Which for most city to city travel will end up being dramatically less efficient and far more expensive than electric, autonomous cars that can go 400+ miles on a charge - unless you're only going from large metro to large metro over a particularly long distance.
For travel within cities, autonomous electric vehicles will ultimately surpass rail travel. That will happen within several decades.
The cost of car use and ownership will plunge. Software and constantly improving batteries will eat the expense out of the heart of the machines.
What's the cost and usefulness to run high speed rail between two mid-sized Romanian cities that are 60km or 100km apart? Right, it's wildly impractical. Inexpensive, autonomous, electric vehicles however are the future and will be extremely practical for all purposes except very long distance travel between two major cities. No other scenario will justify spending the vast sums of money required to install and upkeep high speed railway - and that cost will only continue to climb with wages and security threats in Europe; meanwhile electric, autonomous vehicles will bring the cost of vehicles down dramatically over time.
Wait what? You have it the other way around. Rail will still be dramatically more efficient and cheaper than electric autonomous cars. And inter-city subways will still be more efficient and cheaper than electric autonomous cars. They have higher density, use less space (as opposed to huge roads/highways everywhere), and pollute less.
There will be a combination. Autonomous cars replacing taxis and buses; light rail/MRT for the last 5 miles in dense city centres; heavy rail for rapid medium distance transit (100km < x < 400km); planes for long distance transit.
If anyone thinks that there is the road capacity for a million self-driving cars to drop passengers during every morning rush hour in Mid/Downtown Manhattan or the City of London, they are deluded.
> What's the cost and usefulness to run high speed rail between two mid-sized Romanian cities that are 60km or 100km apart?
What's the cost of building from scratch and maintaining year-on-year a road along the same line, including vehicle and operating costs, before subsidies? That is - what would it actually cost you to drive a car if your taxes weren't paying for it?
Hint - it differs for nearly every situation, and even the idea of high speed rail - 125mph or higher - is not necessarily useful in all situations. A decent commuter line with good bus links to every station is potentially more useful than a high-speed line which zips past dozens of towns.
For travel within cities, autonomous electric vehicles will ultimately surpass rail travel. That will happen within several decades.
The cost of car use and ownership will plunge. Software and constantly improving batteries will eat the expense out of the heart of the machines.
What's the cost and usefulness to run high speed rail between two mid-sized Romanian cities that are 60km or 100km apart? Right, it's wildly impractical. Inexpensive, autonomous, electric vehicles however are the future and will be extremely practical for all purposes except very long distance travel between two major cities. No other scenario will justify spending the vast sums of money required to install and upkeep high speed railway - and that cost will only continue to climb with wages and security threats in Europe; meanwhile electric, autonomous vehicles will bring the cost of vehicles down dramatically over time.