Siemens’ High-Speed Rail: These “Cars” Get 700 Miles-Per-Gallon

Investment U ^ | Friday, June 11, 2010 | David Fessler, Energy and Infrastructure Expert

[Mr. Lucky]

Wow! It looks like you’ve found a great investment for your personal savings.

[camle]

you put a gallon of gas into it, and if it runs for 700 miles, then i’ll beleive your claim. these hypermileage claims by teh rail industry can be considered misleading because they assume certain capacities, loads, etc.

[Psycho_Bunny]

"you might want to hop onboard the Siemens train "

And suddenly I'm snickering like a 12 year-old.

[PLMerite]

“Think about the time you spend waiting in traffic jams… at the doctor/dentist’s office… at restaurants… at the gas station.”

Is he implying that I’m going to be able to take “high speed rail” to pick up a pizza?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

$50 million PER MILE.

[red tie]

Take a look at the cost per passenger mile, then tell me what a great investment this is!

[ZX12R]

you put a gallon of gas into it, and if it runs for 700 miles, then i’ll beleive your claim. these hypermileage claims by teh rail industry can be considered misleading because they assume certain capacities, loads, etc.

The tracks must be built going downhill only.

[cripplecreek]

20 minutes or its free. LOL

[Obadiah]

You’ve GOT to be kidding, right?

There will be no government subsidy of rail, right?

Magically, there will be no lines and no waiting with rail, right?

Each rail car will be filled to capacity to gain that 700 miles per gallon figure, right? They won’t be like all those empty buses I see runing up and down the streets, right?

There will be very little start up cost, right?

All the trains will run (on old tracks) at 250 miles per hour, right?

Wow. Hey, I hear the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale because it will no longer be needed.

[cripplecreek]

Lord Obama gave Michigan a whopping $40 million.

You can go as fast as you want, and as far as you want.....as long as its within 9/10 of a mile.

[Thermalseeker]

....these hypermileage claims by teh rail industry can be considered misleading because they assume certain capacities, loads, etc.

They also never include the fact that the train doesn't go exactly where people want to go, either. Neither do commercial airlines, but what is going to win out in the market? A commercial flight across the country that takes 4 hours and costs $400 or a train ride that takes 15 hours and cost $800?

[Yo-Yo]

Unless there is a high-speed train running every ten minutes from my front door to anywhere I want to go, I’ll still spend all of that same time waiting at lights.

Trains work in Europe because they’ve taxed fuel to $7.00 per Gallon.

[Moonman62]

And how about the six months of your life spent waiting at traffic lights? Or the five years you’ll spend just waiting in lines at retail stores, the post office, DMV, etc.

(psychological disorder)People obviously never wait at train stations or spend time getting to and from them. (/psychological disorder)

[patton]

This is a good place for the picture of the Detroit Rail Station.

[Oldexpat]

We simply don't have masses of people going from city center to city center. None of these systems world wide even pay for their OPERATING COSTS from the fare box. That is a clear indication that they are..overall..not energy efficient. If you include the overall investment expenses they are enormously unprofitable. If the cost of gas goes up much more there will be an incentive to run even more vehicles on natural gas..which is abundant in NA.

[Obadiah]

Here you go...

[dila813]

The 700 Mile per gallon is calculated as compared to if the train is running at full capacity as compared to everyone taking their own car.

In other words, it is the equivalent of a single person on the train driving the same distance in a 700 mile per gallon car.

or further, it is 100% BS.

Doesn’t include the fuel cost involved in constructing this monument to the green ideology either.

[thackney]

Cars get 700 mpg?

No, when you have to be deceptive with the description, it becomes obvious the point is rather weak.

Trains compete with airlines, not personal vehicles.

They should be able to offer that competition in time versus cost.

[outpostinmass2]

If the goverment is bankrupt enough and can’t maintain the highways and oil is expensive enough then the railroads will provide passenger service again. Right now the people of the U.S. want the government to build and maintain highways not rails.

By the way for everyone else commenting railroads are cheaper to build, maintain and operate then interstate highways. So it is not about cost it is more about choice.