The future of transport: No loopy idea | Hacker News Reader

The future of transport: No loopy idea

economist.com

48 pointscsa14 comments

"... A few, presumably not Californian patriots, have even suggested that somewhere like Texas—where the bureaucracy is less stifling—might be a more feasible place to try the idea out..."

This is a great idea. Texas has vast spaces between its cities, plenty of cheaper land, and a willingness to try grand new ideas. Four or five hyperloop routes connecting the various corners of Texas would be a monumental achievement.

Maybe one of the big oil companies that wants to show they are forward looking could build it? The already have expertise building tubes from pipelines.

If Texas were to do that, I might even consider moving there.

I wonder how they'd feel about powering the thing with solar power.

Think about that again. It would take freight trucks and cars off the roads. The pipeline welders are the only ones involved with the oil business who would benefit. It also doesn't solve a congestion problem, there isn't congestion on the roads between cities. It just gets people from city to city faster, so why would rural voters support it?

> "...a willingness to try grand new ideas..."

Sure, as long as they don't involve public transport.

Texas is a big place with diverse local governments, but a lot of the state strongly frowns on public-infrastructure other than roads. On the bright side, that's changing (e.g. look at Dallas).

If it were going to happen in Texas in today's political climate, it would probably have to be 100% privately funded, and cater exclusively to the upper middle class.

Yeah. We really hate public transportation in this state. When we do finally imbibe, we usually suck at it (Houston Metro, especially Metro Rail). There has been a lot of talk about intercity-rail to connect Austin, San Antonio, DFW, Houston; but it never gets past talk. Fewer people are opposed to inter-city rail, but it still never gets anywhere.

>plenty of cheaper land,

Given the scandals around the Trans-Texas Corridor, I wouldn't bet on it. Specious use / threats of use of eminent domain, a Governor who fancies himself a land speculator. People got wind of those things and killed the project. They're even having trouble with the Keystone pipeline here, even though nearly every fool believes that since it is an oil pipeline, it must be good.

>and a willingness to try grand new ideas.

Don't bet on that either. More like a stodgy old stubbornness and a lack of empathy for anyone who has less. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." is the motto these days, and the demographic that controls elections here doesn't see anything broken (except Abortion, public schools, and democrats still having the right to vote).

>>Yeah. We really hate public transportation in this state. When we do finally imbibe, we usually suck at it (Houston Metro, especially Metro Rail).

Everybody sucks at public transit when starting from scratch in the US. Our property rights and sheer land mass make it much more difficult than other countries that have figured it out.

I don't agree. I think Rick Perry would do backflips if he could get the Hyperloop (probably the best example of a "California idea" around - meaning the ideas that Californians base their identity on) built in Texas first. He's already actively trying to bring Californians out here. Also, there is definitely enough private money here to fund it. The problem, as mentioned elsewhere, is that it's oil money. If this is powered by solar, probably won't fly.

If the solar panels were the only warts, they'd be off of the thing in two seconds. One problem with the oil angle is that if it could be powered by solar, then it won't use enough oil to matter, definitely not enough to replace the oil usage that it could potentially displace.

IMO, the only people in Texas who think that Houstonians need to get to Dallas in an hour and vice-versa, are a few people in Houston and Dallas. Without comprehensive inner-city and metropolitan public transport systems in place, it is just two connected hubs with no spokes.

Also as someone else pointed out, Southwest Airlines will lose their minds.

The airlines are actually the barrier I see being biggest. Also, there is already a fairly robust supercommuter population in Texas. This would only add to that trend, especially if you hooked Austin into it.

>Also, there is already a fairly robust supercommuter population in Texas.

I'll say. I know people who commute 100+ miles daily. If it can be made to link rural hubs with city centers, that might fly. People love rural life, but also love affluence. Agriculture, oil/gas doesn't do that for many.

>This would only add to that trend, especially if you hooked Austin into it.

It definitely needs to link the major cities. It's hard to see how one could justify excluding the Capitol.

public-infrastructure other than roads.

And airports. The Houston-San Antonio-Dallas triangle is a major airline cash cow and a few Texas linked airlines are making a fortune on it. I think Southwest and possibly American are big players in the TX government and don't want any competition.

That's why no high speed transit projects will be going ahead in Texas. Florida, screwed up as it is, is probably the best bet. Or maybe Chicago-St. Louis/Minneapolis/Indianapolis.

I think this is a great idea. But considering how I have enough trouble being in a non-sealed elevator going at only a few feet per second for a few minutes, I don't think I'll be able to tolerate something like this unless they tranquilize people like me at the station.

Elevators are small. This would be much bigger. Have you been a plane at night when the window blinds were all down? The hyperloop capsules would be more like that, i.e. not so bad.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com