High Speed-rail

The best way to reduce traffic jams and community connections is a major issue. Representative
Chavez from District 33 claims that high-speed rail can solve this problem, while Representative
Debra Chou argues that computer trains are not the best solution. Although both authors make
good points, the evidence that Chou supports is more specific and thorough. So, the second
article is better supported.
One reason why high-speed rail is not a good idea is the example of China and Europe’s
overestimation of the number of passengers on high-speed rail. Businessmen and rich travelers
can use the computer train due to its location. But, for ordinary citizens, using this train
frequently is not possible because of its expensive ticket fees. The second reason is that the
second paragraph provides evidence from the studies. While California’s estimation of high-
speed rail that connects San Diego and Sacramento cost 100 billion dollars over 20 years, the
studies express that ticket sales are not able to bear the cost of setting up high-speed rail.
Moreover, the second article also states a study from the University of California. It shows that
high-speed rail can reduce less than 1% of carbon dioxide emissions. This percentage does not
show a significant effect on the reduction of greenhouse gases. So, the second article is more
reliable.
On the other hand, the first article is a weaker argument because it does not contain enough
evidence and is not supported by specific data and evidence. The passage states a lot of benefits
of the operation of high-speed rail, such as increasing job opportunities and the economic impact
of a medium-air port. But these facts are just an opinion and are not supported by reliable
statistics or evidence. In addition, it also states that high-speed rail is powered by electricity,
reduces the consumption of fossil fuels, and is good for the environment. But it cannot provide
specific data on how much they can reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
In conclusion, operating high-speed rail to ease traffic blockades is not the best solution. This
argument is supported by facts, evidence, and studies. In contrast, high-speed rail can solve
transportation problems. This is a weak argument because it is based on opinion and unreliable
sources. Based on the evidence, the idea of setting up high-speed rail has been postponed.