Comments by "David H" (@DavidHalko) on "Are High-Speed Trains a Political Scam? - VisualEconomik EN" video.
-
7
-
6
-
2
-
1
-
@monoblock. - use H2, CO2 concerns evaporate
Rail is a great technology for moving heavy cargo.
Trains get stuck in traffic jams because a single rail line is half duplex, while roads are built full duplex.
In the US, roads are used heavily at night for cargo, that comes from sea, air, and train ports. If roads are not heavily used in Europe at night, that is an inefficient use, causing congestion problems during the day for normal human travel.
It makes sense that heavy items travel by rail, goods travel by night, normal human transportation occurs during daylight hours when the average person is awake.
Honestly, automobiles by road should be disappearing in another 40 years, for better autonomous options where we can move through the air & not be so tied to roads. We need to look to the 2100’s and not the 1800’s for human travel options.
1
-
@christopherwaggoner7125 - “we subsidize highways” - which are needed for military transport, so people are using military infrastructure.
“Train… running every couple mins or so” - people don’t need to travel in those quantities between cities in places like the US.
Once people are dropped off in a city, there needs to be transport to other places around the city. Where people live in the suburbs, there needs to be transport from homes to a HSR rail. People buy cars to get to the places the rail does not go, so that private infrastructure will not go away. I have to pay to park my car somewhere, to get the the local public transport. The time from 3x public transportation systems vs the time for the car, when I had the choice I chose to just use the car since it is faster & I can come/go when I want.
In the end, this infrastructure is all a black hole. Most neighboring cities are merely 2 hours by car, so why bother to use rail?
Rail is 1800’s technology. Maybe something like light trams & monorails, which are used at airports, where there is constant local transportation. The future will be air, where expensive land will not take up by transportation. The air is 21st century travel, since expensive rail & roads will not need to be maintained.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@marcbuisson2463 - “absolutely not the case. Decent transit is not a money pit”
Watch the video. Money pit.
“It’s just the people that make the most money out of it…”
Then raise the prices on the tickets, to accommodate the cost, so it is not a money pit. Proper costing encourages innovation. Proper costing also controls pricing of the land surrounding the metro (people do the cost-benefit analysis.)
“In Paris…”
It is already built. I understand standardization benefits. Many short stops where the trains remain in the densely populated area seem to be used well there! Keeping those lines purposefully built, with connections from elsewhere via other technologies was smart.
There is a cost to ripping & replacing railroad ties, rails, wheels, trains, etc. Extremely expensive. A hidden cost that subsidies hide.
We are in the 2000’s. Lighter & less expensive technology that builds 3D (to consume space in the air) can accomplish a lot. Newer technology may be able to add higher degrees of privacy, as well (to discourage pick pockets.)
Maybe other competing older technology can achieve similar goals.
I am a fan of Gondolas, used in places where retrofitting trains is unfeasible. Add more & remove some as needed on always running lines. Low infrastructure & power requirements, cars provide privacy. Redundant cables for safety, like elevators.
Above ground tunnels joining buildings in urban areas with walkways & moving walkways are nice. Used those before. Ticket usage on static & moving walkways for above ground tunnel maintenance.
1
-
1