If its unprofitable, maybe its a bad idea to have unused transportation. While a few buses seem like negligible damage to the environment, I imagine this greater plan is to grow these locations that are in unfavorable geographic locations. Isnt this environmentally irresponsible?
What's the point of money if we're only going to use it to make more of it?
Rural areas should be designated for food production and tourism.
It's a fair question. If the attendance is truly low, maybe a subsidized taxi service would be a better replacement, for example.
I doubt that. Especially combined with home insurance.
Remember that something like 80% of global pollution comes from industry. Focusing too hard on individual vehicles is a smokescreen--even if every driver in the world switched to electric cars/trucks/buses tomorrow, it wouldn't make much difference by itself.
For instance having it be closer to a taxi service with small vehicles when there's low usage and only run big buses on commuting hours or other high usage time, for instance.
Cost and environment impact are legitimate questions, I think there are decent solutions.
Having unsustainably small communities is probably less environmentally friendly than growing them to a size where not all services / materials need to be individually imported.