4 ms·

Imagine a train with 100 cars that can hold 50 people in each car. Imagine that train traveling from Houston to Austin in 3 hours, making three round trips ever

Imagine a train with 100 cars that can hold 50 people in each car. Imagine that train traveling from Houston to Austin in 3 hours, making three round trips every 24 hours. That train could evacuate 15K people a day. Imagine if each state maintained one of those trains. In a crisis, Texas could borrow trains from NM, OK, KS, LA, AR, MS, and AL. They could move a combined ~120K people per day (no pets). Planning ahead a week and beginning the evacuation 3 days before the storm, you could move 360K people. That would leave only 4.6 million in Houston.

mc32 9y ago
But at this time they know the specifically affected areas where people face the danger of rising waters --but mayor still had not called for evacuation. Not a general evacuation, but evacs from the most affected areas in imminent danger. Even NPR is questioning the present stance[1] [1]http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/28/546721363/why-didn-t-officials-order-the-evacuation-of-houston http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/28/546721363/...
- trynewideas 9y ago
  > Even NPR is questioning the present stance The headline has a question mark at the end; that's the extent of the "questioning". The rest of it lists every point made to support the decision to stay. It even notes at the end that both FEMA[1] and the state government not only refused to question the mayor's decision but backed it. It's not a critical story, and it's disingenuous to suggest that simply because "even NPR" ran an explainer story, that there's some widespread official or credible base of observers "questioning the present stance". [1] Literally: > The head of FEMA, Brock Long, "did not question the decision," Reuters reports.
  - mc32 9y ago
    Did you skip: >But at some point, of course, those floodwaters do become deadly. If lower floors flood completely, Houston's Office of Emergency Management cautioned, residents should never take refuge in the attic unless they have a way out. They could risk being fatally trapped.
    - yorwba 9y ago
      I'm not sure what your point here is. Do you disagree with that advice, or do you think it means that a large-scale evacuation is called for? Did you skip: > Attempting to drive through flooded streets is a common cause of death during heavy rainstorms. Basically, you are damned if you stay and damned if you drive. Maybe building a float from furniture would work, but I think the Office of Emergency Management knows better than random internet commenters how to handle a flood.
      - mc32 9y ago
        NPr followed up Lieutenant General Honore (of Katrina and Rita experience) and he disagreed with the decision of Houston mayor.[1] And now they are evacuating areas because of impending breaches. [1]http://www.npr.org/2017/08/29/546978194/with-much-of-houston-still-underwater-rescue-efforts-continue http://www.npr.org/2017/08/29/546978194/with-much-of-houston...
dheera 9y ago
> making three round trips every 24 hours This is the problem with the transportation infrastructure here in the US. In Japan those trains could easily make 100-200 round trips a day. And there would be a bajillion other train routes to other cities as well. Seriously, trains? Between two neighboring major cities? Three times a day? That's laughable at best in most parts of the world.
- mcbits 9y ago
  To make 100 round trips between Houston and Austin, a total of about 33,000 miles, in 24 hours, the train would have to average 1,375 MPH.
  - dheera 9y ago
    That's assuming you only have 1 train. Trains leave between Osaka and Tokyo every few minutes at rush hours, and travel at speeds upto 300 km/h. They are timed to nearly 1 second accuracy, monitored precisely by computers, and each station has multiple tracks to buffer the traffic. Tokyo's station serves 3000 trains daily and some 415K passengers per day as of 2013. The Chinese high-speed rail system also deals with similar levels of passenger traffic. Shanghai's Hongqiao station for instance has no less than 30 tracks, can hold 10K passengers at the same time, and comfortably serves an average of 210K passengers per day (much more on holidays), and it is only one of a few railway stations serving the area. Trains scale well if you do them right. Technology has come a long way.
    - malinens 9y ago
      Tokyo and Shanghai has MUCH more people compared to Houston and it makes more economical sense to have more train infrastructure
      - dheera 9y ago
        Tokyo's population is about 4 times that of Houston. So fine, instead of running 3000 trains a day from the central station, you can run at least 750? That's what life would look like if people in the US actually used trains on a regular basis. In any case, all I'm saying is that if a massive number of people need to be moved, trains can scale well, additional reserve capacity can be deployed during evacuations, and it's also a lot safer than having hundreds of thousands of people taking to the roads in bad weather.

mc32 9y ago

But at this time they know the specifically affected areas where people face the danger of rising waters --but mayor still had not called for evacuation. Not a general evacuation, but evacs from the most affected areas in imminent danger. Even NPR is questioning the present stance[1] [1]http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/28/546721363/why-didn-t-officials-order-the-evacuation-of-houston http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/28/546721363/...

trynewideas 9y ago
> Even NPR is questioning the present stance The headline has a question mark at the end; that's the extent of the "questioning". The rest of it lists every point made to support the decision to stay. It even notes at the end that both FEMA[1] and the state government not only refused to question the mayor's decision but backed it. It's not a critical story, and it's disingenuous to suggest that simply because "even NPR" ran an explainer story, that there's some widespread official or credible base of observers "questioning the present stance". [1] Literally: > The head of FEMA, Brock Long, "did not question the decision," Reuters reports.
- mc32 9y ago
  Did you skip: >But at some point, of course, those floodwaters do become deadly. If lower floors flood completely, Houston's Office of Emergency Management cautioned, residents should never take refuge in the attic unless they have a way out. They could risk being fatally trapped.
  - yorwba 9y ago
    I'm not sure what your point here is. Do you disagree with that advice, or do you think it means that a large-scale evacuation is called for? Did you skip: > Attempting to drive through flooded streets is a common cause of death during heavy rainstorms. Basically, you are damned if you stay and damned if you drive. Maybe building a float from furniture would work, but I think the Office of Emergency Management knows better than random internet commenters how to handle a flood.
    - mc32 9y ago
      NPr followed up Lieutenant General Honore (of Katrina and Rita experience) and he disagreed with the decision of Houston mayor.[1] And now they are evacuating areas because of impending breaches. [1]http://www.npr.org/2017/08/29/546978194/with-much-of-houston-still-underwater-rescue-efforts-continue http://www.npr.org/2017/08/29/546978194/with-much-of-houston...

dheera 9y ago

> making three round trips every 24 hours This is the problem with the transportation infrastructure here in the US. In Japan those trains could easily make 100-200 round trips a day. And there would be a bajillion other train routes to other cities as well. Seriously, trains? Between two neighboring major cities? Three times a day? That's laughable at best in most parts of the world.

mcbits 9y ago
To make 100 round trips between Houston and Austin, a total of about 33,000 miles, in 24 hours, the train would have to average 1,375 MPH.
- dheera 9y ago
  That's assuming you only have 1 train. Trains leave between Osaka and Tokyo every few minutes at rush hours, and travel at speeds upto 300 km/h. They are timed to nearly 1 second accuracy, monitored precisely by computers, and each station has multiple tracks to buffer the traffic. Tokyo's station serves 3000 trains daily and some 415K passengers per day as of 2013. The Chinese high-speed rail system also deals with similar levels of passenger traffic. Shanghai's Hongqiao station for instance has no less than 30 tracks, can hold 10K passengers at the same time, and comfortably serves an average of 210K passengers per day (much more on holidays), and it is only one of a few railway stations serving the area. Trains scale well if you do them right. Technology has come a long way.
  - malinens 9y ago
    Tokyo and Shanghai has MUCH more people compared to Houston and it makes more economical sense to have more train infrastructure
    - dheera 9y ago
      Tokyo's population is about 4 times that of Houston. So fine, instead of running 3000 trains a day from the central station, you can run at least 750? That's what life would look like if people in the US actually used trains on a regular basis. In any case, all I'm saying is that if a massive number of people need to be moved, trains can scale well, additional reserve capacity can be deployed during evacuations, and it's also a lot safer than having hundreds of thousands of people taking to the roads in bad weather.