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

Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 181 posts

Re: Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

#21

Post by cabaalis »

jonas21 wrote: post #8

> The report’s authors estimated the initial cost of protecting the study area to be $78 million, based on the premise that water levels around Wilmington would rise 2 feet by 2050. That's a drop in the bucket compared to Amtrak's $38 billion maintenance backlog or the $13 billion Hudson tunnel project. Out of all the potential effects of climate change, this seems like one of the least worrisome -- we even know how…

> based on the premise that water levels around Wilmington would rise 2 feet by 2050.

I'm curious. I've been hearing about the expected effects of climate change for many years. At least since ~2005 or 2006. Are there any predictions of conditions in 2000, or 2020, which have panned out as predicted?

Re: Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

#22

Post by zachrose »

I was on a road trip throughout a lot of different parts of America last month. A park ranger in Big Bend told me that a tributary creek of the Rio Grande was a hundred feet wide, when normally you can just jump over it. A lakeside highway rest area in North Carolina was flooded up to a permanently mounted bench and trash can.

Re: Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

#23

Post by pavel_lishin »

13of40 wrote: post #17
ams6110 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amtrak is hands-down the worst passenger rail service I've ever used, out of services in four different countries. I will say I've never used Amtrak in the Northeast which I understand is somewhat better than the rest of the country, but that's not saying much.

I've only used it on the west coast, but it seems like the service, cleanliness, etc. are comparable to European and Asian trains, but because the Amtrak trains are super slow and the distances here are so much greater, riding anywhere on it is a terrible experience. Not to mention the fact that it's almost as expensive as flying. (Just checked and it would cost me $79 to fly to Portland from Seattle and $53 to take…

> (Just checked and it would cost me $79 to fly to Portland from Seattle and $53 to take the train. Kind of a no-brainer.)

I agree, but as someone who hates flying, and is very bothered by TSA's production, I would hands-down take the train over the plane in almost every circumstance.

Re: Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

#25

Post by lowercased »

13of40 wrote: post #17
ams6110 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amtrak is hands-down the worst passenger rail service I've ever used, out of services in four different countries. I will say I've never used Amtrak in the Northeast which I understand is somewhat better than the rest of the country, but that's not saying much.

I've only used it on the west coast, but it seems like the service, cleanliness, etc. are comparable to European and Asian trains, but because the Amtrak trains are super slow and the distances here are so much greater, riding anywhere on it is a terrible experience. Not to mention the fact that it's almost as expensive as flying. (Just checked and it would cost me $79 to fly to Portland from Seattle and $53 to take…

> Just checked and it would cost me $79 to fly to Portland from Seattle and $53 to take the train

Baggage? Taking one or two bags up to 50lbs each on Amtrak looks to be always included.

Re: Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

#26

Post by peterhj »

hprotagonist wrote: post #4

Even a decade ago, some long stretches through connecticut reminded me a lot of the tramway sequence in Spirited Away : https://vimeo.com/91985775

In the Bay Area today, a section of Amtrak's Capital Corridor passes through the salt ponds and the Baylands marshes which is also quite reminiscent.

Re: Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

#27

Post by koops »

cabaalis wrote: post #21
jonas21 wrote: post #8

> The report’s authors estimated the initial cost of protecting the study area to be $78 million, based on the premise that water levels around Wilmington would rise 2 feet by 2050. That's a drop in the bucket compared to Amtrak's $38 billion maintenance backlog or the $13 billion Hudson tunnel project. Out of all the potential effects of climate change, this seems like one of the least worrisome -- we even know how…

> based on the premise that water levels around Wilmington would rise 2 feet by 2050. I'm curious. I've been hearing about the expected effects of climate change for many years. At least since ~2005 or 2006. Are there any predictions of conditions in 2000, or 2020, which have panned out as predicted?

I don't know about sea level rise prediction accuracy, but temperature "hindcasts" hold up pretty well:

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-m...

Re: Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

#28

Post by AnimalMuppet »

13of40 wrote: post #17
ams6110 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amtrak is hands-down the worst passenger rail service I've ever used, out of services in four different countries. I will say I've never used Amtrak in the Northeast which I understand is somewhat better than the rest of the country, but that's not saying much.

I've only used it on the west coast, but it seems like the service, cleanliness, etc. are comparable to European and Asian trains, but because the Amtrak trains are super slow and the distances here are so much greater, riding anywhere on it is a terrible experience. Not to mention the fact that it's almost as expensive as flying. (Just checked and it would cost me $79 to fly to Portland from Seattle and $53 to take…

Why is that a no-brainer? In Seattle, first you have to get to the airport. Sea-Tac isn't exactly in Seattle. Depending on where you're coming from, King Street may be easier to reach.

Then there's the bit about arriving at the airport 2 hours before, in order to pass through security. Yeah, you can probably cheat on the two hours, depending on how long security lines tend to be at Sea-Tac. Still, it's a chunk of time you don't have to spend when you take the train.

Roll all that together, and I'm not sure that the train is much slower. And it costs less, and the scenery is better. So from where I sit, it doesn't look like a no-brainer at all.

Have I missed something?

Re: Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

#29

Post by donarb »

13of40 wrote: post #17
ams6110 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amtrak is hands-down the worst passenger rail service I've ever used, out of services in four different countries. I will say I've never used Amtrak in the Northeast which I understand is somewhat better than the rest of the country, but that's not saying much.

I've only used it on the west coast, but it seems like the service, cleanliness, etc. are comparable to European and Asian trains, but because the Amtrak trains are super slow and the distances here are so much greater, riding anywhere on it is a terrible experience. Not to mention the fact that it's almost as expensive as flying. (Just checked and it would cost me $79 to fly to Portland from Seattle and $53 to take…

I'd gladly pay $79 to take the train since I don't have to go through that silly TSA crap at the airport.

Re: Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor

#30

Post by sailfast »

> Water levels around Wilmington would rise 2 feet by 2050. That reflects the median of possible warming scenarios

2 feet is the median!? And things continue to accelerate?

I thought I followed climate change issues but somehow did not know that in most people's lifetimes sea levels will rise multiple feet. I would've thought folks would be more... concerned? The maps of New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut look like they are going to cost us billions to trillions to mitigate between now and 2100.

Post reply on HN