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

The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

practical.engineering

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 216 posts

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#141

Post by Animats »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #84
schlauerfox wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're literally right now building a huge high speed rail project that is planned to link san diego to san francisco through LA, bakersfield and fresno. Progress is made on it daily. https://www.youtube.com/CAHighSpeedRail

Progress is made on it daily? Great. How soon can I ride it?

Caltrain, from SF to SJ, is part of the California high speed rail system, and you can ride it right now. It's now electrified at 25KV, welded rail, concrete ties, and compatible with high speed rail. The Stadler trains are capable of 125MPH but are run slower because there are so many stations.

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#142

Post by Spooky23 »

tjwebbnorfolk wrote: post #89
gorfian_robot wrote: post #11

Being from LA, I am used to a water system that works without needing power. I think most of CA is like that. It was a surprise to lose the water back east when the power went out during a storm.

We do not lose water on the east coast when the power goes out

It depends where you are. Most cities in the Northeast you are correct. But coastal areas, big swaths of New Jersey and Long Island IIRC are definitely dependent on power. Towns with water towers usually pump it from the ground.

Alot of suburbs that can't or won't hook into city supplies will sometimes need more active measures to filter their water as well.

Sanitary sewers are heavily dependent on power.

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#143

Post by baggy_trough »

schlauerfox wrote: post #76
strongpigeon wrote: post #16

Sometimes it feels like the US has lost its appetite for grand structural projects like that. Maybe it’s just that I’m unaware of them and that impression is the result of survival bias, but given how impossibly hard it is to just build anything where I live (Seattle), I’m not so sure.

We're literally right now building a huge high speed rail project that is planned to link san diego to san francisco through LA, bakersfield and fresno. Progress is made on it daily. https://www.youtube.com/CAHighSpeedRail

That may be true for some twisted definition of "building". Most people would say the money is simply being wasted by bureaucrats, consultancies, etc.

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#144

Post by testing22321 »

schlauerfox wrote: post #76
strongpigeon wrote: post #16

Sometimes it feels like the US has lost its appetite for grand structural projects like that. Maybe it’s just that I’m unaware of them and that impression is the result of survival bias, but given how impossibly hard it is to just build anything where I live (Seattle), I’m not so sure.

We're literally right now building a huge high speed rail project that is planned to link san diego to san francisco through LA, bakersfield and fresno. Progress is made on it daily. https://www.youtube.com/CAHighSpeedRail

Rejoice. It will be the world’s slowest and most expensive “high speed” rail.

So slow, in fact, many countries have faster regular rail.

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#145

Post by bronson »

kjkjadksj wrote: post #109
vondur wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Owens valley is basically dried up from the water that LA takes. It's interesting as you drive in the towns in the Valley and you see all the LA Department of Water and Power offices over 200 miles from Los Angeles. The courts had to force the LA DWP to quit taking too much water from the streams that feed Mono Lake as it was in danger of drying out.

It isn’t dried up, they maintain a certain water level in the various lakes.

The lake is completely dried up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owens_Lake And other lakes in the area are in really bad shape.

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#146

Post by mono442 »

macNchz wrote: post #33
gorfian_robot wrote: post #11

Being from LA, I am used to a water system that works without needing power. I think most of CA is like that. It was a surprise to lose the water back east when the power went out during a storm.

The only places I've heard of losing water during power outages are houses that use a private well (no power, no well pump), which would be the case anywhere. Municipal water systems may or may not use power to provide pressure, but are going to have generator power outside of the most severe outages.

Apartment buildings often have pumps to increase pressure in the basement. Without power, the higher floors lose water.

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#147

Post by coryrc »

kenhwang wrote: post #99
coryrc wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almonds are climate-appropriate product and valuable. Alfalfa can cheaply be grown off rainwater in the Midwest and it alone frees up sufficient water.

The problem is alfalfa is expensive to transport (heavy due to desired moisture content). So while it can be cheaply grown in the Midwest, it can't be cheaply transported from the Midwest to where buyers of alfalfa are (typically overseas). Alfalfa is also a staple for crop rotation, so any farming operation will still grow some alfalfa to maintain rotation for good soil health (or during bad condition seasons since…

> it can't be cheaply transported from the Midwest to where buyers of alfalfa are

Trains.

Alfalfa isn't the only alternative, and they should switch to higher-value crops anyway. They would if they had to pay for water. We simply need to charge everybody for water usage.

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#148

Post by willturman »

actionfromafar wrote: post #12
KerrAvon wrote: post #9

If anyone wants a deep dive on this subject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_Desert

Or another kind of take: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071315/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_8... (Chinatown)

Or another kind of take:

Land of Little Rain by Mary Hunter Austin

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/91707.The_Land_of_Little...

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#149

Post by coryrc »

com2kid wrote: post #106
coryrc wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not an insane engineering achievement. It's just a normal one, because nobody else has floating bridges, nobody else needed it. It's also years late and costs 10x more than it should. It's also the wrong stupid technology. The trains are constrained on space because of the low-floor bullshit. It's the longest light rail in the country, it's too fucking long and slow. Even if we fully built out ST3 it can't h…

> No, it's not an insane engineering achievement. It's just a normal one, because nobody else has floating bridges, nobody else needed it. It's also years late and costs 10x more than it should. Your other points aside - Doing something no one else has ever done is the definition of an engineering achievement. There isn't a set of best practices. There aren't a bunch of off the shelf parts, there aren't any contracto…

I said it was, just not an "insane" one. It's not the Hoover Dam. Trains get on to boats all the time. It's innovation.

Oh yeah, and we hamstring ourselves because every extra property can only be used for "affordable" housing and we paid top dollar for it, then limit how much it can be used and tie up prime property which could have been used for more purposes. Gee, why is everything so expensive!?

Re: The Los Angeles Aqueduct Is Wild

#150

Post by oatmeal1 »

strongpigeon wrote: post #16

Sometimes it feels like the US has lost its appetite for grand structural projects like that. Maybe it’s just that I’m unaware of them and that impression is the result of survival bias, but given how impossibly hard it is to just build anything where I live (Seattle), I’m not so sure.

The grand projects the US has embarked on have been completed using unethical means and without regard for real environmental consequences.
Post reply on HN