4 ms·

High speed rail is a bad investment. Rail systematizes discrimination, typically loses money, and struggles to provide a last mile solution. $60B can buy at le

by mch82 7y ago

High speed rail is a bad investment. Rail systematizes discrimination, typically loses money, and struggles to provide a last mile solution. $60B can buy at least 600,000 electric vehicles with 3 million seats. Semi-autonomous vehicles are already capable of operating as a “train” in a dedicated freeway lane and autonomous operation is likely by 2033 (when California’s HSR would begin operation). This solution could be deployed incrementally, with a smaller fleet of human-driven, semi-autonomous EVs in the first phase. 600,000 vehicles may not sound like a lot, but the whole United States had 370,400 taxi & ride share drivers in 2018! [1]. We need to turn the HOV lane into an autonomous car lane & build the future we want instead of tying ourselves to a romanticized version of the past. [1]: https://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/mobile/taxi-drivers-and-chauffeurs.htm https://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/m... Edit: I failed to acknowledge that autonomous vehicles are not available today, so have updated my post. Note, high speed rail isn’t available either & won’t be until, at earliest, 2033.

aiscapehumanity 7y ago
600k additional vehicles sounds like a traffic density disaster.
- mch82 7y ago
  The difference between small, point to point vehicles that operate like taxis and rail is that taxis actually get cars off the road. I attended Hack for LA a couple years back and 1/3 of the traffic in downtown LA is drivers looking for parking. Switching to shared ride transit will decongest the roads.
  - MrMorden 7y ago
    Charging for parking can fix that problem now.
    - mch82 7y ago
      How? Time would be needed to make an alternative transit option available. Are you aware the city (and private lots) already charge for parking?
      - MrMorden 7y ago
        If the city was charging enough for parking, every block would have at least one free space. If 1/3 of traffic is people looking for parking, they're not charging enough.
_delirium 7y ago
$60B can buy zero autonomous vehicles, because there aren't any working ones! And won't be for years, regardless of the wrong predictions [1] Elon Musk keeps making. [1] He promised in 2016 that Tesla vehicles would have level-5 autonomy by 2017: https://futurism.com/elon-musk-every-tesla-car-will-be-fully-autonomous-by-2017 https://futurism.com/elon-musk-every-tesla-car-will-be-fully...
- mch82 7y ago
  We have the technology today to operate a “train” of self-driving vehicles in a dedicated self-driving freeway lane. California high speed rail isn’t scheduled to open until 2033. By 2033 I bet we’ll have self-driving vehicles capable of last mile transportation, at least in dedicated lanes on the road.
  - _delirium 7y ago
    If that actually works, I'm fine with it. I don't care that much about the tech... the Paris Metro uses rubber tires instead of steel rails, but it's functionally the same as any other metro system from a customer's perspective. If LA-SF comes up with a "high-speed rail" solution that runs on rubber wheels on asphalt, but has fast, frequent, and reliable schedules, then sure, sounds good to me! That's the key though... will I be able to buy these tickets the way I can buy TGV tickets in France?
    - my123 7y ago
      The Paris metro system actually has both rubber and rail lines. :-) Autopilot got deployed since the 60s, and 100% driverless lines since the late 90s (currently line 1 and 14 are automatic, and line 4 is becoming automatic too)
- Gibbon1 7y ago
  Autonomous vehicles won't solve the congestion problem and would likely make it worse. The fundamental attraction of autonomous vehicles is to externalize the cost of congestion. It's like cars in general, great it's just you. Not great if it's everyone else too.
SlowRobotAhead 7y ago
> autonomous electric vehicles Not to argue, but this doesn’t exist. Not really. Not on the market. Rail, however does exist. Further, what is the mileage equivalent of cars vs rail? I don’t know, but I think it would favor mass transit rail. You also compared electric cars to taxi drivers - that’s odd. > Rail systematizes discrimination Can you expand further on this?
- mch82 7y ago
  > autonomous electric vehicles... Not to argue, but this doesn’t exist. That’s a fair critique. The original version of my comment assumed a lot & I’ve hopefully restated it in more achievable terms. I don’t think we can turn on autonomy today & it would work. I do think investing in getting an autonomous transit system in place by the 2030s is a better use of my CA tax dollars than a train.
- mch82 7y ago
  > Rail systematizes discrimination Railways are fixed route. People who rely on rail can only go where the rail goes & have limited freedom to access other destinations. The people who pay for rail (via taxes) are often not the people who use it (since people with extra money tend to purchase cars). Wealthy people tend to not want heavy rail in their back yard, so lobby to have it other places. That means wealthy places lack rail access. Edit: For example this case in Seattle asking if building light rail above ground discriminates against poor communities when rail is built below ground in richer communities. They dropped the suit because they couldn’t afford to keep fighting. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20010810&slug=soundtransit10m http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=200... Caveat, I did my primary research for a single grad school course in 2006, so new data may be available.

by mch82 7y ago

aiscapehumanity 7y ago

600k additional vehicles sounds like a traffic density disaster.

mch82 7y ago
The difference between small, point to point vehicles that operate like taxis and rail is that taxis actually get cars off the road. I attended Hack for LA a couple years back and 1/3 of the traffic in downtown LA is drivers looking for parking. Switching to shared ride transit will decongest the roads.
- MrMorden 7y ago
  Charging for parking can fix that problem now.
  - mch82 7y ago
    How? Time would be needed to make an alternative transit option available. Are you aware the city (and private lots) already charge for parking?
    - MrMorden 7y ago
      If the city was charging enough for parking, every block would have at least one free space. If 1/3 of traffic is people looking for parking, they're not charging enough.

_delirium 7y ago

$60B can buy zero autonomous vehicles, because there aren't any working ones! And won't be for years, regardless of the wrong predictions [1] Elon Musk keeps making. [1] He promised in 2016 that Tesla vehicles would have level-5 autonomy by 2017: https://futurism.com/elon-musk-every-tesla-car-will-be-fully-autonomous-by-2017 https://futurism.com/elon-musk-every-tesla-car-will-be-fully...

mch82 7y ago
We have the technology today to operate a “train” of self-driving vehicles in a dedicated self-driving freeway lane. California high speed rail isn’t scheduled to open until 2033. By 2033 I bet we’ll have self-driving vehicles capable of last mile transportation, at least in dedicated lanes on the road.
- _delirium 7y ago
  If that actually works, I'm fine with it. I don't care that much about the tech... the Paris Metro uses rubber tires instead of steel rails, but it's functionally the same as any other metro system from a customer's perspective. If LA-SF comes up with a "high-speed rail" solution that runs on rubber wheels on asphalt, but has fast, frequent, and reliable schedules, then sure, sounds good to me! That's the key though... will I be able to buy these tickets the way I can buy TGV tickets in France?
  - my123 7y ago
    The Paris metro system actually has both rubber and rail lines. :-) Autopilot got deployed since the 60s, and 100% driverless lines since the late 90s (currently line 1 and 14 are automatic, and line 4 is becoming automatic too)
Gibbon1 7y ago
Autonomous vehicles won't solve the congestion problem and would likely make it worse. The fundamental attraction of autonomous vehicles is to externalize the cost of congestion. It's like cars in general, great it's just you. Not great if it's everyone else too.

SlowRobotAhead 7y ago

> autonomous electric vehicles Not to argue, but this doesn’t exist. Not really. Not on the market. Rail, however does exist. Further, what is the mileage equivalent of cars vs rail? I don’t know, but I think it would favor mass transit rail. You also compared electric cars to taxi drivers - that’s odd. > Rail systematizes discrimination Can you expand further on this?

mch82 7y ago
> autonomous electric vehicles... Not to argue, but this doesn’t exist. That’s a fair critique. The original version of my comment assumed a lot & I’ve hopefully restated it in more achievable terms. I don’t think we can turn on autonomy today & it would work. I do think investing in getting an autonomous transit system in place by the 2030s is a better use of my CA tax dollars than a train.
mch82 7y ago
> Rail systematizes discrimination Railways are fixed route. People who rely on rail can only go where the rail goes & have limited freedom to access other destinations. The people who pay for rail (via taxes) are often not the people who use it (since people with extra money tend to purchase cars). Wealthy people tend to not want heavy rail in their back yard, so lobby to have it other places. That means wealthy places lack rail access. Edit: For example this case in Seattle asking if building light rail above ground discriminates against poor communities when rail is built below ground in richer communities. They dropped the suit because they couldn’t afford to keep fighting. http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20010810&slug=soundtransit10m http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=200... Caveat, I did my primary research for a single grad school course in 2006, so new data may be available.