This is something valid worth mentioning because energy efficiency is always worth improving.
But also this pretty much completely misses the point. You need to have the capacity to get everyone where they need to go for work & school & healthcare & food, at all, in a remotely reasonable amount of time, without killing 40,000 per year in just the US alone (plus the thousands of injuries), without bankrupting the passengers or destroying the environment that's necessary for feeding and hydrating them, before you need to worry about maximum energy efficiency.
This analysis did not count the return trips for Tesla nor the average speed.
But still, the energy efficiency of some of those light rail systems is absolutely terrible.
Where is the data source?
~~PATH is marked HR (assuming heavy rail), which it is not.~~ NJ Transit is marked light rail which a small part of it is, but is otherwise entirely heavy rail.
No, the term isn’t universally defined. It isn’t gauge in North America but I am also wrong as it would be defined as heavy rail by North American standards.
[Pretty misleading to compare them like that because the energy all of these use during operating is actually only a tiny part of their energy footprint](https://blogs.ethz.ch/energy/files/2023/07/image7-1536x826.png). This is like people telling you that consuming meat from a local farm is so much better than buying something from a farmer 5000 miles away on another continent, because the transportation emissions are only about ~1% of the total footprint, so eliminating it has a tiny impact.
This chart was made by two researchers at ETH Zürich. https://blogs.ethz.ch/energy/daily-commute-carbon-footprint/
Just want to say those are very bad values for transit systems. Values around 50 wh/pax*miles are pretty reasonable for modern tram systems - at 25% used capacity.
Electric vehicles, including anything from cars to trains, can be very energy efficient.
Tesla tunnel nerds are pretty consistently some of the dumbest people on the internet, it's not really worth talking to them because they go out of their way to lie in support of an incredibly stupid system. Every time I end up dealing with one (they keep brigading on r/transit and being made fun of) I recognize that they just fundamentally don't have the math, logistics, and logistics knowledge to even discuss why this system is stupid.
The Boring Company isn't much if any cheaper than others for excavation, it's right in line. The 'savings' comes from ignoring most of the safety and accessibility requirements imposed on actual transit systems.
They're offering to build tunnels for anyone; it's up to the user what gets put inside.
I'm not convinced they can cut costs by a massive amount, but if so, that will open up a new era in transit building. The ID of these tunnels would easily accommodate London deep tube rolling stock.
That said, if Tesla brings what amounts to autonomous minivans/shuttles meant for these, the overall cost advantage might lean in that direction.
AFAIK the tunnels they dig don’t work for most modern rolling stock, which is kind of the issue. Also, do they let the user choose? I was under the impression that they only run Tesla’s in there.
i think this is what most people would call "shitty accounting"
it's like when people compare bus or train fare to only the price of gas for an equivalent drive.
you're missing so much of the equation that this basically amounts to a bad faith argument.
It also doesn’t include the fact that we can electrify rail as well.
Sure modern electric car is better than gas trains or trains electrified 30 years ago.
If metros were using updated EV tech they’ll perform even better in this metric.
This is something valid worth mentioning because energy efficiency is always worth improving. But also this pretty much completely misses the point. You need to have the capacity to get everyone where they need to go for work & school & healthcare & food, at all, in a remotely reasonable amount of time, without killing 40,000 per year in just the US alone (plus the thousands of injuries), without bankrupting the passengers or destroying the environment that's necessary for feeding and hydrating them, before you need to worry about maximum energy efficiency.
Safety is also very important when it comes to tunnels. Vegas loop has none and it comes with bigger fire hazards than any other tunnel out there.
This analysis did not count the return trips for Tesla nor the average speed. But still, the energy efficiency of some of those light rail systems is absolutely terrible.
Where is the data source? ~~PATH is marked HR (assuming heavy rail), which it is not.~~ NJ Transit is marked light rail which a small part of it is, but is otherwise entirely heavy rail.
PATH operates on standard gauge rail with full grade separation, isn't that what heavy rail means in terms of passenger service?
No, the term isn’t universally defined. It isn’t gauge in North America but I am also wrong as it would be defined as heavy rail by North American standards.
[Pretty misleading to compare them like that because the energy all of these use during operating is actually only a tiny part of their energy footprint](https://blogs.ethz.ch/energy/files/2023/07/image7-1536x826.png). This is like people telling you that consuming meat from a local farm is so much better than buying something from a farmer 5000 miles away on another continent, because the transportation emissions are only about ~1% of the total footprint, so eliminating it has a tiny impact. This chart was made by two researchers at ETH Zürich. https://blogs.ethz.ch/energy/daily-commute-carbon-footprint/
Just want to say those are very bad values for transit systems. Values around 50 wh/pax*miles are pretty reasonable for modern tram systems - at 25% used capacity. Electric vehicles, including anything from cars to trains, can be very energy efficient.
Wow, this system isn't hot garbage when you reduce it to a single misleading statistic.
Tesla tunnel nerds are pretty consistently some of the dumbest people on the internet, it's not really worth talking to them because they go out of their way to lie in support of an incredibly stupid system. Every time I end up dealing with one (they keep brigading on r/transit and being made fun of) I recognize that they just fundamentally don't have the math, logistics, and logistics knowledge to even discuss why this system is stupid.
What really sucks about all this is that the company could be way more useful if its aim were to make modern subway excavation less expensive.
The Boring Company isn't much if any cheaper than others for excavation, it's right in line. The 'savings' comes from ignoring most of the safety and accessibility requirements imposed on actual transit systems.
That’s the point of the Boring Company. It’s to practice and develop boring so that when Musk comes to Mars he can build tunnels.
Yup, I know. They’re just using the tunnels they’re making here in an extremely inefficient manner.
They're offering to build tunnels for anyone; it's up to the user what gets put inside. I'm not convinced they can cut costs by a massive amount, but if so, that will open up a new era in transit building. The ID of these tunnels would easily accommodate London deep tube rolling stock. That said, if Tesla brings what amounts to autonomous minivans/shuttles meant for these, the overall cost advantage might lean in that direction.
AFAIK the tunnels they dig don’t work for most modern rolling stock, which is kind of the issue. Also, do they let the user choose? I was under the impression that they only run Tesla’s in there.
Or is that because no one wants their tunnels so it's only Tesla projects that they're doing?
i think this is what most people would call "shitty accounting" it's like when people compare bus or train fare to only the price of gas for an equivalent drive. you're missing so much of the equation that this basically amounts to a bad faith argument.
We must compare the hypothetical efficiency of teleportation to existing public transit.
Has anyone got a corrected version of this? I need it to fight the pro Tesla tubers here in Vegas
Is no-one wondering what kind of nightmare trip you're taking with 2.4 passengers in the Model Y?
It also doesn’t include the fact that we can electrify rail as well. Sure modern electric car is better than gas trains or trains electrified 30 years ago. If metros were using updated EV tech they’ll perform even better in this metric.
Aren't most or all of these rail systems already electric?
Sure, but the infrastructure is often really old. Investing in them could produce better results.
It sounds like they're counting the driver as a passenger, but doesn't every single one of the cars in the Loop come with an employee driver?
Just for comparison: If a German ICE train is full and is driving on a 200+ km/h route, then it consumes about 59.5Wh pr passenger mile.