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.
It doesn’t seem right that Musk’s company should be exempt from the environmental review process that other companies have to go through .
I don’t blame the residents for being worried about damage to their homes . If the home gets damaged who will pay for that?
Would you want an untested tunnel dug near your home ?
—-
Elon Musk is no stranger to controversy. Even his "boring" company — The Boring Company — can't steer clear of it. It is in the very early stages of trying to solve a legendary traffic problem here on earth. In May, Musk detailed his plans to dig mass transit tunnels under the city of Los Angeles, where the Boring Company is headquartered.
The project has faced some criticism from local communities amid fears about earthquakes and that tunneling could damage their homes. Two neighborhood groups representing parts of LA's west side have filed a legal challenge against the city's proposal to exempt the project from environmental review. But the city is trying to fast-track the project. At the state level, a bill introduced earlier this year in the California legislature to impede Musk's Boring Company from selling flamethrowers to the public also just failed.
I'm not a fan of the whole Boring Company's plans, but the far-right shouldn't complain since they happily allowed fracking all through red states, with similar negative consequences.
In both cases, people need to consider the fallout of their decisions before selling out to big business... fat chance that'll ever happen, though.
Why would those affected residents in LA care about that? Their concerned about their homes for heaven's sake.
That said, I think Musk should play by the same rules as similar companies.
What do you think per the topic at hand?
I think the point is that problem isn't unique to California. I seriously doubt the people affected by fracking were given any choice in the matter, either, and I'd be shocked if fracking isn't also "fast-tracked," at least in some states, with much the same negative consequences as one would expect when companies don't have to play by the rules.
The point is that this thread risks turning into yet another "Uh, California is uniquely terrible" thread, which is all the ignorant rage on this forum. The facts reveal a different story - companies finding ways to skirt the rules to make money is hardly unique to California.
The environmental study exemption is for a 2.5 mile test tunnel 30-70 feet under Sepulveda Blvd from Pico to Washington, with a station at one end.
Once tested, The Boring Company's priority is a Washington DC to Baltimore tunnel, which is a much busier corridor w/ higher ridership than Sepulveda. They did however show a visionary plan for a network of tunnels in LA... but the environmental exemption would not apply to that - just to the test track.
The tunnels will not cause earthquakes, are not under private property and won't damage houses. If anything the project will create less vibration than regular heavy subway cars
The size of the project warrants the exemption. Sounds like a 'proof of concept' project LA should back 100%.
Building a house doesn't warrant exemption from environmental studies, why does a very large hole under ground. Especially if they are messing with liquefaction and the water table.
Arent there already massive tunnel systems spread thru out the US?
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.