General Question

CugelTheClueless's avatar

Should the US invest in high-tech rail or skip it and go directly to self-driving cars?

Asked by CugelTheClueless (1539points) April 15th, 2015

I’d like to see better passenger rail options in the US, but I wonder if a system of self-driving cars would make improved passenger rail unnecessary. I’m hearing more talk about self-driving cars these days but don’t know how close the technology is to implementation on a large scale.

Given that funds are limited, does it make sense to invest in both self-driving cars and next-generation rail? If we can’t have both in the next 20 years or so, which would be the better investment?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

9 Answers

gorillapaws's avatar

Yes, it makes sense to invest in both. They’re solving different problems. Self-driving cars have the potential to create a ton more traffic on our roads, and is much less efficient than trains.

elbanditoroso's avatar

Two different solutions to two different problems.

Both technologies should be pursued.

jca's avatar

My vote is for the rails. Rails reduce exhaust emissions and are better for the environment. Also, not everyone can afford a car. I just bought a new one and after putting down 5k, my payment is still almost $500 a month. Not everyone can afford that.

kritiper's avatar

Both. For people gong to a certain place, like work, day after day, the train is the thing. For people who go to different places, the car’s the thing. What the rail system needs is 2 sets of track, one in each direction. Self driving cars will eliminate traffic jams, accidents, traffic lights.

Silence04's avatar

Trains for long distance. Automated driving for local.

We already have the tech to do full scale automated driving. It has the potential to completely eliminate all traffic. The main thing preventing it from happening is the majority of society not feeling comfortable enough to hand over their keys to computers.

Dr_Lawrence's avatar

High quality mass transit by rail is environmentally more desirable for long distance travel. For local travel, electric cars are the best choice. Incorporating the high-tech crash prevention technologies currently available in high end cars would be a better solution to self-driving cars.
For those who don’t or can’t drive, electric light rail or bus services would be an excellent choice.

Espiritus_Corvus's avatar

More rail—including long-distance, commuter, and street cars—in populated areas and more self-driving autos in rural areas where it may be impractical to put in and maintain rail.

LostInParadise's avatar

I go along with the consensus of combining the two. Keep in mind that high speed railroad can go a whole lot faster than cars can. Considering how awful airline service has become, I look forward to high speed trains.

CugelTheClueless's avatar

Thanks all. So the answer seems to be both, or failing that, rail. That’s what I hoped the answer would be, yet somehow I still have doubts.

I think the consequences of self-driving cars might be hard to envisage at this point. Maybe they will make carpooling and ridesharing easier. Maybe employers will find it in their interest to have shuttles for their workers (no need to hire a driver)—or maybe some cities will require employers to do so instead of investing in mass transit.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther