Europe is investing heavily in trains

Post by xyzzyz » Tue, Apr 12, 2022, 6:30 AM UTC

411111111111111 wrote: post #422

mrtksn wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I checked it out and the number seems about right(like up to 2x but not too much). So, to beat an airplane on fuel efficiency you need to be at least 2 persons on an extremely fuel efficient small car. Surely, the actual costs calculations will need to include the infra and operational costs however if you check the energy consumption per passenger per distance[0], rail transport is always on the more efficient side…

Trains are more efficient, but flights only do the most traveled routes generally, which is why they're usually booked out afaik. The same can't be said about trains usually, as they're also doing the outlying routes It makes flying seem more competitive then it actually is, as trains usually aren't booked relative how much your transportation cost and instead the overall cost to also enable these almost empty routin…

Post by fulafel » Tue, Apr 12, 2022, 6:31 AM UTC

xeeeeeeeeeeenu wrote: post #231

It seems likely that hydrogen will replace diesel in trains. Companies like Alstom[1], PESA[2] and Talgo[3] are developing hydrogen trains. Germany has already started deploying them on a small scale[4], while Poland is planning to[5]. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alstom_Coradia_LINT#iLint [2] - https://fuelcellsworks.com/news/poland-pesa-presented-a-hydr... [3] - https://www.railwaypro.com/wp/talgo-to-launch-…

Post by jwr » Tue, Apr 12, 2022, 6:32 AM UTC

scyzoryk_xyz wrote: post #400

axiomsEnd wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Poland made a huge step back when it comes to trains after 1990 - there is a good book by Karol Trammer "Ostre cięcie" about disastrous cuts. On the other hand - Pendolino is a real step forward, and at least Cracow is trying to improve general quality and invest in intra-city trains, which maybe not the fastest, but still much better than buses or trams.

I highly disagree on Pendolino and I am quite angry about it. It has been around for what, >5 years now? I have still yet to take it because it is so expensive. It’s basically the Concorde of Polish trains - it cost a fortune to build and only rich people take it because it speeds up travel time by ~30%. Meanwhile, standard speed trains, which are still capable of covering the same distances in reasonable time, are l…

Post by mrtksn » Tue, Apr 12, 2022, 6:35 AM UTC

jseban wrote: post #421

mrtksn wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I checked it out and the number seems about right(like up to 2x but not too much). So, to beat an airplane on fuel efficiency you need to be at least 2 persons on an extremely fuel efficient small car. Surely, the actual costs calculations will need to include the infra and operational costs however if you check the energy consumption per passenger per distance[0], rail transport is always on the more efficient side…

> Is the rail infrastructure that much expensive? Building and maintaining one runway at point A and one at point B is obviously much easier than building and maintaining a railroad between them.

Post by mcv » Tue, Apr 12, 2022, 6:37 AM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #312

mcv wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Countries like France and Japan already do use overhead wires" Don't most countries already use these? World wide, a third of all rails is electrified in some way, and for long-distance rail, that's bound to be overhead. Most European rail is electrified. So hydrogen or any other diesel replacement is only relevant for very rural, very sparsely used lines.

If a third of all rail is electrified then two thirds are not. Most of North America's railways are not electrified. Be cautious when looking at statistics on electrification: many results specifically only show electrification of passenger railways.