Comment by bluGill
2 days ago
No less efficient than track sitting empty most the time.
And your bus only lane has a lot more options. If there is a major disaster you can divert other traffic (not necessarily all traffic though that is an option) into it which might be a useful compromise at time. If you need to repair your bus only lane you just divert the bus to regular traffic. For that matter most places there isn't any traffic and so a bus in mixed traffic has no downsides thus not costing you that whole lane (or track), just build the bus-only lane where it is needed.
Trains are a good thing when they do something a road cannot. However the common bus can be just as good for much less. If you have the money and want good service and ride quality the bus can do it too, and typically for much less cost than a train.
Trains are good where they don't mix with traffic (meaning elevated or underground) because they can then be automated (and also faster). Alternatively a train can hold more people, so if you are in the rare situation where a 100 passenger bus every 5 minutes can't handle the passengers a train is good. Most of the time though you are not in either situation and so a bus can do everything a train can.
I live in a city with trams in the UK and that’s not how it works. There are sections that run on dedicated train lines, and sections where it runs on the street. Where it runs on the streets, priority is given over cars by switching traffic lights to red. Once the tram has passed onto the road it switches back to green so you can end up following the tram in your car.
> No less efficient than track sitting empty most the time
Unless the track is just in a regular lane that can be full of cars/busses/trucks whenever there isn’t a light train. Like how trams work in most of the world