A ride on the Finnish side
Posted on July 11th, 2007 – 8:57 AMBy Roadguy
Guest blogger Kitty works on the Star Tribune copy desk. She and her family just got back from a vacation in Finland, to visit friends and celebrate Midsummer. Though she is generally both bored and ignorant when it comes to transportation issues, she was struck, even impressed, by several transportation wonders.
Can these be imported?
1. Before you get on a tram, bus, train, ferry or the metro in Helsinki, you can buy your ticket using your cell phone. I saw my friend do it. You punch in a number, and the fare is added to your phone bill. And an adult with a kid in a stroller gets on free. Check it out here.
2. Intercity trains have a special kids’ car, with toys and books and a slide. Better, as you watch your kid play, you can drink a fabulous cup of coffee or cold can of beer from the 
traveling refreshment cart.
On the other hand, if you don’t enjoy children, you can pick a different car. The nearest thing I’ve seen on a train here is the Lounge Car on the Amtrak. Nice views, but not that amusing for kids under 5.
Of course the first thing to import here would be reliable, regular intercity train service. Here’s the train website.
3. There seem to be bike paths next to every road, even 4-lane highways. For example, we rode the 8K trip to a summer cottage, from Tampere to Niihama, on a beautiful trail through the woods. In Helsinki, there are bike paths all over the city, too, even though the streets barely have room for cars.
In general, it seems like traffic goes about 10 miles per hour slower all over, city or highway. Could be we were riding with cautious drivers, but there are lots of “traffic-calming” features like roundabouts, curvy roads and bumpy cobblestone streets that would explain this.
You can decide if this is an advance or not.
34 Responses to "A ride on the Finnish side"
Having lived in Sweden for two years way back in the last century, I can confirm that Scandinavians always consider children in the design of their societies. Something as simple as a sidewalk or a bike lane makes it possible for a child to go from one place to another without an adult. In much of our country, children have to find a grownup to drive them whenever they want to go anywhere beyond their yard.
To be fair, we have a goodly number of bike trails along our roads as well, and the counties (espeically in/close to the metro) are proceeding with adding more paths or adding wider shoulders for bikes.
“Importing reliable regular intercity train service” would require a goodly bit of cash, since it requires either separate tracks for Amtrak trains or requires upgrades to existing freight tracks so that freight trains and Amtrak trains can intermingle without being slowed down.
Sounds like the Finns have got their priorities straight. Fostering mobility and accessibility for ALL citizens in an environmentally responsible way is in sharp contrast to fostering the rapid movement of “vehicles” from one vast parking lot to another as we do in the US, to the detriment of anyone who can’t drive, can’t afford, or would otherwise not choose to own or drive a car.
James, I grew up in the kind of environment you mention, years ago and miles away. By the time I was 8, I could freely get to anything, anywhere, whenever I wanted to without depending on a ride from adults. What a sense of freedom! Sadly, many of these features have been engineered out of the Twin Cities’ environment because the car is king, the suburbs reign and the city is disposable.
I love that car for kids!! What a wonderful idea - kids can be entertained away from the other passengers instead of expecting them to sit still and not annoy everyone else.
It makes me pretty ashamed of our priorities. We pour hundreds of millions into car-friendly investments over and over with no real signs of alleviating a congested system. An equal investment in rail transportation (as evidenced by even our comparatively wimpy system) has shown to reduce the number of cars on the road and encourage new users of public transportation. Furthermore, if you took even the smallest percentage of our investment in roads, it would vastly improve our (albeit solid) bike and pedestrian network. The money is there, maybe not to the extent of the Finns, but we just need the wisdom and will to adjust these priorities.
It’s a great idea, but you’ve gotta figure the kiddy kar would be thoroughly trashed and destroyed within a week. And BEER in the kiddy kar!?!?!
Egads, the puritans here (And this nations was founded BY Puritans.) would absolutely flip out.
I lived in Helsinki for 6 months(study abroad). I miss their transportation system. I especially miss their trains and trams. I wish we had both here in Minnesota.
We’re the richest country in the world with the poorest priorities. I’m beginning to think this will never change.
One thing I have seen in Europe (The Netherlands, not Finland) that I would love to see here is bike freeways. Yes, in Holland, they have a network of bicycle-only, limited-access trails. I would love to see that here, but somehow I don’t think it’s in the cards.
The kiddie car’s a great idea. Too bad there isn’t any on airplanes. There’s nothing worse than someones damn kid crying for three hours straight!!!
We already have “bike freeways” in the metro…The Midtown Greenway, Cedar Lake Trail, parts of the Southwest LRT and Gateway trails. Portions are closed access, bridges and tunnels over roadways, traintracks, etc. These are about as close to a “bike freeway” as you can get.
jj beat me to it, but I certainly talk about the trails mentioned as the “bicycle freeway system.” They have limited access, you can cover the entire Minneapolis part of the metro (within reason) and you don’t have to go 10mph. (And people are generally very good about following the rules.)
As much as I love Europe and European culture, I keep reminding myself and others that WE ARE NOT EUROPE. We just aren’t. Everything from priorities to the way the land is laid out couldn’t be any more different from Europe than it already is, and we will never be like Europe. (I am generalizing, I know.)
That being said, I do wish we would respect our children a lot more in our culture.
I think the trails that you guys bring up are a good start, but it’s nowhere near the same scale. You can ride a bike from one end of the country to the other without leaving the Dutch system. And, yes, I know this is the Minneapolis paper, but there are those of us on the other side of the river for whom these do no good.
I studied abroad in Europe and have done extensive traveling in Wester and Eastern Europe and the one thing that NEVER failed to impress me was the train system. It was absolutely amazing everywhere. It went to even the smallest towns and was easily accessible and efficient, and usually fairly cheap (though European budget airlines give trains a run for their money).
While I realize the infrastructure isn’t in place here, so it will likely never be a possibility, intercity train service is awesome! I really hope we can get the commuter rail line completed and then get more light rail in. Even these small steps are huge advances in transportation in my opinion. I love trains.
The folks on the east side of the river are extremely deficient in bike paths. There are some desperately needed repairs on the way for existing paths along the river. However, more paths and lanes are needed, including downtown and to many of the suburbs.
Last fall I travelled around Sweden and Norway for two weeks using a Scanrail pass. I used 8 different trains during that period, all were clean comfortable and on time to the minute.
This country did once have a good passenger train system, the best in the world actually, until the mid-1950s, then stupidly junked nearly all of it in favor of building highways.
Short of gasoline at $10 per gallon as a teaching tool I suspect we’re ineducable on the virtues of good rail systems.
Sean brings up a good point: We are not Europe, in ways too numerous to mention. Our hosts in Tampere pointed out a helpful comparison, though: Finland is about the size, population-wise, of Minnesota, but with more area. It kind of looks like Minnesota, too — lots of water, lots of forest. If we look at it that way, are there any further lessons we can take from Suomi?
Those who think that Finland (and Norway and Sweden) are not car- dependent are fooling themselves. As a current resident of Stockholm (U of M alumnus) I can say, with certainty, that there are plenty of people here whose jobs do not require cars that still drive whenever they get the chance. Furthermore, I just spent a long weekend in Dalarna (Rättvik-Falun-Borlänge) where all I did was ride in a car. There are two big differences in the train systems in Scandinavia, and, contrary to belief they are not population density and infrastructure.
-They allow passenger trains to go faster; AMTRAK generally is not allowed to go as fast as freight trains due to safety laws (which haven’t necessarily been updated);
-Passenger trains have PRECEDENCE over freight. These are not exclusive tracks. At. All. I’ve have, on numerous occasions, seen fully-loaded freight trains rolling through the platforms at Stockholm’s central station. They use an advanced system (similar to air-traffic control) to time the trains and minimize waiting, especialy for meeting passenger trains on single-track lines.
Sweden actually runs a lot of passenger trains on single-tracks, while AMTRAK often has the luxury of double-tracks (though on busier lines, it doesn’t matter much in either case.)
An improved passenger rail system is not as far away as people believe–in fact, most of the changes needed are on paper. Sure there are some stretches where the trains have to creep along at 30 MPH. Those stretches exist here, too.
One comment about the budget airlines: they gave them a run for the money a couple years back, but now the trains (at least SJ, Sweden’s rail system) are claiming passengers back because, simply put, flying budget is inconveneint and getting more expensive.
On the cell-phone fare system: they’ve also instituted that in Stockholm; mostly to eliminate cash in their bus system due to a string of bus driver stick-ups. Now you have to pre-purchase your ticket in al of Stockholm, with the exception of the subway-turnstiles, where they still accept cash. With the different fare collection system (on-bus lockbox instead of a leather pouch sitting next to the driver’s seat), I don’t know that paying by cell phone wll be coming to the US anytime soon.
Addendum: OK, I admit frequency is a big issue outside of the East Coast. Maybe if the cngressional delegations from the Midwestern states would get together, an improved inter-city system could be a relity. Until then, we’ll never see trains to MSP more frequently than 1/day.
Want to know why we don’t have inter-city trains here in the U.S. - and more specifically in the midwest? Compare this and this.
The reason we have and use cars is because we are so spread apart that even if we did have inter-city trains, you would still need to drive to get to the station. That certainly is not the case with most of Europe.
In places where there is higher density of population (i.e. east coast, parts of west coast, inside large cities such as New York, Chicago, D.C., etc.), you do find extensive public transportation.
I remember one of my first days back from a four-month study abroad in Italy. I kept thinking that I was living out in the countryside and was so annoyed that I had to drive for 5 mins to get to an ATM. Everything was just so far apart.
Build in density and you’ll develop the demand for public transit. That transit will in turn generate more density (ala Hwy. 55). Until you do that, it’s just a train serving those living right next to it.
Matt, if you are so “ashamed” and don’t like the priorities in America, then move to the “utopia” that is Europe.
“Matt, if you are so “ashamed” and don’t like the priorities in America, then move to the “utopia” that is Europe. ”
LOL, saw this one coming since yesterday morning! Ralph, what took ya so long?
“While I realize the infrastructure isn’t in place here, so it will likely never be a possibility…”
Mike, your pessimism may be unwarranted. As others have pointed out here, 50 years ago we DID have a great passenger rail transportaion infrastructure on par with Europe, and the interstate highway infrastucture was barely a blip on the radar screen to most Americans. No reason things can’t change back and give us a more balanced system with more reasonable transportation choices available to us.
I have not been to Finland but have used European transport in France, where the train systems are certainly very impressive. I do think it’s great how much more accessible European cities are without cars, and a model that we need to consider in the US, especially as the baby boomers age and become less able to drive.
Or we could just ship our elderly off to Europe if they can’t stick it in the good old US of A… Ralph, the “love it or leave it” stance is unproductive and cliche. There is nothing wrong or unpatriotic about admitting that one’s country has flaws and offering ways that it might be improved.
The flaw in the US, is giving priority to the automobile at the expense of everything else. It is not sustainable and excludes too many people.
Now that we know the consequences of auto-dominated planning and infrastructure, it is time to make changes instead of continuing with 1950’s mentality. Once you see how other countries added infrastructure for autos, and still continued to regard other modes of transit (ie. people), it is embarrassing to realize how our society failed to consider everyone, not just the petroleum and auto industry.
Lately, it sounds like lots of politicians are ashamed of what their party’s president is doing and no longer support it. Should they have to move? “Like it or leave it.” I’ve heard that junk before. How about get involved to try to improve it, instead?
Passenger rail makes sense in Europe because of population density. Passenger rail does not make sense in the US outside of the crowded northeast because of population density. It’s really that simple.
Please stop comparing the US to Europe. The conditions are just too different.
Jay,
High speed passenger rail can compete (quite favorably) with air travel over distances up to about 500 miles. There are plenty of US situations where rail could be effective. No one’s suggesting the return of competitive rail service from Chicago to LA, but Chicago to Minneapolis, or Chicago to St. Louis, and many other shorter, regional distances could do very well.
As it is, the one true high speed rail corridor in the US, the Northeast corridor, is the prime choice for travel between DC and Boston, eating up more than 50% of the total trips. Plenty of shorter haul trains are making profits and effectively competing now, as it is. Imagine what they could do with true high speed rail.
Rail should be a cornerstone of a national transportation policy where it is the most efficient mode.
The reason that rail works in the northeast corridor is precisely that it has the population density to support it. There’s just not enough of that outside the northeast to support rail. Why do you think it failed and Amtrak had to be formed to bail it out? Hint: It has nothing to do with any form of conspiracy, government, industry, or otherwise.
Jay, density is not the only issue. Passenger rail was historically run by the freight rail industry. It was not as big of a money-maker for that industry so naturally they phased it out.
Yes, many other factors played into this. The airplane, for one. But you can’t say that the rail industry had nothing to do with it.
The Empire Builder is Amtrak’s most profitable line. That is in direct conflict with your assertion that density is the sole determiner of rail feasibility. There are many reasons the Empire Builder works well: resorts along its route, cities and towns with no accessable airport and so on.
Your use of density as the sole metric for evaluating the desirability of rail is just as bad as the FTA’s use of its cost-effectiveness index as the sole determiner of whether new starts transit projects get federal funding. It’s a narrow-minded view that ignores a lot of important effects.
Jay,
David rightly notes that there are far more issues besides population density. I’d argue that population density is actually one of the least important major factors.
The NE corridor is successful because it’s fast. It’s fast because Amtrak actually owns the track, and thus can prioritize passenger service, make use of true high-speed rail (even though the Acela trains are slugs compared to Japanese and European high speed trains).
Amtrak services are turning profits on a number of short haul routes. The Hiawatha line between Chicago and Milwaukee is one example. The Wolverine service between Metro Detroit and Chicago is another, as are some of the Caltrain services in California.
Regional high speed rail service can work, and like we’ve seen in Europe and the NE corridor, could probably make significant inroads against air travel along those lines. A regional system based out of San Fran, one out of Chicago, one from Atlanta, one from Seattle, one out of Dallas, and expansion of the network in the NE could all work.
The reason rail failed in the US isn’t some conspiracy, as you note. It was, however, due to the government coming in and directly subsidizing rail’s competitors (via massive subsidies for highways and airports), while simultaneously strictly regulating rail traffic with speed limits and other restrictions.
If you want a nice summary of the downfall of American passenger rail, read the link below (also linked in my name, above). It’s a long read, but very interesting.
http://web.archive.org/web/20010614133724/wwics.si.edu/outreach/wq/WQSELECT/TRAIN.HTM
Sounds like a nice trip.
I hope I am not being redundant here… I took the Amtrak Coast Starlight from Oakland, CA to LA last September. The first floor of my car had a play room for kids. I won’t say the room was amazing. However, there was one, and I saw it being used.
The defenders of American sprawl love ‘density’ and hate Europe. They also have short memories.
A train trip to Chicago could be as fast as a car trip, especially if it was high speed. Right here in the undense Midwest. When you get to Chicago, they have a thing called the “El.” So you don’t need a car to get around when you get there.
As one writer pointed out, passenger and freight trains in Europe use one track, but are programmed not to run into each other, so a whole new track system is not necessarily needed.
Eventually we won’t have as much of a choice of driving or even flying. Trains are going to be the future. Back to the future!
Elydog, a train trip to Chicago, if it were on a true high speed rail system, like those in Europe and Japan, would not only compete with driving, but also with flying.
French TGV trains cruise at near 190 mph. Some of their lines average 150-160 mph for the entire journey, including stops. At roughly 400 miles from Minneapolis to Chicago, you’re talking about a total journey of less than 3 hours to get to the loop. When you consider the added time of going through security, checking bags, and then getting from the airport to downtown, high speed rail could certainly compete, if not win outright in a battle against air travel.
As it is, even slower trains can effectively compete.
I remember reading that trains traveled from MSP to Chicago at up to 130 MPH. I wish I could find the website now, but it was backed up by some sort of timetable and a scanned in flyer noting the max speed. It is also evidenced by the tracks north of Red Wing, where you can see the old track bed (pre-1900s) which connected to the Welch line less than a mile from the “new” double track which has track geometry to support those high speeds.
