4 ms·

To pick just one point, vis a vis Brandolini's law, > For starters, the cost of Tesla vehicles needed to transport the same number of people as a train, with t

To pick just one point, vis a vis Brandolini's law, > For starters, the cost of Tesla vehicles needed to transport the same number of people as a train, with the same life span, would be prohibitively expensive. Some quick math: > ...the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) plans to spend $3.686 billion in the order. The contract is split into three parts: R211A, R211S, and R211T. The majority of the 535-car base order will comprise 440 R211A cars... $3.686B / 535 cars / 30 seats/car ~ $230k/seat. Of course, you can sardine people into trains more than you can squeeze people into cars, but we've ignored the cost of rail, larger tunnels, and large underground stations needed to run subways, and cars can handle load variance more cheaply than trains, which often run near-empty. And anyway, $3.686B / 535 cars / 240 sardines/car ~ $29k/sardine. If there's an advantage to train cars here, it's not as obvious as you state. Maybe the cost of mass produced road cars is somehow worse, but it's certainly not obviously worse enough to make the project illegal over.

manuelabeledo 3y ago
You ignored the lifespan of a train vs a Tesla vehicle. Maintenance is also a big cost factor. You can run a train for decades with very low maintenance costs, which is just not true for a car fleet. Your average car would suffer from some critical, perhaps non-repairable condition, at 300,000 miles. Train cars last for decades. > Of course, you can sardine people into trains more than you can squeeze people into cars, but we've ignored the cost of rail, larger tunnels, and large underground stations needed to run subways, and cars can handle load variance more cheaply than trains, which often run near-empty. It seems that you are really concerned about personal space, but anyway. "Larger" tunnels and stations are needed for several reasons, one of them being able to handle passenger volume and accessibility. What you are saying is, essentially, that underground train infrastructure is "more expensive" because it is just better: it can handle more passengers, has to comply with safety regulations, and needs to be accessible.
- Veedrac 3y ago
  Train maintenance is not cheap.
  - manuelabeledo 3y ago
    It is cheaper to maintain one train, than the equivalent number of cars. Simply put, there is no way a Tesla car would run 30+ years without having to replace batteries and motors several times. If an average Tesla car would run for, say, 1 mile per minute, and kept it for 12 hours a day (nothing unusual for an average train line), that would average to over +500,000 miles in less than two years. These cars would definitely need to be fully rebuilt or replaced, and I'm not even counting interior wear and tear.

manuelabeledo 3y ago

You ignored the lifespan of a train vs a Tesla vehicle. Maintenance is also a big cost factor. You can run a train for decades with very low maintenance costs, which is just not true for a car fleet. Your average car would suffer from some critical, perhaps non-repairable condition, at 300,000 miles. Train cars last for decades. > Of course, you can sardine people into trains more than you can squeeze people into cars, but we've ignored the cost of rail, larger tunnels, and large underground stations needed to run subways, and cars can handle load variance more cheaply than trains, which often run near-empty. It seems that you are really concerned about personal space, but anyway. "Larger" tunnels and stations are needed for several reasons, one of them being able to handle passenger volume and accessibility. What you are saying is, essentially, that underground train infrastructure is "more expensive" because it is just better: it can handle more passengers, has to comply with safety regulations, and needs to be accessible.

Veedrac 3y ago
Train maintenance is not cheap.
- manuelabeledo 3y ago
  It is cheaper to maintain one train, than the equivalent number of cars. Simply put, there is no way a Tesla car would run 30+ years without having to replace batteries and motors several times. If an average Tesla car would run for, say, 1 mile per minute, and kept it for 12 hours a day (nothing unusual for an average train line), that would average to over +500,000 miles in less than two years. These cars would definitely need to be fully rebuilt or replaced, and I'm not even counting interior wear and tear.