The rolling highway, or the way we're going to get the fuck out of this mess.

[originalpckelly]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgjQO5-kPXg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8faYMD8xlGE&feature=related

Drive on the back of a train. Just stay in your car as the train takes you to your destination at 100 + mph. Have your choice between a green train, powered by renewable clean electricity, or save money with a train powered by cheap coal generated electricity.

When you arrive at your destination, you just drive off. You get to keep your car, and more of your money.

If you won't be needing your car, you can either take public transit to the rail station or drive your car and park it there. <-This is already done, so we know it works.

Passenger trains can run right over the same rails as the trains carrying cars + people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_Highway
http://www.swissworld.org/en/switzerland/swiss_specials/swiss_trains/rolling_highway/

[originalpckelly]

1. I think if people could take their cars with them, they'd use rail more.

The real problem now is that they can drive to a park-n-ride, but they have to leave their car. Their jobs have to be close to the rail system, or they have to take clunky yucky buses, which most people simply don't want to do.

So, why not let a person take their car with themselves on a train?

The flexibility of a private auto, without all the fuel prices/environmental downsides.

[livetohike]

2. It's a great idea. The major problem with mass transit in the

places I have lived include that once you get off the train/bus, it's difficult getting to your ultimate destination.

[originalpckelly]

3. And it's not like this is some whiz-bang BS that's impossible...

The Eurotunnel shuttle already transports car traffic like this. If it can be done under the English Channel, it can be done right next to a highway. They also transport big 16-wheelers. With a little work, this could be the solution.

Not only would it be faster, it would also be less boring. Fuck the monotonous drives that many in America have to deal with, they can just jump on the rolling highway and be there without driving far at all.

[originalpckelly]

4. There should probably be varying fees for the weight of a vehicle...

to encourage people to use lighter cars, which would cost less money to transport point to point.

[livetohike]

5. Good points

Maybe these "new" ideas will be part of the change Obama will bring. It would create a lot of new jobs if this type of transportation came into widespread use here in the states. (I've lived in the LA, NYC, San Diego, Mpls, and Houston areas. It would have been great to have this in all of those places.

[originalpckelly]

7. It could be considered an extension of the interstate highway system.

[CK_John]

6. But..but.. what about the legal liability, what rail line will take that chance. n/t

[originalpckelly]

8. 1. Rail is the safest method of land transportation.

2. Liability has already been tested. Amtrack has an AutoTrain service that transports people and their cars. If the car carrying vehicles are enclosed, as is done with the Eurotunnel Shuttle service, then there is no more danger than walking around in a parking lot, albeit one traveling 100 mph.

[jaksavage]

9. We haul cars on ferries

It's nice , you can get out and go up on deck.
Was free in NC and of course widespread use in puget sound.
Much more appropriate use.

[originalpckelly]

10. That is the most efficient method of transportation, albeit not the fastest.

The benefits are two fold: better efficiency/ability to dramatically reduce consumption of foreign fossil fuels and the ability to get out of traffic and zoom to one's destination.