From an ecological point of view I would like for the domestic long-distance transport is well developed, well-utilized rail. Punctual, fast and affordable. Who knows the Swiss railway know what I mean.
But what I get instead? Make way for long-distance buses.
Yes, you will say: That's a good thing. Free travel for free citizens. A beautiful black-and-train our Liberal government, already committed - then the coalition agreement. And the bus is not even the means of transport with the lowest CO2 emissions per capita? If it were so simple then.
Legends of free navigation and environmental
The truth about the legend of the free ride daily reports of the traffic. A ride from the city center to the center of Berlin takes Frankfurt by bus for more than nine hours - by train only half of it.
But the carbon dioxide! Yes, there's been times 2005 figures cited by the likes Buslobby. The only apply to coaches, not for buses. For the route Frankfurt - Berlin, this means that the coach met 19 kg of CO2 per passenger, the rail head 26 per kilogram - nearly a third more. What makes the difference? Capacity utilization, which is in fact currently coaches significantly higher than the train. For the buses is not cut off much worse than the train, especially because an even lower utilization.
What does that mean? For me, the consequence is clear: Rather than weaken the train traffic through competition, we need to utilize him better and make more attractive and affordable. Cited by Ramsauer Transport Minister at the launch of the cabinet decision to ask young people can go on long-distance train, not bus. Rail saver fares and bus fares are not that far apart, there is something else. Assuming you wanted.
So we do not misunderstand us: I'm talking about trains, not buses by train. They should not hesitate to face the competition. But just the regional bus services to 50 kilometers to stay with the current changes largely sidelined.
None of the twelve-lane highways Republic
If we do not want a twelve-lane highways of the Republic, we must hold on to the mass transit train. And then it makes environmental sense, and thus better utilize the features to make it more effective. Just a reminder: More buses, which means more traffic, noise. Air pollution. And land consumption by new bus stations. As pleased by short-term, the local construction industry, but nobody else.
An economically more expensive it is also fun, because the roads are overused by more heavy-duty buses go faster than broken anyway. Make no mistake about it: The new customers of the bus routes will be people who have little money. Instead of cheap train ride, they will clog the highways in buses spree. And our federal government that is still in progress as a liberal. Well, thank you!
currency converter,NZD/INR Exchange Table,NZD/INR Graph Chart ,NZD/INR Performance ,NZD/INR Appreciation ,NZD/INR Depreciation ,NZD/INR Investment Calculator ,NZD/INR Metal Prices
But what I get instead? Make way for long-distance buses.
Yes, you will say: That's a good thing. Free travel for free citizens. A beautiful black-and-train our Liberal government, already committed - then the coalition agreement. And the bus is not even the means of transport with the lowest CO2 emissions per capita? If it were so simple then.
Legends of free navigation and environmental
The truth about the legend of the free ride daily reports of the traffic. A ride from the city center to the center of Berlin takes Frankfurt by bus for more than nine hours - by train only half of it.
But the carbon dioxide! Yes, there's been times 2005 figures cited by the likes Buslobby. The only apply to coaches, not for buses. For the route Frankfurt - Berlin, this means that the coach met 19 kg of CO2 per passenger, the rail head 26 per kilogram - nearly a third more. What makes the difference? Capacity utilization, which is in fact currently coaches significantly higher than the train. For the buses is not cut off much worse than the train, especially because an even lower utilization.
What does that mean? For me, the consequence is clear: Rather than weaken the train traffic through competition, we need to utilize him better and make more attractive and affordable. Cited by Ramsauer Transport Minister at the launch of the cabinet decision to ask young people can go on long-distance train, not bus. Rail saver fares and bus fares are not that far apart, there is something else. Assuming you wanted.
So we do not misunderstand us: I'm talking about trains, not buses by train. They should not hesitate to face the competition. But just the regional bus services to 50 kilometers to stay with the current changes largely sidelined.
None of the twelve-lane highways Republic
If we do not want a twelve-lane highways of the Republic, we must hold on to the mass transit train. And then it makes environmental sense, and thus better utilize the features to make it more effective. Just a reminder: More buses, which means more traffic, noise. Air pollution. And land consumption by new bus stations. As pleased by short-term, the local construction industry, but nobody else.
An economically more expensive it is also fun, because the roads are overused by more heavy-duty buses go faster than broken anyway. Make no mistake about it: The new customers of the bus routes will be people who have little money. Instead of cheap train ride, they will clog the highways in buses spree. And our federal government that is still in progress as a liberal. Well, thank you!
No comments:
Post a Comment