# Relative advantages/disadvantages of different mass-transit technologies **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 28, 2005, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503 "2005-12-28T22:32:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![gotpasswords](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c57346/32.png) [@gotpasswords](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gotpasswords)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/41 "2006-01-04T20:00:36Z")
> [@gotpasswords](#): > > **BART is heavy rail** with an electric third rail, as opposed to light rail with overhead wire. (bolding mine) ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/42 "2006-01-04T22:40:45Z")
Missed that - and in any case, that means BART isn’t relevant to **BrainGlutton** ’s question, other than demonstrating that heavy rail is too expensive for urban situations. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/43 "2006-01-04T23:02:44Z")
> [@GorillaMan](#): > > other than demonstrating that heavy rail is too expensive for urban situations. This is true only if it’s **new** heavy rail, requiring the obtaining land (usually via condemnation), paying to move the current residents or businesses, demolition of the buildings, and then clearing the land and building your trackage. But many urban areas have existing heavy rail lines running thru them, often unused or very lightly used nowdays. If one of these can be adapted for transit use, it will be much cheaper. Probably cheaper than any other system. Certainly cheaper than building or expanding a freeway. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2006, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/44 "2006-01-04T23:04:49Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > But many urban areas have existing heavy rail lines running thru them, often unused or very lightly used nowdays. If one of these can be adapted for transit use, it will be much cheaper. Probably cheaper than any other system. Certainly cheaper than building or expanding a freeway. Very true, but if so, it’s reclaiming infrastructure and property for light rail - which is a major part of all the schemes I gave costings for earlier. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2006, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/45 "2006-01-06T19:38:50Z")
I said in an eariler post that I would ask my son for a web site that compares costs. Here is his reply: > [@](#): > > I can’t think of any single site where you can find all of that > information. You might try the APTA ([www.apta.com](http://www.apta.com)) or the Federal > Transit Administration ([www.fta.dot.gov](http://www.fta.dot.gov)). Heavy rail (rapid transit) > seems to be running at least $100M/mile and up, light rail is > $50M/mile and up, while on-street trolleys can vary widely. Buses are > signficantly less, even for trolley buses. It sounds like BART is somewhat on the high side. But maybe that $100M/mile doesn’t include the land acquisition costs. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2006, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/46 "2006-01-06T19:42:14Z")
> [@Hari Seldon](#): > > But maybe that $100M/mile doesn’t include the land acquisition costs. Even if it _does_ include land costs, I’d like to see how on earth they arrive at that figure, given my examples earlier. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2006, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/47 "2006-01-08T15:03:18Z")
I just got this from my son. He read the thread, but could not post. The omitted chart claimed, among other things, is that with park & ride, you don’t need high residential density for a rail system to make sense, but you need a very high emplyment density. Lacking park & ride, even bus systems required fairly dense residences. > [@](#): > > Well, it’s an interesting thread, with less uninformed babble than your typical discussion group, which is probably because they are Straight Dope fans (fortunately, the libertarians haven’t latched on to this discussion yet). Obviously, the answers to these questions are fairly complicated and context-specific (which is why I actually get paid to do my job, as opposed to leaving it to internet foamers). > > As far as the original question goes, you might find the attached “nomograph” interesting, which attempts to describe which modes of transportation are effective as a function of residential density at the origin and total employment center size at the destination end. This is based on a meta-analysis that a couple of my former co-workers at PB [that’s Parson’s Brinkerhoff, a transit conculting company he used to work for] did on a bunch of transit systems. I think this is a proprietary piece of work, so I wouldn’t post it to the Straight Dope, but I thought you might want to take a look at it. One interesting point is that commuter rail can work in locations with very low residential density (assuming park-ride access), but must be supported by a big employment center. > > In terms of costs, I did go back and find a table that describes the normalized costs for constructing new rail systems, based on the type of construction (at grade, elevated, subway). > > - At-Grade=1.0 > - Elevated=3.3 > - Subway=8.3 > > Based on this same normalization, busway was estimated at 0.3 (and all of these numbers are independent of right-of-way costs, since that can vary so much). This doesn’t address the mode, but it costs about the same to build light rail in a tunnel as it does to build rapid transit in a tunnel, and decisions about mode are more often based on issues such as capacity, flexibility, or system integration. Part of the reason why each system (particularly the newer ones) winds up with a unique vehicle is that it is optimized for the particular operating conditions of that line (mix of right-of-way types, speed, operating envelope), as opposed to the PCC car, which was optimized for on-street, mixed traffic operation, which was the dominant expected use (although it was and is used in a lot of other situations; the Mattapan-Ashmont line in Boston uses recently refurbished PCCs). > > Some other thoughts based on the discussion: > > - As a couple of people pointed out, high speed rail is an intercity mode, which largely competes with air travel. > > - My understanding is that Seattle is going to be getting rid of the dual-mode Breda buses (they are reaching the end of their useful lives) for diesel-electric hybrid buses that can operate through the tunnel. On the other hand, the T just started using new dual-mode trolleybuses for service along the Silver Line to South Boston and Logan airport. In general, modern buses are a lot less smelly, if they have catalytic converters, particulate traps, and use low-sulphur diesel (and are well maintained). > > - While BART is very expensive, it is also very fast and has a high capacity. Overall, I think people see it as a success (although it took a while for that to happen). One thing people tend to forget about ridership projections is that they are typically made for 20 years from the date of opening, so you will rarely see the projected ridership on opening day (and if you do, it’s a really successful system). The difference in track gauge probably doesn’t make that much of a difference, since it doesn’t (and probably never will) interface with other rail systems. > > - Hopefully the various problems with the Las Vegas monorail and the Seattle Center monorail (and the cancelation of the new lines) will keep people away from monorail for a while. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2006, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/48 "2006-01-08T20:14:11Z")
> [@Hari Seldon](#): > > . . . (fortunately, the libertarians haven’t latched on to this discussion yet). Is there such thing as a Libertarian approach to mass transit? Most Libertarian writings I’ve seen on the issue seem to fervently deny that sprawl is a “problem” and even more strongly deny that mass transit (or any other public policy) can provide a solution to it. E.g., _The Vanishing Automobile and Other Urban Myths: How Smart Growth Will Harm American Cities,_ by Randal O’Toole – [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/097064390X/qid=1136751154/sr=8-2/ref=sr\_8\_xs\_ap\_i2\_xgl14/104-0764394-7859165?n=507846&s=books&v=glance](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/097064390X/qid=1136751154/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i2_xgl14/104-0764394-7859165?n=507846&s=books&v=glance). ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2006, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/49 "2006-01-08T21:51:52Z")
> [@Hari Seldon](#): > > - Hopefully the various problems with the Las Vegas monorail and the Seattle Center monorail (and the cancelation of the new lines) will keep people away from monorail for a while. Why does your son think monorail is a bad idea? ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2006, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/50 "2006-01-09T02:46:46Z")
Libertarianly speaking, were we a libertarian country, the problem would take care of itself. “Urban sprawl” left to the pure libertarian government either wouldn’t happen, or the free market would regulate to the point that it works perfectly. People not counting on the government and counting only on themselves would make decisions to that respect. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2006, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/51 "2006-01-09T03:36:45Z")
> [@Balthisar](#): > > Libertarianly speaking, were we a libertarian country, the problem would take care of itself. “Urban sprawl” left to the pure libertarian government either wouldn’t happen, or the free market would regulate to the point that it works perfectly. People not counting on the government and counting only on themselves would make decisions to that respect. 😕 OK, we’re verging onto GD territory now. (And if the Mods choose the move the thread there I have no objection.) But you are aware, I hope, that the “free market” does not always “regulate” things, let alone cause things to “work perfectly”? Mainly because the market is fundamentally incapable of taking a long view, defining “long” as anything beyond the next quarter’s statement. Government-employed urban planners, OTOH, take account of the fact that automotive transportation depends mostly on resources that we’re not exactly running out of just yet, but which are ultimately and finally non-renewable; also, that it involves “externalities” (air pollution, etc.), the long-term cost of which does not necessarily show up on the quarterly statement of the parties producing them. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2006, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/52 "2006-01-09T16:46:57Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > OK, we’re verging onto GD territory now. No, I’m not trying to get us moved or argue Libertarianism right here, right now. It was suggested that there may be a libertarian approach to mass transit. Mass transit today is mostly a government or at very least heavily government subsidized. The natural position of a libertarian, of course, is that the government shouldn’t participate in that kind of stuff. So how does that apply to urban sprawl? Potentially urban sprawl wouldn’t happen without the mass transit infrastructure to support it. Of course that’s particular to regional behavior, because here in SE Michigan there’s all kinds of sprawl with no mass transit, which segues into: -or- urband sprawl would still happen, but if mass transit isn’t needed or wanted, then there’s no “problem” per se. The next possibility, of course, is that urban sprawl happens (it’s a choice, after all), and mass transit is wanted. In a libertarian world, then, either private enterprise will meet the mass transit needs, or the sprawl will not occur because of the lack of mass transit. Or the sprawl will occur anyway by people that don’t want or need mass transit. I think I just convinced myself that we don’t need mass transit at all. Screw the poor – they shouldn’t sprawl anywhere anyway, and just stay in their ghettos. ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2006, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/53 "2006-01-09T16:48:24Z")
> [@Balthisar](#): > > I think I just convinced myself that we don’t need mass transit at all. Screw the poor – they shouldn’t sprawl anywhere anyway, and just stay in their ghettos. And of course I forgot the smily to indicate that that’s to have been read with a sense of humor rather than any literal sentiment. ---
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2006, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/54 "2006-01-09T16:58:40Z")
Here in Belfast, Northern Ireland, there doesn’t really seem to be much money to invest in anything but bus lanes on the roads. The city (from what I’ve seen on maps and living and working here) has most jobs in the city centre and roads stretching from there to the outskirts covering most residential areas. The bus lanes that have sprung up are hard enough to squeeze into the streets we have, so I’m not sure where light rail, buses on rails etc could fit in 😕 ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2006, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/55 "2006-01-09T21:11:12Z")
> [@Balthisar](#): > > Potentially urban sprawl wouldn’t happen without the mass transit infrastructure to support it. No. Yes, sprawl is made possible by infrastructure government builds – but that infrastructure is in the form of paved roads and highways, not light-rail lines. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2006, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/56 "2006-01-14T22:41:47Z")
**Hari Seldon,** you never answered: Why does your son, who apparently knows a lot about mass transit, oppose monorail? What are the disadvantages? ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2006, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/57 "2006-01-14T22:45:11Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > **Hari Seldon,** you never answered: Why does your son, who apparently knows a lot about mass transit, oppose monorail? What are the disadvantages? The question is what are the _advantages_, other than sounding futuristic in a 70s way? It involves heavy infrastructre, at least as heavy as for light rail. Mostly this will be of a unique design, unlike light rail which is virtually off-the-shelf in many cases. It’s impossible to have crossings with roads or pedestrians, _everything_ has to work at two different levels. And there’s a huge mechanism for each change of route (switch, point, whatever they’re called in your locale), whereas light rail needs smaller installations, and non-rail solutions need nothing. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2006, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/58 "2006-01-14T22:57:22Z")
An alternative answer: Look [here](http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/MonoVs.html), and we’ll rebut most of the pro-monorail comments. Firstly, ignore ‘heavy rail/subway’. That’s not the competition, light rail is. The comments on ‘aesthetics’ are bullshit. Nothing created for a monorail cannot be created for light rail. Construction: this is where the ‘light rail’ arguments start to focus entirely on street running, even though modern light rail doesn’t use street running unless there’s no alternative. In any case, pile-driving is a horribly unpleasant thing to live near. ‘Cost’. I can’t make head or tail of the entry under light rail. ‘Efficiency’. Again, a big ‘huh?’ Modern light rail does not spend extended periods sharing lanes with regular traffic. The comments about maintenance are also bullshit. ‘Safety’ - the implication here seems to be ‘light rail is dangerous because our drivers don’t know what they’re doing’. Errrrrrrrrrrr, the problem is the rail system? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2006, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503/59 "2006-01-15T20:21:00Z")
Here’s an interesting bit from James Howard Kunstler’s latest “Clusterfuck Nation” editorial, 1/9/06 – [http://www.kunstler.com/mags\_diary16.html:](http://www.kunstler.com/mags_diary16.html:) > [@](#): > > I had the local news on the boob tube up in my hotel room before the kickoff cocktail schmooze. There was some kind of grotesque traffic accident on the Nimitz Freeway across the bay and the TV station had aerial shots from their helicopter showing a vast ribbon of frozen headlights snaking clear down from Alameda to Fremont in the violet crepuscular rush hour gloaming. The news clones were treating this like an everyday event, ho-hum, and I had to suppose it was. But it was easy to imagine the despair of someone stuck down there in a Toyota Highlander with a bladder near bursting and not a hope in the world of being able to do anything about it. How many people pee all over their car seats every night, I wondered. Must be a few at least. > These, I was moved to reflect, are some of manifestations of being at peak. Peak Oil, that is. The all-time worldwide production zenith. > Now, I was also moved to wonder: why do the good people of the Bay Area willingly endure this insanity? They built a subway about thirty years ago called Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), but it barely goes anywhere except back and forth under the bay. It would cost less to put in surface light rail lines down both sides of the bay than to fix two freeway overpasses – but they’d rather pee on their car seats because at least they’d be able to choose their own tunes while doing so. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/relative-advantages-disadvantages-of-different-mass-transit-technologies/337503.md?page=2)