Jump to content


Photo

French Opinion Piece/Anti-Monorail


  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1 Sloan

Sloan

    Member

  • Global Moderator
  • PipPip
  • 12851 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Harrisburg, PA
  • Interests:Light Rail & Commuter Rail<br>Passenger Rail Stations

Posted 10 October 2015 - 09:40 AM

Writer nit picks, IMHO. Lengthy transcript translated from French:

http://voir.ca/phili...s-cette-galere/

 

 

 

Monorail: qu'irions but we do in this mess?
October 8, 2015 · 8:15 p.m. Philippe Gauthier
The monorails are dreaming. They are a symbol of modernity in the public eye, which sees an elegant and affordable solution to transport problems. Yet urban monorails are rare and cities that decide to equip only rarely to expand their network. For example, the famous monorail of Wuppertal, Germany, has never been extended since 1903. And the city of Sydney has demolished his own in 2013.
Is that the monorail rarely deliver on their promises. Their promoters usually evoke their small footprint and low cost of construction, but these optimistic scenarios rarely check in reality. Overhead complex, expensive and bad coexist with their environment. The high-speed monorail project (MGV), two groups are to defend the Quebec public, will not escape the harsh realities.
Technical problems

The draft MGV is essentially based on the idea of ​​installing towers on the influence of Highway 20, in which the suspended gondolas would roll at the speed of 250 km / h. In one version, the project uses a wheel motor should be designed from scratch, whereas existing electric motors offer all the required power. The nacelle, the size of a coach, would receive 50 to 60 passengers, or a few tons of small packages.
The whole project is based on the assumption of very light poles manufactured in series. According to the developers, this choice would build a two-way line for $ 12 million per kilometer, or about three billion $ for a Quebec-Montreal line. It never mentions the system development cost and the manufacturing cost of vehicles.
Yet it is difficult to see how a vehicle suspended on a single rail at high speed and launched can avoid swinging and rails to bend under stress - the existing load calculations are based on the assumption of a vehicle traveling at 150 km / h. It is also unclear how the shuttle could take to 250 km / h on highway curves provided for vehicles launched at half this speed. It will inevitably wider rails, heavier and more expensive ....

 

The figure of $ 12 million per kilometer is disconnected from reality. On recent monorails, such as Las Vegas, the track cost $ 100 million per kilometer. This would bring the bill monorail Montreal-Quebec at a whopping ... $ 25 billion. Even assuming a reduced bill by half due to economies of scale and the choice of a suspended monorail, is still spoken by almost $ 12.5 billion, not including the shuttles and development costs.

And again, for that price, there is only one system without branches or detours. In case of failure - not, according to the designers! - The whole system is blocked. Worse still, go troubleshoot passengers hanging 15 meters above the 20, causing the closure of the highway itself. Same problem for rail maintenance. In addition, the towers every 50 meters in the embankment are a danger to vehicles that make road trips.
The intake of air problems will be. On the highway, the main problem will probably snow and dust qu'aspireront shuttles. In town, on rather narrow, it will provide a piston effect and the wind blows bothersome for pedestrians and residents.

 

An ecological varnish

The MGV will be powered by electricity, allowing developers to avail himself of the electric transportation policy. But a full assessment of the project must also consider the environmental liability, which is not negligible. The production of one ton of steel requires about 600 kilograms of coal; that of a tonne of concrete, about 200 kilos. The MGV represent between one and three million tonnes of CO2, according to the Québec researcher Yvan Dutil.
The environmental cost can be justified where significant savings of fossil fuels with the key. Proponents argue that yes, without advancing serious data. Now, we already calculated that the tracks of the TGV - very busy - not dampen than about 100 years. Thousands of MGV the pylons represent an environmental cost even heavier.
MGV proponents hope to reduce car traffic between Montreal and Quebec, but elsewhere in the world, especially the TGV are competing with plane, train and coach. The car is unaffected. In France, highways are less busy than before, although the TGV offers shorter trips. Developers rely on 3.65 million passengers a year between Quebec and Montreal, while Via Rail did that attracts 400,000 and that air traffic is negligible.
Worse still, the plane, train and bus are public transport relatively energy efficient point of view and transferring their clientele to the MGV, net gains can only be negligible. Therefore it can be expected that environmental damping is still longer than in the case of TGV - is longer than the lifetime of the equipment. In sum, the MGV does not reduce the production of greenhouse gases, it increases it.

 

Major economic benefits ... really?

Whether we retain the promoters or those estimates, more realistic, reviews, project MGV will require billions of government subsidies of dollars. One wonders if it would be well invested sums, while health growl and that it would take $ 700 million per year to make free secondary education.
Proponents suggest dangled huge economic benefits for their "unique technology". However, the MGV not unique. The project is an identical copy of a Dutch monorail project, Overhead Transportation System (OTS). Active for years, the consortium has knocked on all the doors of the world to sell its highly advanced suspension monorail project at high speed. In vain. It is therefore permissible to ask are based on what the promoters of the MGV to assert that there is a huge potential market for their product.
We must also admit that in terms of high speed, 250 km / h, it is little. The French TGV regularly traveling at 320 km / h and Japanese high speed trains do the same. Chinese trains reach 380 km / h in regular service. The magnetic suspension train currently under construction in Japan will have a cruising speed of 500 km / h. In sum, the MGV, assuming we can finalize it would be technologically outdated even before it was built.
To his followers, the MGV is a "visionary" project. But having a vision, it is not about a project to paper futuristic look. You have to offer a product that really stands out, which responds to a real need and that is profitable, financially and energetically. The Concorde also seemed "revolutionary" in his day. But too complex and energy, the magnificent bird turned into white elephants.
The MGV, draft project that sells dreams, is of the same nature.

 

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users