If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#192
|
|||
|
|||
The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
B A R R Y wrote:
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:35:03 GMT, wrote: California has a bigger county than some European countries. California is also the world's 8th largest economy. Be careful with that statistic. It is only true if you can consider Califonia as a country in its own right for analysis, but do not consider portions of other countries. However, if you can do that with California, one can cherry pick other regions from other countries (such as a portion of Japan) and put them in line too. |
#193
|
|||
|
|||
The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
Jennifer Howland wrote:
wrote: B A R R Y wrote: On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:35:03 GMT, wrote: California has a bigger county than some European countries. California is also the world's 8th largest economy. Yep, and also has electric trains for moving people along most of the coast. Really? Which lines are those that move people "along most of the coast" with electricity? Not in one piece, in segments, just like most of the stuff in Europe. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#194
|
|||
|
|||
The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
wrote: Jennifer Howland wrote: wrote: B A R R Y wrote: On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:35:03 GMT, wrote: California has a bigger county than some European countries. California is also the world's 8th largest economy. Yep, and also has electric trains for moving people along most of the coast. Really? Which lines are those that move people "along most of the coast" with electricity? Not in one piece, in segments, just like most of the stuff in Europe. What electrified rail segments are you talking about that move people "along most of the coast" in Californnia? |
#195
|
|||
|
|||
The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
Jennifer Howland wrote:
wrote: Jennifer Howland wrote: wrote: Jim Logajan wrote: wrote: LOCAL trucks, LOCAL trains, and LOCAL busses, but not those haulingu the crap between cities, much less across the country. Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going to be any electric powered trucks hauling carrots from Fresno to Chicago. Ahem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive Electric trains work in parts of Europe because a long haul there is what would be called just down the road in the US and for local transit such as the Bay Area Bart system. Huh? Have you even done much train riding in Europe?? Today, one can take an electric train from London to Paris and thence to Marseilles. (For example; there are many others). You think that is equivalent to the local trains that just serve the SF Bay Area? Dream on! The European trains can go a good bit faster too. Even in the USA, you can ride an all electric train froom Washington DC to Boston MA? You don't consider that inter-city? Heck, the Pennsylvania Railroad had electric trains between New York (later to New Haven), Washington, Philadelphia, and Harrisburg almost 100 years ago. Yep, works where distances are short and population densities are high. You declared that long haul in Europe "would be called just down the road in the US and for local transit such as the Bay Area BART system." London to Marseilles, one example that I cited, is a good deal greater than the local BART system, or "down the road." Are you having a problem understanding "such as"? Do I need to specifically mention the stuff on the east coast to make you happy? European and US East Coast distances are tiny and population densities enourmous when take into context of the whole US. Really? Europe distances are certainly comparable to the US, even the whole US. And the population density of US places such as Southern Califoniia is a good deal greater than most places in Europe that have far superior rail coverage/service. Oh really? Los Angeles to New York 2139 nm Houston to Billings 1141 nm Lisbon to Berlin 1247 nm Rome to London 779 nm And the population density of California is why there is any rail service at all. Compare the distance and population density from Los Angeles to Chicago or San Diego to Maddison. California has a bigger county than some European countries. So does Massachusetts. So what??? Have you ever traveled from Detroit to Los Angeles on the ground? No, but I've travelled from Philadelphia to Seattle, Denver to Virginia Beach, etc. So what? You compared long distance trains in Europe to the San Francisco Bay BART system. Baloney! No, I didn't. Your paranoia is showing. Take a trip to Europe and learn something. There isn't a lot of passenger rail in the US because there isn't much use for it other than the places it alread exists, and even in those places, much of it has to be subsidized to get anyone on it. But let's get back to freight, which was the original issue. As of 2000, US percentage of freight moved by rail 38%, the European Union 8%. The amount of freight moved, US 2,165 billion ton-kilometers, European Union 238 billion ton-kilometers. Obviously the US is WAY behind Europe when it comes to trains. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#196
|
|||
|
|||
The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
"Blueskies" wrote Most of the mogas STCs don't even require 'premium' While that is true, some do. Extra octane does not hurt an engine, other than perhaps causing slightly less HP, unless the engine is tuned with advanced timing to take advantage of the octane. Most or perhaps all Rotax that are become very popular with the LSA crowd need premium. If you are going to go to a bunch of effort to get clean gas, might as well get some that everyone can use, right? After all, the gallon of premium at the pump goes for about 20 cents per gallon more than regular. Compare the price of premium unleaded to 100 LL, and it is still a bargain. -- Jim in NC |
#197
|
|||
|
|||
The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
Jennifer Howland wrote:
wrote: Jennifer Howland wrote: wrote: B A R R Y wrote: On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:35:03 GMT, wrote: California has a bigger county than some European countries. California is also the world's 8th largest economy. Yep, and also has electric trains for moving people along most of the coast. Really? Which lines are those that move people "along most of the coast" with electricity? Not in one piece, in segments, just like most of the stuff in Europe. What electrified rail segments are you talking about that move people "along most of the coast" in Californnia? OK, you got me, there's nothing north of San Francisco, but then again, there are no people north of San Francisco. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#198
|
|||
|
|||
The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
wrote: Jennifer Howland wrote: wrote: Jennifer Howland wrote: wrote: B A R R Y wrote: On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 23:35:03 GMT, wrote: California has a bigger county than some European countries. California is also the world's 8th largest economy. Yep, and also has electric trains for moving people along most of the coast. Really? Which lines are those that move people "along most of the coast" with electricity? Not in one piece, in segments, just like most of the stuff in Europe. What electrified rail segments are you talking about that move people "along most of the coast" in Californnia? OK, you got me, there's nothing north of San Francisco, but then again, there are no people north of San Francisco. How about electrified rail segments along most of the Californian coast, south of San Francisco? |
#199
|
|||
|
|||
The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
|
#200
|
|||
|
|||
The ethanol nightmare has arrived!
wrote: Jennifer Howland wrote: wrote: Jennifer Howland wrote: wrote: Jim Logajan wrote: wrote: LOCAL trucks, LOCAL trains, and LOCAL busses, but not those haulingu the crap between cities, much less across the country. Absent the invention of Mr. Fusion, there isn't going to be any electric powered trucks hauling carrots from Fresno to Chicago. Ahem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_locomotive Electric trains work in parts of Europe because a long haul there is what would be called just down the road in the US and for local transit such as the Bay Area Bart system. Huh? Have you even done much train riding in Europe?? Today, one can take an electric train from London to Paris and thence to Marseilles. (For example; there are many others). You think that is equivalent to the local trains that just serve the SF Bay Area? Dream on! The European trains can go a good bit faster too. Even in the USA, you can ride an all electric train froom Washington DC to Boston MA? You don't consider that inter-city? Heck, the Pennsylvania Railroad had electric trains between New York (later to New Haven), Washington, Philadelphia, and Harrisburg almost 100 years ago. Yep, works where distances are short and population densities are high. You declared that long haul in Europe "would be called just down the road in the US and for local transit such as the Bay Area BART system." London to Marseilles, one example that I cited, is a good deal greater than the local BART system, or "down the road." Are you having a problem understanding "such as"? Not at all. "Such as" indicates a specific example, to wit San Francisco Bay's BART local system, which you indicated is what would be called "long haul" in Europe.. Do I need to specifically mention the stuff on the east coast to make you happy? No, just try to relate to reality. Long Haul in Europe is NOT analogous to local transit, 'such as' BART. European and US East Coast distances are tiny and population densities enourmous when take into context of the whole US. Really? Europe distances are certainly comparable to the US, even the whole US. And the population density of US places such as Southern Califoniia is a good deal greater than most places in Europe that have far superior rail coverage/service. Oh really? Los Angeles to New York 2139 nm Houston to Billings 1141 nm Lisbon to Berlin 1247 nm Rome to London 779 nm Keep picking arbitrary city pairs and you can confirm any belief you please. And the population density of California is why there is any rail service at all. Compare the distance and population density from Los Angeles to Chicago or San Diego to Maddison. California has a bigger county than some European countries. So does Massachusetts. So what??? ? Have you ever traveled from Detroit to Los Angeles on the ground? No, but I've travelled from Philadelphia to Seattle, Denver to Virginia Beach, etc. So what? You compared long distance trains in Europe to the San Francisco Bay BART system. Baloney! No, I didn't. "...long haul there [EUROPE] is what would be called just down the road in the US and for local transit such as the Bay Area Bart system." --Jim Pennino Your paranoia is showing. Paranoia of what? Oh do tell!!! :-) Take a trip to Europe and learn something. There isn't a lot of passenger rail in the US because there isn't much use for it other than the places it alread exists, and even in those places, much of it has to be subsidized to get anyone on it. Of course it's subsidized. So is everything else. According to Phil Boyer's [AOPA] last talk in my area, General Aviation receives far more from the Airway and Aviation Trust Fund more than it sends from fuel taxes. That is one of the reasons why AOPA supported the privatization of AFSS services. In other words ticket taxes subsidize GA airport improvements and operations. (Runway surfacing, ASOS, PAPI, lighting, GPS approach design and verification, etc. My property and income taxes pay for/subsidize local, county, and state roads, whether I use them or not. Sure, it would be nice if just the fuel tax paid for that, but it doesn't happen. While railroads need to pay for the train, the locomotive, the fuel (plus any taxes) AND all of the tracks and land (plus the associated real estate taxes), trucking companies need only pay for the truck and fuel. The fuel tax is a pay as you go system. (Trucks pay other fees as well, but nothing comparable to paying for the entire transportation infrastructure.) Before and while the nation's policies started decimating the previously very successful rail industry, rail taxes helped subsidize highway construction. But let's get back to freight, which was the original issue. As of 2000, US percentage of freight moved by rail 38%, the European Union 8%. The amount of freight moved, US 2,165 billion ton-kilometers, European Union 238 billion ton-kilometers. Source? What were the competing modes? Are we still just comparing roads vs rail or are we now introducing water/sea/canal transport? Obviously the US is WAY behind Europe when it comes to trains. "Obviously....?" :-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A GA pilot's worst nightmare? | Kingfish | Piloting | 49 | February 1st 07 02:51 PM |
Our Worst Nightmare? | alank | Piloting | 56 | January 10th 07 10:10 AM |
Nightmare (long story) | JJS | Owning | 7 | April 2nd 06 11:34 PM |
Eurofighter is turning into German nightmare | Chad Irby | Military Aviation | 45 | October 4th 03 03:18 AM |
(long) WxWorx arrived... | Tom S. | Piloting | 0 | September 9th 03 04:54 PM |