"Berang" (berang)
02/09/2019 at 17:55 • Filed to: None
1
20|
"Berang" (berang)
02/09/2019 at 17:55 • Filed to: None | 1
| 20 |
how ru gonna make tren trecks across america - my country 2 big - biggest cunctry is the worl... can’d do it
WilliamsSW
> Berang
02/09/2019 at 18:02 |
|
It’s not that we’re too big it’s that we’re too impatient
kanadanmajava1
> Berang
02/09/2019 at 18:04 |
|
Yeah, long train routes are impossible in large countries.
|
kanadanmajava1
> WilliamsSW
02/09/2019 at 18:10 |
|
But in a train you could fiddle with your smart phone for hours without any take off/landing pauses.
|
WilliamsSW
> kanadanmajava1
02/09/2019 at 18:12 |
|
What could possibly be better than uninterrupted smart phone access?
|
WilliamsSW
> kanadanmajava1
02/09/2019 at 18:13 |
|
Well we have long train routes but no one rides them ( actually they’re full whenever I look)
|
kanadanmajava1
> WilliamsSW
02/09/2019 at 18:17 |
|
Apparently regular people love this. Maybe train marketing people just haven’t yet gotten their priorities s orted out?
Alfalfa
> Berang
02/09/2019 at 18:18 |
|
In one of my middle school history classes, they had this picture in our textbook but with the beer bottles ‘shopped out.
cbell04
> Berang
02/09/2019 at 18:39 |
|
I kind of like that hell on wheels show about laying the tracks.
just-a-scratch
> Berang
02/09/2019 at 22:12 |
|
It’s funny how I don’t see any Chine
se workers in the picture.
facw
> Berang
02/09/2019 at 22:22 |
|
Fun fact, that route was obsolete fairly quickly, and the tracks removed except at the meeting point, because they decided it was better to build a 30 mile bridge across the Great Salt Lake than to make trains climb up to Promontory Summit :
|
facw
> WilliamsSW
02/09/2019 at 22:26 |
|
Regardless of how many people they are booking, those long cross-country trips are big money losers for Amtrak. Getting rid of them would make financial sense, but would probably make Amtrak’s life much harder politically, hindering their ability to do business where rail does make sense.
|
facw
> just-a-scratch
02/09/2019 at 22:34 |
|
I could be wrong, but my impression is that mid- 19th century Utah was not a very welcoming place for non-whites of any stripe. I’m not surprised they’d be omitted from such a celebration, regardless of their contribution to the railroad.
|
WilliamsSW
> facw
02/09/2019 at 22:37 |
|
The whole reason Amtrak exists is because the freight railroads were losing their asses on long-distance rail travel. It was nationalized (!) in the early 1970's.
You know who makes money on long-distance rail travel? No one. Ever.
|
facw
> WilliamsSW
02/09/2019 at 22:56 |
|
Well ever is a bit of stretch. Those passenger railroads were making money (sometimes, a lot of money) prior to the jet age. Now though, long distance trains definitely don’t make sense. For high-speed rail, you generally want your stops to be at least 50 miles apart but you also shouldn’t expect passengers to want to go more than 300 miles (they’d be better off flying at that point).
|
WilliamsSW
> facw
02/09/2019 at 23:06 |
|
Ok, ‘ever’ is a stretch - but the losses pre-date the jet age really. The only times they’ve ever been profitable - anywhere in the world - is when long distance rail has no competition.
One of the issues I have with the GND is the idea that high-speed rail can drastically reduce airline travel. For those <300 mile routes, hell yes, it’s a great idea. But what the hell can replace Chicago-LA? No technology that exists currently.
|
facw
> WilliamsSW
02/09/2019 at 23:19 |
|
Yeah, I really don’t think anything other than aircraft will work for those long distance routes. In theory the hyperloop could, but I think there are a ton of overly optimistic assumptions going to that. Certainly we’d want to see it working well on a shorter route before assuming it can provide trans-continental travel.
|
WilliamsSW
> facw
02/09/2019 at 23:21 |
|
I get why they want to go after it - jet aircraft are a complete shitshow environmentally. But you can’t put the genie back in the box.
I feel like we’re a long way away from hyperloop - but would be cool if it did take off.
|
WilliamsSW
> facw
02/09/2019 at 23:21 |
|
I get why they want to go after it - jet aircraft are a complete shitshow environmentally. But you can’t put the genie back in the box.
I feel like we’re a long way away from hyperloop - but would be cool if it did take off.
|
facw
> WilliamsSW
02/09/2019 at 23:30 |
|
I’m a strong supporter of green policies, but I don’t think bans (for planes or cars) , or even CAFE makes sense. I think you set a carbon target, and set up a cap and trade system with the cap as that target. Make fossil fuel sellers buy the credits for the fuel they sell (seems way easier than trying to measure at the smoke stack/exhaust). Those costs will get passed to consumers and the market will take care of things. It would be a regressive tax, but if the government captures some or all of the money from auctioning credits, it should be possible to use that to lessen the impact. Something should be done about emissions but I’d rather something to nudge consumers(and industry) in the right direction as opposed to heavy-handed bans.
|
WilliamsSW
> facw
02/09/2019 at 23:37 |
|
I agree with all of that - and would add emphasis to this:
It would be a regressive tax, but if the government captures some or all of the money from auctioning credits, it should be possible to use that to lessen the impact
I think this is critical, because just about anything favoring green technology will be regressive initially.
I can’t stand government ‘picking winners’ - regulations should be performance based. ie, ‘reduce emissions to X’ not ‘use this technology’.