Cover of July Trains:
Is Maglev on its way? YES
An update on a topic relating to power needed for high-speed transportation--I wote that there are examples of non-linear results regarding air resistance and size at high speed, and also said that cold fusion in volcanoes was a non-linear process. FIrst, I want to provide a reference for the existence of non-linear physics.
P. Barthelmy, J. Bertolotti, and S. Wiersma; "A Levy FLight for Light," Nature v. 453 pp.495-498, 22 May 2008.
The theory of Levy Flight is 80 years old; it contrasts with a "Brownian" view of the universe. A good analogy is a vibrating tray of loose ball bearings; they will exhibit Brownian motion. The theory of Levy Flight, in very simplified terms, says that every now and then a ball bearing will go flying off the tray. It is easy to observe Levy FLights in artificial systems (tracking human movements traced by cell phone calls is a classic example), but finding natural examples has been elusive. Some promising lines of research have been species evolution and predator foraging. The study cited above is very significant.
The "news" is that I am not alone in believing in non-linear physics. I recently received issue #85 of Infinite Energy (May / June, 2009). Among the interesting (and outlandish!) articles is a summary of cold fusion presentations at the 237th meeting of the American Chemical Society in Salt Lake City, March 22-24, 2009 (by Scott Chubb, pp. 11-15). There were over 40 presentations from respected institutions throughout the world.
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham
We may limit the discussion to the relative merits of maglev, but in fact I am urging my Congressional Representatives to support a nationwide high-speed rail network. If I find evidence for a new source of abundant, inexpensive, clean electricity; then the development of a futuristic system may become viable.
Please contact me with questions:
phillip.bose@gmail.com
Maglev I submit a proposal to the Department of Energy Inventions and Innovations Program while I lived in Hawaii. It involved revisting some old ideas with new technology. Geothermal development in Hawaii could produce electricity for refining ocean minerals, but when this was first proposed after Hawaii's statehood the United Nations quickly banned ocean mining to preserve global trade patterns. We are talking about reserves relative to what is on land of copper 20%, nickel 80%, and manganese and cobalt exceeding known land resources. Also, in the 1970's, the lack of remote undersea technology (semi-autonomous underwater vehicles) meant that mining at that time would have been an environmental disaster. See J. Schneider and H. Thiel, "Environmental Problems of Deep-Sea Mining," Manganese Nodule Belt of the Pacific Ocean, pp. 223-228; Stuttgart: Ferdinad Enke Verlag, 1988. I had requested information on tritium in 1999 before submitting my DOE proposal, but the packet they sent was delayed in the mail by six weeks and most of the references were sensitive military stuff (eg, all zeroes for location of information). I did not get any information until I actually visited DOE headquarters in September, 2000, where they have a small library with journals such as Science and Global Security and full-text Environmental Impact Statements for nuclear projects. Among other things, just the value of tritum produced by a fusion plant is significant (a couple kilos per year at $26,000 per gram). I am still waiting for my current Congressional Representative Rick Larsen (D-Washington District 2) to answer my questions about tritium, so I will refrain from answering carnej1's question at this time.
I submit a proposal to the Department of Energy Inventions and Innovations Program while I lived in Hawaii. It involved revisting some old ideas with new technology. Geothermal development in Hawaii could produce electricity for refining ocean minerals, but when this was first proposed after Hawaii's statehood the United Nations quickly banned ocean mining to preserve global trade patterns. We are talking about reserves relative to what is on land of copper 20%, nickel 80%, and manganese and cobalt exceeding known land resources. Also, in the 1970's, the lack of remote undersea technology (semi-autonomous underwater vehicles) meant that mining at that time would have been an environmental disaster. See J. Schneider and H. Thiel, "Environmental Problems of Deep-Sea Mining," Manganese Nodule Belt of the Pacific Ocean, pp. 223-228; Stuttgart: Ferdinad Enke Verlag, 1988.
I had requested information on tritium in 1999 before submitting my DOE proposal, but the packet they sent was delayed in the mail by six weeks and most of the references were sensitive military stuff (eg, all zeroes for location of information). I did not get any information until I actually visited DOE headquarters in September, 2000, where they have a small library with journals such as Science and Global Security and full-text Environmental Impact Statements for nuclear projects. Among other things, just the value of tritum produced by a fusion plant is significant (a couple kilos per year at $26,000 per gram).
I am still waiting for my current Congressional Representative Rick Larsen (D-Washington District 2) to answer my questions about tritium, so I will refrain from answering carnej1's question at this time.
And again, acknowledging that we are FAR off topic but why bring up the subject when you are unwilling to discuss it?
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
Maglev carnej1 I make no claims about the Earth's core; this is a crustal phenomenon. The Earth's inner core is in fact solid: Inner-core shear-wave anisotropy and texture from an observation of PKJKP waves George Helffrich, James Wookey Nature 454, 873-876 (14 August 2008).
carnej1
I make no claims about the Earth's core; this is a crustal phenomenon. The Earth's inner core is in fact solid:
George Helffrich, James Wookey
Nature 454, 873-876 (14 August 2008).
Ah, I stand corrected on that..but my question was how would you generate electricity using Geo-fusion different from a conventional geothermal system?
jclass--
Your comments touch my heart because I mentioned Vancouver to Seattle, which includes what is possibly the most beautiful stretch of coastal train scenery in the world along the base of Chuckanut Mountain. (I say "possibly" because the train schedule is so incovenient I may never ride it...). Parallel I-5 runs inland betwen Bellingham and Burlington.
The proverbial choice for maglev alignment is interstate highway medians. Train passengers would ride above the infrastructure, and the intrusion from ground level could be less than what is used in Japan. Several posts have questioned the abilities of current concrete technology to maintain correct geometry for high-speed surface transportation, but improved magnetic conducting materials and variable aerodynamic surfaces could allow reduction in the size of the guideway. I am not up-to-date on current research in these areas, as I have yet to get to a good transportation library.
YES, this might be ugly when we could incrementally improve train service with limited environmental impact. As an environmental scientist, my suggestion to support a maglev system is based on its having less impact than expansion of our automobile and airplane system. For example, a 15,000 foot runway and taxiway is probably a hundred times as wide as a maglev guideway--so one runway equals 300 miles of maglev. One lane on an interstate equals one maglev. The advantage of maglev over incrementally better trains is that higher speeds can be achieved for what is ultimately a similar cost to TRUE high-speed rail, which in general requires a new corridor anyway.
Regarding noise on the trains--I have not been on a maglev train, but I offer these comments. Noise control is the nemesis of airplane design: when you cram that many people in that small a space, you NEED LOTS of background noise. Noise control is required in inverse proportion to the density of passenger seating. Also, I do not think the Japanese have been very successful; Shanghai really has the only maglev in public service, and it was built by Transrapid of Germany.
Thank you again for your comments!
Phillip Bose
Maglev Paul- Indeed, I not only appreciate your criticism; the whole reason I started this thread was to SOLICIT criticism. My previous ventures on these fora taught me what to expect from especially you, and your comments are always the most eye opening. As for the veracity of my references, perhaps the most important point I make is the alleged contradiction between the letter I have and accepted science. The letter is locked in a safe deposit box; it bears a special watermark which proves its authenticity. I'll post a photo of the letter if you want. Prof. John Sinton of the University of Hawaii has always disputed my theory, and UH sent a team to the Galapagos to look for anomalous tritium. They didn't find any, but I suspect it was a nice trip anyway. A specific USGS study dsimissing anomalous tritium on the basis of age of water source is: MA Scholl, SE Ingebritsen, CJ Janik, and JP Kauahikaua; "An Isoptope Hydrology Study of the Kilauea Volcano Area, Hawaii," USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 95-4213; Menlo Park, CA; 1995.
Paul-
Indeed, I not only appreciate your criticism; the whole reason I started this thread was to SOLICIT criticism. My previous ventures on these fora taught me what to expect from especially you, and your comments are always the most eye opening.
As for the veracity of my references, perhaps the most important point I make is the alleged contradiction between the letter I have and accepted science. The letter is locked in a safe deposit box; it bears a special watermark which proves its authenticity. I'll post a photo of the letter if you want. Prof. John Sinton of the University of Hawaii has always disputed my theory, and UH sent a team to the Galapagos to look for anomalous tritium. They didn't find any, but I suspect it was a nice trip anyway. A specific USGS study dsimissing anomalous tritium on the basis of age of water source is: MA Scholl, SE Ingebritsen, CJ Janik, and JP Kauahikaua; "An Isoptope Hydrology Study of the Kilauea Volcano Area, Hawaii," USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 95-4213; Menlo Park, CA; 1995.
We are getting very off topic...having said that I have looked up the theory of Geo-fusion and understand it to be an alternative explanation for the molten state of the Earth's core and volcanism. I am unclear as to what harnessing Geo-fusion to produce energy would do that current Geothermal plants (with their limitations) do not? Unless you're proposing somehow drilling down to the planet's core?
No trouble, Maglev. I understood what you meant.
When I watch the youtube Japanese and Chinese maglev videos, it sounds like the noise the trains make at speed is earsplitting. Is that the case? And the ROW structures look formidable. I'm not intending cynicism here. Where is the aesthetic consideration in the creation? One aspect of much of traditional railroading that I've always found attractive is its very low impact on its surroundings. A couple years ago, for the first time, I drove the interstate from Binghamton to Albany, NY. Absolutely stunning topography, except that the interstate itself brutalizes the route. At the same time the exD&H mainline is hardly perceptible.
Regarding wide-body maglev: there are interesting phenomena involving shape and high-speed, this is one reason why we need to "develop" maglev for American conditions. Think of the upper deck on a 747, which sort-of fills a vacuum in the air flow. Also, submarines can actually reduce power at very high speeds. This is what I call a "non-linear effect," scientists are finding them more and more often, and indeed it explains cold fusion in volcanoes.
jclass-when I said shallow, I meant the depth at which we would find fusion. NOT that your comments were shallow
And a correction has been made to an earlier post; minor, I gave reference to a corrigendum to a Letter instead of the actual Letter, and so in my post it appeared that the review of the Letter preceeded it instead of being published in the same issue. Temperature-dependent thermal diffusivity of the Earth's crust and implications for magmatism, Alan G. Whittington, Anne M. Hofmeister, Peter I. Nabelek, Nature 458, 319-321 (19 March 2009).
Is maglev the best solution in terms of energy per ton mile?
Is maglev the simplest solution?
It depends on your criteria. Clearly, our nation plans to invest more in highways and fossil fuel systems than maglev, promoting urban sprawl and pollution. The present criterion is profit. I am suggesting we work towards an electric passenger transportation system where the goal is speed, convenience, and comfort.
Regarding jclass "knee-jerk reaction to ideas that mess with the earth's deep heat," please read my earlier posts. This is higher in the Earth's crust than I thought; until the Missouri study, I presumed the US only had limited geofusion resources in Hawaii and possibly Oregon. Also, I feel a spiritual righteousness of my proposal; it is not easy to be at peace with the volcanoes of Hawaii. Think of the Earth as an animal such as a horse: if we exploit geofusion, we are riding the horse; extracting oil is the same as eating the horse.
Steel rails on steel wheels, 56 1/2, off the shelf -- easier on the taxpayer, the few remaining... Star Trek will certainly provide all the answers -- beam me up...
Maglev,
I'm not familiar with the geo-fusion proposals. I do feel a knee-jerk reaction to ideas that mess with the earth's deep heat. I did attend a presentation here a year and a half ago put on by Harrison Schmitt (last man to walk on the moon, former Arizona senator). His interest involves returning to the moon to mine heavy helium which is plentiful, and using it to fuel fusion reactors. IIRC, a space shuttle load would provide enough electricity to power the US for a year. Also, I attended a physicists' meeting on fusion where the opinion was that commercial reactors were 50+ years out.
I don't knock your interest in maglev at all. What I wonder is... is it a simple solution to what people need, want, and are willing to pay for? I mean simple, not simplistic.
MaglevBeaulieu-- So we are back to the necessity of cheap electricity, and indeed the cold fusion thing almost looks more promising than maglev from what I get on this forum!
Beaulieu--
So we are back to the necessity of cheap electricity, and indeed the cold fusion thing almost looks more promising than maglev from what I get on this forum!
It really does, from my point of view there is no reason to spend much money on Maglev until such time as there are serious prospects for cheap energy, and at this point there are none in the 10 - 20 year horizon. Transportation is only one of many fields looking for more energy. The goal for all forms of transportation needs to be more work for less energy expenditure, whether that is passenger-miles or ton-miles.
Reference for a plausible mechanism whereby the Sun might affect volcanoes:
ULF energy transfer in the solar wind - magnetosphere - ionosphere - solid Earth system; R. Kessel, F. Freund, G. Duma Geophysical Research Abstracts, Vol. 8, 01705, 2006 SRef-ID: 1607-7962/gra/EGU06-A-01705 © European Geosciences Union 2006
I'm loathe to criticize other members of this forum, but it appears that most of the scientific citations used by Maglev in defense of "cold fusion" are questionable at best. He comes across as a true believer with little room for healthy scepticism.
The Missouri study of heat flow in the Earth's crust, published in March 19 Nature, refutes most arguments against geo-fusion. I know that all I have is ad ignorantiam evidence. (That is, my theory is consistent with current observations and there is no evidence against my theory.)
The problem is that supporting evidence is being withheld by government. That is, published USGS information contradicts a personal communication I have from Stephen M. Sohinki, Director, Office of Tritium Production Defense Programs; Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration, dated July 20, 2001. (I may have incorrectly stated Mr. Sohinki's title and office in previous posts):
"It is well-known that hot spot volcanism produces an excess of radioactive tritium..."
As I have mentioned here previously, my Representative from Hawaii was assisting me until her sudden death in 2002. After that time, the political climate and my wife's terminal illness changed my attention...
Now, the political climate has changed. More than that: we have survived what Trains called an economic "tsunami." And at the same time God has landed me here in this beautiful place, taken away my job but given me a new computer (well, mother-in-law financed that...) NOW, all of a sudden, the geo-fusion evidence comes raining upon me! Science News printed an article on how the Sun affects radioactive decay of certain elements, and later published a review of cold fusion. In the latter, an email from the author Charles Petit stated that he felt volcanic nuclear fusion was not as "contentious" as the bench-top hocus-pocus, and he knew "too little about tritium" to comment. But the Missouri study has very direct implications for this region (Pacific Northwest).
And why am I obsessed with maglev? On most other fora where I post regularly, my screen name is "Maui," and I never mention my childhood (1967-2004) home by name. That name was not available here, but the same force by which the Sun affects volcanoes may be used to move trains. I aspire to be a fourth-generation transportation pioneer. My father's role is admittedly minor; he was mostly a librarian, but had one brief job doing traffic studies for the design of BART. And he found a house for us where, for the entire fourth year of my life, I watched the line being constructed at Chabot School. Grandpa was a "big fish in the small pond" of L & N in Corbin but his buddies were Sanders (chicken), Lear (jets), and Land (cameras); GGF was L & N VP of Personnel. One of John Bose Sr.'s honorary titles was President of the Lake Ponchartrain Railroad, first railroad west of the Alleghenies...
Maglev Well, if the airlines don't want more airplanes, how WILL we get around? There have been a lot of press reports questioning airline safety these days, but the ultimate cause is economic. They could build planes where you stand up and face the windows, allowing twenty passengers in two rows whereas now we enjoy the spacious accommodations of just six seats...
Well, if the airlines don't want more airplanes, how WILL we get around? There have been a lot of press reports questioning airline safety these days, but the ultimate cause is economic.
They could build planes where you stand up and face the windows, allowing twenty passengers in two rows whereas now we enjoy the spacious accommodations of just six seats...
The reason for the limited width is aerodynamic cross-section and what it does to drag. The greater the drag the greater the energy needed to attain the desired speed. Maglev, you seem to assume unlimited power will be available to power what ever form of HSR chosen. I don't believe that will be the case. I believe that reasonable amounts will be found, but that there will not be unlimited amounts available. The only reason no one is looking at going faster than about 200mph with steel rail HSR is because the cost of the energy needed to over come aerodynamic drag becomes too high to make it economic. Maglev creates no magic solution to aerodynamic drag.
It's not a bad idea, ever. It's just a bad idea for now. It's not ready for "prime time". Even incremental improvements in railroading have come with painful, unforseen costs.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
MaglevAnd if this IS a bad idea, why ARE we developing it?
Developmant is one thing. a full speed ahead is another. Look what has happened to the A-380 and B-787?
First of all, it is my understanding that the Transrapid system uses magnetic attraction for levitation: the guideway magnets face down. The Japanese system uses repulsion, but even in that system I think the guideway magnets are covered. Maglev construction details are in the civil engineering handbook, which I wanted but itcosts $200; someone please check accuracy of my statement.
And if this IS a bad idea, why ARE we developing it? Anyone out there from Greensburg?
HEY, F. R. A.!!! Maybe we could use some of that $45 million to study a way to pay the $1500 per train border crossing fee for so we can get our second Vancouver train going!!!
blue streak 1 oltmannd 1. Concrete guideways may be fairly simple to constuct - but ones that are smooth at 350 mph is outside of any current state of the art. Extrapolation is always risky business. 2. And, you have to power that guideway, so that concrete has to have stuff in it and be completely imprevious to freeze-thaw issues. 3. Ice? Snow? Coping with track section failures? All outside the state of the art. Oltmannd is correct. 1. Around sediment type soils it is a constant battle to keep bridges and roads level. To give an extreme example I-10 near New Iberia, La. has a 26 mile long bridge over the Atchafalaya River basin that has to have constant shimming and unshimming of the various segments by the state to provide a somewhat smooth and level ride. This soil type is alive among other thing the moisture content of the soil changes changing the altitude and location of soils. UP, SP, BNSF, CN, KCS can handle this by surfacing the track more often. Also the Victorville - Las Vegas HSR EIS had 1100 severe to low probability faults (don't you believe the LOW) that are an earthquake possibility. And that's just the ones that are known. Remember not all earthquakes of magnitued say 7.0 are equal; you have upward , downward, sideslip, deep, intermediate, shallow, volcanic, fracture, etc. and combinations of these. Then you have continental drift thrown in.Ever cross the Palmdale fault? look at how it changes and it is only a very localized happening. All in all a couple days of realignment or a shoefly of a regular rail can be accomplished but if Maglev concrete guideway is compressed or pulled apart then you have a major repair. 2. Make concrete impervious to freeze - thaw? Lots of luck. 3. Oltmannd is especially right about freezing rain. It isn't pretty! Maybe some of you haven't but He and I have experienced it and it isn't prety. Freezing rain loves exposed wires, exposed structures, trees, bridges, exposed metal, etc.Run a Maglev into that and it will be "very interesting"
oltmannd 1. Concrete guideways may be fairly simple to constuct - but ones that are smooth at 350 mph is outside of any current state of the art. Extrapolation is always risky business. 2. And, you have to power that guideway, so that concrete has to have stuff in it and be completely imprevious to freeze-thaw issues. 3. Ice? Snow? Coping with track section failures? All outside the state of the art.
1. Concrete guideways may be fairly simple to constuct - but ones that are smooth at 350 mph is outside of any current state of the art. Extrapolation is always risky business.
2. And, you have to power that guideway, so that concrete has to have stuff in it and be completely imprevious to freeze-thaw issues.
3. Ice? Snow? Coping with track section failures? All outside the state of the art.
1. Around sediment type soils it is a constant battle to keep bridges and roads level. To give an extreme example I-10 near New Iberia, La. has a 26 mile long bridge over the Atchafalaya River basin that has to have constant shimming and unshimming of the various segments by the state to provide a somewhat smooth and level ride. This soil type is alive among other thing the moisture content of the soil changes changing the altitude and location of soils. UP, SP, BNSF, CN, KCS can handle this by surfacing the track more often. Also the Victorville - Las Vegas HSR EIS had 1100 severe to low probability faults (don't you believe the LOW) that are an earthquake possibility. And that's just the ones that are known. Remember not all earthquakes of magnitued say 7.0 are equal; you have upward , downward, sideslip, deep, intermediate, shallow, volcanic, fracture, etc. and combinations of these. Then you have continental drift thrown in.Ever cross the Palmdale fault? look at how it changes and it is only a very localized happening. All in all a couple days of realignment or a shoefly of a regular rail can be accomplished but if Maglev concrete guideway is compressed or pulled apart then you have a major repair.
2. Make concrete impervious to freeze - thaw? Lots of luck.
3. Oltmannd is especially right about freezing rain. It isn't pretty! Maybe some of you haven't but He and I have experienced it and it isn't prety. Freezing rain loves exposed wires, exposed structures, trees, bridges, exposed metal, etc.Run a Maglev into that and it will be "very interesting"
There may be engineering solutions to deal or cope with these, and other things. We don't know what they might be or how well they might work because we haven't tried them yet. That, by definition, places them outside of the state of the art.
There is so much risk going outside of the state of the art for anything where reliability is paramount that it makes maglev a really risky proposition.
I'm not so sure a Maglev line that was only up and running 75% of the time would be of much use to anybody.
The risk pretty much overwhelms the reward, in my opinion.
Aside from energy efficiency, value for dollar, problems with shitching, greater visual impact on the environment, maglev does fit interchangeability with existing modes. Building a new high speed line not only gives the benefit of that line, but all the connecting rail lines that can interchange both passenger and freight equipment and trains with that line.
China had one operating line. But they are putting billions of dollars (equivalent) into new rail rail lines and into electrifying and modernizing existing ones.
Rail can share a line with automobiles if it has to do so. Maglev cannot. Rail can include a tramtrain that behaves like a streetcar in a city and then provides high speed service on a dedicated right of way, like the old interurbans or the modern tramtrains of Karlsruh. Maglev cannot.
Maglev "Concrete guideways may be fairly simple to constuct - but ones that are smooth at 350 mph is outside of any current state of the art. Extrapolation is always risky business. And, you have to power that guideway, so that concrete has to have stuff in it and be completely imprevious to freeze-thaw issues. Ice? Snow? Coping with track section failures? All outside the state of the art. HSR is off the shelf with proven equipment, known costs and known practices. Pretty near risk free on the cost side. Maglev makes my engineering mind very unhappy. Build it at Disney World first. " MAGLEV IS AN EXISTING, PROVEN TECHNOLOGY Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Sunday, March 7, 1999 By Joe Grata, Post-Gazette Staff Writer "...Ice and snow don’t affect superconducting magnets or linear induction motors. The guideway will be designed with angles so most snow falls off or through holes that also allow natural light to penetrate below. If there’s an accumulation of snow, the tow vehicle mentioned above can be equipped with a snow plow and a rotating broom to clear the path...."
"Concrete guideways may be fairly simple to constuct - but ones that are smooth at 350 mph is outside of any current state of the art. Extrapolation is always risky business. And, you have to power that guideway, so that concrete has to have stuff in it and be completely imprevious to freeze-thaw issues. Ice? Snow? Coping with track section failures? All outside the state of the art. HSR is off the shelf with proven equipment, known costs and known practices. Pretty near risk free on the cost side. Maglev makes my engineering mind very unhappy. Build it at Disney World first. "
MAGLEV IS AN EXISTING, PROVEN TECHNOLOGY
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Sunday, March 7, 1999
By Joe Grata, Post-Gazette Staff Writer
"...Ice and snow don’t affect superconducting magnets or linear induction motors. The guideway will be designed with angles so most snow falls off or through holes that also allow natural light to penetrate below. If there’s an accumulation of snow, the tow vehicle mentioned above can be equipped with a snow plow and a rotating broom to clear the path...."
I was thinking of accumulating ice from freezing rain that you can't generally sweep off but will effect the clearance between the vehicle and the guideway.
350 mph snow sweepers? Really?
Maglev sounds appealing mostly because it's high-tech and looks like a major improvement over conventional steel wheel on steel rail. But how much of an improvement is it and is it worth the extraordinary expense compared to conventional rail or air?
Note, I made some minor corrections to the speed of the Shanghai maglev in a previous post. The Transrapid train broke the 500 km/h mark in 2003.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.