Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 154 posts

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#101

Post by Shivetya »

sschueller wrote: post #91
apeace wrote: post #74

The idea of having Boring Company pay for the construction and then reap the profits strikes me as a really great idea. When the government pays for construction, the contractors don't have a strong incentive to actually finish the project. They'll keep getting paid no matter how long it runs over or how over-budget it goes. But in this situation, Boring Co won't make any money unless and until they get it up and run…

It is the opposite of a good idea in my opinion. The reason you don't want to do that is because the private enterprise wants to maximize its profits. There is nothing wrong with that but in order to do so they will cut corners where ever possible and do the absolute minimum for upkeep. Yes, this happens with poorly managed and financed public projects as well but public infrastructure can and sometimes must operate…

you do realize that across the US there is nearly a hundred billion dollars of deferred maintenance to light rail lines used in most cities? Look at all the maintenance issues just with NYC subway system which is considered the best in the US. Plus they have the ability to provide rides for less than cost and recoup it by other means, taxes on unrelated activities.

I find this idea really odd that a private company is going to cut corners. The fact is it has been the public projects that have cut corners. A private company always has the incentive to stay profitable and cutting corners is not how you play the long term game. Unlike the public held transport agencies they cannot just ask for a bailout or tax increase

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#102

Post by Element_ »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #13

> In Toronto, where the subway system doesn’t reach the international airport, a brand-new airport express line has fallen seriously short of ridership expectations, even with its one-way fare of $12.35 The reason this is failing is because of awareness. I travel to Toronto for work 4-5 times every year (for the past 12 years). I heard about this extension being approved a couple years ago and I've never seen a sign…

There are signs all over the airport, there are signs and digital boards on the airports local shuttle showing which stop to get off for the UP Express etc... If you goto the airport website (www.torontopearson.com) it is displayed on the front page.

The reason it's receiving slow adoption is because of the price. Even after they reduced the fare you can still get a taxi or Uber directly to your door for a little more than the fare price (Uber and Lyft were recently granted permission for pickups directly from the airport).

Additionally because of the lumpy nature of air travel and the multiple commuting stops the UP Express can be packed during peak times. The last time I got off a flight from London and took the UP Express downtown there was standing room only and no space in the luggage racks for my bags.

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#103

Post by dsfyu404ed »

sschueller wrote: post #91
apeace wrote: post #74

The idea of having Boring Company pay for the construction and then reap the profits strikes me as a really great idea. When the government pays for construction, the contractors don't have a strong incentive to actually finish the project. They'll keep getting paid no matter how long it runs over or how over-budget it goes. But in this situation, Boring Co won't make any money unless and until they get it up and run…

It is the opposite of a good idea in my opinion. The reason you don't want to do that is because the private enterprise wants to maximize its profits. There is nothing wrong with that but in order to do so they will cut corners where ever possible and do the absolute minimum for upkeep. Yes, this happens with poorly managed and financed public projects as well but public infrastructure can and sometimes must operate…

>The reason you don't want to do that is because the private enterprise wants to maximize its profits. There is nothing wrong with that but in order to do so they will cut corners where ever possible and do the absolute minimum for upkeep.

Government does this and when they do it it's much, much harder to hold them accountable. Look at the Big Dig or anything the MTA touches.

When a private company acts like this and the public notices there's at least the risk that some politicians will latch on to the issue (no politician ever lost public support by being tough on a company that was mistreating the public). When government is the wrongdoer it's needs to get incredibly bad before the other parts of government hold them accountable.

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#104

Post by gok »

apeace wrote: post #74

The idea of having Boring Company pay for the construction and then reap the profits strikes me as a really great idea. When the government pays for construction, the contractors don't have a strong incentive to actually finish the project. They'll keep getting paid no matter how long it runs over or how over-budget it goes. But in this situation, Boring Co won't make any money unless and until they get it up and run…

Most mass transit systems we have were originally privately built and operated until they became unprofitable in the 1930s-40s at which point they were publicly taken over. More recently there has been a resurgence of "public-private partnerships" where a private company builds a project and then gets a long term deal to extract money from it once it's done. Denver's recent transit expansion is one example.

A potential downside is that we might end up back in the 1940s, when the subways became unprofitable and cities were forced to buy them out of bankruptcy because residents came to rely on them.

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#105

Post by rhcom2 »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #103
sschueller wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is the opposite of a good idea in my opinion. The reason you don't want to do that is because the private enterprise wants to maximize its profits. There is nothing wrong with that but in order to do so they will cut corners where ever possible and do the absolute minimum for upkeep. Yes, this happens with poorly managed and financed public projects as well but public infrastructure can and sometimes must operate…

>The reason you don't want to do that is because the private enterprise wants to maximize its profits. There is nothing wrong with that but in order to do so they will cut corners where ever possible and do the absolute minimum for upkeep. Government does this and when they do it it's much, much harder to hold them accountable. Look at the Big Dig or anything the MTA touches. When a private company acts like this and…

Part of the problem with the Big Dig were the government was defrauded by a materials supplier who used substandard in order to cut costs.

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#106

Post by Pxtl »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #13

> In Toronto, where the subway system doesn’t reach the international airport, a brand-new airport express line has fallen seriously short of ridership expectations, even with its one-way fare of $12.35 The reason this is failing is because of awareness. I travel to Toronto for work 4-5 times every year (for the past 12 years). I heard about this extension being approved a couple years ago and I've never seen a sign…

To be fair, everything about Pearson is hard. I've always found it difficult to navigate - everything feels backwards and confusing, even simple things like the terminal names (there is no Terminal 2!?). UPX having the same problem is unsurprising.

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#107

Post by ComradeTaco »

apeace wrote: post #74

The idea of having Boring Company pay for the construction and then reap the profits strikes me as a really great idea. When the government pays for construction, the contractors don't have a strong incentive to actually finish the project. They'll keep getting paid no matter how long it runs over or how over-budget it goes. But in this situation, Boring Co won't make any money unless and until they get it up and run…

Okay, my bachelors was in civil engineering and I have worked in construction and engineering for just over two years now.

Most public projects today have generous structured incentives that are given to companies for meeting goals for time and budget. We work to these incentives.

Keep in mind that often you cannot be aware of the things that will go wrong until you actually do them. This happens in software development quite a bit.

I am not aware of any extensive private tunnel construction that has occurred without public financing inside of the U.S.

So here are the drawbacks to Musk's plan:

1. He may prioritize speed over safety, either unintentionally causing loss of life or limb because of construction practices or geotechnically destablize the foundations of the buildings and infrastructure that he's traveling under.

2. I firmly believe that it's going to cost far, far more than 1 billion. That leaves the chance of a big hole in the ground that may eventually fill with water.

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#108

Post by cassieramen »

gok wrote: post #104
apeace wrote: post #74

The idea of having Boring Company pay for the construction and then reap the profits strikes me as a really great idea. When the government pays for construction, the contractors don't have a strong incentive to actually finish the project. They'll keep getting paid no matter how long it runs over or how over-budget it goes. But in this situation, Boring Co won't make any money unless and until they get it up and run…

Most mass transit systems we have were originally privately built and operated until they became unprofitable in the 1930s-40s at which point they were publicly taken over. More recently there has been a resurgence of "public-private partnerships" where a private company builds a project and then gets a long term deal to extract money from it once it's done. Denver's recent transit expansion is one example. A potenti…

It's important to remember that the federal government was actively subsidizing the urban exodus to suburbia in the 1940s. The subway became unprofitable due to federal housing policy and the local or state government ended up having to bail it out.

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#109

Post by bonestamp2 »

motohagiography wrote: post #99
bonestamp2 wrote: post #13

> In Toronto, where the subway system doesn’t reach the international airport, a brand-new airport express line has fallen seriously short of ridership expectations, even with its one-way fare of $12.35 The reason this is failing is because of awareness. I travel to Toronto for work 4-5 times every year (for the past 12 years). I heard about this extension being approved a couple years ago and I've never seen a sign…

Part of why I don't use the Toronto UP link is: - I didn't know it was completed and operating. - Bulk of residential population is 30-45min+ subway ride from Union Station anyway, might have assumed people travel from their offices. - If due to a subway delay I miss a flight because I only paid $15 and wanted to save $30, the savings doesn't justify the risk. The independent probabilities of unavoidable delays on ea…

> I didn't know it was completed and operating.

A new transit line is usually pretty big news in any city, but like I said... everyone in Toronto that I asked about it didn't know about it either. So they've really blown it on awareness. Thankfully, that's actually a pretty easy thing to fix.

Re: For $1B, Elon Musk’s Tunnel to O’Hare Would Be a Miracle

#110

Post by rory096 »

This article has several errors:

>The Musk “Loop” would have a capacity of 2,000 passengers per hour in each direction, which is about 60 percent of the Blue Line’s current, mostly-under-capacity average hourly ridership.

The RFQ[0] makes clear that the intent is to compete against taxi and ride-share services, which comprise 52% of trips in the 2015 estimate, to CTA Rail's 20%[1]. The article says "the Blue Line works pretty darn well", but revealed preferences tell a different story.

I can't find what O'Hare Xpress LLC (the other finalist) proposed, but the RFP[2] required respondents to specify "maximum passenger capacity: (i) per 15 minutes; and (ii) per hour". The JFK AirTrain was designed for 34,000 riders per day.[3]

>Most transit moves horizontally, some moves vertically; the concept for the “Chicago Express Loop” is to do both.

The tunnel will terminate at Block 37, where Chicago already has an unused, very expensive, giant subway station. This concept doesn't include elevators, as described so far.

> The writer and transportation researcher Alon Levy compiled the grim per-mile pricing of recent tunnel projects for CityLab in January, shown below. This table gives a sense of how extraordinary Musk’s project would be on a cost basis—and how improbable.

This cherry-picks a US price chart from an article[4] that's entirely about how tunneling is inordinately expensive in the United States compared to the rest of the world and refutes the idea that labor is the main cause. The cited article even has a pull-quote that says "There’s no reason why building subways and light rail in sprawling cities should be as expensive as it is."

>If the Boring Company’s cost projection of $1 billion is anywhere near accurate, that pencils out to $55.5 million per mile—far and away, the cheapest construction cost for any subterranean transit line in the U.S.

That should be $27.8 million per mile ($17.3m per km), since you'll presumably want it to go in both directions. This is low even compared to European transit,[5] but those tunnels are 2-3x the diameter.

Really, this project is a Loop mostly in name, diameter and rolling stock — it doesn't approach the ambitious concept of operations (elevators, dynamic routing, and car access) that is planned for Maryland and LA. That should alleviate a substantial part of the technical risk, leaving it mostly as a financial risk for investors.

Since (like most infrastructure) tunneling mostly consists of fixed costs, the most likely failure mode is not reaching completion at all. Once it's complete it's likely to be cash flow positive even if it has a poor or negative return on investment, so there's little incentive to shut it down. (This was echoed by Musk in the press conference.)

[0] http://chicagoinfrastructure.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/...

[1] Taxi/Uber: 5,164, CTA Rail: 2,011, Total: 9,956. n.b. These ridership estimates are for daily one-way trips, with total daily trips being twice those in the table. https://i.imgur.com/naVUjnA.png

[2] http://chicagoinfrastructure.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/...

[3] https://www.bechtel.com/projects/jfk-airtrain-jfk-2000/

[4] https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2018/01/why-its-so-ex...

[5] https://pedestrianobservations.com/2013/06/03/comparative-su...

Post reply on HN