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

As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

thetransportpolitic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 171 posts

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#101

Post by bobthepanda »

trhway wrote: post #71
quickthrower2 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article talks about a train that can go 200mph. That makes having people drive between cities seem a rather slow option. Plus you can get work done on a train. On a car it is not possible as a driver (other than phone calls) and pretty hard as a passenger. I take your point about planes, but it's good to have more than one option and trains are good for middling distances, as there isn't all the need to check in,…

Instead of trains we're working on self driving cars. They better serve last mile and are better suited for private investment and innovation than huge infrastructure projects.

The self driving car can't go 200MPH.

You also can't fit as many people in self driving cars, simply because having the requisite fuel storage and engine per 2-4 seater car is quite a lot of space when you can spread that around 200 people per train car. And this is before we consider that average car occupancy is something like 1.5.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#102

Post by joshuaheard »

As an American that live in France for several years, the high-speed trains were great for certain trips, but they wouldn't work in the U.S. because they are not as efficient. By efficiency I mean cost over time. For instance, to go from Paris to Bordeaux by car is about 8 hours, the price of gas is $5/gal and all the freeways are toll roads. Total trip would be about the same to fly. To Fly is about $500 for one-hour flight. The train is about 8 hours and $100.

In America, gas is $3-4/gal, the flight from LA to SF (about 1 hour) is $200. Also, don't forget European cities were designed for pedestrians, while in the US, they were built for cars.

I would say the most efficient way to travel in France is by train, while in the US, it is by plane.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#103

Post by melling »

reindeerer wrote: post #22
cobookman wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% spot on. Many don't realize just how large the us is. Going from SF to ATL is longer distance than Portugal to Belarus.

China is the same size as US. Somehow, they have HSR

They have a lot of HSR.

About 15,000 miles at the moment, with another 10,000 on the way.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#104

Post by realityczeque »

rdl wrote: post #36
randomsearch wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about climate change?

Since cars have a 10-20 year lifespan, and electric is becoming superior, that will probably solve itself over the next 10-20 years (maybe they'll be EV powered by natural gas for a while, but that's still a win, and then the grid might get greener.) Aviation fuel is the highest and best use of hydrocarbons (along with some chemical production), so we can deal with that last, after lots of power generation, demand re…

Not sure your math checks out. EVs are < 1% of fleet and < 2% of sales in the USA. As you say, cars last 10-20 years and this number is rapidly getting longer. Vehicles older than 16 years are the most-rapidly-growing segment of the US vehicle fleet. The average age of US light passenger vehicles hit 12 years in 2016. In 2020 there will still be 80 million cars on the road that were built 1995 or earlier, none of which were electric or even hybrids. Virtually all of the cars sold this year will still be on the road in 2030, and 98% of them will be combustion powered.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#105

Post by rdl »

astura wrote: post #87
rdl wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A non-new, efficient car (say, a 3 year old Prius) is about $0.15/mi to operate.

How is that number calculated?

AAA and others have good data (usually for new cars, though, so depreciation makes it $0.30-0.40/mi total).

https://therideshareguy.com/is-a-toyota-prius-the-best-car-f... has a 2011 and 2016 Prius.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#106

Post by grecy »

kingosticks wrote: post #98
shdh wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why just 200mph

Because it's here today. It's easy with simple investment, it's got huge benefits over the joke that is the current U.S train service.

There are plenty of passenger trains in service around the world that go faster than 200mp/h, today.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#107

Post by gniv »

joshuaheard wrote: post #102

As an American that live in France for several years, the high-speed trains were great for certain trips, but they wouldn't work in the U.S. because they are not as efficient. By efficiency I mean cost over time. For instance, to go from Paris to Bordeaux by car is about 8 hours, the price of gas is $5/gal and all the freeways are toll roads. Total trip would be about the same to fly. To Fly is about $500 for one-hou…

> The train is about 8 hours and $100.

Small correction: It's 2 hours from Paris to Bordeaux.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#108

Post by rdl »

WalterBright wrote: post #99
rdl wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since cars have a 10-20 year lifespan, and electric is becoming superior, that will probably solve itself over the next 10-20 years (maybe they'll be EV powered by natural gas for a while, but that's still a win, and then the grid might get greener.) Aviation fuel is the highest and best use of hydrocarbons (along with some chemical production), so we can deal with that last, after lots of power generation, demand re…

Airliners have gotten far more efficient over the last 40 years, starting with the 757/767. (The 757 design got its start from more efficient engines and a new wing shape.) In fact, efficiency improvements are the primary factor driving new airliner models and sales. At the time of the 757 launch, fuel was 40% of the operating cost of air travel.

A huge improvement (for the biggest planes) is going to twins and ETOPS (not just fuel, also maintenance cost, but also fuel). Not as relevant to domestic routes, though.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#109

Post by sampo »

kiran-rao wrote: post #32
_delirium wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traffic congestion is a pretty big issue for intercity too in some regions. Dallas-Houston is a mere 240 miles but often takes 5 hours to drive. Even in "light" traffic, 4 or so is common. You can do a lot better than that with even decently upgraded "legacy" rail, never mind a Shinkansen/TGV type system. For example, London-Manchester is 210 miles, and trains take only 2 hours.

Is there a solution to the last mile problem? It's every difficult to get to the final destination in sprawled suburban cities even if there's a direct center-center high speed rail line.

Build dense cities.

For example the Tokio-Osaka Shinkansen averages 130 mph over the whole route with 15 stops in between the end stations. You could get from midtown Manhattan to downtown Boston in 1h40min. Make that 1h15min, if the train didn't have stops between NYC and Boston.

So visiting Boston could be almost as fast as visiting the far end of Queens, from Manhattan.

Re: As the U.S. fantasizes, the rest of the world builds new transport system (2017)

#110

Post by rdl »

realityczeque wrote: post #104
rdl wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since cars have a 10-20 year lifespan, and electric is becoming superior, that will probably solve itself over the next 10-20 years (maybe they'll be EV powered by natural gas for a while, but that's still a win, and then the grid might get greener.) Aviation fuel is the highest and best use of hydrocarbons (along with some chemical production), so we can deal with that last, after lots of power generation, demand re…

Not sure your math checks out. EVs are < 1% of fleet and < 2% of sales in the USA. As you say, cars last 10-20 years and this number is rapidly getting longer. Vehicles older than 16 years are the most-rapidly-growing segment of the US vehicle fleet. The average age of US light passenger vehicles hit 12 years in 2016. In 2020 there will still be 80 million cars on the road that were built 1995 or earlier, none of whi…

What matters is miles driven, not number of vehicles. For someone with a 1-2h each way commute (sigh), replacing a 2010 truck with a 5-year-old 2025 EV in 2030 will make sense on a 2 year cash return basis. For someone who drives 1-2k miles/year, it probably isn't worth upgrading.
Post reply on HN