked specifically about not giving states a blank check from the stimulus pot for infrastructure.  Just because a state makes a wishlist, it doesn't mean it will get funding for every item.

I would also point out that Obama is on the record in support of a National Infrastructure Bank that would take the project-related decisions out of politicians hands (though this is more of a long-term solution).  I believe Chris Dodd just introduced a new version of an NIB bill that could be tied into the stimulus.

Beyond Green http://weaversway.coop/blog/

]]> Comment #13 by RobKimball http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Wed, 31 Dec 2008 01:33:18 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/13 @Jon - good point

Jon's point about the rest of our infrastructure needs is right on target. The ASCE report card he links to gives its worst grade, a D-, to our water infrastructure.

American Rivers, together with a diverse bunch of partners including contractors, non profits, and state and community governments, has been pushing to include green water infrastructure in the stimulus. Green water projects create good, non-offshore-able jobs building effective infrastructure that lasts.

Check out http://www.americanrivers.org/greeninfrastructure for more info!

Rob Kimball, American Rivers - http://www.americanrivers.org

]]> @Jon - good point

Jon's point about the rest of our infrastructure needs is right on target. The ASCE report card he links to gives its worst grade, a D-, to our water infrastructure.

American Rivers, together with a diverse bunch of partners including contractors, non profits, and state and community governments, has been pushing to include green water infrastructure in the stimulus. Green water projects create good, non-offshore-able jobs building effective infrastructure that lasts.

Check out http://www.americanrivers.org/greeninfrastructure for more info!

Rob Kimball, American Rivers - http://www.americanrivers.org

]]> Comment #14 by JMG http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Wed, 31 Dec 2008 02:56:47 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/14 Not only ....

is "stimulus" money going for roads, but it's apparently going to be Christmas all year round for sprawl-building, if California is any guide:


<http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-transpo31-2008dec31,0,3768851.story>http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-transpo31-2008dec ...

Advocacy group criticizes California transportation wish list

The state plans to spend 31% of federal road money on creating new capacity instead of addressing long-deferred maintenance and repair projects, the group says.
By Patrick McGreevy
7:39 PM PST, December 30, 2008
California officials are counting on Washington to inject billions of dollars in transportation money to help revive the state economy. But a public advocacy group said the state's wish list of projects would undermine efforts to repair and modernize the state's crumbling infrastructure and reduce U.S. dependence on oil.

The California Public Interest Research Group reports that the state plans to spend 31% of road money on creating new capacity instead of addressing long-deferred maintenance and repair projects. By contrast, the group said, Massachusetts would commit 100% of its road funds to repairs.

"We can't afford to waste precious resources on new highways at the expense of ready-to-go projects to repair and maintain existing roads and bridges and expand public transportation," said Erin Steva, a spokeswoman for the group.

The group also faulted the California Department of Transportation's list, saying that only 37% of the funds would flow to public transportation. The group called for a higher percentage, citing the record ridership on California's mass transit systems, which have been hit by severe cutbacks in recent years. The proposed percentage is less than what is being planned in Tennessee, Wisconsin and Massachusetts, CALPIRG said.

Caltrans spokesman Benjamin DeLanty defended the list, saying that it was an initial response to a request from members of Congress for possible projects and may change as federal legislation and state needs evolve.

"We note that the list provided included a fairly even distribution among capital, maintenance and mass transportation projects," DeLanty said. "However, that list continues to be a work in progress and is not definitive."

<mailto:patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com>patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com

The 5% Project Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay.





]]> Not only ....

is "stimulus" money going for roads, but it's apparently going to be Christmas all year round for sprawl-building, if California is any guide:


<http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-transpo31-2008dec31,0,3768851.story>http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-transpo31-2008dec ...

Advocacy group criticizes California transportation wish list

The state plans to spend 31% of federal road money on creating new capacity instead of addressing long-deferred maintenance and repair projects, the group says.
By Patrick McGreevy
7:39 PM PST, December 30, 2008
California officials are counting on Washington to inject billions of dollars in transportation money to help revive the state economy. But a public advocacy group said the state's wish list of projects would undermine efforts to repair and modernize the state's crumbling infrastructure and reduce U.S. dependence on oil.

The California Public Interest Research Group reports that the state plans to spend 31% of road money on creating new capacity instead of addressing long-deferred maintenance and repair projects. By contrast, the group said, Massachusetts would commit 100% of its road funds to repairs.

"We can't afford to waste precious resources on new highways at the expense of ready-to-go projects to repair and maintain existing roads and bridges and expand public transportation," said Erin Steva, a spokeswoman for the group.

The group also faulted the California Department of Transportation's list, saying that only 37% of the funds would flow to public transportation. The group called for a higher percentage, citing the record ridership on California's mass transit systems, which have been hit by severe cutbacks in recent years. The proposed percentage is less than what is being planned in Tennessee, Wisconsin and Massachusetts, CALPIRG said.

Caltrans spokesman Benjamin DeLanty defended the list, saying that it was an initial response to a request from members of Congress for possible projects and may change as federal legislation and state needs evolve.

"We note that the list provided included a fairly even distribution among capital, maintenance and mass transportation projects," DeLanty said. "However, that list continues to be a work in progress and is not definitive."

<mailto:patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com>patrick.mcgreevy@latimes.com

The 5% Project Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay.





]]> Comment #15 by JMG http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:19:20 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/15 Meanwhile

Pretend-green Oregon wants to do away with the gas tax and charge a mileage tax.  

This way, big heavy polluting beasts will pay the same for using the roads as tiny, high-mileage cars.

Oh, and instead of just having an efficient, low-admin cost tax applied with every gallon of hydrocarbon fuel sold, we'll need a huge new infrastructure of GPS units so that we can reduce the tax on hydrocarbon use!

That's some brilliant thinking there, Vern.  

The 5% Project Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay.

]]> Meanwhile

Pretend-green Oregon wants to do away with the gas tax and charge a mileage tax.  

This way, big heavy polluting beasts will pay the same for using the roads as tiny, high-mileage cars.

Oh, and instead of just having an efficient, low-admin cost tax applied with every gallon of hydrocarbon fuel sold, we'll need a huge new infrastructure of GPS units so that we can reduce the tax on hydrocarbon use!

That's some brilliant thinking there, Vern.  

The 5% Project Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay.

]]> Comment #16 by JMG http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:19:48 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/16 Link

Sorry, forgot the link to that item above:

http://is.gd/eiJz

The 5% Project Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay.

]]> Link

Sorry, forgot the link to that item above:

http://is.gd/eiJz

The 5% Project Let's live on the planet as if we intend to stay.

]]> Comment #17 by Jon Rynn http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Wed, 31 Dec 2008 03:48:28 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/17 California's got some nerve

especially after they cut $1.3 billion from transit that they weren't supposed to last year, in order to cover for budget gaps.

]]> California's got some nerve

especially after they cut $1.3 billion from transit that they weren't supposed to last year, in order to cover for budget gaps.

]]> Comment #18 by amazingdrx http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Wed, 31 Dec 2008 04:39:39 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/18 Remember this

Stimulus through infrastructure spending did not end the great depression, manufacturing did.  Infrastructure spending goes to contractors.  How much really gets to workers?

WW II war production spending went to manufacturers.  Evidently more of that money gets out into the economy.  Is this still the case in todays economy?  

Government projects like dams and highways and bridges helped relieve some of the pain of the great depression, but only actual manufacturing ended it.  

New safer electric trains and buses, those are non-auto addiction manufacturing projects.  NEVs for cities are car replacements too.

Fix the RR tracks and build much safer commuter trains to run on them.  The track repair and expansion is infrastructure, and the rail car production is manufacturing.

How about putting collapsable rail cars on the front and back of commuter trains that carry inexpensive commodities and use air bag-like design to cushion passengers in a crash?  Crunch three cars and a lot of the crash impact would be kept away from fragile humans.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

]]> Remember this

Stimulus through infrastructure spending did not end the great depression, manufacturing did.  Infrastructure spending goes to contractors.  How much really gets to workers?

WW II war production spending went to manufacturers.  Evidently more of that money gets out into the economy.  Is this still the case in todays economy?  

Government projects like dams and highways and bridges helped relieve some of the pain of the great depression, but only actual manufacturing ended it.  

New safer electric trains and buses, those are non-auto addiction manufacturing projects.  NEVs for cities are car replacements too.

Fix the RR tracks and build much safer commuter trains to run on them.  The track repair and expansion is infrastructure, and the rail car production is manufacturing.

How about putting collapsable rail cars on the front and back of commuter trains that carry inexpensive commodities and use air bag-like design to cushion passengers in a crash?  Crunch three cars and a lot of the crash impact would be kept away from fragile humans.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

]]> Comment #19 by Pompey Road http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/ Thu, 01 Jan 2009 06:41:22 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/Stimulus-spending-going-to-roads/19 Can't get enough mass transit:

How about putting passenger rail service back in East Kentucky and West Virginia all we have now are coal trains. We have to drive 3 to 4 hours in most cases to get to an airport. This is one reason we can't diversify and are kept as a coal only region. This is the reason we don't have rail freight hubs that can support any type of heavy manufacturing . We would not be so isolated and maybe more people would come in here and notice the devastation caused by Mountain Top Removal and coal sludge and slurry impoundments. Passenger rail service and bus service would help open up an isolated area of Appalachia and let the rest of the country see how much destruction they are causing each time they flip a light switch on. We would of course experience the fuel savings and less environmental damage provided by mass transit.

The eons of time and nature was good to us down here. It was not until we become civilized that destroying our habitat become fathomable or fashionable.


]]> Can't get enough mass transit:

How about putting passenger rail service back in East Kentucky and West Virginia all we have now are coal trains. We have to drive 3 to 4 hours in most cases to get to an airport. This is one reason we can't diversify and are kept as a coal only region. This is the reason we don't have rail freight hubs that can support any type of heavy manufacturing . We would not be so isolated and maybe more people would come in here and notice the devastation caused by Mountain Top Removal and coal sludge and slurry impoundments. Passenger rail service and bus service would help open up an isolated area of Appalachia and let the rest of the country see how much destruction they are causing each time they flip a light switch on. We would of course experience the fuel savings and less environmental damage provided by mass transit.

The eons of time and nature was good to us down here. It was not until we become civilized that destroying our habitat become fathomable or fashionable.


]]>