7 ms·

Isn't this just describing building a small but fancy subway system? Honest question: what's the novel "wow" factor that I'm missing?

by altacc 7y ago

mdszy 7y ago
The "wow" factor is that Musk's name is associated with it. Nothing more.
- 3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
  Isn’t the Tesla just an electric car? Musk as a company leader means a lot. I’m sure a lot of other people had the idea for a “Tesla” before there was Tesla. Or the idea of self-landing rockets.
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    There's a big difference between an ICE car and a BEV. There's no difference between a tunnel and a tunnel.
    - elsonrodriguez 7y ago
      There's also no difference between a rocket and a rocket, until you figure out how to make one cheaper than the other.
      - 3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
        The difference between one that falls into the ocean and one that brings itself back down into orbit and lands safely is one is cheaper than the other?
        elsonrodriguez 7y ago
        I guess the better analogy is "an orbit is an orbit". We don't care about the orbit as much as we care about the rockets in the case of SpaceX, because what the rockets mean for our ability to explore space. In the case of Boring, a tunnel is a tunnel, but if they can make them cheap and fast, that opens up a bunch of possibilities for improving transit.
        CydeWeys 7y ago
        > but if they can make them cheap and fast The "if" in this sentence is doing a lot of work. With SpaceX, it's very clear how they're getting the >10X cost efficiencies. Rockets are massively expensive to build, and instead of building a new one for each launch and throwing them away as part of the mission, SpaceX is reusing each rocket many times. Their next-gen architecture BFR will be reusable dozens of times. So it's super obvious how SpaceX is putting things into orbit cheaply. This is not true at all for tunnel construction, though. SpaceX is using largely the same technology (tunnel-boring machines) and is going to have all the same problems going through permitting, land acquisition, entrance/exit construction, etc., same as anyone else. It's not clear at all what fundamental advantage they have that would allow them to do this stuff much more cheaply.
    - maxharris 7y ago
      When you build the tunnel for a tenth the cost, that's a pretty big difference. The same budget lets you build ten times more infrastructure, which is quite badly needed! I live in Los Angeles and things are so bad here that often you simply can't see friends that live only a few miles away.
      - yongjik 7y ago
        But what if it's also tenth the capacity? According to the article this accommodates 4,400 people/hr. BART ridership is 411k/day, and (to pick a random example) Gangnam subway station in Seoul averages at 230k/day. And that's actual usage, not max capacity.
        maxharris 7y ago
        That's only a valid comparison if you take massive infrastructure projects head-on. There is no law of physics stating that these tunnels can't be used for other situations and purposes. Several things come to mind: 1. There are lots of places with lower density than city centers, but higher density than suburbs that would benefit massively from underground transportation. 2. Smaller tunnels running everywhere will be very useful for package delivery! John McCarthy (the man that gave us LISP) explains it in detail here: http://jmc.stanford.edu/commentary/future/delivery.html http://jmc.stanford.edu/commentary/future/delivery.html 3. Let's not discount the strong likelihood of further cost reductions. The Boring Company has made huge strides already, with further cost and speed gains to be had from a TBM they are designing and building from scratch: https://www.teslarati.com/boring-company-line-storm-tunneling-machine-active/ https://www.teslarati.com/boring-company-line-storm-tunnelin...
        reitzensteinm 7y ago
        Do you have any citation for the "huge strides" TBC has made already? The only concrete numbers I've seen have been apples to oranges, either not normalizing for cross section area, or comparing just the cost of TBC digging to complete projects.
        7y ago
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    > I’m sure a lot of other people had the idea for a “Tesla” before there was Tesla. Well, certainly Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning had the idea for Tesla before Musk was involved.
grouseway 7y ago
Maybe the price? My city recently built an overpass over a single rail track that cost the same amount - $50 million. A tunnel like this would probably be a 10x cost run by most companies.
- wedn3sday 7y ago
  The "wow" factor is the price per distance, and digging rate. These infrastructure projects (in the USA at least) are usually extremely expensive and slow.
dzhiurgis 7y ago
Novel is faster and cheaper (because faster and less ventilation cuz electric cars). I think it makes total sense. Rail is so much more complex when compared to an electric bus.
- ClumsyPilot 7y ago
  Rail moves a lot more people than a 10-line highway.
  - dzhiurgis 7y ago
    Absolute capacity is far from useful metric when you have so many options of commute.
    - ClumsyPilot 7y ago
      On the contrary, it's all about capacity. In London I have a thousand options, and every single one of them is clogged at 6 pm. People stay extra hour at work because there is no way for them all to get home.
      - dzhiurgis 7y ago
        London has two options - tube or (half each) car or bus. All suck, but tube gets you there fastest (with probably higher level of discomfort as bus does). Imagine having real bike lanes (and not getting killed) where you'd be able to use e-bikes and e-scooters. Imagine pooling electric car with your neighbour in a Boring tunnel. Even when it's slower you are not a sardine in a sweaty, hearing-damaging tube.
        ClumsyPilot 7y ago
        Options dont matter when roads are already clogged. Whether the cars are electric or not wont make a difference. Bikes/scooter are last mile transport, sure, you can squeeze another 10% capacity out of them or whatever. Maybe another 10% from car pooling. That's it. The only way to get more throughput on the surface is to replace cars with buses. The only way to get more throughput underground is to expand the tube. It does not need to be sweaty or ear damaging, in Prague our metro is really nice, and so is the one in Madrid. The boring tunnel is basically useless, a hundred of them will move less people than a single tube line. There is no space in central megacities for cars and the sooner you people realise that, the sooner we can start solving the problem.
worldsayshi 7y ago
I mean, neither the Tesla being an electric car or an iPhone being a smart phone were new things but they are changing/changed the landscape of technology. I guess it makes sense to listen in when someone who has shown to be more than a one hit wonder tries to do more of these things. Also, I think the point here is the hypothetical way that cars can be moved in the tunnels which makes the smaller size still useful.
spookthesunset 7y ago
It isn’t even a subway system. It is a single lane road for cars.

Isn't this just describing building a small but fancy subway system? Honest question: what's the novel "wow" factor that I'm missing?

by altacc 7y ago

Isn't this just describing building a small but fancy subway system? Honest question: what's the novel "wow" factor that I'm missing?

mdszy 7y ago

The "wow" factor is that Musk's name is associated with it. Nothing more.

3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
Isn’t the Tesla just an electric car? Musk as a company leader means a lot. I’m sure a lot of other people had the idea for a “Tesla” before there was Tesla. Or the idea of self-landing rockets.
- CydeWeys 7y ago
  There's a big difference between an ICE car and a BEV. There's no difference between a tunnel and a tunnel.
  - elsonrodriguez 7y ago
    There's also no difference between a rocket and a rocket, until you figure out how to make one cheaper than the other.
    - 3fe9a03ccd14ca5 7y ago
      The difference between one that falls into the ocean and one that brings itself back down into orbit and lands safely is one is cheaper than the other?
      - elsonrodriguez 7y ago
        I guess the better analogy is "an orbit is an orbit". We don't care about the orbit as much as we care about the rockets in the case of SpaceX, because what the rockets mean for our ability to explore space. In the case of Boring, a tunnel is a tunnel, but if they can make them cheap and fast, that opens up a bunch of possibilities for improving transit.
        CydeWeys 7y ago
        > but if they can make them cheap and fast The "if" in this sentence is doing a lot of work. With SpaceX, it's very clear how they're getting the >10X cost efficiencies. Rockets are massively expensive to build, and instead of building a new one for each launch and throwing them away as part of the mission, SpaceX is reusing each rocket many times. Their next-gen architecture BFR will be reusable dozens of times. So it's super obvious how SpaceX is putting things into orbit cheaply. This is not true at all for tunnel construction, though. SpaceX is using largely the same technology (tunnel-boring machines) and is going to have all the same problems going through permitting, land acquisition, entrance/exit construction, etc., same as anyone else. It's not clear at all what fundamental advantage they have that would allow them to do this stuff much more cheaply.
  - maxharris 7y ago
    When you build the tunnel for a tenth the cost, that's a pretty big difference. The same budget lets you build ten times more infrastructure, which is quite badly needed! I live in Los Angeles and things are so bad here that often you simply can't see friends that live only a few miles away.
    - yongjik 7y ago
      But what if it's also tenth the capacity? According to the article this accommodates 4,400 people/hr. BART ridership is 411k/day, and (to pick a random example) Gangnam subway station in Seoul averages at 230k/day. And that's actual usage, not max capacity.
      - maxharris 7y ago
        That's only a valid comparison if you take massive infrastructure projects head-on. There is no law of physics stating that these tunnels can't be used for other situations and purposes. Several things come to mind: 1. There are lots of places with lower density than city centers, but higher density than suburbs that would benefit massively from underground transportation. 2. Smaller tunnels running everywhere will be very useful for package delivery! John McCarthy (the man that gave us LISP) explains it in detail here: http://jmc.stanford.edu/commentary/future/delivery.html http://jmc.stanford.edu/commentary/future/delivery.html 3. Let's not discount the strong likelihood of further cost reductions. The Boring Company has made huge strides already, with further cost and speed gains to be had from a TBM they are designing and building from scratch: https://www.teslarati.com/boring-company-line-storm-tunneling-machine-active/ https://www.teslarati.com/boring-company-line-storm-tunnelin...
        reitzensteinm 7y ago
        Do you have any citation for the "huge strides" TBC has made already? The only concrete numbers I've seen have been apples to oranges, either not normalizing for cross section area, or comparing just the cost of TBC digging to complete projects.
        7y ago
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > I’m sure a lot of other people had the idea for a “Tesla” before there was Tesla. Well, certainly Martin Eberhard and Marc Tarpenning had the idea for Tesla before Musk was involved.

grouseway 7y ago

Maybe the price? My city recently built an overpass over a single rail track that cost the same amount - $50 million. A tunnel like this would probably be a 10x cost run by most companies.

wedn3sday 7y ago
The "wow" factor is the price per distance, and digging rate. These infrastructure projects (in the USA at least) are usually extremely expensive and slow.

dzhiurgis 7y ago

Novel is faster and cheaper (because faster and less ventilation cuz electric cars). I think it makes total sense. Rail is so much more complex when compared to an electric bus.

ClumsyPilot 7y ago
Rail moves a lot more people than a 10-line highway.
- dzhiurgis 7y ago
  Absolute capacity is far from useful metric when you have so many options of commute.
  - ClumsyPilot 7y ago
    On the contrary, it's all about capacity. In London I have a thousand options, and every single one of them is clogged at 6 pm. People stay extra hour at work because there is no way for them all to get home.
    - dzhiurgis 7y ago
      London has two options - tube or (half each) car or bus. All suck, but tube gets you there fastest (with probably higher level of discomfort as bus does). Imagine having real bike lanes (and not getting killed) where you'd be able to use e-bikes and e-scooters. Imagine pooling electric car with your neighbour in a Boring tunnel. Even when it's slower you are not a sardine in a sweaty, hearing-damaging tube.
      - ClumsyPilot 7y ago
        Options dont matter when roads are already clogged. Whether the cars are electric or not wont make a difference. Bikes/scooter are last mile transport, sure, you can squeeze another 10% capacity out of them or whatever. Maybe another 10% from car pooling. That's it. The only way to get more throughput on the surface is to replace cars with buses. The only way to get more throughput underground is to expand the tube. It does not need to be sweaty or ear damaging, in Prague our metro is really nice, and so is the one in Madrid. The boring tunnel is basically useless, a hundred of them will move less people than a single tube line. There is no space in central megacities for cars and the sooner you people realise that, the sooner we can start solving the problem.

worldsayshi 7y ago

I mean, neither the Tesla being an electric car or an iPhone being a smart phone were new things but they are changing/changed the landscape of technology. I guess it makes sense to listen in when someone who has shown to be more than a one hit wonder tries to do more of these things. Also, I think the point here is the hypothetical way that cars can be moved in the tunnels which makes the smaller size still useful.

spookthesunset 7y ago

It isn’t even a subway system. It is a single lane road for cars.