Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wiz, not a bad idea. I'd put tolls on most Interstates, for everyone; else raise the gas tax, which will get howls from some folks.
This is a probably a good idea. Many of our neighbors, such as Kansas and Oklahoma, charge a reasonable toll on their major interstates -- and everyone seems to pay the toll without complaint. If you're on a road trip, say, from Topeka to Wichita, paying $5.00 or so in tolls doesn't seem like a big deal when you're shelling out $50 at every gas station stop along the way.
I have heard that a lot of truckers actually do take other routes such as I-80 (in Nebraska) or US-287 (through Texas) to avoid Kansas and Oklahoma's turnpikes. But if all states charged a few bucks to drive through them then there wouldn't be a need to avoid them.
Passenger rail, like horses, are mostly for recreational entertainment.
Especially in Europe and Asia where millions of business minded folk, those going home to see their families and even long distance commuters use rail to get to and from work every day. Those are entirely recreational uses.
Quote:
Why ride a train when you can fly or drive?
Comfort, reliability, sturdier in wider weather conditions, fear of flying, speed, let someone else do the "driving", service, fuel costs...
I might as well ask, "Why fly or drive when you can ride a train?"
Quote:
I can't see the big hang up about cars. The world is full of oil, natural gas and biofuel and they've just made a big technology gain with hydrogen.
Not gonna even get started about fossil fuels, but that big technology gain with hydrogen is slightly negated by the fact that it still takes more energy to extract and store the hydrogen than you get out of it in the end.
Quote:
People that don't like cars, don't like em because they don't want freedom of movement.
I hate freedom. Yes. That's the problem. OR, they are polluting, contributors to stress, inefficient, contributors to a disconnected, spread out lifestyle...
Absolutely they can be fun to drive (sometimes), and they certainly have a great deal of value in our society, but Americans in particular seem to treat "the car" as essential to being American. It is not. The car is (and should be) just another option.
Quote:
Rail has it's use, but it has a narrow window where it is useful and relevant to modern life.
Like getting from one place to another, or consolidating / compacting urban and town development, or moving goods from one place to another.
Automobiles are good at two of those things.
Quote:
We need to think forward and stop thinking backwards to the 1860's. Life has moved on, technology has moved on.
Also, why do we still eat ancient foods like corn or beef? What's with our reliance on century (plus) old fossil fuels like coal and oil? Certainly we moved on from dwellings such as "the house!" And democracy? Why do we still cling to such outdated notions?
Ahhh, that's right. Because, for the most part, THEY WORK.
If not an engineer, I'll still practice it a bit here.
In the late 19th century Otto Mears built a number of remarkable narrow gauge railroads out of Silverton, CO to service nearby mines. One of them traversed Red Mountain Pass, with ambitions on reaching Ouray, although only at last reaching the relatively flat valley at Ironton before some serious geography got in his way. But apparently no one had informed him of the physics of railroad construction, which in places several of his lines trespassed upon and exceeded.
Further north, one will notice that the train track running from Georgetown up to Silver Plume, CO is hardly straight; in fact it tends to be rather circular in winding its way up a challenging grade. If one of the more severe sections, anyone having driven I-70 between Denver and Summit County will appreciate the challenges such a route would present to a traditional railroad.
Note that I said 'traditional.' Your regular railroad is more usually confined to grades of 2 to 3%. Obviously trying to maintain that along I-70 would require some expensive engineering feats. But I still rather like the idea of monorails, and it turns out they are ideally suited to Maglev propulsion, which is a different animal altogether. In brief, Maglev is a system using magnets to suspend, guide and propel a train or other vehicle. There are a few existing Maglev trains in the world, and many more proposals for them in the near future. They provide some distinct advantages over traditional railroads.
With my lack of engineering expertise I always felt free to envision a monorail running simply and cleanly along the I-70 right-of-way, in the otherwise empty median between opposing lanes of traffic. If many advantages, obviously such a route would prove impractical for your average railroad. Although I am informed, if not in exhausting, fail-safe, detail, that with an entirely different system of propulsion that a Maglev train might navigate grades up to 10%. That changes a lot of otherwise troubling parameters. It suggests that a Maglev monorail might closely parallel I-70, importantly using its existing grade. Such things as overpasses might be inexpensively bypassed by running under them, incorporating the monorail as part of the central support column, when there is one. Other than that just a vertical support column placed every so often, with sections of monorail track quickly lifted into place on them. Some support infrastructure as well, etc., and then the little matter of the Eisenhower Tunnel. But it has all got to be a lot simpler and less expensive than plowing two more lanes of interstate all the way up to and beyond that tunnel, and then trying to get that through, or suffering the bottleneck of but the four existing lanes.
There does of course remain the question of long-term need for increased transport capacity on I-70, if this broke society can afford it, or would use it if a train, etc., etc. I'll leave that to others with an healthy appetite for arguments and endless debate.
However it might be noted that the fastest recorded speed of a Maglev train to date was in Japan in 2003, at 581 kilometres per hour (or 361mph).[1] In practice they tend to run a bit slower. But in example the distance between Denver and Frisco, CO, about 70 miles, and taking over an hour by auto even in good conditions, would be well less than an easy hour if traveling at, say, 100mph. It might be noted that unlike traditional railroads Maglev trains are not unduly inconvenienced by such things as snow. It is another of their many advantages.
Something to possibly contemplate on maybe a very long drive home from a winter ski weekend.
Next time I'm driving my big block gas guzzling Chrysler down the road, I'll think of you folks and yell out the window, "Woot Woot!"
A set of airhorns on the roof of that whale would be righteous. With a 5-chime Nathan off a locomotive you could cause rock slides.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
With mental giants like those noise-making morons, it's hardly any wonder why the country is in such trouble. Probably bought the muffler tips with their welfare money.
It might surprise some cretins to learn that Colorado has existing traffic noise laws.
I have not checked California statutes, but Colorado is not the only western state with such ordinances, and for a reason. The Colorado statute specifically cites the "adverse effect on human beings physiologically and psychologically" for the need. The limits vary, but for residential zones the limit is 55dba from 7am to 7pm, and 50dba from 7pm to 7am.
From personal experience I can vouch for the serious detriment to well-being and health that excessive noise can cause. Also that many people ignore these laws, and particularly with motorcycles forgo even just half a muffler to make all the noise they can. Something that may surprise you is that the police often do not care, and refuse to do their duty in enforcing these laws. I've been told by them, by officers specifically assigned to traffic duties, that their estimate that at least 90% of just motorcycles are in violation of such laws; then in the same breath confess that they couldn't be bothered to do anything about it. That is not only fact, but proof in that they do not. Anyone else might confirm as much for themselves simply in suffering one of these idiots, their noxious racket echoing far and wide, and witness just how much effort is expended in reigning them in.
Let me be perfectly clear, in a civil society there are certain compromises and rules of conduct for the betterment of all. Anyone running around making an undue racket, in inflicting this upon everyone in a wide radius everywhere they go, serve as ample advertisement of exactly what type of low-life they are.
For all the argument about trucks vs. rail, no one has brought up this simple fact: Trains ARE more cost efficient than trucks, but ONLY if the trip is non-stop and exceeds about 300 miles. While trains can transport much more freight, the costs of starting and stopping such a huge vehicle and unloading the shipping containers more frequently than every 300 miles or so would raise the costs of transport above that of trucks. Businesses, thoretically, should choose trucks for the short haul deliveries (less than 300 mi) and trains for longer haul deliveries.
The mountains also make rail deliveries (and truck deliveries, for that matter) more expensive because the terrain makes it impossible for the train to operate at peak efficiency as a relatively straight, flat route offers the greatest efficiency. The trains must operate more slowly to travel up and down the grades and around the curves without derailing. Because trucks speed up and slow down more quickly than trains, than can operate at levels that are closer to their peak efficiency than trains can.
Additionally, because of the limitation of trains to traverse steep grades, trucks would still be driving up and down I-70 because of the lack of train tracks between Denver and Glenwood Springs. This, I might remind everyone, is the area of I-70 that experiences the greatest congestion.
.
Trains already carry 45% of all freight in the US (half of that freight is coal), and businesses are already warming up to the idea that trains are more efficient over 300 miles. This is why we have seen an explosion in intermodal transportation practices like "piggybacking" -- loading full semi-tractor trailers onto flatbed railcars so they may be unloaded, hooked up to a truck and driven away.
BTW- the most efficient way to transport goods is by water, as buoyancy gives barges an advantage in moving large amounts of freight, but it not feasible in the mountains.
I am a fan of the toll road idea. It's amazing how the user-fee crowd is in favor of user fees until it comes to toll roads. I think the most efficient way to expand I-70 would be to charge a toll, add two more lanes and make them reversible so that they can be used most efficiently.
It might surprise some cretins to learn that Colorado has existing traffic noise laws.
I have not checked California statutes, but Colorado is not the only western state with such ordinances, and for a reason. The Colorado statute specifically cites the "adverse effect on human beings physiologically and psychologically" for the need. The limits vary, but for residential zones the limit is 55dba from 7am to 7pm, and 50dba from 7pm to 7am.
From personal experience I can vouch for the serious detriment to well-being and health that excessive noise can cause. Also that many people ignore these laws, and particularly with motorcycles forgo even just half a muffler to make all the noise they can. Something that may surprise you is that the police often do not care, and refuse to do their duty in enforcing these laws. I've been told by them, by officers specifically assigned to traffic duties, that their estimate that at least 90% of just motorcycles are in violation of such laws; then in the same breath confess that they couldn't be bothered to do anything about it. That is not only fact, but proof in that they do not. Anyone else might confirm as much for themselves simply in suffering one of these idiots, their noxious racket echoing far and wide, and witness just how much effort is expended in reigning them in.
Let me be perfectly clear, in a civil society there are certain compromises and rules of conduct for the betterment of all. Anyone running around making an undue racket, in inflicting this upon everyone in a wide radius everywhere they go, serve as ample advertisement of exactly what type of low-life they are.
So... what was your point again?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Otto Mears on steroids
