• TheBest@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    "India is on the cusp of electrifying 100 percent of its rail lines, while China is nearing three-quarters of its network. Over 57 percent of the rail system in the European Union is electric. The US, which has historically prioritized personal cars over high-volume passenger trains, now can boast that it has two electric trains — and more on the way. "

    • jordanlund@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      They must not be counting light rail which is electric.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail_in_the_United_States

      "The United States, with its 27 systems (as counted by the Light Rail Transit Association), has a much larger number of “true” light rail systems (not including streetcar systems), by far, compared to any other country in the world (the next largest are Germany with 10 and Japan with 9).[1]

      According to the American Public Transportation Association, of the roughly 30 cities with light rail systems in the United States, the light rail systems in six of them (Boston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Portland (Oregon), San Diego, and San Francisco) achieve more than 30 million unlinked passenger transits per year.[2]"

      The problem with light rail here is excessive heat makes the overhead wire expand and when that happens, it sags causing the trains to have to slow down. :(

      In the winter, the problem is snow and ice blocking the lines and the switches.

      • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        In Portland, the biggest problem light rail has are assholes parking on the tracks.

      • reddig33@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        3 months ago

        You’d think with current battery tech we wouldn’t need the overhead wire anymore.

        • dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          47
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Batteries are heavy and expensive. A wired power source is so much more efficient for rail it’s barely worth discussing.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          3 months ago

          The best use of a battery on a train is a small one to handle junctions. You disconnect from the wire at the end of one set, go through the junction, and then reconnect at the other side. Saves a lot of ugly spaghetti wiring.

          Otherwise, no, just use wires.

        • Iron Lynx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          That would mean that instead of an engine, you’re lugging around a battery pack, which is just as heavy while giving you a fraction of the range of an engine. Not to forget that battery cells have only a finite lifespan.

          Meanwhile, OHLE gives you infinite range and room for major weight savings. Plus you can keep running the same power system for decades.

        • zaphod@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Battery and hydrogen-powered trains exist, they’re mainly used on less frequented lines because it would be more expensive to electrify them.

      • LordPassionFruit@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Maybe we should reanimate John MacDonald. Not to be a politician or give him any legitimate power (for obvious reasons), just give him a bat and make him a CN lobbyist.

        Surely we’d get our rail soon.