11–20 of 472 posts
This does not answer the most obvious and important question: why not invest in public transport? It's boring but it will work.
> What do you do with all that dirt? >... The Boring Company is investigating technologies that will recycle the earth into useful bricks to be used to build structures... These bricks can potentially be used as a portion of the tunnel lining itself, which is typically built from concrete. Since concrete production accounts for 4.5% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, earth bricks would reduce both environmental…
> What do you do with all that dirt? >... The Boring Company is investigating technologies that will recycle the earth into useful bricks to be used to build structures... These bricks can potentially be used as a portion of the tunnel lining itself, which is typically built from concrete. Since concrete production accounts for 4.5% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, earth bricks would reduce both environmental…
I have seen ~3 decades old earth bricks (granted, uncompressed) and it's not pretty. Maybe compression and hydro-isolation does wonders.
This does not answer the most obvious and important question: why not invest in public transport? It's boring but it will work.
If this technology truly can reduce the cost of tunnel boring by a factor of ten, subway systems can be created in many more cities and existing systems updated with a thicker network. I also wonder if, because of the smaller diameter of the tunnels, a network of self-driving buses doesn't make more sense to deploy in these tunnel networks.
This does not answer the most obvious and important question: why not invest in public transport? It's boring but it will work.
I'd like to see more details about edge case scenarios. What happens if a sled gets stuck? What would be the procedure and response time for getting the right personnel down there? What failsafes are in place for disasters? What if the power grid went offline or there was a flood? How do you prevent human error? What if people left their gas vehicles on and there was a toxic level of carbon monoxide in the tunnels? W…
You can have the sleds equipped with oxygen and a mask, similar to what airplanes have for cabin depressurization. As for point B you can have doors or what not around the sled. But if people really want to commit suicide by sled there's nothing stopping them. What stops someone from jumping off a bridge with a highway below?
I'd like to see more details about edge case scenarios. What happens if a sled gets stuck? What would be the procedure and response time for getting the right personnel down there? What failsafes are in place for disasters? What if the power grid went offline or there was a flood? How do you prevent human error? What if people left their gas vehicles on and there was a toxic level of carbon monoxide in the tunnels? W…
You can have the sleds equipped with oxygen and a mask, similar to what airplanes have for cabin depressurization. As for point B you can have doors or what not around the sled. But if people really want to commit suicide by sled there's nothing stopping them. What stops someone from jumping off a bridge with a highway below?
This does not answer the most obvious and important question: why not invest in public transport? It's boring but it will work.
"In addition to consumer vehicles,... high passenger-density urban transport... in the early stages of development at Tesla and should be ready for unveiling next year. With the advent of autonomy, it will probably make sense to shrink the size of buses and transition the role of bus driver to that of fleet manager... It would also take people all the way to their destination. Fixed summon buttons at existing bus stops would serve those who don't have a phone. Design accommodates wheelchairs, strollers and bikes."
I'd like to see more details about edge case scenarios. What happens if a sled gets stuck? What would be the procedure and response time for getting the right personnel down there? What failsafes are in place for disasters? What if the power grid went offline or there was a flood? How do you prevent human error? What if people left their gas vehicles on and there was a toxic level of carbon monoxide in the tunnels? W…
The thing is, we're all MUCH more comfortable with the danger we're familiar with, than the danger we're unfamiliar with. Imagine if planes were just being introduced today - what are the edge case scenarios? What happens if there's mechanical failure at 30,000 feet? What happens if there's turbulence, lightning, birds, volcanic ash? What happens if the pilot is suicidal? What happens if... But we really don't care, do we? Air transport is familiar.
I'm not saying the dangers of new tech aren't important - they're very important; but keep in mind that while the idea of suffocating after a crash or malfunction in a hyperloop tube/tunnel will feel significantly more perilous than any misfortune that may befall you on a plane simply because a plane's risks are now familiar.
When we look back at how planes came of age, it seems like people were idiots to get on them (I recently read about the de Havilland Comet... it disintegrated in mid-air like 3 times in a year - don't quote me on that, but it was bad). Did it have to be so bad? No; of course some disasters could have been avoided with better oversight and accountability, but nonetheless, in the face of risk, the new tech provided such great advantages that its risks were accepted. It's fair to be aware of the way new tech can fail, but we shouldn't dismiss a tech simply because it can't "prevent human error" 100% of the time, or be perfectly immune to failure of any sort.
If we can introduce a new tech that has failure properties similar or better to current tech, but that adds significant value to everyday life, we're netting a very positive gain. We shouldn't let fear any failure prevent us from pursuing new tech, just like we shouldn't let fear of stubbing our toes prevent us from walking.