Seems to me, that Hyperloop is not only the future, it will benefit all of us and save us a lot of time.

[Remeca]

it depends on the rail
some trains do have a double engine which concert fossil fuels to electric energy and then it uses that go
some other are only via fossil, other full electronical (but they are rare)

No train is zero emissions. Neither would any hyperloop be. That's all I'm saying.

anyway musks bullshits such as other companies shouldn't be taken literally, their only interest is to make money, they are less ethical/green that they would like you make think, but if you do think so, they can bail out taxpayers money over false promises while at the same time sponsor their apparance/pay less taxes or none if they set up things as beneficiary

There is no disputing the fact standard rails are easier to build and maintain than any proposed hyperloop track.

 

[Space Lynx]

No train is zero emissions. Neither would any hyperloop be. That's all I'm saying.

There is no disputing the fact standard rails are easier to build and maintain than any proposed hyperloop track.

if one were to employ Keynesian Economic theory and create a new Great Public Works project to stimulate the economy, hyperloop would probably overcome this obstacle fairly easily, due to volume/strength. No worries though, you don't have to worry about that, both sides of the aisle are far to inept to accomplish anything Great these days.

 

[Remeca]

if one were to employ Keynesian Economic theory and create a new Great Public Works project to stimulate the economy, hyperloop would probably overcome this obstacle fairly easily, due to volume/strength. No worries though, you don't have to worry about that, both sides of the aisle are far to inept to accomplish anything Great these days.

There are physics problems they just can't overcome. You can't have a near vacuum, and also nowhere to put the air that builds up in front. There is also no way to stop Billy Bob from using a tube as target practice and destroying large portions of it.

 

[Deleted member 50521]

My bet is on near complete internal combustion to EV transition. High speed rail would also take a large portion. Hyperloop i dont have much hope

 

[Space Lynx]

I just read this. So, I thought Elon was done with Hyperloop, as in that it is an engineering failed attempt? He just made this comment yesterday. I never know if he is trolling or not, but if not... this could be very interesting. My guess is trolling though, I don't have much faith in him these days.

 

[Vayra86]

View attachment 262153

I just read this. So, I thought Elon was done with Hyperloop, as in that it is an engineering failed attempt? He just made this comment yesterday. I never know if he is trolling or not, but if not... this could be very interesting. My guess is trolling though, I don't have much faith in him these days.

His facade has already fallen quite a few times, come on. 'I'm buying Twittuurrr' 'Oh no I'm noohooot' 'Oh shit this isn't Twittuurrr I said this on hur hur'. I honestly hope they force him into the transaction.

That was the last credibility he had left after all the broken promises on deadlines, Tesla features and even contractual agreements... Now he posts this truly obvious 'Look at me, I need attention' blurb and gets reposted.

Its a big mouth with a lot of money and disruptive tech ideas much like the rest of those silicon valley muppets, always 'failing forward' and off to the next incredible feat to bury his previous fuckups.

Disgusting genius, I think describes him well.

My bet is on near complete internal combustion to EV transition. High speed rail would also take a large portion. Hyperloop i dont have much hope

Transition is in full motion, yep. EV as far as it will go (range/mass wise).

Hydrogen is happening too though possibly not in cars. But the EU is pushing that one super hard and industries are aligning.

 

[80251]

If people would get easely covid or other airborne disease from riding public transportation, we would have millions of cases each day. It only matters what is practical and can be implemented around the world. If a few wealthy countries make a fancy train, it changes nothing globally. I don't see this being implemented in our lifetime nor do i see colonizing any planet as a posibility without a major power source that dose not go kaboom with the power of millions of kilograms of TNT

What "major power source" goes "kaboom with the power of millions of kilograms of TNT"? If it's nuclear fission power I'd like to see proof that any nuclear reactor anywhere (incl. Chernobyl) has the capability of going "kaboom with the power of millions of kilograms of TNT."

 

[R-T-B]

What "major power source" goes "kaboom with the power of millions of kilograms of TNT"? If it's nuclear fission power I'd like to see proof that any nuclear reactor anywhere (incl. Chernobyl) has the capability of going "kaboom with the power of millions of kilograms of TNT."

Fission can. Check Trinity site for proof of that.

The fact reactors don't is obviously due to design parameters, but when things break, there are no certainties.

 

[80251]

Fission can. Check Trinity site for proof of that.

The fact reactors don't is obviously due to design parameters, but when things break, there are no certainties.

There are significant design differences between an atomic bomb and a nuclear reactor. The most obvious being explosives are not part of the design of ANY nuclear reactor EVER.

 

[R-T-B]

There are significant design differences between an atomic bomb and a nuclear reactor. The most obvious being explosives are not part of the design of ANY nuclear reactor EVER.

And explosions never happen at a reactor ever either, right?

tl;dr: You are validating my statement. Reactors are safe because of design parameters. Take away those and let chaos in, and you'll find your guarantee expires quickly.

 

[80251]

The explosions at any and all nuclear reactors to date collectively are nothing in comparison to the kiloton nuclear devices detonated over Japan at the end of WW2 -- incl. Chernobyl.

 

[claes]

But it begs the question, why wouldn’t more efficient nuclear processes lead to more efficient or new (and therefore more, barring hypothetical disarmament) nuclear weapons?

 

[Vayra86]

World's first hydrogen engine tractor.
Like I said above, EV for everything until the use case won't allow it:

H2 Dual Power | De allereerste waterstoftrekker ter wereld

Meer informatie of een vrijblijvende offerte? Neem zeker contact op!

h2dualpower.com

 

[qubit]

There are significant design differences between an atomic bomb and a nuclear reactor. The most obvious being explosives are not part of the design of ANY nuclear reactor EVER.

Indeed, there's basically zero chance of a reactor exploding. The worst that happens is a meltdown, which in the end isn't quite as bad as people think. It's still bad though.

 

[the54thvoid]

The discussion on this thread is for Hyperloop. It seems to have very little relevance to that anymore. @CallandorWoT - I'm closing it down for now but feel free to PM me to open it up if there is any new developments on Hyperloop.