Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee
If you think 65 billion is expensive, try a budget for a an SF-LA maglev... 150 billion would be the ground floor if I had to guess.
|
I wasn't the one complaining about the price tag HAHA. Long Term though. Maglev would pay for itself. No metal tracks needing constant repair. less energy consumption. Less noise. Not needing to constantly replace the steel tires since...there aren't any. Overall Maglev has been proven to cut maintenance cost because of the lack of friction. And construction in regards to infrastructure is similar to conventional rail. Minus the guidance system. so cost shouldn't double just because of that. Maybe add a few billions to the price tag which seems to be the norm for the systems in China and Japan.