It was made expensive by letting the oil companies force regulatory capture on it, then tear up all the rails they let could. There were more rails in the US 100 years ago then there are today. Adding stops didn’t take years when there were already rails near by to branch off of. The only reason adding stops is so hard now it because the cut down lines.
One train stop (utility freight, not passanger) is much larger, sure. But how many tons does it process compared to an 18-wheeler? Then, in high density urban centers where you have passenger trains, they normally put them underground. Meaning, the only “land” they take up is about the size of 2 pumps, without the accompanying convenient store. Meanwhile, they remove thousands of cars off the road per day.
It is unquestionably more efficient to run more trains for both freight or passenger. That is why oil and gas hate it. So they buy-in and stack the boards of the rail companies, beg congress for more “regulation and safety”, and cripple expansion with mandatory oversight comittees to slow down whatever gets through. All classic plays.
I think you’re missing the context where this is about resupplying gasoline to fuel stations. So the highway infrastructure is already there and you don’t gain anything by shipping a large load to a central place.
Tbh though if a rail line was built parallel to the road, it doesn’t seem prohibitively expensive to build a pump that can get the gas from a train. Though probably still not financially sensible for the gas station without subsidies or something.
and what about in less urban areas, where there are a higher number of gas stations per person? where you don’t need more than a semitruck of gasoline/desil/propane per week?
It was made expensive by letting the oil companies force regulatory capture on it, then tear up all the rails they let could. There were more rails in the US 100 years ago then there are today. Adding stops didn’t take years when there were already rails near by to branch off of. The only reason adding stops is so hard now it because the cut down lines.
don’t train stops still need significantly more land than is practical for individual gas stations to have?
One train stop (utility freight, not passanger) is much larger, sure. But how many tons does it process compared to an 18-wheeler? Then, in high density urban centers where you have passenger trains, they normally put them underground. Meaning, the only “land” they take up is about the size of 2 pumps, without the accompanying convenient store. Meanwhile, they remove thousands of cars off the road per day.
It is unquestionably more efficient to run more trains for both freight or passenger. That is why oil and gas hate it. So they buy-in and stack the boards of the rail companies, beg congress for more “regulation and safety”, and cripple expansion with mandatory oversight comittees to slow down whatever gets through. All classic plays.
I think you’re missing the context where this is about resupplying gasoline to fuel stations. So the highway infrastructure is already there and you don’t gain anything by shipping a large load to a central place.
Tbh though if a rail line was built parallel to the road, it doesn’t seem prohibitively expensive to build a pump that can get the gas from a train. Though probably still not financially sensible for the gas station without subsidies or something.
and what about in less urban areas, where there are a higher number of gas stations per person? where you don’t need more than a semitruck of gasoline/desil/propane per week?