🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <101.UUL1.3#1@vortex.COM> lauren@vortex.COM (Lauren Weinstein) writes:
>.....  Only a tiny portion of drivers would even be in a situation
>where the metro *could* be useful to them, assuming they wanted to 
>ride it.
>
>Odds are that the effect of the metro on regular vehicular traffic will
>be essentially zero, if not negative (how could it be negative?  I'll
>leave that as a thought experiment for the readership for now).

Whath with all the immigration, the entire Metro Rail / Metrolink system
will merely OFFSET the effect of all the new residents 20 years from now!
The freeways will remain crowded just the same.  In fact, if Metrolink to
the southern Inland Empire succeeds, it will induce more people to move there
(the tollway from Orange will do even more).  Even if everyone drives "clean
fuel" SOV's, the traffic problems remain, or get worse.

Maybe the assumption that one SHOULD be able to travel from , say, central
Orange Co. to downtown LA at 60 mph is faulty?  Even the Pac Electric Red
Cars couldn't go from San Pedro to downtown in less than an hour and a half
(this info is from a woman who grew up there in the 1940's).

And, why should the residents of Utah and Arizona put up with So Cal Edison's
polluting plants (the Intermountain, the Navajo Generating Station, the Four
Corners, etc.) so that L.A. can ride electric vehicles everywhere?  EV's
are not totally pollution-free (although they're much more efficient than
Infernal Combustion engines).


-- 
--Dudley McFadden     <demcfadden@ucdavis.edu>