|
Title: Bullet Trains Post by: chovy on November 19, 2007, 01:17:27 AM Quote The electrically powered bullet trains would cost an estimated $30 billion to establish and could get riders from San Francisco to Los Angeles in two-and-a-half hours, reaching speeds of 220 mph. http://www.gilroydispatch.com/news/contentview.asp?c=101497 Sure will be nice if and when people want a bullet train. I personally think it would be great, but would need to go through santa cruz to santa clara too. more recent account (http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=1593&topicId=21355&docId=l:701759603) Because they run on electricity, the trains themselves will not pollute. Once the electricity grid is powered by the sun, then there won't be any. Title: Re: Bullet Trains Post by: Major Zee Lee on November 19, 2007, 03:57:54 AM Well... after 40 years of experience in Japan, and after 30 years of experience in Europe, high velocity trains are a seasoned and dependable technology. They're unbeatable over distances which imply less than three hours of travel time. Which at current commercial speeds means 600 to 700 miles. Whenever the high velocity train arrives, airplane routes doing the same service lose between 40 and 60% of passengers; and it's a distance where railroad is clearly more proficent in energy/passenger/mile than airplane.
It would be great if the USA began implementing this technology in urban corridors like those in East and West coast. It would save energy and pollution and likely would increase productivity as it's far easier and cheaper to implement wireless technology in HVT than on airplane -so the business passenger is able to work with his laptop while he/she travels. And that's not future technology, it's what you get in Europe now... Title: Re: Bullet Trains Post by: chovy on November 19, 2007, 08:24:24 AM totally on board.
Title: Re: Bullet Trains Post by: allpoints on November 19, 2007, 02:52:41 PM I'd like to see a nuclear powered train system with a single power plant electrifying a lot of track.
Sure, ~70% of France's electricity is nuclear, so the TGV is a nuclear train, but bullet trains could be run at the same economies as intercity freight, subways, and cable cars if it's all based on the same dedicated power source. Both the East and West coast corridors of the US could benefit from an integrated nuclear rail. Nuclear power is expensive, but not so much in comparison to the energy/pollution costs of moving freight. I'd like to see if it would be justified from an economic perspective. Title: Re: Bullet Trains Post by: chovy on November 19, 2007, 03:03:00 PM Me too, minus the nukes of course ;)
Title: Re: Bullet Trains Post by: allpoints on November 19, 2007, 03:58:42 PM Me too, minus the nukes of course ;) :D Fusion would be better ;) Title: Re: Bullet Trains Post by: chovy on November 19, 2007, 04:03:11 PM why?
Title: Re: Bullet Trains Post by: allpoints on November 19, 2007, 04:26:37 PM Helium is a less troublesome byproduct than radioactive waste, IMHO. Too bad fusion is still not viable as an energy source.
Title: Re: Bullet Trains Post by: chovy on November 19, 2007, 05:15:56 PM oh, sure ... instead of nuclear.
Powered by SMF 1.1.5 |
SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC
Joomla Bridge by JoomlaHacks.com |