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

Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

caltrain.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 305 posts

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#141

Post by gdudeman »

defrost wrote: post #51
ssuds wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking of BART, this story is priceless: https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/bart-seat-slasher-hur... The firm that reupholstered damaged BART seats in the ‘80s paid people to slash them so they’d get more business.

I love these kinds of true snippets of general security history: It was estimated that "possibly 85 percent of the more than 7,000 BART train cushions damaged since August 1979" was the work of this company, the Examiner reported at the time. All said and done, BART had paid the company $115,000 for the repairs, a total of about $339,128 in today's money. Always follow the money.

Under $50 per cushion repair in today’s money seems super cheap!

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#142

Post by jeffbee »

erikgaas wrote: post #133
jeffbee wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4th & King has much better connections to transit and neighborhoods, and I hope they never build that tunnel.

Much better really? Looking at the muni map, pretty much all transit clusters around downtown. And bart doesn't even stop at 4th and King. You have to go to Millbrae for a close-ish transfer. Added to that the transit center is very close to the ferry building. And then you have golden gate transit. And it's a hub that has tons of space to accommodate a ton of transfers. https://www.sfmta.com/maps/muni-service-map

From Salesforce you can go up to the street and get the 38, granted. But to connect with BART or Muni Metro you are walking 2 blocks. At Caltrain you can get the N or T right across from the end of the platform, or board the 15, 30, or 25 bus. The T transfers to BART at Powell, with significant subterranean walking. And for trips within SF you might be closer to your destination starting from Caltrain. You'd crawl through a tunnel to Salesforce to be in Downtown/SoMa, a place everyone wants to leave?

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#143

Post by dpierce9 »

lacker wrote: post #53

They claim that "Caltrain is running its service on 100% renewable energy", but they are connected to the same grid as everyone else. It doesn't really make sense to say, half of our electricity is green, so customer X is renewable, but customer Y is not renewable.

Power is pooled. If I buy from a supplier or group of suppliers that (1) procures only from renewable resources (2) isn’t reselling power from non renewable sources, (3) hasn’t sold the power more than once, and (4) is capable of providing my energy demands at any given time, then I am buying green power from the pool. It doesn’t matter if the actual electrons come from Ng or coal because I bought enough for the pool (the electrons I added to the pool will be used by someone else if I am using ng electrons).

Not 100% sure this is how Caltrain works but the fact that everyone is physically using the same pool does not imply that you cannot be 100% renewable if you buy from suppliers to the pool with the above properties.

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#144

Post by timewizard »

tbrownaw wrote: post #135
timewizard wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> more than 20 years to get here due to environmental reviews How thorough were they being? > We (as Californians) have GOT to do better than this! We pay more taxes than anyone else in the country. /We/ are doing our part. The administration needs to be held accountable. > We have got to cut the red tape and properly fund projects. We need to light a fire under the administration and someone needs to take a wrecking…

> /We/ are doing our part. The administration needs to be held accountable. ... By the electorate, who clearly aren't doing their part if things like this keep happening.

Other than going down to the assembly and yelling what do you propose? We could call the representatives, recall the representatives, create a ballot measure, or vote differently next time.

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#145

Post by dcrazy »

joeblubaugh wrote: post #118
saagarjha wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, BART director is an elected position? Why don't I get to vote on it? (Also, while I am biased towards Caltrain, the new trains beat traffic on 101/280 San Francisco↔San Jose during rush hour).

You do. San Jose’s districts were not up in the most recent election https://www.bart.gov/about/bod/elections

Santa Clara County is not part of the BART District. The extension to downtown San Jose is being funded by VTA as a service-purchase agreement.

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#147

Post by vmladenov »

timewizard wrote: post #127
pm90 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can generally choose what kind of power generation mix you want from a utility. eg I am on a 100% renewable plan.

Out of the 25GW being generated right now only 3GW are renewable. There is a corner where there is more demand from "100% renewable" customers than there actually is available renewable energy. There is no point at which this gets made up.

I’m not sure where your figures are coming from, did you mean at the moment of posting your comment? If you look at the integral over the year, California does decently well[1] on renewables, and the people paying for it help blunt the competitive edge of the tremendous federal subsidies enjoyed by fossil fuels.

[1]https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/califo...

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#148

Post by dpierce9 »

timewizard wrote: post #127
pm90 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can generally choose what kind of power generation mix you want from a utility. eg I am on a 100% renewable plan.

Out of the 25GW being generated right now only 3GW are renewable. There is a corner where there is more demand from "100% renewable" customers than there actually is available renewable energy. There is no point at which this gets made up.

There are two views of this.

The first is that at any given point in time, my instantaneous energy use is offset by renewables.

The second is that over some period of time (e.g., one month) my aggregate energy use is offset by renewables.

The second is MUCH easier. When people say things are 100% renewable, I generally think they mean the second thing. This is a bit of a fudge (not wrong but not 100% level).

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#149

Post by dcrazy »

jeffbee wrote: post #126
erikgaas wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other important implication is how Caltrain could be routed through underground tunnels to Salesforce transit center. 4th and king isn't super nice and, correct me if I'm wrong, but it isn't well connected to other modes of transport. Maybe some muni buses.

4th & King has much better connections to transit and neighborhoods, and I hope they never build that tunnel.

This is certainly a take. Getting anywhere except SOMA startupland from 4th and King is a minimum 15 minute ride on the T or N.

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#150

Post by Groxx »

fsckboy wrote: post #131

> regenerative braking on the new trains is generating and sending back to the electric grid approximately 23% of the energy consumed by the system does this make sense? let's round that 23 up to 25%, and say brake energy regeneration is 100% efficient (it's not): one quarter of the energy put into the system comes back out? city driving in a car, you might have your foot on the brake 25% of the time (yes, that's not…

"rolling very far unpowered" is like the entire point of rail systems
Post reply on HN