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

Jellyfish Undersea Roundabout

visitfaroeislands.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–37 of 37 posts

Re: Jellyfish Undersea Roundabout

#31

Post by Symbiote »

darrenf wrote: post #26
Symbiote wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you do, rent the smallest available car. You'll be thankful for it on single-lane tunnels, single-lane (for both directions) roads and so on. This tunnel was fine, a novelty on a relatively long drive. The natural scenery was wonderful.

Or do as I did and just use the buses. Highly reliable IME.

We were four people, and a car gave us more flexibility for hiking. A couple of times we abandoned plans during the drive once we saw the weather and went elsewhere.

But yes, the buses were good too. The others all used them when they wanted to do something different. (I didn't, as I was the only one willing to drive the car.)

Re: Jellyfish Undersea Roundabout

#32

Post by darrenf »

Symbiote wrote: post #31
darrenf wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or do as I did and just use the buses. Highly reliable IME.

We were four people, and a car gave us more flexibility for hiking. A couple of times we abandoned plans during the drive once we saw the weather and went elsewhere. But yes, the buses were good too. The others all used them when they wanted to do something different. (I didn't, as I was the only one willing to drive the car.)

Fair. I was solo :) got plenty of hiking done too and can’t wait to go back

Re: Jellyfish Undersea Roundabout

#33

Post by inigyou »

elcritch wrote: post #23
inigyou wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When stable government collapses they're also going to be involuntary nature reserves.

Not with modern fail-safe designs.

Doesn't have to be a Chernobyl. Fuel leaching into the groundwater works just as well. And nobody has found a way to store those safely without continued maintenance.

Re: Jellyfish Undersea Roundabout

#34

Post by thaumasiotes »

nemomarx wrote: post #30
thaumasiotes wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article says this: > The income from this new tunnel is expected to fund the next tunnel projects on the Faroe Islands. Which seems like something of a rosy description. I tend to agree that this is going to require heavy subsidies. But back of the envelope: - The "whole tunnel project", involving multiple tunnels, is estimated at 260m euros. - One transit one way across the most expensive tunnel is estimated at…

isn't this a tourist attraction? You wouldn't want to estimate with the local population but by visitors or something. https://nors.ku.dk/english/news/2025/tourists-flock-to-the-f... Looks like about 130k visitors a year but I'm sure the tourism board is trying to get that number way up.

Well, they want it to be a tourist attraction. But that's unlikely to work because it's in the Faroe Islands.

The other aspect of that is that while it's perfectly reasonable to expect some share of the residents to use a tunnel twice a day, tourists are going to use it 0-2 times per trip. 130k tourists a year are worth 260k trips a year at the upper end.

Re: Jellyfish Undersea Roundabout

#36

Post by elcritch »

inigyou wrote: post #33
elcritch wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not with modern fail-safe designs.

Doesn't have to be a Chernobyl. Fuel leaching into the groundwater works just as well. And nobody has found a way to store those safely without continued maintenance.

We have plenty of solutions for spent fuel storage as well as recycling fuel now. We just have NIMBY folks who protest it because they’re scared of “nuclear”.

Re: Jellyfish Undersea Roundabout

#37

Post by inigyou »

elcritch wrote: post #36
inigyou wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't have to be a Chernobyl. Fuel leaching into the groundwater works just as well. And nobody has found a way to store those safely without continued maintenance.

We have plenty of solutions for spent fuel storage as well as recycling fuel now. We just have NIMBY folks who protest it because they’re scared of “nuclear”.

Nobody has ever invented one that survives by itself for the long term.
Post reply on HN