Economy

I might have some disagreements with the article. I haven't gone through it yet.

Hat tip, Greater Greater Washington:

Former College DJ 2 hours ago

Let me preface my comments by saying implementing PTC on the rail network is better than not having it. But PTC or PTC-like technologies, in addition to being very expensive to implement, are themselves are not a panacea; the technology can fail. Look at the June 2009 WMATA Red Line crash that killed nine people - a PTC-like technology was used on the rail line, yet that technology didn't work at a critical time. To this day, nearly 10 years later, WMATA is reluctant to operate trains in automatic mode because of their fears the automated train control technology will fail again. What if PTC fails at some point in the system? Are rail system operators or more accurately governments going to be reluctant to rely on PTC?

In addition to the above, it should be noted 300 fatalities over 50 years is not a large number of fatalities. Many, MANY more people have been killed by cars while crossing the street, or by being involved in motor vehicle accidents on U.S. roadways between two or more motor vehicles, or by intentional or accidental gun deaths. The benefits of implementing PTC have to be weighed against the costs, and the number of lives saved by implementing other accident prevention or reduction measures.

kurt topel 19 hours ago

Agreed. Under ANY reasonable cost-benefit analysis PTC is not justified, and yet the 2008 Chatsworth crash referred to above spurred Congress to pass the Rail Safety Improvement Act, which included the mandating of PTC. The 25 lost lives were a terrible loss, especially to those 25 families. However, 25 people die EVERY TWO WEEKS trespassing on rights-of-way.
The fatalities which PTC is designed to save amount to only 4% of total rail fatalities (employees and passengers). The OVERWHELMING number of rail fatalities happen to people trespassing on the right of way (72%). One cannot find how much either government or industry spends keeping people off the tracks, but it is very little. Of course, trespassers shouldn’t be on the rights-of-way, but neither should drivers and pedestrians who race the train, or stop on the tracks, or any other risky behavior at highway-rail crossings. Still, both Congress and the industry spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year making crossings safer for the remaining 16% of fatalities.
If one analyzes the effectiveness of railroad safety spending (especially at crossings) it is obvious that investment can reduce fatalities significantly. Yes, derailments are spectacular as well as tragic, but they are thankfully very rare. Let’s start focusing our attention and money where we can make a significant improvement in fatalities by targeting the installation of fencing, investing in detection technology, and subsidizing local law enforcement to prevent deaths to people on the railroad rights of way.