No impact

Abbym,

Yes, I once took the train from Chicago to Montana. We were only two hours late during a 26 hour journey. The distances are just so great in the US compared to Europe that long-haul train travel is a hard sell on many levels. I love regional and commuter rail, even in the US. Metra around Chicago and commuter rail around Washington DC really do work.

As for the environmental impact of flying, commercial air travel only accounts for something like 7% of carbon emissions. It will probably rise to 9% with the projected growth in air travel. I'm a little baffled why it has become such a target for environmental campaigners, but I guess it makes a high profile target. The bulk of emissions comes from building and construction. Green building practices would dramatically cut emissions.

I am a little hyper active and taking a slow train would "literarily" kill me. It is one of these things that according with a person's project leaves them with a no choice to take. It would make me feel better if the aircraft was powered by hydrogen just like the space shuttle. Despite of that I am only flying when I real need it.

I must be honest here, I have always LOVED flying. I love that feeling when you go on your hols and you get on the plane in miserable grey London and then the doors open at the other end and you're hit by a blast of lovely hot, tropical air and the sun on your face! Recently though, quite apart from my middle-class eco-guilt, I've been struck by how annoying air travel has become. I stupidly chose to fly to France recently to go skiing. First I got stuck on a broken tube train, then the Stansted Express (I don't know how they've got the gall to call it that - Stansted Slow and Steady they should call it) was delayed and then you have to practically get undressed to go through security and when I finally arrived at the departure gate, huffing and puffing and trying to get my belt and shoes back on, the flight was delayed for another hour! For me it's these short haul European flights that I'm going to replace with a nice comfy train. It takes pretty much the same amount of time anyway...

It depends on the journey for me. For my daily commute, I usually go for 1. efficiency, 2. cost, 3. environment. But living in London where traveling during the rush means either standing on a tube train with my face in someone else's armpit, or sitting on the bus in traffic that moves about 1 mph on a good day, I usually opt for walking which is probably the most efficient (I still beat the bus, and sometimes the tube), cost-effective and environmentally friendly option out there.

That being said, for long hauls, I like taking the train in Europe... but fly or drive in USA. The train system in Europe works. For some reason, Amtrak struggles. Once I took Amtrak from Colorado to Oregon and it was a series of unbelievable delays and breakdowns that would likely put anyone off riding a train forever. I think more people in the US would use the train if it worked better.