PeakOil is You
THE Private transportation after PO Thread (merged)
Re: Personal Transportation Solution ?
by Mark_i » Sat 14 Jan 2006, 14:29:13
Extreme-Carpooling in Malaysia
-
Mark_i - Peat
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Sun 09 May 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Bavaria, Germany - for the Americans here: this is in Europa ;o)
Re: Transportation - PO
by cube » Sat 14 Jan 2006, 18:46:38
Looks like a greenie's wet dream.
Unfortunately 2/3 rds of American adults are obese so the chances that Velomobiles will be the prefured mode of transport in the future is how should I say this...rather slim!
Anyways keep the ideas coming...I learned a new word today...."Velomobile".
This is for the Star Wars fans: Badonkadonk Land Cruiser/Tank
Unfortunately 2/3 rds of American adults are obese so the chances that Velomobiles will be the prefured mode of transport in the future is how should I say this...rather slim!
Anyways keep the ideas coming...I learned a new word today...."Velomobile".
This is for the Star Wars fans: Badonkadonk Land Cruiser/Tank
- cube
- Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3909
- Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Re: Transportation - PO
by ubercynicmeister » Sat 14 Jan 2006, 20:16:52
Assuming that money becomes no object, then the costs associated with the relative transportation modes is as follows:
Rail, through undulating country, no big hills, no major watercourses: Australian $3 to $5 million per kilometre.
Freeways through the same type of country: Aus$25 million per kilometre.
Magnalev is nice, but it's costs are stated as being somewhat higher then freeways - I'm told that the costs may go as high as Aus$100 million per km, but it should be remembered, that that cost is the "top end" of things.
Modern trains can travel at around 200 km/h without too much expenditure. To travel the 4,700 km from one side of the US to the other (that's rail-route presently established) at 200 km/h gives an overall time for the trip as being 23 hours, 30 mins.
Note well: the reason the present service is so damn slack is simply because people don't use it enough. People don't use it enough because the service is so darn slack.
If one were to raise the train's speed to (say) 300 km/ h, the time taken goes down to 15 hours, 40 mins, which is actually a reasonable amount of time. It's about as long as the average person spends in holding patterns over air-ports, anyway.
And one can put beds on trains, too, at minimal extra cost. A bus comes in at about Aus$125,000 each. A train's carriage comes in at about Aus$400,000 each, and the locomotive costs about Aus$5.2 million each.
The bus carries about 70 persons, the train carriage (double-deck) carries about 180, and one can take surf-boards, bicycles, LOTSA bulk luggage, etc on a train...I dunno if I'd wanna do that with a coach!
Rail, through undulating country, no big hills, no major watercourses: Australian $3 to $5 million per kilometre.
Freeways through the same type of country: Aus$25 million per kilometre.
Magnalev is nice, but it's costs are stated as being somewhat higher then freeways - I'm told that the costs may go as high as Aus$100 million per km, but it should be remembered, that that cost is the "top end" of things.
Modern trains can travel at around 200 km/h without too much expenditure. To travel the 4,700 km from one side of the US to the other (that's rail-route presently established) at 200 km/h gives an overall time for the trip as being 23 hours, 30 mins.
Note well: the reason the present service is so damn slack is simply because people don't use it enough. People don't use it enough because the service is so darn slack.
If one were to raise the train's speed to (say) 300 km/ h, the time taken goes down to 15 hours, 40 mins, which is actually a reasonable amount of time. It's about as long as the average person spends in holding patterns over air-ports, anyway.
And one can put beds on trains, too, at minimal extra cost. A bus comes in at about Aus$125,000 each. A train's carriage comes in at about Aus$400,000 each, and the locomotive costs about Aus$5.2 million each.
The bus carries about 70 persons, the train carriage (double-deck) carries about 180, and one can take surf-boards, bicycles, LOTSA bulk luggage, etc on a train...I dunno if I'd wanna do that with a coach!
-
ubercynicmeister - Tar Sands
- Posts: 640
- Joined: Sun 25 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Hunter Valley, New South Wales, Australia
Re: Personal Transportation Solution ?
by Revi » Sun 15 Jan 2006, 14:32:27
I took my bike out for a spin because we had a January thaw here. Really fun! I look forward to spring when I can use the electric bike again. It has several advantages. The battery can be stored inside, so it doesn't drain all its energy in the cold. It's a nickel metal hydride battery, so it doesn't have to be checked or anything. The bike is a great way to get around on a nice day, and makes all errands an adventure. The battery could be charged with a small solar setup. You can affix baskets or even a trailer to get groceries, etc. It really feels like the transportation of the future, and it augments your present modes of transport. (and it's an awfully fun toy)
-
Revi - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 7417
- Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: Maine
Re: Transportation - PO
by Wildwell » Sun 15 Jan 2006, 14:42:44
In the UK right now there’s a group commissioned by the Department for Transport to look at long term transportation needs. In the magic mix of solutions they are looking at airport expansion, new toll roads, new high speed railways.
There are three options for the high speed railway:
1. Maglev. A 300mph line, along I’m not sure it will run into cities, so I see little point if you are trying to compete with planes.
2. French/German convention high speed 200mph 25kv AC electrified line, use conventional tracks into cities.
3. And the latest glint in the eye…150mph Gas turbine running on vast amounts of aviation fuel, thus to avoid the expense of electrification. Has anyone told them about the price shocks?
THE government’s chief transport adviser, Sir Rod Eddington, favours plans for a new high-speed rail link that could see jet-propelled trains ferrying passengers between London and Scotland in record times.
The new trains would eschew conventional power sources and would instead be fired-up by a jet engine similar to those used in aircraft.
A prototype, capable of travelling at 150mph, has been built in north America but manufacturers believe that, in the right conditions, it could achieve a much higher top speed.
The jet train plan — which some industry experts have dubbed “Eddington’s Rocket” — would cut journey times between London and cities such as Birmingham, Manchester and Edinburgh.
Virgin Pendolinos, operating at 125mph, are currently the fastest trains running up and down the country.
Eddington, the former boss of British Airways, is considering a new north-south high-speed link as part of a long-term review of Britain’s transport needs.
Tasked with looking beyond 2015, he will present his findings directly to Gordon Brown, the chancellor, and Alistair Darling, the transport secretary, this summer.
Eddington has previously claimed that fast trains would be preferable to many domestic flights. “Everyone should be taking the train,” he said.
“People wouldn’t need to fly between London and Manchester if the service was faster.”
With passenger journeys forecast to rise by 28% in the next decade, Darling is keen to free up capacity on existing tracks. The east coast main line from London to Edinburgh, for example, is already struggling to accommodate extra services.
Eddington believes a new high-speed link may provide a solution to this congestion and has discussed its feasibility with John Armitt, chief executive of Network Rail.
He has also consulted officials at Bombardier, the Canadian maker of the jet train, and at Ultraspeed, a company that is proposing a magnetic levitation — or maglev — system for Britain. Ultraspeed claims its train could reach speeds of 311mph.
A team of experts at Network Rail are now weighing up the merits of the competing technologies, as well as conventional high-speed trains such as the TGV in France, which travels at speeds of up to 186mph.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/ ... _2,00.html
Meanwhile on the other side of the pond..
ere we go again. President Bush puts highly unqualified political supporters in charge of a vital public service, and Americans pay the price.
But this time it isn't the Federal Emergency Management Agency. It's our national passenger railroad - Amtrak.
Amtrak's directors, appointed by the Bush administration based on cronyism, not competence, are shirking their responsibilities and dismantling - through outsourcing and privatization schemes - the very rail company they are charged with strengthening. If we don't stop this runaway train, millions of passengers will lose vital rail service along the Northeast Corridor and across America.
Defying the wishes of a bipartisan Congress, Amtrak board members are pushing a disastrous "reorganization" plan that would dismantle the rail carrier, abandon passengers, dump billions of dollars in costs onto Maryland and other states and allow profit-driven speculators to cherry-pick Amtrak's most prized assets. Other than the White House and its handpicked Amtrak board, few are for this plan.
The Bush administration wants to eliminate federal funding for Amtrak, and the Amtrak board of directors wants to separate the Northeast Corridor from the rest of the network and open the system up to competition/privatization.
The current board chairman, David M. Laney, a Texas attorney, sits at the helm of Amtrak after raising more than $100,000 for the Bush-Cheney campaign.
Another board member's qualification to serve as fiduciary for a multibillion-dollar passenger railroad is his experience as the CEO of Kmart and the Museum Co., both of which ended up in bankruptcy. Undoubtedly, Floyd Hall's $360,000 in "soft money" contributions to the Bush-Cheney machine since 2000 did not hurt, either.
The third private-sector member, Bush-booster Enrique Sosa, told Democratic Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey in June 2004 that he had never ridden on an Amtrak train before his appointment.
Meanwhile, the board has operated without a quorum for several years, casting grave doubt on the legitimacy, if not the legality, of its actions, the most recent of which was the firing of CEO David L. Gunn, a 40-year rail professional. We had strong differences with Mr. Gunn's labor-management practices, but he has forgotten more about passenger rail than the three private-sector Amtrak board members combined have ever known. Mr. Gunn was fired because he refused to take a blood oath to carry out the "kill Amtrak from within" strategy.
Key Republicans are also fed up. House Railroads Subcommittee Chairman Steven C. LaTourette of Ohio recently called the situation "pathetic" and "such a mess that I have heard it said that you couldn't think up a hypothetical case this loony if you tried."
This would be laughable if the travel needs of 25 million passengers (including 2 million Marylanders), the jobs of 20,000 dedicated Amtrak employees (including 2,600 Marylanders) and the health of our transportation system were not at risk.
Cronyism is leading Amtrak over a cliff. The White House and its Amtrak board want to emulate the British rail privatization debacle. That catastrophe caused years of rampant delays, steep fare increases, higher accident and injury rates, and apoplectic passengers. The British government had to end this half-baked scheme and reportedly could face a $40 billion tab - $10 billion more than we've spent on Amtrak in 35 years - to clean up the mess.
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1215-33.htm
There are three options for the high speed railway:
1. Maglev. A 300mph line, along I’m not sure it will run into cities, so I see little point if you are trying to compete with planes.
2. French/German convention high speed 200mph 25kv AC electrified line, use conventional tracks into cities.
3. And the latest glint in the eye…150mph Gas turbine running on vast amounts of aviation fuel, thus to avoid the expense of electrification. Has anyone told them about the price shocks?
THE government’s chief transport adviser, Sir Rod Eddington, favours plans for a new high-speed rail link that could see jet-propelled trains ferrying passengers between London and Scotland in record times.
The new trains would eschew conventional power sources and would instead be fired-up by a jet engine similar to those used in aircraft.
A prototype, capable of travelling at 150mph, has been built in north America but manufacturers believe that, in the right conditions, it could achieve a much higher top speed.
The jet train plan — which some industry experts have dubbed “Eddington’s Rocket” — would cut journey times between London and cities such as Birmingham, Manchester and Edinburgh.
Virgin Pendolinos, operating at 125mph, are currently the fastest trains running up and down the country.
Eddington, the former boss of British Airways, is considering a new north-south high-speed link as part of a long-term review of Britain’s transport needs.
Tasked with looking beyond 2015, he will present his findings directly to Gordon Brown, the chancellor, and Alistair Darling, the transport secretary, this summer.
Eddington has previously claimed that fast trains would be preferable to many domestic flights. “Everyone should be taking the train,” he said.
“People wouldn’t need to fly between London and Manchester if the service was faster.”
With passenger journeys forecast to rise by 28% in the next decade, Darling is keen to free up capacity on existing tracks. The east coast main line from London to Edinburgh, for example, is already struggling to accommodate extra services.
Eddington believes a new high-speed link may provide a solution to this congestion and has discussed its feasibility with John Armitt, chief executive of Network Rail.
He has also consulted officials at Bombardier, the Canadian maker of the jet train, and at Ultraspeed, a company that is proposing a magnetic levitation — or maglev — system for Britain. Ultraspeed claims its train could reach speeds of 311mph.
A team of experts at Network Rail are now weighing up the merits of the competing technologies, as well as conventional high-speed trains such as the TGV in France, which travels at speeds of up to 186mph.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/ ... _2,00.html
Meanwhile on the other side of the pond..
ere we go again. President Bush puts highly unqualified political supporters in charge of a vital public service, and Americans pay the price.
But this time it isn't the Federal Emergency Management Agency. It's our national passenger railroad - Amtrak.
Amtrak's directors, appointed by the Bush administration based on cronyism, not competence, are shirking their responsibilities and dismantling - through outsourcing and privatization schemes - the very rail company they are charged with strengthening. If we don't stop this runaway train, millions of passengers will lose vital rail service along the Northeast Corridor and across America.
Defying the wishes of a bipartisan Congress, Amtrak board members are pushing a disastrous "reorganization" plan that would dismantle the rail carrier, abandon passengers, dump billions of dollars in costs onto Maryland and other states and allow profit-driven speculators to cherry-pick Amtrak's most prized assets. Other than the White House and its handpicked Amtrak board, few are for this plan.
The Bush administration wants to eliminate federal funding for Amtrak, and the Amtrak board of directors wants to separate the Northeast Corridor from the rest of the network and open the system up to competition/privatization.
The current board chairman, David M. Laney, a Texas attorney, sits at the helm of Amtrak after raising more than $100,000 for the Bush-Cheney campaign.
Another board member's qualification to serve as fiduciary for a multibillion-dollar passenger railroad is his experience as the CEO of Kmart and the Museum Co., both of which ended up in bankruptcy. Undoubtedly, Floyd Hall's $360,000 in "soft money" contributions to the Bush-Cheney machine since 2000 did not hurt, either.
The third private-sector member, Bush-booster Enrique Sosa, told Democratic Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg of New Jersey in June 2004 that he had never ridden on an Amtrak train before his appointment.
Meanwhile, the board has operated without a quorum for several years, casting grave doubt on the legitimacy, if not the legality, of its actions, the most recent of which was the firing of CEO David L. Gunn, a 40-year rail professional. We had strong differences with Mr. Gunn's labor-management practices, but he has forgotten more about passenger rail than the three private-sector Amtrak board members combined have ever known. Mr. Gunn was fired because he refused to take a blood oath to carry out the "kill Amtrak from within" strategy.
Key Republicans are also fed up. House Railroads Subcommittee Chairman Steven C. LaTourette of Ohio recently called the situation "pathetic" and "such a mess that I have heard it said that you couldn't think up a hypothetical case this loony if you tried."
This would be laughable if the travel needs of 25 million passengers (including 2 million Marylanders), the jobs of 20,000 dedicated Amtrak employees (including 2,600 Marylanders) and the health of our transportation system were not at risk.
Cronyism is leading Amtrak over a cliff. The White House and its Amtrak board want to emulate the British rail privatization debacle. That catastrophe caused years of rampant delays, steep fare increases, higher accident and injury rates, and apoplectic passengers. The British government had to end this half-baked scheme and reportedly could face a $40 billion tab - $10 billion more than we've spent on Amtrak in 35 years - to clean up the mess.
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1215-33.htm
-
Wildwell - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1962
- Joined: Thu 03 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: UK
Re: Transportation - PO
by cube » Mon 16 Jan 2006, 02:56:51
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Wildwell', '.')...
The Bush administration wants to eliminate federal funding for Amtrak, and the Amtrak board of directors wants to separate the Northeast Corridor from the rest of the network and open the system up to competition/privatization.
....
The northeast corridor is Amtrak's most successful corridor. (D.C. to Boston) It actually produces a profit! There is one other corridor that also makes money. (Texas to Oklahoma) All other Amtrak routes are money lossers if I'm not mistaken.
The Bush administration wants to eliminate federal funding for Amtrak, and the Amtrak board of directors wants to separate the Northeast Corridor from the rest of the network and open the system up to competition/privatization.
....
Therefore if the system were to actually become privatized those would be the only 2 routes to survive. here's an interesting link that shows the most profitable/ or least profitable Amtrak routes:
http://search.csmonitor.com/specials/amtrak/lines.html
As for Britain's options for future transport, I'd put the maglev option as the least likely to happen. There are really only 2 maglev systems worth mentioning:
1) German
2) Japanese
There's a German maglev train in Shanghai right now but it's such a financial disaster it's going to be awhile before some other country wants to take such a financial risk. As for the Japanese design it's still in the experimental stage.
- cube
- Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3909
- Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Re: Transportation - PO
by Starvid » Mon 16 Jan 2006, 10:47:19
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '1'). Maglev. A 300mph line, along I’m not sure it will run into cities, so I see little point if you are trying to compete with planes.
Too expensive by a long shot.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '2'). French/German convention high speed 200mph 25kv AC electrified line, use conventional tracks into cities.
The perfect choice.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '3'). And the latest glint in the eye…150mph Gas turbine running on vast amounts of aviation fuel, thus to avoid the expense of electrification. Has anyone told them about the price shocks?
Are they fucking crazy?
Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
-
Starvid - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 3021
- Joined: Sun 20 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Uppsala, Sweden
