在美国到底值不值得花钱去建立一个高铁网络？_风闻

【来源龙腾网】

正文原创翻译：

Is it cost-efficient to build a network of bullet trains across the United States

在美国到底值不值得花钱去建立一个高速列车网络？

I’ve noticed that places like Europe and China have large bullet networks, which made me wonder why the US doesn’t. Is there something about the geography of the US that makes it difficult? Like the Rocky Mountains? Or are there not enough large population centers in the interior to make it cost-efficient or something? Or are US cities much too far apart to make it worth it?

我注意到，像欧洲和中国这样的地方都有大型的高铁网络，这让我想知道为什么美国没有。是不是美国的地理环境有什么问题，使得建立它很困难？比如落基山脉？还是内陆地区没有足够的大型人口中心来使其具有成本效益或其他？还是美国的城市相距太远，不值得这样做？

评论翻译

Valcatraxx

Before dreaming this big you should set your sights on fixing local public transportation first. In Europe most train stations are in walkable locations with adequate options getting to and from the station itself. I doubt people are going to want to take the train if it just turns into the same airport nightmare we deal with in NA

在做这么大的梦之前，你应该先把目光放在修复当地的公共交通上。在欧洲，大多数火车站都在可步行可达的地方，有足够的选择来往于车站本身。如果它变成了像我们在北美洲处理的机场噩梦那样，我怀疑大家还愿不愿意坐火车。

Dtownknives

I was looking all over for this comment. High speed rail loses some of its attractiveness over flying and almost all of it over driving when you still need a car to navigate the final destination.

There’s enough demand for travel between Denver and Albuquerque, for example, to support regular full flights, and they are close enough that many choose to drive rather than deal with the hassle of an airport. However the public transit systems of both cities are so bad that you can’t reasonably get anywhere if you arrive until you have a car. I make that trip relatively often and am a huge proponent of rail, but if a high-speed route opened I’d likely still choose to drive. Whereas I’d absolutely consider a high-speed rail trip from DC to NYC because both of those cities have mature public transit systems.

So much of the environmental conversation around rail focuses on the long haul trips, but what we need to work on first is providing an alternative for the shorter daily drives, and the longer trips can come after that.

说到点子上了。跟飞机比，高铁失去了一部分吸引力，而跟驾车比，当你坐火车到达地方还是需要一辆汽车来搭你到最终目的地的时候，高铁几乎失去了所有的吸引力。

比如说，在丹佛和阿尔伯克基之间有足够的旅行需求，以支持定期的完整的航班，而且它们足够近，许多人选择开车而不是去处理机场的麻烦。然而，这两个城市的公共交通系统都很糟糕，如果你到达时没有汽车，你就没办法方便地到达任何地方。我经常去那里，是铁路的忠实拥护者，但如果这两个城市之间有一条高铁线路开通，我可能还是会选择开车。而从华盛顿到纽约市之间我绝对会考虑高铁出行，因为这两个城市都有成熟的公共交通系统。

围绕铁路的许多环境对话都集中在长途旅行上，但我们首先需要做的是为较短的日常驾驶提供一个替代方案，然后才是考虑长途旅行。

arrayofeels

I live in Europe and take high speed rail even when I need a car at my final destination, which I usually do if I travel for work. Just rent a car at the train station, 20 mins or so after arriving I am on the road. Much easier than renting a car at an airport too. If I have a trip that I can make in a day combining say, 1.5 hr train + 1.5 hour driving as opposed to 4.5 hour driving each way then train plus driving for me is much more relaxing, allows me to work for part of it, then there is just no question which option I am going to take

我生活在欧洲，即使在我到达最终目的地时仍需要汽车，我也会乘坐高铁，如果我要出差，我通常会这样做。只要在火车站租一辆车，到达后20分钟左右我就可以上路了。这也比在机场租车容易得多。如果我有一个在一天内结束的旅行，比如说，1.5小时的火车+1.5小时的开车，相比单程4.5小时的开车，选择火车加开车对我来说要轻松得多，可以让我在部分时间里工作，所以会采取哪种方式是毫无疑问的。

der_innkeeper

There is not a high enough density to move people coast to coast.

Where it is dense enough, such as San Diego to Los Angeles, or the DC to NY route, there is high interest, but also very high NIMBYism when it comes to actually building them and right of way procurement.

Also, the “fair market value” needed to compensate for land acquired through eminent domain is prohibitive. Because these areas are popular and dense, land prices are very high.

没有足够高的人口密度来支持从西海岸到东海岸的线路。

在人口密度足够大的地方，如圣地亚哥到洛杉矶，或华盛顿到纽约的路线，大家对此很感兴趣，但在进行实际建设和路权采购的时候，也有着很高的“别打扰到我”的心态。

另外，对通过征用土地进行补偿所需的"公平市场价值"也很高。因为这些地区很受欢迎，而且很密集，土地价格非常高。

tuctrohs

There is not a high enough density to move people coast to coast.

I think this problem is often overstated. If you actually look at the volume of traffic on our highways, even a small fraction of that opting for High-Speed rail would mean we could have hourly train service. I’ve tried that exercise for local roots in regions where people say the population is too low to support transit and concluded that we could have full buses running every 5 minutes if people actually opted for transit. I haven’t run the numbers for cross country interstate traffic, but I I’m pretty confident that it would support at least hourly high speed rail.

“没有足够高的人口密度来支持从西海岸到东海岸的线路。”

我认为这个问题往往被夸大了。如果你真正去查看一下我们高速公路上的交通量，会发现即使只有一小部分人选择高速铁路，也意味着我们可以拥有每小时一趟的火车服务。我曾经在那些人们说人口太少无法支持公共交通的地区尝试过这种做法，结论是如果人们真的选择了公共交通，我们可以每5分钟就有一辆满载的公交车。我没有计算过跨州交通的数字，但我我很有信心，它至少可以支持每小时一趟的高速铁路。

iAmRiight

Agreed, it only takes a small percentage of traffic converting to mass transit for it to make sense. Besides the stigma and resistance to commuting by mass transit, when it comes to lower density areas there is a legitimate problem with lack of affordable local transit once you get into the vicinity of where you need to be.

I can take a light rail train to within 3 miles of my workplace, but there’s no realistic way for me to get those last few miles except to walk, bike or post an Uber every day. For the price of transit and taxi service I’m nearly financially break even with driving myself, and I have freedom to travel on my schedule and go elsewhere if needed.

Unless there is extra infrastructure put in place to effectively serve the metro suburbs, mass transit is not a viable option for most people.

同意，只需要一小部分人将私人交通转换为公共交通就足以维持了。然而除了对乘坐公共运输工具通勤的偏见和抵触，当涉及到低人口密度地区时，一旦你进入你需要去的地方附近，就会产生一个无法忽视的问题，即缺乏负担得起的当地的公共交通。

我可以乘坐轻轨列车到达我工作地点的3英里范围内，但除了每天步行、骑自行车或使用Uber，我没有任何现实的方法可以结束最后几英里。对于公共交通和出租车服务的价格，几乎与我自己开车的支出持平，而且如果是自己开车，我还可以根据自己的时间安排自由出行，如果需要的话，还可以去其他地方。

所以除非有额外的基础设施到位，有效地服务于地铁郊区，否则对于大多数人来说，公共交通不是一个可行的选择。