Why isn’t public transport used more for evacuations?

861 viewsOther

I know the easy answer is politics but it has to be more complicated that that because evacuations tend to involve other things that go against certain politics (like free food and open shelters). And even though somewhere like Florida doesn’t have tons of public buses, it would be logistically relatively easy to redirect the ones they do have plus school buses and private buses that are currently in disuse. Or for Amtrak to send extra trains down there, like cities do for sporting events. I’m seeing a lot of people online who seem like they’d be willing to jump on the first train/bus/plane to literally anywhere. What’s the logic in not making that more available as an option?

I’m using the US but I do feel like it’s not something you see even in general, at least not as much as expected.

Are there more complex reasons that I’m not considering?

In: Other

33 Answers

Anonymous 0 Comments

Busses are absolutely used for evacuation, but has limitations because people need to bring more than just themselves. Passenger interstate rail does not have very much capacity and is probably not worthwhile to coordinate.

As well, people who do own cars want to bring those cars with them. If they leave them behind, they are likely going to be complete losses and may not be covered by insurance. So just making busses and rail available is not going to move people from cars to those options. It just provides an option for those without cars.

You are viewing 1 out of 33 answers, click here to view all answers.