We really need to cut air travel because of the climate crisis, it would be good to reduce production of new airliners but it's not nearly enough.
It is extremely practical and at times without alternative (e.g. long distance flights, think 12 hours). I am however not anywhere near the field, so I'm pretty sure I'm ignorant in regards to alternatives.
Do you happen to know any alternatives ? Or maybe some strategies, new fuels, or anything that can help with emissions in regards to airplanes ? I'd love to read more about that stuff.
It's a hard pill to swallow, and I think we're going to be seeing more of those situations popping up. We're very much used to "Progressing" our problems away and never compromising, making our lives better by making the problems disappear with technology. But we're starting to see some hard barriers in our planets ecology, and we're going to need to sacrifice instead. At least for now.
Plastic is a good example. Coke won't stop making plastic bottles because it's not what consumers want, but of course it's not what consumers want. Consumers, myself included, want the continued march of progress to make our lives better without compromise.
The COVID-19 crisis teaches us a lot about remote meetings and remote work, and will impose friction on air travel for a while yet, so hopefully this will become a culturally easier choice to make for business meetings.
You still need to secure the land and build the track but instead of a cheap traditional track you need a low-pressure vessel. The costs and increased complexity are really not worth the shorter trip times.
Your comments continue to tell me you don't know any details about The Boring Company's efforts, where the boring machine they've designed so far - from having bought 3 different machines and did 3 test tunnels to study the machines, to then design their own boring machine - has apparently reached around a 15x speed improvement, essentially meaning a 15x cost reduction from the standard cost associated with digging tunnels.
Your attitude is akin to saying launching rockets into space can't get any cheaper, meanwhile Elon with SpaceX has proven that you can get the cost down from rocket launches from $60 million per launch down to $6 million per launch by having successfully creating re-usable rockets.
Re: the complexity of Hyperloop specifically needing a near-vacuum - Do you understand Elon has that expertise at his fingertips with SpaceX engineers? And that they've clearly proven they're competent and able at understanding and safely designing for physics?
Edit to add: also see my comment here for more insight - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23179150
For example, try and figure out how many lines would be needed to connect all the major cities of America with high speed trains/hyperloops with useful travel times. Imagine New York to San Fran, now New York to Los Angeles, now NY to Dallas. Now how do I get from Dallas to San Fran? You can't afford to just make a different set of rails between every city, so they need to compromise with connections and detours all over the place, and with express long distance lines and stopping all station lines. It gets crazy complicated quickly.
Take a look at all the places that high speed rail works, and you'll note that they're all pretty linear lines. Japan's Shinkansen is pretty much a north to south trunk line with just a handful of high speed lines diverging away, and comparatively few stops along the trunk line. You can't do that in America.
I'm not sure that's correct..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_France#/med...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_China#/medi...
Simply through competitive factors they should be able to takeover, compete with, existing transit lines - initially the higher traffic lanes, however eventually costs of tunnelling will come down further, demand will go up as the value of the tunnels will go up.
In Hawthorn, California, the city already approved a tunnel to go from a main tunnel leading into the house of someone garage; https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/09/boring-company-approved... - imagine the possibilities with that and the markets it disrupts because of the convenience then possible.
Or imagine having that tunnel system connecting to the top and/or bottom and/or middle of your street - so it's a short walk away, where a scheduled driverless pedestrian-centric vehicle comes to pick you up, or you get a package delivered to you that you pickup.
Elon suggested a cost of $1 per use of the tunnels. In LA traffic, how many people would pay $1 each way (or perhaps higher during peak for surge pricing they could implement if certain tunnels have excess demand; but then they can decide if they dig another parallel tunnel and earn even more profit) to save 3 minutes 15 seconds on their daily commute (~66% faster) - like this real-life demo comparison video shows on The Boring Company's landing page - https://www.boringcompany.com/?
I think people who are thinking the Loop and Hyperloop systems are going to fail are simply ignorant, unaware of where the product is already at, and/or they simply don't have a developed business-competition mind.
To the naysayers, it's akin to them saying pedestrians will never use a subway system - and with those systems initially it was private developers who made specific lines, only for cities to eventually buy out the individual owners so they could create a cohesive system for the citizens who's economies and people depended on.
Demand for the product is what will lead to these tunnelling systems becoming widespread - conveniently Elon needs the technology for his Mars project as well - and it will be investors who trust what they already see, and their own understanding and passion for the product, who invest funds to develop the technology further to build more tunnels and develop more revenue streams.