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

Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

design-milk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 276 posts

Re: Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

#141

Post by exegete »

wkat4242 wrote: post #135
morsch wrote: post #114

I agree it looks nice, but dressing up an airport in sustainable materials won't materially change the fact that a flight Boston - NYC (one-way!) blasts through ~0.7t[1] of CO2eq of your yearly budget of 1-3t[2]. It won't change the fact, but I'm sure it'll make it easier to forget or ignore. [1] https://co2.myclimate.org/en/portfolios?calculation_id=75775... [2] e.g. https://ieep.eu/publications/carbon-inequality-in…

It boggles my mind why the US doesn't simply offer high-speed trains for easy distances like those. That whole Northeast is just screaming for it with easily managable distances. Boston, NYC, Philly, Baltimore, DC.. All easily high-speed-trainable. Boston to Portland too, for that matter. Instead of spending 1 hour queueing at the airport, spend one hour on the train and you're there.

It’s being planned, but projects like these are never certain: https://secretnyc.co/high-speed-train-nyc-to-boston/

Re: Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

#142

Post by dataengineer56 »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #130
dataengineer56 wrote: post #127

Does Portland airport have the same issues with homeless people as other major US airports?

Tons of US cities have issues with large homeless populations, but it being a problem for airports too is news to me.

O'Hare has a real problem, it was alarming to see when I was waiting at the baggage carousel.

Re: Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

#144

Post by wkat4242 »

Sparkyte wrote: post #99
swalling wrote: post #66

The wood is pretty, but as someone who uses this terminal, the key improvement is that they raised the ceiling and significantly increased the amount of natural light. Here's a good photo of what it looked like before: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Portland_Internation... The major functional drawback is that wayfinding for both arrivals and departures is much worse. The overall flow of foot traffic is way…

I believe the other improvement people don't pay attention to is the new TSA scanners you don't have to take your laptop out.

You're lucky you get to use those.

In Holland they had those at Schiphol Airport and we were able to leave liquids in our bags and the 100ml limit was removed. But the EU ordered it to be reintroduced because they wanted the rules the same within Europe.

Edit: This previously said we could no longer keep the laptops in our bags but this part was not affected, I've amended this post to avoid confusion.

Re: Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

#145

Post by wkat4242 »

paranoidrobot wrote: post #102
Sparkyte wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the other improvement people don't pay attention to is the new TSA scanners you don't have to take your laptop out.

Sounds like the same scanner tech that has been deployed at some Australian airports. Flying out of Melbourne 18 months ago and I'm getting ready to take my laptop and water bottle out. Nope, firmly told to keep it all in my bag. They still pulled me aside, but had a cool 3D model of the inside of my bag. Of course they ruin the efficiency advantage of that by then putting us through body scanners. If you're not in t…

Ahh is that why. I'm pretty heavy too and I've been groped way too much in Amsterdam too :(

Re: Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

#146

Post by Underpass9041 »

wkat4242 wrote: post #144
Sparkyte wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the other improvement people don't pay attention to is the new TSA scanners you don't have to take your laptop out.

You're lucky you get to use those. In Holland they had those at Schiphol Airport and we were able to leave liquids in our bags and the 100ml limit was removed. But the EU ordered it to be reintroduced because they wanted the rules the same within Europe. Edit: This previously said we could no longer keep the laptops in our bags but this part was not affected, I've amended this post to avoid confusion.

A couple of days ago this was not the case, they use CT machines and did not require anything to be taken out of bags.

Re: Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

#147

Post by fakedang »

jdenning wrote: post #100
rootusrootus wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very happy they have a direct route to LHR. I wish BA was more pleasant to fly, but at least they're using 787s for the route. > they invented TSA and stopped letting non-passengers into the terminals I'd like them to uninvent that. I so fondly remember when family could take you to the gate, and meet you when you came home. Now that planes have impenetrable doors, I don't think we need to keep up the absurd leve…

I really wish we could get rid of the TSA, but I don't think it'll ever happen. It's not about security, the whole thing is a jobs program (and always was IMO).

I think studies have shown that the TSA sucks at threat detection, but is a significant factor in threat aversion in the first place.

It sucks but in the current world we live in, the alternative is travel bans placed against many countries a fraction of whose citizens have a propensity for terrorism. That would include a bunch of American allies and even the US, incidentally.

Re: Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

#148

Post by wkat4242 »

Underpass9041 wrote: post #146
wkat4242 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're lucky you get to use those. In Holland they had those at Schiphol Airport and we were able to leave liquids in our bags and the 100ml limit was removed. But the EU ordered it to be reintroduced because they wanted the rules the same within Europe. Edit: This previously said we could no longer keep the laptops in our bags but this part was not affected, I've amended this post to avoid confusion.

A couple of days ago this was not the case, they use CT machines and did not require anything to be taken out of bags.

Yeah it's a new EU law that takes effect soon. I'll look it up, one moment.

Edit: Ok oops I was wrong, it was about liquids. This had been relaxed with the new scanners too but it had to be re-tightened on EU orders. https://www.trbusiness.com/regional-news/europe/dutch-airpor...

Re: Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

#149

Post by closewith »

Perz1val wrote: post #124
morsch wrote: post #114

I agree it looks nice, but dressing up an airport in sustainable materials won't materially change the fact that a flight Boston - NYC (one-way!) blasts through ~0.7t[1] of CO2eq of your yearly budget of 1-3t[2]. It won't change the fact, but I'm sure it'll make it easier to forget or ignore. [1] https://co2.myclimate.org/en/portfolios?calculation_id=75775... [2] e.g. https://ieep.eu/publications/carbon-inequality-in…

The carbon emission is not a problem, the imbalance is. When we burn fossil fuels, we use carbon that was stored by dead plants being buried. We take carbon from the ground and dump it in the atmosphere. Plants take carbon from the atmosphere. If were to bury the equivalent amount of wood, we would be equal. Buried wood is not useful, but building from it also locks the carbon somewhere else that isn't an atmosphere.…

1 kilo of wood sequesters (temporarily for the most part) about 2kg CO2 equivalent, so for the GP's example of a single seat one-way from Boston - NYC, you'd need to sequester 350kg of wood.

To sequester the ~800 Mt of CO2 emitted by aviation annually, you'd need to sequester about 400 billion kilograms of wood. So a finite but absurd amount.

Re: Portland airport grows with expansive mass timber roof canopy

#150

Post by bell-cot »

wkat4242 wrote: post #135
morsch wrote: post #114

I agree it looks nice, but dressing up an airport in sustainable materials won't materially change the fact that a flight Boston - NYC (one-way!) blasts through ~0.7t[1] of CO2eq of your yearly budget of 1-3t[2]. It won't change the fact, but I'm sure it'll make it easier to forget or ignore. [1] https://co2.myclimate.org/en/portfolios?calculation_id=75775... [2] e.g. https://ieep.eu/publications/carbon-inequality-in…

It boggles my mind why the US doesn't simply offer high-speed trains for easy distances like those. That whole Northeast is just screaming for it with easily managable distances. Boston, NYC, Philly, Baltimore, DC.. All easily high-speed-trainable. Boston to Portland too, for that matter. Instead of spending 1 hour queueing at the airport, spend one hour on the train and you're there.

Flying has been the preferred travel mode of both the well-to-do and the aspirational for over half a century. Air travel only needs working airplanes, and a relatively simple airport at each end. So, in general, there's ample social pressure to get the job done quickly.

Vs. high-speed trains went out of fashion (in America) well before most people's memories. And their tracks have to be threaded, foot-by-foot, across a landscape which is overflowing with red tape and jurisdictions and NIMBY's and existing infrastructure. Said threading to be planned by yet more politicians and bureaucrats and planners, then done by America's low-functioning construction industry.

Nations with good high-speed rail systems have quite different priorities and local governance structures than America.

Post reply on HN