We NEED Maglev-do you agree?

Question

I noticed that none of our politicos in D.C. have been saying anything about any new mass transit initiatives, such as maglev. When Hillary was once asked about it, she said she didn't know what it WAS!

Answer 1

I concur with Andy 100%.  While I myself am an avid supporter of passenger rail and rail in general, I'm not sure what the fascination is concerning Maglev. The technology, while inviting, is far from being reliable and efficient, as it is still for the most part, in the developmental stage. For instance, I believe Japan had a short segment of Maglev but shut it down in recent years due to high cost and unreliability.

At this time, if you're after efficiency and speed at a reasonable cost and ROI, there is still nothing that can beat electrics.  It would be far cheaper and more reliable in this country to develop a fast, efficient, electrified passenger rail system (similar to what the French have done) then spend the billions required on unproven Maglev technology.

Regarding the politicians, unfortunately you probably won't hear anything on passenger rail, considering their track record concerning Amtrak over the last 30+ years...

EDIT:  I have studied Mag-Lev for some time now and while the website you note is interesting, it fails to mention or take into account several things.  First, while they claim to reduce cost construction to between $13-$19 million a mile that number does not take into account that vast amount of electricity required to power Mag-Lev trains; and  yes, electricity is most certainly required to power these trains.  Also, even while they mention that construction costs have been reduced consider that new railroad today only costs about $1-3 million a mile (or roughly double that if you are electrifying the right-of-way).  

So, all in all, even a small, for example, 100-mile corridor of Mag-Lev by their numbers is still going to cost between $1.3 and $1.9 billion dollars for construction alone (to not mention the cost of maintenance, overhead, and other unforeseen expenditures), far more expensive than traditional steel rail.  Also note that all of the projects they do cite are very small at just a few miles (mostly for airports)  and nothing on the scale of large corridors.  (And no, current Mag-Lev technology cannot move freight, they are LRT, or light rail transit systems, designed specifically to haul people.)

Lastly, no where in their website do they prove the reliability of current Mag-Lev technology.

The bottom line is, again, I am all for passenger rail, and perhaps one day Mag-Lev will indeed become the way to travel  by train, but let's be realistic here and stick with what is already proven; electrics, which are far more reliable, efficient, and just as environmentally friendly (if not moreso) than current Mag-Lev technology.

Answer 2

I agree that high speed mass transit is needed.  But, as pointed out, the means to that end is what needs to be considered.

That new high speed railroad must be constructed is a given, at least in so far as medium distance (500-700 miles) travel is concerned.  Even at a modest 225 mph your trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles would be right around 3 hrs.  It takes that long to navigate the airline terminal today and forever.

But, it seems to me that a great number of people who profess to have eco-interests at the forefront are disingenuous, to some degree.  I see the "Think Green" bumper stickers on the backs of many cars, but only briefly, as they fly past me at 75 mph on the freeway.

Those who were here and driving during the oil gouges of the mid '70s will remember a 55 mph national speed limit for the purpose of reducing the amount of fuel consumed in a trip from point A to B.  Then, a number of years ago, DC said "Everything is okie dokie, crank them muthers up!"

So, to them, slow down or quit chur bitchin' 'bout greenhouse effect problems or the cost/supply/source of crude...

It is obvious lawmakers are content to sit on their butts and watch everything go to h**l.  How come the 55 mph national limit isn't a topic of discussion for McCain, Obama or Billary?  But, we can take matters into our own hands without having to have a mandate from DC.  All it takes is the courage of ones convictions.  This is a stop-gap measure, but we can put it into practice in the interim.

But, it always comes back to the same stumbling block :  until people are willing to end the love affair with their automobiles, there will be zero pressure put on Washington by we constituents to actually take action.

It is an election year.  Log off Y!A and shoot a note to your representatives demanding immediate re-enactment of this emergency measure.  They did it before, at a time when greenhouse effect wasn't even on the table; the move was motivated as strictly a conservation measure.

Research and development of lighter-than-air (blimps) heavy lift vehicles, including ability to couple, has been underway for quite some time now with smaller prototypes already in testing.  Who knows?  The sky-train may be taking shape right now...  talk about a low coefficient of friction...  and on windy days, I guess everyone gets to stay home, unless they have that worked out.  I dunno, but they're out there.

Answer 3

No i don't agree.Mag-lev is great technology but way to costly.Conventional hs rail is much cheaper to build and can still go very fast.Government just has to decide we need some alternative means of public transport in America.Til they do were going to be stuck with Amtrack which can't operate at a profit as it is now.

Andee i stand with what i say.On your link from wikipedia scroll down to the pros and cons and read the economics section. And what Hillary doesn't know would fill a large book.

Answer 4

Freight railroads are more important to the enviroment than passanger trains. Passanger trains tend to slow down the freight train industry, so you could argue that Maglev would be bad for the enviroement.  Just look at the difference between Europe and North America, they have great passanger trains, but they use a lot more trucks than North America.  What is more heavy humans or Coal?

Answer 5

Maglev is nice, but the intial cost would be enormous...

Answer 6

Absolutely NOT,

are there ANY advantages to Maglev?? other than economic to the builders I mean??

For the cost of one mile of maglev you could upgrade several hundred miles of high speed conventional railroad, high speed rail like Japan's bullet train and the TGV in France already run 350 MPH at a fraction of the cost.

Maglev equipment can only be used on maglev track, high speed rail equipment can be used anywhere at conventional speeds.

We already have a railroad system in place, it needs upgrading, not replacing.