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

181–190 of 305 posts

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#181

Post by jacobjjacob »

whyenot wrote: post #34

It's great, but it took more than 20 years to get here due to environmental reviews and shaky funding. ...and this was just re-fitting an existing, relatively short stretch of track! We (as Californians) have GOT to do better than this! There are huge infrastructure projects that we need to undertake in the coming years. We have got to cut the red tape and properly fund projects.

People want infrastructure and then when it gets built, they say it’s too expensive and takes too long. Valid criticisms but many throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#182

Post by jer0me »

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.

Yes, electrons are electrons are electrons. But customer X is paying for the renewable sources and customer Y is paying for the non-renewable sources, so customer X can say that they are renewable.

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#183

Post by basiccalendar74 »

ghouse wrote: post #165
Animats wrote: post #136

That's good to hear. Especially since the electric trains accelerate so much faster than the Diesel ones did. Have you been next to one at takeoff? They're going about 40MPH before the train has traveled its own length. Probably limited more by standing passengers than power. Most of the energy used accelerating is recovered at the next stop, so the fast acceleration does not consume much energy.

> Most of the energy used accelerating is recovered at the next stop, so the fast acceleration does not consume much energy. Not "most," but a lot. From the article: > regenerative braking on the new trains is generating and sending back to the electric grid approximately 23% of the energy consumed by the system

it is 23% of total energy. if you consider only acceleration energy, it will be much larger percentage, probably 80% (as in electric cars).

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#184

Post by rsanek »

winrid wrote: post #81
benced wrote: post #58

This literally doesn’t matter. The energy consumption of a train is trivial compared to displacing cars. If there was a way to trade this savings for higher speed, ridership, or frequency, it would be worth it. (If there’s not, this is a free win and yay - but it’s the wrong focus)

At least it's a win for air quality for the people that live near the tracks. You could smell and taste the old diesels, was pretty annoying.

really? how close were you living? i lived for years just 3 houses over from the tracks and never even smelled the trains. definitely heard them tho

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#185

Post by presentation »

blintz wrote: post #3

The electric Caltrain is so wonderful. It’s way quieter, the cars have nicer interiors, and it is running faster and more frequently than before. Between this, the new BART cars (also much quieter!), and Muni hitting a reliability & satisfaction records, there’s really a transit renaissance going on in the Bay Area. I really hope we can keep this going!

The train itself was quiet when I rode it from SF to Palo Alto but they were honking the horn almost nonstop… so much for peace and quiet.

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#186

Post by quantified »

Dalewyn wrote: post #163
timewizard wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[flagged]

Do you mean they won't at least check your professed name and address?

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#187

Post by quantified »

rsanek wrote: post #184
winrid wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least it's a win for air quality for the people that live near the tracks. You could smell and taste the old diesels, was pretty annoying.

really? how close were you living? i lived for years just 3 houses over from the tracks and never even smelled the trains. definitely heard them tho

I'd breathe it as I biked alongside. Maybe prevailing wind helped your air quality.

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#188

Post by sofixa »

pm90 wrote: post #17
blintz wrote: post #3

The electric Caltrain is so wonderful. It’s way quieter, the cars have nicer interiors, and it is running faster and more frequently than before. Between this, the new BART cars (also much quieter!), and Muni hitting a reliability & satisfaction records, there’s really a transit renaissance going on in the Bay Area. I really hope we can keep this going!

To unlock the true value of these systems the BA needs to be forced to increase density of their cities though. We need SF proper to look more like Manhattan.

It doesn't have to look like Manhattan. Even medium density (5-10 stories) will be enough in terms of housing provided, and is cheaper to build, and doesn't risk making the street level inhospitable (if nothing is human scale and there's no sunlight on the street, there will be less people there, making it feel or become dangerous).

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#189

Post by ninetyninenine »

Johnny555 wrote: post #179
ninetyninenine wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I'm saying you can HAVE all 3 of those things PLUS a metro. Hence the term BOTH

Where in Tokyo do you have easy access to transit and a large suburban house? My brother in law moved from Tokyo to where he could buy a house and yard in Chiba Japan, it's around 900 sq ft with a "yard" that's smaller than the deck on the back of my house. And it's still a 20 minute bike ride + 90 minute train ride to his job in Tokyo. I don't know if you've been to many homes in Walnut creek, but a small attached h…

I lived in the bay area my entire life. You don't have to go to walnut creek to see suburbia. That ugly shit is everywhere.

Public transit in Tokyo is largely underground. Density is irrelevant. If you have high density or low density above ground, this factor is completely orthogonal to whatever you build Underground. Understand?

>I don't think I'm overstating when I say that American style suburbs with large lots and large homes are not conducive effective public transit.

You, in fact, didn't say ANYTHING related to this matter. You simply stated it's not conducive without mentioning why it's not conducive. I disagree. You can still build it because what's above ground has nothing to do with what's below ground.

The fact of the matter is, once you build this, barring zoning restrictions, the density should follow. Right now the bay area is a political battle ground where rich people effectively price out poor people with zoning restrictions. It's a class based war where a luxury you want is impacting the lives of people less fortunate than you.

If you let the bay grow naturally and fairly then people with your "wants" should move to the country side.

Suburbia is also not sustainable for the environment. It's why greenhouse gases per capita in the US is the worst in the world.

Re: Caltrain's electric fleet more efficient than expected

#190

Post by frosted-flakes »

astrange wrote: post #48
lswainemoore wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why so negative? Given that the served population is conservatively a quarter of either of those areas, doesn't seem like a fair comparison. More to the point, I've been favorably impressed with the transit options since moving here, and in terms of reliability it's been better than NYC, though obviously there are fewer trains/branches. I'd love to see BART open later, like NYC, but even Tokyo trains stop at midnight…

NYC is more or less the only system in the world that runs all night like that. It makes it very hard to do maintenance.

And NYC can do that because most of it's lines have three or four tracks.
Post reply on HN