Commuter rail: the normalized collapse

Today I plan to go to Basel by train. What else can I do on the train but write about the structural absurdity of the situation with Adif, Renfe, and Cercanías (commuter rail) in Catalonia?

The desolation to which decades of neglect of a vital public service have led us is profound, and it has implications and ramifications for society as a whole, even for those who never take the train. Indeed, in the news, we read about some of these immediate consequences of the collapse.

We read about 23,000 tons of metal who cannot reach Martorell through a tunnel in Rubí that they have long known to be in poor condition, and whose works –The newspaper AHORA had predicted it.– will be extended by three years. We read that 43 trucks are needed to replace one train, which will have to travel along roads that are already congested, literally so in some sections. We read that traffic has increased by 11% in the city of Barcelona (5% on access roads), which is increasing traffic jams and pollution in the city. However, Laia Bonet assured us that "mobility is functioning normally enough."

But I would like us to think about the effects of "equilibrium," like economists do, to interpret this "normality." How is it possible that mobility didn't collapse after such a structural failure? The reason is relatively simple. The service has been so precarious for so long that, in equilibrium, it ends up having little value and fewer users than would be socially expected.

It's no secret. Many of the users who still use the Cercanías commuter rail cannot afford an alternative, or the one they can afford is equally precarious. They use the Cercanías despite the Cercanías. In the areas served by Renfe, higher-income users had already adopted the car as a regular alternative before the collapse. And thinking about the long-term effects, companies and individuals had taken into account the precariousness of the service when deciding where to invest or where to live.

I'd like us to imagine, for a moment, that the S1 and S2 lines of the FGC (which run between Sabadell and Barcelona, ​​and Terrassa and Barcelona) stop operating. These lines have fueled significant population growth, partly due to the exodus from the big city, and partly thanks to the attraction of people from surrounding regions. Part of the appeal of living in these towns is their train, which runs punctually and quietly. These towns have undergone a strong process of gentrification, largely thanks to this train.

So, as I was saying, let's imagine that the FGC breaks down spectacularly, as has happened with the Cercanías commuter rail. What would happen next, I speculate, would be the complete collapse of the roads throughout the metropolitan area. Why? Well, because in towns like Sant Cugat, people take the train because it works, because it's worthwhile even if they can afford alternatives, but they have at least one car right outside their homes. To roads that are already completely gridlocked (and poorly maintained), we would probably add much more than 5% more cars on the access roads. The gridlock wouldn't be limited to the access roads: with rush hours of two or three hours, it would occur primarily locally, around schools, neighborhoods, and workplaces, where the train currently dictates daily commutes. No demonstration, large, medium, or small, with or without leaflets on the ground, will be enough to make them hear a clamor that has lasted for decades. We've made that perfectly clear. Albert Pla suggested to Catalunya Ràdio that they burn train cars (and perhaps stations). And it made us laugh, at least it made me laugh. Laugh so we wouldn't cry, because our health, our economy, and our morale are at stake.

With all this, it seems we left on time. Long live the train.