An Inconvenient Scientist

[Ddrak]

There's no economic damage in shipping things by high speed rail as opposed to shipping things by air

Probably a bad example - because there's actually significant economic damage:

i) Air is faster. Much, much faster. I've yet to hear of any rail technology that can sustain 600mph. The difference between 6 hours coast to coast and 48 hours coast to coast is still significant.
ii) Rail actually has a higher lead cost - all those tracks cost an insane amount of money. There's a good reason there hasn't been any significant rail expansion since the robber baron days - it's just too expensive. Current lines aren't always suitable for high-speed use either.

In any case - you're point is tangential to my original point, which is why I'm saying it doesn't make any sense to bring it up. You're simply advocating conserving energy now, not switching sources. I'm fine with that - where it's economically viable. In fact, industry loves to conserve energy because it makes things cheaper.

My point was about energy sources, and right now oil based sources are the cheapest.

Dd

[Kulaf]

You also won't see high speed rail extend to freight due to the incredible amount of time it would take to get it to speed.....and then slow it down again.

[Rsak]

Then I stand corrected. You were not whining just doing a horrible job of trolling. You have my apologies and I will eagerly await your the proper behavior from yourself when you apologize in turn. I fail to see how I could possibly be disappointed.

[Arathena]

There's no economic damage in shipping things by high speed rail as opposed to shipping things by air

Probably a bad example - because there's actually significant economic damage:

i) Air is faster. Much, much faster. I've yet to hear of any rail technology that can sustain 600mph. The difference between 6 hours coast to coast and 48 hours coast to coast is still significant.
ii) Rail actually has a higher lead cost - all those tracks cost an insane amount of money. There's a good reason there hasn't been any significant rail expansion since the robber baron days - it's just too expensive. Current lines aren't always suitable for high-speed use either.

In any case - you're point is tangential to my original point, which is why I'm saying it doesn't make any sense to bring it up. You're simply advocating conserving energy now, not switching sources. I'm fine with that - where it's economically viable. In fact, industry loves to conserve energy because it makes things cheaper.

My point was about energy sources, and right now oil based sources are the cheapest.

Dd

Top end maglevs run at approximately 350 mph. To replace the current American rail system with a maglev system comparable to the one recently built in Shanghai would cost on the order of 7 trillion dollars. (~70m /mile * 100k miles of rail.) Triple that milage would need to be put in to return the American rail system to relevancy. HSR costs about a third of that to put in per mile, but cannot be shared with the current rail system, meaning that you have to buy tremendous amounts of land to put it on, bore fresh tunnels through the Appalachians and Rockies, etc. etc. And you can't take it to Toronto, Mexico City, London, Seoul, or Moscow. HSR is also slower and more expensive to run than maglevs.

Mass transit in US towns would be great. If it freaking existed. At all. There simply is no local transit in my city. Zilch. It's the center of county government. There's a couple buses that run from some place god knows where to some of the outlying towns and back... three times a day. On weekdays only. Can't hop on a bus across town, there's not even one stinking route.

The French Post Service operates multiple HSR Freight trains. It can be done. Again, the problem is not acceleration or braking, it's stomaching your choice of 6 trillion or 20 trillion dollars in start up costs, and realizing you probably won't recoup the price in operation.

[Arathena]

Oh, yeah, and if we're going to doubt the need for seperate passenger / cargo rail systems, I point you to the current issues with Amtrak.


Some excerpts:

Overall on-time performance for the entire Amtrak system was only 69.7 percent in April and 68.9 percent in May, according to Amtrak’s monthly report. These figures actually understate the severe and endemic delays outside of the northeastern region of the United States. Long-distance Amtrak trains, which operate over the tracks of private freight railroads, had an abysmal 40 percent on-time performance in April and 37.5 percent in May—that is, well over half of long-distance trains are late.

The Sunset Limited, between New Orleans and Los Angeles, had April OTP of 11.3 percent. Its average delay was nearly six hours, and if the padded schedule is ignored, it averaged delays of over 12 hours. The California Zephyr, which runs between Chicago and San Francisco, has similar delays. Its average OTP was 0 percent in April of 2007 and every prior month since July of 2006. In the last eleven months just two editions of this daily train have arrived on time!

The bulk of this occurs because the tracks are owned, sceduled, and maintained by large transportation conglomerates. Priority goes to the big-ass-mother-fucker that's lucky to make 35 mph.

[Lurker]

I respect your authority on your comments and expect the same in kind which you have failed to do.

I don't respect your authority on your own comments. Too often the words on the screen don't match at all to what you, pages later, claim you really meant. You said, "feel free to continue living in your imaginary world, but you continue to be wrong no matter how much you whine". That's you in a nutshell.

[Finglefinn]

I saw a PBS special on that Chinese rail line built. WOW. What in insane construction project that was. Huge chasms, permafrost and tons of other issues they had to deal with to build that thing. Crazy.

[Rsak]

*gasp*

Harlowe surprised me and continued down the self deluded path of myopically closing her mind to the possibility that her point of view might not be the right one.

The difference between you and me Harlowe is that I can actually accept that my point of view might not be the correct one and accept that if I read something that is vague or ambiguous you might have meant it differently then I interpreted it. You on the other hand take my comments that are direct and unambiguous and refuse to waiver in your perception that your view is the correct one despite the evidence in the original post and the repetitions reinforcing the key part that you just don't get. Troll all you want but it doesn't change the fact that you are a close minded bigot.

[Lurker]

While I agree that Harlowe is on a path of self-delusion and that she's a close minded myopic bigot for not understanding your direct and unambiguous points of view . . .

I also don't respect your authority on your own comments.

[Rsak]

*yawn*

Should I have expected any less from someone scared to have an open and honest discussion on the effects of fixing global warming? The crowd recognizes your departure from any meaningful discussion and straight into trollville. You need to clean up on your behavior before you try to take anyone to task on the science of the matter again.

[Harlowe]

*gasp* *yawn*

Posts filled with such eeeemotion and melodrama! Discuss what, you are playing Over-acting Master Thespian. There isn't a real discussion going on. Just you queening-up the place as usual.

Delusional, hypocrisy, rinse, repeat.

Frankly, it's become painfully clear you're just a fecal-wall-painting away from being certifiable.

[Rsak]

Someone else dared to make that claim, but failed to put his money where his mouth is. Are you brave enough to try or are you full of empty threats and more name calling?

[Lurker]

What was the empty threat?

[Rsak]

Troll elsewhere Lurker

[Lurker]

I'm just curious what the 'empty threats' were.

You think of yourself as a force to be reckoned with on the boards; as someone who it requires great daring and bravery to debate against. So I was wondering if the 'empty threats' you mentioned were part of your delusion too.

[Embar Angylwrath]

I'm just curious what the 'empty threats' were.

You think of yourself as a force to be reckoned with on the boards; as someone who it requires great daring and bravery to debate against. So I was wondering if the 'empty threats' you mentioned were part of your delusion too.

[Rsak]

Lurker,

I have no self delusions that I am any kind of force to be reckoned with on this board or any other. If you state falsehoods then they will be corrected.

To answer your other question the last person to make the claims Harlowe has made was full of empty promises and thought that I would run down a rabbit trail distracted without excepting any burden or responsibility for them self. For her to claim ignorance of that fact is laughable. The only daring and bravery required would be to actually put the money up in escrow for the cost of the medical determination. If it was so painfully clear then I fail to see where the fear comes from. I extend the same offer I made then. If you want to put up the money then for the test then I will match that in the escrow and pay the bill myself. You double the money your risk and I come out even depending on the verdict.

So does anyone have the guts to follow through or will you follow your path of more hollow name calling?

[Harlowe]

Watch out guys, Rsak is threatening to bang out the same 2-3 adjectives over and over again at us. Brace yourselves.

[Rsak]

I see you continue to add nothing to the conversation. *golfclap*

[Lurker]

I think anyone who when told on a message board they are certifiable, challenges the other person to prove it with real life psychological tests, is - by default - certifiable.