Hundreds of North Carolinians switch to train over the car

Charlotte News 14 ^ | Friday, September 3, 2010 | Jessica Cervantez

[Willie Green]

RALEIGH — If you want to beat the holiday traffic, lose the keys for a train ticket.

The ridership for the North Carolina Amtrak station in Raleigh has gone up this Labor Day weekend. The new Piedmont mid-train service between Charlotte and Raleigh began on June 5. From June 2009 to June 2010 ridership has gone up 200-percent.

“It's a great way to beat the traffic, you can read, you can work on the computer and you can spend time with the kids,” said Melina Cope.

Dozens of passengers are ditching the roads for the ride. In fact, just last Friday, there were 284 riders at the Raleigh Amtrak station and on Labor Day Friday they were expecting more than 334 riders, which is a 10 to 15-percent increase.

“We're very excited about that and we feel like it's going to continue to grow as people see that the train as a viable option,” said Joan Bagherpour, of the North Carolina Department of Transportation Rail Division.

That train is said to be auto competitive with a three hour ride, but some riders may disagree.

“Sometimes they have too many delays for me but it's a comfortable ride,” said Johnson County resident Larry Johnson.

As far as train fares go, toddlers up to two-years-old ride for free, children between ages 2 and 15 ride for half the price of whatever an adult ticket would be, and 15-percent discounts go to seniors, college students, the military, and American Automobile Association members.

[super7man]

From June 2009 to June 2010 ridership has gone up 200-percent.

And it still loses money.

[sgtyork]

Oil futures contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange are based largely on the price of WTI (West Texas Intermediate), or “Texas Light Sweet,” a type of crude oil used as a pricing benchmark. According to Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc. freight transportation analysts William Greene and Adam Longson

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1215/is_9_210/ai_n39242649/

[fatnotlazy]

Glad people are wising up to train travel. So much easier and cheaper, plus you don’t have the stress of driving. And I might add that the disabled also may be entitled to a discount, although I don’t know if those fares apply everywhere. Even without a discount, it’s still cheap.

[FrankR]

In normal times, I would see this as probably good common sense, saving money and traffic hassles...but with obama in there and his big push for “high speed trains” and use of trains...I wonder. /tinfoil hat

[Grunthor]

“Hundreds of North Carolinians switch to train over the car”

Hundreds? Lord I wonder how many federal tax dollars went into this boondoggle.

[meyer]

"From June 2009 to June 2010 ridership has gone up 200-percent."

Did they double the size of the crew?

[Mmogamer]

Cheap? It’s cheaper to fly to NYC than to take Amtrak.

[Grunthor]

Agreed. Also if I drive to the same city that the train goes to, I can drive directly to my final destination rather than stand at the train station wondering how I am getting to the office or home.

[napscoordinator]

As far as train fares go, toddlers up to two-years-old ride for free, children between ages 2 and 15 ride for half the price of whatever an adult ticket would be, and 15-percent discounts go to seniors, college students, the military, and American Automobile Association members.

Supporting the military. I like that. These folks are patriotic. I hope they succeed. It is great to see Americans giving back. God Bless them and their ventures into the train business!!!!!

[JRios1968]

The new Piedmont mid-train service between Charlotte and Raleigh began on June 5. From June 2009 to June 2010 ridership has gone up 200-percent.

Alright! They've cracked the 20-rider mark!

In the words of Joe "Plugs" Biden, this is "a big *^&%%&( deal!!!!"

[Charles Martel]

In another part of the article, the increase is measured in “dozens”. Clearly, this is a huge success < rolls eyes >.

[AGreatPer]

Wondering what kind of jobs the riders have?
Just who are these people now riding the train?
How were they traveling before, car, bus, stagecoach?

[screaminsunshine]

Dozens of people? The riders went from 2 doz. to 4 doz. as more cars are repossessed..

[DontTreadOnMe2009]

Hundreds?

That’s the part that also caught my attention.

Don’t trains cost millions of dollars and sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars?

So, perhaps each rider needs $1 million to build his own little piece of train?

Question: Haven’t we all seen a train going by, as we drive down the highway, with about seven people on it, knowing that that train required $100 million of government subsidies?

I certainly know that I have.

Sorry, Willie, just telling the truth. No need to angrily attack me, like you did last time.

[Grunthor]

“In another part of the article, the increase is measured in “dozens”.”

At a cost to the tax payer of how many thousands of dollars per rider? These pro-choo choo folks always seem to forget to add that part.

[dr_who]

Neighbors Rally Against High Speed Rail Option

[Kartographer]

“So much easier and cheaper”

It's cheaper because everyone else is subsidizing it. There are no publice passenger railways that pay their own way and certainly none that make money. It would be cheaper for me to drive to work if the state was picking up 1/2 to 2/3's of my gas and maintenance cost!

[Rebelbase]

There’s no train service in NC to the coast or the mountains. Charlotte and Raleigh are OK, but not vacation spots, IMO.

[UB355]

Dozens of passengers according to the article

[fatnotlazy]

“Cheap? It’s cheaper to fly to NYC than to take Amtrak.”

***

Not from where I live. Best airfare I could find was $105 each way. Amtrak = $65 each way.

[Gritty]

334 train riders on a single day? Wow! That's about how many automobile riders are cruising along a single mile of I-85 between Raleigh and Charlotte in a single minute on the same day.

What's newsworthy about this story is almost nobody is riding the train but is driving their own car!

[napscoordinator]

Good Lord you are right. After you mentioned that, I went to the Amtrack website and put in some two cities that I travel normally (round trip) and goodness it is over 300 hundred dollars round trip and that is basic....good lord it is expensive if you want a room. It is actually ridiculous and now I see why Americans don’t use the train system. I went on ONE train in Europe and that was from northern Germany to Berlin and it was three hours. It was nice but it was on a tour so when we got to the destination a bus was waiting for us to take us on tour. I would not hazard a guess what I would have done had I been by myself as it was not in the best area. That is another problem with bus stations. They are usually in the worst areas of the city.

[Moonman62]

Dozens of passengers are ditching the roads for the ride.

Wow, dozens.

[napscoordinator]

I put in Orlando to Boston and it was over 300 bucks and that was basic with no frills. You get first class or own room and you are looking close to 1000 bucks. It is insane. And the hours you waste when you don’t fly is crazy. You can get to your destination flying in three hours or it take 28 hours to get there by train. Yuk!!!!

[Ed Condon]

Next time you are driving to work, just think of who paid for the road or highway that you are using.

Maybe then you will start taking the “Road Runner”, and really stick it to the rest of us.

[Mr. Lucky]

This article deals with the wonderful government operated train service from Charlotte, North Carolina.

The Amtrak train from Charlotte to New York takes 13 1/2 hours and costs $388 round trip. Privately owned airlines take 1hr 41 min and charge $347 for the roundtrip.

Yeah, government control of the economy sure is special.

[Kartographer]

I can ride the train from Albuqurque to LA for $126. To fly would around $208, but the train would take almost 17 hours the plane less than a hour and half. So add two days travel to a trip along with added expenses and it works out cost wise the same.

[fatnotlazy]

I agree. Trains take way too long compared to airlines especially when you have to be somewhere right away. But if you’re comparing train travel to driving, it takes about the same amount of time and it’s a lot less hassle. And by the way, when I fly, I’ve almost always encountered some sort of delay — so that one hour trip often winds up being several hours.

These days, I hate to fly. Too much trouble going through all that stupid security. Airlines have also gone out of their way to make the trip as uncomfortable as possible. Putrid food (at an outrageous extra cost and seats designed for midgets. Ok, so train food isn’t all that wonderful, but you have comfortable seats (the last train I took had a lounge car too) plus some nice views of the countryside you can’t see from an airplane or when driving.

[Kartographer]

The only way taking the Rail Runner makes sense is if you work downtown ABQ. Otherwise once you add the commute from the train to work and back you would have to be crazy or have no other life than work!

[Ed Condon]

OOOPS, post 26, meant “Rail Runner”, (Why not take it to the wine festival?)

[BwanaNdege]

When our son was in middle school he won the county geography bee. The prize was two Amtrak tickets to the NC State Geography Bee in Chapel Hill.

Great!

The problem was that in order to get from our small town in the mountains to Chapel Hill on Amtrak we had to drive (2 hrs) to Greenville, SC, take Amtrak (11 hrs) to Washington, DC then switch trains to travel to Raleigh (6 hrs). We then would have had to figure out how to get from Raleigh to Chapel Hill. The current price for the two tickets is $222 (Amtrak now has a Greenville-Charlotte-Raleigh run- 6 hrs $84).

Instead we drove, 266 miles, 4 1/2 hours, $56 gas round trip, at today’s prices.

Amtrak usually doesn’t work in “fly-over” country.

[tanknetter]

It's cheaper because everyone else is subsidizing it. There are no publice passenger railways that pay their own way and certainly none that make money. It would be cheaper for me to drive to work if the state was picking up 1/2 to 2/3's of my gas and maintenance cost!

Fair enough, but then look at it this way: in all likelihood the government is also subsidizing the roads you use. Or are you paying tolls in order to cover the total costs of the roads you use?

For comparative analysis, here in VA, the Dulles Greenway - which is a 13-mile private toll road, has tolls that run from $2.60 to $5.25 each way (depending on how many exits you go and at what time of day) in order to cover costs. Per the Wiki entry on it, "It receives no public funds, was built with no subsidies, and is policed at its own expense, competing as a wholly private enterprise with the state-built and -maintained roads."

So, the question is, would it still be cheaper for you to drive if you were required to pay tolls necessary to cover the upkeep of the roads you use, plus other related costs (fire/rescue crews that respond to accidents, etc)?

I don't know the answer to that, because I've never seen a study that shows the true/full per-mile costs involved with car vs. rail travel. But I think it's a legitimate question to ask.

[Free_SJersey]

A lot of the money came from taxes on fuel as do the subsidies for trains.
Next time you eat some food, think of how it got to you, No highways, no trucks, no fresh food.

[Kartographer]

The other problem you have to add is the vast majority of people will not be working next door to the railway station. What about the commute from the station to work and back? As well as the commute from the persons house to the depot. I will concede in highly urban areas with plenty of existing rail infrastructure the cost are possible comparable, but for the vast majorty of the remainder of the country I don’t see how they could be.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Maybe you can pay me $32 to drive, then? That’s what we’re paying for each and every AMTRAK rider, after all ($32 of their costs).

And when you arrive at your destination/station - what do you do, then? Hope a friend picks you up and drives you around? Or do you get a taxi? How does that cost factor in versus just driving?

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Next time you are driving to work, just think of who paid for the road or highway that you are using.

Yes, let's look at that:

In fact, let's get the details about the highway portion of that graph:

The net federal subsidy to highway passenger transportation shows negative values for the entire period, indicating excess user charge payments (e.g., fuel taxes) by highway users over their allocated cost (Figure 1)[2]. Users of the highway passenger transportation system paid significantly greater amounts of money to the federal government than their allocated costs in 1994-2000. This was a result of the increase in the deficit reduction motor fuel tax rates between October 1993 and September 1997, and the increase in Highway Trust Fund fuel tax rates starting in October 1997[3].

I highlighted the relevant portion for you...

Seems like the users pay for the costs AND then some. The people actually using the highway paid for it. Can the same be said of trains? The data from the Federal Governments says unequivocally NO.

[mountainlion]

According to Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc. freight transportation analysts William Greene and Adam Longson

Is that our Willie Green? It looks like a good stay at home weekend. Too many weirdos out this weekend.

[fatnotlazy]

“And when you arrive at your destination/station - what do you do, then? Hope a friend picks you up and drives you around? Or do you get a taxi? How does that cost factor in versus just driving?”

***

Depends on where your destination is. Last time, my friend and I got into DC by train, we took a Metro to our destination. Of course, we had the option in DC to walk around rather than drive. Either way, it was still inexpensive.

And another thing: When you figure in the cost of gas, stopping to eat and empty a kidney or two and so on, I don’t see driving as being any better than the train.

[SoCal Pubbie]

You don't have to pee when you ride the train? There isn't all kinds of stops at stations along the way? Where is this magic choo choo that makes no stops and cancels bodily functions?

[Kartographer]

“Depends on where your destination is.”

Correct rail makes sense only in limited highly urbanized areas, but for the vast majority of folks just getting to the train and from the train can be a logistical ‘nightmare’. If I have a hour and a half commute by car why would I want to travel 25-30 minutes to the train station ride a train for 1 to 1 1/2 hours on the train and then commute 25 to 30 minutes from the rail station to my work?

[Mr. Lucky]

At least prior to the current recession, motor fuel taxes generated by highway use exceeded the cost of maintaining the highways. If the Amtrak subsidy were paid for by a user tax imposed on each passenger, the comparison to highways would be more apt.

[SampleMan]

Wow, Hundreds! And what did that cost the taxpayer?

[fatnotlazy]

There are facilities on the train to take care of your bodily functions. I don’t know of any cars that have such facilities. Maybe your Winebago?

[meadsjn]

Dozens of passengers are ditching the roads for the ride.

... at twenty gazillion dollars per passenger mile, subsidized by millions of taxpayers who will never get within a hundred miles of any portion of this transit path.

Trains take you from where you ain't, to where you don't want to be. Mark Twain

[fatnotlazy]

Yes, I know that train travel may not be good for every trip. When my friend and I took the train to DC, we had lots of time on our hands. We didn’t have to be there and back home quickly. Now this same friend and I are traveling to Chicago later this month. However, our time on this next trip is more limited, so traveling by train isn’t practical. Driving would be even worse. So yes, we will be flying.

I’m just saying it’s a shame more people don’t consider trains when they travel.

[PugetSoundSoldier]

Great! So it’s just the $32 each way that the taxpayers subsidized you that is required to make your trip affordable.

[SoCal Pubbie]

And there’s no stops of any kind on the train? You just take the Freeper Express that never stops along the way. And your hunger? You never get hungry either?

I don’t know about where you live but in So Cal unless you hit rush hour there is NO WAY the train gets there faster, or for less cost, particularly when more than one are traveling.

[DemonDeac]

If trains in the US could ever be made convenient time and price wise i’d use them in a heartbeat. I’ve traveled a lot in Europe and I love how easy trains are there and how nice of a way they are to get around. Assuming the time difference isn’t too huge i’d much rather take the train and fly and spend so much time clearing security and waiting.

[Poser]

“Maybe then you will start taking the “Road Runner”, and really stick it to the rest of us.”

Um... Gasoline tax? It’s a user fee.
The only train in my area goes to Boston or Portland. I like to go to Boston, so lets do the math.

My lady and I can take the train to North Station for $38 (total $76 for the two of us). Then we have to take public transportation to our final destinations.

Or... We could drive the 60 miles (120 round trip) in the car to the Oak Grove station. At 30 miles per gallon, that’s 4 gallons at $2.60 a gallon and $5 to park at Oak Grove station. Total cost: $15.40 plus maintenance, much much cheaper than the train. Even alone, the train doesn’t come close. As the number of riders in the car increases, the cost savings add up quickly.

Driving also takes almost an hour less each way and is much more convenient.

Most days, the trains are virtually empty (under 20 riders). On holidays, the trains get better ridership but as I learned once, never ride on holiday weekends. You may end up standing on the train for 2 to 3 hours because there is no room.

By the way, the bus costs less than the train (still double the cost of a car) and runs more often. It also takes less time.