You're viewing a single thread.
Not a US citizen and don't know enough about geography, but even though I'm a very avid anti-car person, many people do depend on cars there given that the US is that big. Plus in a situation like this where you'd ideally want to evac as quickly as possible, I do quite get that struggle.
Do let me know if I'm missing something here though
I think the point is that with a robust high speed rail infrastructure and an appropriate mergency response to multiply trains on the escape routes, a lot fewer people would die because it would be considerably more efficient.
I'm not sure I buy it as people tend to evacuate with large belongings that fit in cars but wouldn't necessarily fit in trains, though I suppose freight trains could also move them efficiently.
I guess this is also why many evacuation plans for extreme disasters say to leave your belongings behind.
Belongings are one thing. The biggest problem I see with rail evacuation is the same problem a lot of existing bus-based government evac options have. They don't let you bring your pets. A lot of people refuse to evacuate because they can't afford many nights in a hotel, and the government-provided evac options prohibit people from bringing their pets along. Even if you're lucky and your own home survives, who's going to look after your cats or dogs while you're away for who knows how long? Then when it comes time to return, often people aren't let back in for prolonged periods of time until authorities decide things are safe. Imagine being in that situation, knowing that your pet is dying of dehydration while the cops sit there and decide whether it's time to let you return home or not.
I don't really think it's about saving the TV. I think the biggest reason people would insist on using private transport for evac is they don't want to condemn their pets to death.
A car is a passable temporary shelter. You're protected from the elements (in non storm areas, where you fled to previously), you have heating and power (at least for your phone), you have radio, maybe even a screen.
I'm pretty sure that every time we evacuated to a relative's house, we over-packed. But most of that "overpacking" wasn't just all the clothes, it was often food in the fridge going into ice chests, lots of water, extra fuel.
It would be common to get stuck in traffic trying to leave, and it even happened a couple of times that the highway was down to a complete stop.
I guess the unfortunate thing there is that they often "counter flow" the highway as well, meaning that they put all lanes leaving, but people rarely ever knew, so I sometimes saw someone going the "wrong way" on the highway while we were outside of our cars wondering what was happening.
Getting stuck like that was rare, but to avoid it you have to leave a day or two before everyone else.
You literally just need normal rail infrastructure.
Fuck all talks about high speed rail in the US, you don't even have normal rail. How do you expect people to stop using their cars if all you will have is rail that ONLY connects metropolises?
Seriously, high speed rail is a prestige project for the most part. It's nearly useless without a solid local rail infrastructure foundation. If you have to travel 60 miles to the nearest train station via car you might as well drive to your destination fully.
There's a video on Youtube by this bloke who calls himself Bald and Bankrupt, where he happened to be in Kyiv on the day the Russians invaded the city so they evacuated, and they just left by train. It was packed wall to wall, obviously, but very feasible.
Rail doesn't get congested the same way highways do and nothing in your house is worth more than your life when evacuating. If you want to keep certain belongings safe, maybe it is best to transport them away before hurricane season comes.
Hell even a well serperated bus lane and lots of buses could evacuate more people than cars.
If I can't take my dog I'm not going, and thats likely the issue for a lot of others. The government does have buses for evacuation but you can't bring pets on them.
The people without pets can take the rail which can lessen the congestion on the highway for people who need to transport pets. More options is better than 1 option.
Rail doesn’t get congested the same way highways do
This is a point worth emphasizing. In fact, Oh The Urbanity! made an entire video explaining it, which everyone ought to watch.
Life > belongings.
We purposefully neglected viable alternatives because of the power of the auto industry here. Florida especially, since it has extremely limited space for development, should've spent its energy on rail rather than car infrastructure.
Brightline has entered the chat but it is on the right side of the state
Short-term, missing fuel in the US is a humanitarian issue.
Long-term, there's much unused leverage to prevent or circumvent or lessen crisis mobility shortages.
America is car dependent because that's how the infrastructure was build up, not because of its size. Like, the highways are just as long as the train lines would be.
Do let me know if I’m missing something here though
Yes: missing car fuel and road space
Ay gotem
Florida has a population density greater than France (400per sqmi vs 300 per sqmi for France) so there is zero excuse for any east coast state to be this car dependent. Florida could have easily built denser communities connected by public transit allowing them to preserve more of their wetlands to greatly reduce their risk of flooding.