Conversation

The Boring tunnels and systems are backwards tech. Cities are moving away from cars. Driving your own personal vehicle made of metal and plastic, no matter how they are powered is still worse for the environment than mass transit.
1
Subways are made of metal and plastic too. Irrelevant. Still can’t beat the cost. If you don’t have money to pay for a subway, it’s useless.
1
No shit but how many people does 1 train carry in a lifetime compared to a car? If you don't have money for a subway, you don't have money for an inefficient vanity project. That's why this shit is happening in Vegas and nowhere else.
1
Subway cars costs more than a single Tesla. So obviously 1 Tesla isn’t going to beat a subway. But if you factor in proportional costs and factor in the fact that Teslas take you directly to the destination without stopping in between (making trip time less), it’s proportional.
1
Do the math. A *single* subway car costs a couple of million dollars. Holds about the same as 50 Teslas. 50 Teslas costs a couple of million dollars. A subway car makes many stops in between trips. A Tesla doesn’t. It transports the user directly to destination, less travel time
1
1
A single subway car does not need tires and batteries replaced on a regular basis. It is cheaper and easier to clean and repair, it requires less power per passenger, it runs on rails, which need fewer repairs than a road, it doesn't need to stop to be charged.
2
It needs to carry more because people need to wait multiple stops before they get to their destination which means more braking/accelerating in between destinations. A Tesla accelerates, then decelerates, then a person is dropped. Again, it’s proportional to the service.
1
I already explained it’s proportional. You just said a subway car = 50 teslas. Both are a couple of million. Maintenance on subway is every 6 years it needs to be rebuilt which equates to about the same cost of maintenance to 50 teslas (I’d argue Teslas are less).
1
Show replies