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

121–130 of 171 posts

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

#121

Post by rdl »

realityczeque wrote: post #115
rdl wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yeah but EVs make up a far smaller proportion of miles driven than they do the fleet by units. For obvious reasons: many EVs are short-range vehicles and the people who buy them are self-selecting as people who are both environmentally conscious and able to live with the range problems. People with long commutes who can't afford a Tesla are obligated to burn gas.

It is reasonable to assume that a 5 year old EV will be as cheap in 2030 (2025 model) as a 5 year old EV is today (2014 model), while becoming more capable at roughly the rate we've seen so far. A 5 year old Leaf is $6-10k now, and would be a ~250 mile range car by 2025.

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

#122

Post by soheil »

melling wrote: post #100
soheil wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually a helpful example to support the conclusion. Why would the author provide a "better" example that supports his/her idea less? LA to Chicago may not be a commonly travelled route nor one that would lend itself to train travel best, but the author's point still stands, which is in the US on average distances between major cities are much longer than any individual country in Europe, hence the immense cost…

The author’s point does not stand. No one is saying build high-speed rail between cities that are extremely far apart. Find the handful of places where it does make sense then build there. If it only makes sense in 4 locations then build there. You can safely ignore the other 20 locations.

Then there is the argument why should the rest of the country pay for something that will only be used in the coasts or densely populated areas?

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

#123

Post by soheil »

xg15 wrote: post #89
soheil wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually a helpful example to support the conclusion. Why would the author provide a "better" example that supports his/her idea less? LA to Chicago may not be a commonly travelled route nor one that would lend itself to train travel best, but the author's point still stands, which is in the US on average distances between major cities are much longer than any individual country in Europe, hence the immense cost…

> We might have bit the bullet and done it with highways back in the day for whatever reason, today the reasoning for doing the same thing may not apply and the cost unjustified. So the rational, cost-effective solution would have been not to have any connection at all?

I'm leaning towards a yes but then again I wasn't there at the time.

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

#124

Post by melling »

joshuaheard wrote: post #116
gniv wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The train is about 8 hours and $100. Small correction: It's 2 hours from Paris to Bordeaux.

That's true, I should have used Nice as my example.

Yeah, and you should have included the time to get to the airport. The need to arrive early, trains make a few stops between destinations, etc

That plane leaving SFO isn’t stopping in Fresno.

I suppose when you’re contriving an example, you’re hoping that people aren’t really paying attention.

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

#125

Post by soheil »

Part of me thinks the word "fantasize" in the title is referring to the efforts by Elon Musk with the Boring company, Hyperloop, SpaceX intra-earth travel thus I'd like to see arguments for why that is when in fact Boring company is making non-stop progress given how busy Musk is and SpaceX constantly advancing the edge of what is possible with space tech, fantasy? Not one bit.

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

#126

Post by TheCoelacanth »

ams6110 wrote: post #84
techsupporter wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that flights are not sustainable much longer. Flying uses an astounding amount of subsidized fossil fuels, requires infrastructure that takes up quite a large amount of space, and is increasingly both inconvenient and intrusive. They're also a separate matter from the last-mile problem that bicycles, scooters, and autonomous vehicles aim to solve (assuming we can structure AV use in a way that, during…

Commercial air travel is more efficient in fuel usage than driving, per passenger mile.

Fossil fuel powered driving will also not be sustainable long-term.

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

#127

Post by bobthepanda »

grecy wrote: post #106
kingosticks wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Those are all in China. Wikipedia tells me that max achievable speed in regular service in every country except China is 320km/h. China does 350km/h, but you need to be traveling at quite a long distance for a measly 30km/h increase in speed to be worth it, and China runs much longer high speed rail services than other countries (Beijing to Hong Kong is 9 hours).

Besides, the more important thing is average speed. Acela's top speed is respectable for legacy rail, but it achieves this top speed for a total of 33 miles over a 457 mile route.

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

#128

Post by manicdee »

Also worth noting: where Europe designed their rail system to reduce fatalities by improving control of trains on the track, the US chose to make trains tougher to withstand the completely avoidable accidents.

As a result no European train can run on US rails (technical compatibility aside) because trains like HSV are lightweight and do not meet US design rules.

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

#129

Post by andrepd »

soheil wrote: post #125

Part of me thinks the word "fantasize" in the title is referring to the efforts by Elon Musk with the Boring company, Hyperloop, SpaceX intra-earth travel thus I'd like to see arguments for why that is when in fact Boring company is making non-stop progress given how busy Musk is and SpaceX constantly advancing the edge of what is possible with space tech, fantasy? Not one bit.

"Musk" was not mentioned or even alluded to in the piece, so maybe it's not a good idea to try to shoehorn the man into every situation.

Also, wrt both Boring Company and Hyperloop, "fantasy" is exactly the word to describe them. Outlandish projects, with a lot of buzz and PR but no sense or reason and many real problems, some fatal.

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

#130

Post by soheil »

andrepd wrote: post #129
soheil wrote: post #125

Part of me thinks the word "fantasize" in the title is referring to the efforts by Elon Musk with the Boring company, Hyperloop, SpaceX intra-earth travel thus I'd like to see arguments for why that is when in fact Boring company is making non-stop progress given how busy Musk is and SpaceX constantly advancing the edge of what is possible with space tech, fantasy? Not one bit.

"Musk" was not mentioned or even alluded to in the piece, so maybe it's not a good idea to try to shoehorn the man into every situation. Also, wrt both Boring Company and Hyperloop, "fantasy" is exactly the word to describe them. Outlandish projects, with a lot of buzz and PR but no sense or reason and many real problems, some fatal.

He's been in the news almost constantly talking about both those projects and just announced a milestone with the Boring company, so I don't think it is completely out there to believe the author might have been referring to Musk's efforts. After all you think both those projects by Musk are outlandish and would use the word "fantasy" to describe them maybe so did the author, but forgot to mention Musk specifically or chose not to for whatever reason. Suffice it to say I don't think they are fantasies at all and not sure why people keep characterizing such Herculean efforts that require so much will and drive as such and are so keen to so easily dismiss them instead of admiring them.
Post reply on HN