On Tue, 05 Jul 2016 16:27:22 +1000 JanW wrote:
> I find it amazing that the country could build an electricity grid, a rail network, a road network, and HUGE water pipelines many many decades ago, but now is afraid to invest in building the 21st century equivalent. If people back then behaved as they are today, we would still be walking or riding horses. > Not every network pays back its costs, and at any time - not only in days of cost-benefit/user-pays/debt aversion - building improvements to an existing network service is very expensive. You would not be surprised if you looked at the history in a little more detail. The first British railway phase made enormous profits - subsequent railways typically lost money but the larger network provided enormous social benefits. The opportunities to replace slow, low capacity packhorse, cart, and winding 5kmh canal boats were quickly exploited. (equivalent of providing the first internet access?). The second phase of railway constriction including Australian railways never made much money - too many routes with low traffic, constructed at high prices to have wide reach (sound familiar?). Very high speed rail is now effective on only a few routes, does not haul goods traffic, and does not go to the door - taxis and Ubers take benefits of the last haulage. The new HS2 high speed rail link in England is estimated to cost UKP 50 billion for about 170 miles. -- Chris Johnson p 02 6282 1993 m 0401 498 684 _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
