2 ms·

This isn’t a true cost analysis: NYC subway lines can simultaneously be more expensive in absolute terms and cheaper per commuter-mile-year. The amortized cost

This isn’t a true cost analysis: NYC subway lines can simultaneously be more expensive in absolute terms and cheaper per commuter-mile-year. The amortized cost of a commuter journey on the subway is a tiny fraction of the cost of and on roads, for all parties. (This is true even when the subway is obscenely expensive to construct, as the 2nd Avenue line is. But treating deep-tunnel construction under some of the densest and most expensive real estate in the US as the norm is essentially dishonest.)

cyberax 3y ago
> This isn’t a true cost analysis: NYC subway lines can simultaneously be more expensive in absolute terms and cheaper per commuter-mile-year. It's not. > The amortized cost of a commuter journey on the subway is a tiny fraction of the cost of and on roads, for all parties. Nope. Roads in sparse cities are cheaper on per-commute and the building cost. > But treating deep-tunnel construction under some of the densest and most expensive real estate in the US as the norm is essentially dishonest. Why? Ever-rising costs is the inevitable result of densification.
- woodruffw 3y ago
  The NYC subway serves 1.8 billion rides in a down year, comprising tens of billions of passenger miles. Amortized over decades of 24/7 operation, there’s no road in the US that comes close to that, even with obscenely expensive deep tunneling. Roads are cheap on paper, and expensive per commuter-mile. Mass transit is expensive on paper, and cheap per commuter-mile, especially in dense cities.
  - cyberax 3y ago
    Do you think scary big numbers are significant in itself? Well, Houston carries about the same number of commuters. At a fraction of the cost.
    - woodruffw 3y ago
      If the argument is about sustainable transportation, then yes: big numbers matter. Scale matters, and mass transit is the definition of scale. I genuinely don’t believe that Houston carries “about the same number of commuters” as the NYC subway. It has a quarter as many people; you should cite a source. I can’t find one for that.
      - cyberax 3y ago
        No. Scary big numbers don't matter by themselves without a context. 1.8 billion rides per year for a 8-million city works out to less than 0.7 rides per day per capita. I can guarantee that Houston has more road trips. > Scale matters, and mass transit is the definition of scale. Yes, and multi-dozen billion dollar corruption on public projects is also the definition of scale. > I genuinely don’t believe that Houston carries “about the same number of commuters” as the NYC subway. It has a quarter as many people; you should cite a source. I can’t find one for that. I'm using the data for the Greater Houston Area (pop: 7.2 million), which matches what people think when they say "Houston".
        woodruffw 3y ago
        > 1.8 billion rides per year for a 8-million city works out to less than 0.7 rides per day per capita. I can guarantee that Houston has more road trips. That's just the subway. Add another 100 million for MNRR and LIRR, plus another 100 million for PATH and NJT. And those are all post-COVID numbers; you can roughly double each to get an actual picture for the volume of mass transit needed to run NYC. > I'm using the data for the Greater Houston Area (pop: 7.2 million), which matches what people think when they say "Houston". The NYC Combined Statistical area has 23 million people in it[1]. Nearly as many people commute into just Manhattan as live in the actual city of Houston[2]. You simply do not get those numbers with road-based transit. It doesn't matter how you cut this: Houston is operating at a fractional scale, and will continue to do so as long as roads dominate its development patterns. Houston's government appears to be aware of this[3]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_metropolitan_area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_metropolitan_area [2]: https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/rudincenter/dynamic_pop_manhattan.pdf https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/rudincenter/dynamic_pop_manhatt... [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METRORail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METRORail

cyberax 3y ago

> This isn’t a true cost analysis: NYC subway lines can simultaneously be more expensive in absolute terms and cheaper per commuter-mile-year. It's not. > The amortized cost of a commuter journey on the subway is a tiny fraction of the cost of and on roads, for all parties. Nope. Roads in sparse cities are cheaper on per-commute and the building cost. > But treating deep-tunnel construction under some of the densest and most expensive real estate in the US as the norm is essentially dishonest. Why? Ever-rising costs is the inevitable result of densification.

woodruffw 3y ago
The NYC subway serves 1.8 billion rides in a down year, comprising tens of billions of passenger miles. Amortized over decades of 24/7 operation, there’s no road in the US that comes close to that, even with obscenely expensive deep tunneling. Roads are cheap on paper, and expensive per commuter-mile. Mass transit is expensive on paper, and cheap per commuter-mile, especially in dense cities.
- cyberax 3y ago
  Do you think scary big numbers are significant in itself? Well, Houston carries about the same number of commuters. At a fraction of the cost.
  - woodruffw 3y ago
    If the argument is about sustainable transportation, then yes: big numbers matter. Scale matters, and mass transit is the definition of scale. I genuinely don’t believe that Houston carries “about the same number of commuters” as the NYC subway. It has a quarter as many people; you should cite a source. I can’t find one for that.
    - cyberax 3y ago
      No. Scary big numbers don't matter by themselves without a context. 1.8 billion rides per year for a 8-million city works out to less than 0.7 rides per day per capita. I can guarantee that Houston has more road trips. > Scale matters, and mass transit is the definition of scale. Yes, and multi-dozen billion dollar corruption on public projects is also the definition of scale. > I genuinely don’t believe that Houston carries “about the same number of commuters” as the NYC subway. It has a quarter as many people; you should cite a source. I can’t find one for that. I'm using the data for the Greater Houston Area (pop: 7.2 million), which matches what people think when they say "Houston".
      - woodruffw 3y ago
        > 1.8 billion rides per year for a 8-million city works out to less than 0.7 rides per day per capita. I can guarantee that Houston has more road trips. That's just the subway. Add another 100 million for MNRR and LIRR, plus another 100 million for PATH and NJT. And those are all post-COVID numbers; you can roughly double each to get an actual picture for the volume of mass transit needed to run NYC. > I'm using the data for the Greater Houston Area (pop: 7.2 million), which matches what people think when they say "Houston". The NYC Combined Statistical area has 23 million people in it[1]. Nearly as many people commute into just Manhattan as live in the actual city of Houston[2]. You simply do not get those numbers with road-based transit. It doesn't matter how you cut this: Houston is operating at a fractional scale, and will continue to do so as long as roads dominate its development patterns. Houston's government appears to be aware of this[3]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_metropolitan_area https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_metropolitan_area [2]: https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/rudincenter/dynamic_pop_manhattan.pdf https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/rudincenter/dynamic_pop_manhatt... [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METRORail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METRORail