Scott Morrison Announces National Passenger Rail proposal for Australia
Australasian Railway Association outlines two-year plan for rail freight
ARA calls for tender changes to maximise benefit of rail
Bid to move Kingston railway station a 'retrograde step'?
Tram claims not just hot air
Start date revealed for Canberra's light rail system
From showpiece to goat track: the long, dangerous decline of Sydney-to-Melbourne rail travel
Roads swallow federal infrastructure funding as ACT bags new light rail stop
Canberra light rail: Car crashes into tram in Gungahlin
Leon Arundell says (Letters, May 29) it'll take twenty three years for tram trip reductions in carbon emissions to pay back the carbon emissions in building Stage One.
That's if you ignore the carbon emissions in making cars and building roads, costs that are higher than the tram building costs for similar trip numbers.
If you compare life cycle costs of trams to life cycle costs of cars, the payback for substituting trams for cars is very much quicker. By many years quicker.
Anti tram proponents like to disregard the carbon costs of road building and expansion, and the carbon costs of motor vehicle construction. Interestingly, some people similarly disregard the carbon costs of infernal combustion vehicle construction when claiming high carbon costs of electric and hybrid vehicles.
Estimates are hard enough if you make fair comparisons. They decline into puffery if you don't.
Christopher Hood, Queanbeyan
This article first appeared on www.canberratimes.com.au
About this website
Railpage version 3.10.0.0037
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest is © 2003-2020 Interactive Omnimedia Pty Ltd.
You can syndicate our news using one of the RSS feeds.