They’re definitely used, but there’s a massive mountain range in the way down the entire East and South coast. And it ain’t subtle either. You’re at sea level, then suddenly climbing very steep.
It’s called The Great Dividing Range because that’s what it does.
But if you’re not needing a vehicle to get around, just going city to city on the same side of the ranges, train is good. High speed rail would be excellent. Australia is a perfect candidate for it since so many kilometres need to be eaten up getting between places and where it’s flat, it’s real flat
The article is talking about on-costs to the national economy, not what is achievable in physics or not. Same concept of the fuel expenditure in space programs exiting the atmosphere.
Desoite it’s reputation, Australia’s geography makes its flora, ecosystems, and fauna very fragile.
Overcoming a mountain range four times the size of Great Britain for a population density that’s 1.3% of just one Great Britain doesn’t make financial or, in Australia’s case, environmental sense. They’re still trying to fix up the mistakes they made to the environment during colonialism, plus the modern globalisation ones.
Energy for recommending train solutions is more efficiently directed to countless other places. Else we may as well be mentioning Liberians could just get a Costcobto solve their issues.
Feels like trains between cities would be way cheaper.
They’re definitely used, but there’s a massive mountain range in the way down the entire East and South coast. And it ain’t subtle either. You’re at sea level, then suddenly climbing very steep.
It’s called The Great Dividing Range because that’s what it does.
But if you’re not needing a vehicle to get around, just going city to city on the same side of the ranges, train is good. High speed rail would be excellent. Australia is a perfect candidate for it since so many kilometres need to be eaten up getting between places and where it’s flat, it’s real flat
Famously, trains cannot cross mountain ranges. Only cars can do that.
The article is talking about on-costs to the national economy, not what is achievable in physics or not. Same concept of the fuel expenditure in space programs exiting the atmosphere.
Desoite it’s reputation, Australia’s geography makes its flora, ecosystems, and fauna very fragile.
Overcoming a mountain range four times the size of Great Britain for a population density that’s 1.3% of just one Great Britain doesn’t make financial or, in Australia’s case, environmental sense. They’re still trying to fix up the mistakes they made to the environment during colonialism, plus the modern globalisation ones.
Energy for recommending train solutions is more efficiently directed to countless other places. Else we may as well be mentioning Liberians could just get a Costcobto solve their issues.
Like cars. Famously energy efficient cars.