7 ms·

For context, here's population http://i.imgur.com/mcA2hWa.jpg http://i.imgur.com/mcA2hWa.jpg. Kind of obvious, but a lot of infrastructure (esp. for resource e

by glup 10y ago

For context, here's population http://i.imgur.com/mcA2hWa.jpg http://i.imgur.com/mcA2hWa.jpg. Kind of obvious, but a lot of infrastructure (esp. for resource extraction) is far away from centers of population.

protomyth 10y ago
Most infrastructure will be. The idea of using city spaces to put your infrastructure has always been a bit daft. Vertical Farming is one example. As we have seen multiple times on HN new apartments would be more welcome than farms. The cost of transport which these maps show in some detail is small because of our infrastructure (e.g. rail, barge, truck, and vessels). Crops and livestock really do ok in rural areas. Livestock[2] does better roaming between the summer and winter fields. Energy generation is another rural activity. Although solar is fine on roofs[1], wind is rather annoying to live next to and with the possibility of fire when those turbines go best kept away from town. Coal, gas, and nuclear power plants aren't very welcome either. 1) even then, I get the feeling a lot of architects would rather have green spaces instead. 2) ok, well turkeys as we raise them are not an outdoor animal
- vacri 10y ago
  > Energy generation is another rural activity. Although solar is fine on roofs[1], wind is rather annoying to live next to... It was interesting to see just how notably absent windpower was in the South (excluding Texas). What's the reason for such apparent opposition to it? Curious.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    Well, looking at the South (other than Texas), I'm not sure its really flat enough for the investment. To make it worth it you really need a large flat area with a lot of constant wind. The great plains (ND to Texas) is a much better investment than Alabama. I would bet offshore in the Gulf is worth it[1]. The great plains is not exactly built out yet. Never mind hooking all to a grid that can take it. Plus, wind power (traditional) does kill birds and bats so there is a problems there. 1) it does apparently given the UK experience improve the fishing
  - tbihl 10y ago
    I'm surprised you haven't gotten much response. First of all, the South is quite flat (sort of surprised at other response saying it's not.) That means that there aren't ridges where you can get some easy benefit from elevation. The South also isn't very windy. Corrosion is also a huge issue. It's humid, and on the coasts, where there might actually be some wind, you get salt too. Think of how quickly cars fall apart in regions that salt heavily in winter. Now imagine doing that year-round to machines that have to be built with some measure of precision in order to extract the most energy reasonably possible. The only place I've ever seen windmills in the South is Corpus Christi, and I can only imagine the unfortunate people who have to keep those working. That's pretty much it for the South; you don't see many more until you get into the mountains (some in VA and probably TN.) Texas has tons of wind power, but but only in the parts that wouldn't really be considered the South; they're all in the NW part of the state. I won't purport to be an expert, but as I've driven around, the places that struck me as having pretty successful wind farms were Central valley in CA, Eastern CO, and Southern MN and WI.
    - bluedino 10y ago
      Don't they build wind farms IN the oceans?
      - hydrogen18 10y ago
        Yes, there is also tons of equipment offshore in the Gulf of Mexico.
    - protomyth 10y ago
      I'm a North Dakotan so when I think flat, I think Great Plains flat. Last time I was in the south it still had bumps.
    - hydrogen18 10y ago
      Brownwood has a massive installation http://www.ktxs.com/news/big-country/new-wind-farm-going-up-in-comanche-county/12441397 http://www.ktxs.com/news/big-country/new-wind-farm-going-up-...
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    Here's some maps of annual average wind: http://www.nrel.gov/gis/wind.html http://www.nrel.gov/gis/wind.html It's not very windy in the south, relatively speaking.
mason240 10y ago
Which is something to keep in mind when people talk about blue states being net Federal tax payers and red states being net Federal tax receivers. The interstates and railways through ID, WY, or NE aren't there for the people of those states - there to connect CA and WA to the east coast.
- honkhonkpants 10y ago
  I thought there were there to connect coal fields in the Powder River Basin to power plants in the midwest.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - Miner49er 10y ago
    This is correct for probably most of the railroads in Wyoming. Not sure about the other states mentioned but probably true for them too.
- kerbalspacepro 10y ago
  I'm pretty sure those rails/roads are there to collect and connect the corn that the blue states pay for and subsidize.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > The interstates and railways through ID, WY, or NE aren't there for the people of those states Really? How else are the people of those states going to get the things they produce (whethee by mining, farming, or otherwise) to outside domestic or, by way of seaports, overseas markets?
1812Overture 10y ago
FYI this map is based on 26 year old data.

by glup 10y ago

protomyth 10y ago

Most infrastructure will be. The idea of using city spaces to put your infrastructure has always been a bit daft. Vertical Farming is one example. As we have seen multiple times on HN new apartments would be more welcome than farms. The cost of transport which these maps show in some detail is small because of our infrastructure (e.g. rail, barge, truck, and vessels). Crops and livestock really do ok in rural areas. Livestock[2] does better roaming between the summer and winter fields. Energy generation is another rural activity. Although solar is fine on roofs[1], wind is rather annoying to live next to and with the possibility of fire when those turbines go best kept away from town. Coal, gas, and nuclear power plants aren't very welcome either. 1) even then, I get the feeling a lot of architects would rather have green spaces instead. 2) ok, well turkeys as we raise them are not an outdoor animal

vacri 10y ago
> Energy generation is another rural activity. Although solar is fine on roofs[1], wind is rather annoying to live next to... It was interesting to see just how notably absent windpower was in the South (excluding Texas). What's the reason for such apparent opposition to it? Curious.
- protomyth 10y ago
  Well, looking at the South (other than Texas), I'm not sure its really flat enough for the investment. To make it worth it you really need a large flat area with a lot of constant wind. The great plains (ND to Texas) is a much better investment than Alabama. I would bet offshore in the Gulf is worth it[1]. The great plains is not exactly built out yet. Never mind hooking all to a grid that can take it. Plus, wind power (traditional) does kill birds and bats so there is a problems there. 1) it does apparently given the UK experience improve the fishing
- tbihl 10y ago
  I'm surprised you haven't gotten much response. First of all, the South is quite flat (sort of surprised at other response saying it's not.) That means that there aren't ridges where you can get some easy benefit from elevation. The South also isn't very windy. Corrosion is also a huge issue. It's humid, and on the coasts, where there might actually be some wind, you get salt too. Think of how quickly cars fall apart in regions that salt heavily in winter. Now imagine doing that year-round to machines that have to be built with some measure of precision in order to extract the most energy reasonably possible. The only place I've ever seen windmills in the South is Corpus Christi, and I can only imagine the unfortunate people who have to keep those working. That's pretty much it for the South; you don't see many more until you get into the mountains (some in VA and probably TN.) Texas has tons of wind power, but but only in the parts that wouldn't really be considered the South; they're all in the NW part of the state. I won't purport to be an expert, but as I've driven around, the places that struck me as having pretty successful wind farms were Central valley in CA, Eastern CO, and Southern MN and WI.
  - bluedino 10y ago
    Don't they build wind farms IN the oceans?
    - hydrogen18 10y ago
      Yes, there is also tons of equipment offshore in the Gulf of Mexico.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    I'm a North Dakotan so when I think flat, I think Great Plains flat. Last time I was in the south it still had bumps.
  - hydrogen18 10y ago
    Brownwood has a massive installation http://www.ktxs.com/news/big-country/new-wind-farm-going-up-in-comanche-county/12441397 http://www.ktxs.com/news/big-country/new-wind-farm-going-up-...
- maxerickson 10y ago
  Here's some maps of annual average wind: http://www.nrel.gov/gis/wind.html http://www.nrel.gov/gis/wind.html It's not very windy in the south, relatively speaking.

mason240 10y ago

Which is something to keep in mind when people talk about blue states being net Federal tax payers and red states being net Federal tax receivers. The interstates and railways through ID, WY, or NE aren't there for the people of those states - there to connect CA and WA to the east coast.

honkhonkpants 10y ago
I thought there were there to connect coal fields in the Powder River Basin to power plants in the midwest.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- Miner49er 10y ago
  This is correct for probably most of the railroads in Wyoming. Not sure about the other states mentioned but probably true for them too.
kerbalspacepro 10y ago
I'm pretty sure those rails/roads are there to collect and connect the corn that the blue states pay for and subsidize.
dragonwriter 10y ago
> The interstates and railways through ID, WY, or NE aren't there for the people of those states Really? How else are the people of those states going to get the things they produce (whethee by mining, farming, or otherwise) to outside domestic or, by way of seaports, overseas markets?

1812Overture 10y ago

FYI this map is based on 26 year old data.