Live data from Hacker News

The Boring Company FAQ

boringcompany.com

101–110 of 472 posts

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#101
post #85
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If NYC didn't have a third dimension for transportation (subway and trains), no amount of busses and bikes would fix the soul-destroying traffic. The listed alternatives are all nice, but none of them allow you to move at 125+ mph. We should be able to get to our destination faster, not just with a bit less soul-destruction. Remote work is of course not for every or even most professions, and I don't see why it would…

Tokyo is a much bigger city. They solved the problem by building elevated toll highways. Much simpler solution than digging new holes everywhere and keeping those silly carts running.

OTOH JR Central is in the process of building a tunnel from Tokyo to Nagoya: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chūō_Shinkansen

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#102

I'm more interested in the nuances of tunneling, like how they'll handle water seepage and flooding. Flooding is actually a huge problem with climate change causing larger and more frequent major weather events. After Hurricane Sandy, it took almost a week to reopen the subway tunnels. I can just imagine the kind of kinetic force that'll occur if a sled carrying a car slams into a section that has a few feet of water…

>Any good paints or fabrics or metamaterials that could be used as a tunnel liner that only allow water to wick in one direction (from tunnel internals to surrounding soil)? Thermodynamically impossible without an input of energy. FWIW.

It turns out that most transportation tunnels do in fact have a significant input of energy.

Ventillation to exhaust waste heat is a major concern.

From discussions of net-zero housing in Alaska (Thorstein Chlupp), my understanding is that water tends to flow from hot to cold -- it will condense along a cold surface. A condenser + sump system where some engineering mechanism keeps the inner tunnel wall from remaining at equilibrium temperature with the interior, might work, though how cold that would need to be to keep humidity manageable would be a question. Routing the cold-side air ducts such that they waste heat to the subsurface and draw heat from the tunnel wall might be one approach. Further cooling through water (fresh, sea) is another possibility, though both present significant issues, scarcity of fresh in Los Angeles, and general nastiness of sea,

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#103

When everyone thinks about flying cars, this is a good thought. At least things won't fall in my head when I go out for a burrito.

That's like comparing oranges to apples. And planes, indeed fly over your head all the time; there is probably hundred of thousands of them in the air as we speak - how many of them are falling on your head?

If I have a choice of an autonomous emergency parachutte -deployed landing done by my mid-air broken aircar, and being stuck in the heart of Earth with no air and very high temperature literally feeling like a needle in someone's body, I chose the falling cars.

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#104
post #98

Uhh, this isn't going to be the panacea many are making it out to be here. This will not come close to accommodating the current capacity of freeways. The tunnel is being planned to be 14 feet wide, which is how it suddenly becomes viable. That's around two 'stabilized electric sleds' in one tunnel. Current freeways are 8+ lanes and you'll have to consider how the specifics of group travel are going to be worked out.…

Well hang on. Do we understand the impact of, for example, just a single lane, one-direction tunnel with respect to rush hour traffic in LA? It's like a shunt. Sure, more is better, but we're not talking about replacing freeways. We're looking at a way to improve traffic.

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#105
Part of me keeps waiting for someone with the right clout and means to attack the elephant in the room:

Change the rules of the road.

Our roads can move far more cars per unit time than they do now. This is easy to see if you drive around Los Angeles for a fair amount of time. I drive the 405 corridor with some frequency and I can say it has gotten worst over the last few years.

Yet, the one common theme you see every day consists of these characteristics:

  - Cars driving everywhere at whatever speed they want
  - Cars driving slowly on the left
  - "Synchronized" driving, where two cars drive equally slow side-by-side
  - People who can and want to drive faster have to zig-zag through traffic
  - The carpool lane is inhabited by people who do nor carpool
    Just because a car has more than one person it doesn't mean they are
    carpooling.
  - The carpool lane has buses going slow and sometimes (often) empty
  - No penalty for slowing down when going uphill and causing backup
It's insane, there are no penalties for going slow and causing backups that trigger massive oscillations that lead to the entire freeway going through these nodes where speed grinds down to zero. This wave travels backwards and it can be triggered by slow or insecure drivers. I've seen in time and time again.

If I were to generalize, the rules of the road are not designed or evolved to optimize flow. You can't even say they are optimized for safety because there is nothing safe about a moron going 55 on the fast lane while people are swerving all over the place to get around him.

What we need is a new mentality: Caltrans and CHP need to work together to optimize flow, not get in the way of it. The carpool lane is a disgrace. It takes-up 20 to 25 percent of the road's capacity for no gains whatsoever. We need a layered system where slow drivers get out of the way and don't impede others. I am not saying go full autobahn but there's merit to the idea that slow drivers should not be allowed to impede others. I've watched the 405 grind to a halt because of a few (two or three) drivers who manage to lock-up an area. It always gets worst before it gets better.

Tunnels? Sure. But first fix the real problem.

This is where self driving cars might do an amazing job. We will be able to extract far more capacity out of the existing infrastructure by increasing speeds and layering them from right to left.

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#107

I'm more interested in the nuances of tunneling, like how they'll handle water seepage and flooding. Flooding is actually a huge problem with climate change causing larger and more frequent major weather events. After Hurricane Sandy, it took almost a week to reopen the subway tunnels. I can just imagine the kind of kinetic force that'll occur if a sled carrying a car slams into a section that has a few feet of water…

>Any good paints or fabrics or metamaterials that could be used as a tunnel liner that only allow water to wick in one direction (from tunnel internals to surrounding soil)? Thermodynamically impossible without an input of energy. FWIW.

I'd like to know more about this. Check valves [1] do just this, and they work without energy input, what is the difference ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Check_valve

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#108
post #85
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If NYC didn't have a third dimension for transportation (subway and trains), no amount of busses and bikes would fix the soul-destroying traffic. The listed alternatives are all nice, but none of them allow you to move at 125+ mph. We should be able to get to our destination faster, not just with a bit less soul-destruction. Remote work is of course not for every or even most professions, and I don't see why it would…

Tokyo is a much bigger city. They solved the problem by building elevated toll highways. Much simpler solution than digging new holes everywhere and keeping those silly carts running.

That is still going 3D but without the significant speed increase. Also it is much more beautiful and less noisy to have highways out of sight so that the city is left for people and bikes, as opposed to stacked highways towering over head.

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#109
post #95
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that still taking roads 3D?

What's more expensive and has long term track record success?

Well, given that both tunnels and elevated roads are still being built, the most expensive likely varies depending on the situation. If Musk really reduces the cost of tunneling by 10x, that calculus will shift in the direction of tunneling, obviously.

Dirt roads are extremely cheap and have been around forever. That doesn't make them the best choice in a modern society.

Re: The Boring Company FAQ

#110

This does not answer the most obvious and important question: why not invest in public transport? It's boring but it will work.

Because the decision whether or not to invest in public transport is a political one. A private company can't force society to allocate more tax money to public transport infrastructure. It can, however, provide more attractive infrastructure options, which seems to be what the Boring company is trying to do.
Post reply on HN