Salt Lake Transit News Thread - Page 35

delts145 · #**681** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 12:21 PM**

Hydrogen cars: Fuel-cell technology coming on fast

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_9639624

Honda FCX Clarity

...But there's a solution somewhere over the horizon. Hang on, folks. Hydrogen, the most abundant element on Earth, is on the way.
Honda's new hydrogen fuel cell car rolled off the assembly line in Japan this week, en route to Southern California. It runs on H2 and, instead of spewing CO2, CO, NOx, Pm2 and other pollutants, it will emit good old H2O - water vapor - out its exhaust pipe.

Honda Motor Co.

SLC Projects · #**682** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 4:25 PM**

^^^
I want one.

urbanboy · #**683** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 5:29 PM**

WooooooHOOOOO!

Although this doesn't give us the right to continue in an outward sprawl! We need to conserve water, and those suburban grass lawns do not help! Also, public mass transit will still be very important for social justice, community building, and efficiency.

SLCforme · #**684** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 8:13 PM**

Ok, so I LOVE that this is being developed, but did anyone catch this line "It's expensive to build; Honda won't say how much." The last estimate I heard was over $1 million. the technology isn't there to do this thing in a cost effective manner yet, if it ever will be. The technology for electric cars is ready here and now, so we need to focus on producing and utilizing them, while the technology for fuel cells is being developed further to be an economically viable option. And of course, more mass transit, as urbanboy stated.

RC14 · #**685** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 8:13 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WASDEN

I love TRAX but I've never understood the West Valley line, especially now that theres BRT. It seems like the West Valley line just kind of snakes to nowhere. If we really want to serve the West side with mass transit, cutting down on the number of transfers would be optimal. Jumping of BRT to board the West Valley TRAX line, only to switch again when reaching the main TRAX line just doesn't make sense- especially since BRT is WAY cheaper. I don't see why BRT can't continue down 35th and connect with the 33rd TRAX station, or if there really is that much of a ridership projection along the West Valley TRAX allignment, BRT could follow a similar route and connect with the TRAX main line at 21rst.

I live just a few blocks from where the end of the line will be, so it will help me out alot, I'm guessing this should shave about 30min off my commute DT. However I agree, it seems kind of wierd that this line will end on the east side of the city. I think they should have a line brake off the W.V.C. line at 3100 south and continue west towrd Magna.

delts145 · #**686** Posted **Jun 20, 2008, 9:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLCforme

Ok, so I LOVE that this is being developed, but did anyone catch this line "It's expensive to build; Honda won't say how much." The last estimate I heard was over $1 million. the technology isn't there to do this thing in a cost effective manner yet, if it ever will be. The technology for electric cars is ready here and now, so we need to focus on producing and utilizing them, while the technology for fuel cells is being developed further to be an economically viable option. And of course, more mass transit, as urbanboy stated.

I agree SLCforme that the first few prototypes were million dollar cars or more, as a represenative investment to Honda. However, I don't think that the production line will be at that same ratio. Of course, as the numbers increase and the car proves itself, it's appeal and cost for the average consumer should improve dramatically. Like you, I'm hoping the new electrics will continue to advance very quickly now, and make the gas engine obsolete as soon as possible. One thing is for sure, this whole techno advancement in the auto industry is coming on very fast, and I am absolutely loving it!!!!!!

RFPCME · #**687** Posted **Jun 21, 2008, 2:30 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLCforme

Ok, so I LOVE that this is being developed, but did anyone catch this line "It's expensive to build; Honda won't say how much." The last estimate I heard was over $1 million. the technology isn't there to do this thing in a cost effective manner yet, if it ever will be. The technology for electric cars is ready here and now, so we need to focus on producing and utilizing them, while the technology for fuel cells is being developed further to be an economically viable option. And of course, more mass transit, as urbanboy stated.

SLCforme: $1M per car is probably a little high, even right now. But even if it were that high ($1m per car) and the car retails for less than $50K (I have no idea what they are selling for), the car may make economic sense for Honda.

Remember when the Toyota started retailing the Prius at the end of July in 2000? I was working for Toyota at the time. I know the retail price for the car was slightly higher than $20K. I also know the first year of so, the actual cost to build the car was way over $40K, possibly even $50K. The exact cost was a secret even within the company. I wouldn't be surprised if the Prius today still costs more to make than what Toyota can sell it for. Why would they do this? To be good corporate citizens and environmentally responsible? It would be pretty to think so, but it's not true.

Remember that all car makers have to meet something called "corporate fuel economy averages?" The Prius raised Toyota's corporate fuel economy average high enough so that Toyota was able to introduce it's line of V-8 trucks (The Tundra) and large SUV (The Sequoia) and keep its corporate fuel economy average in line. Both the Tundra and Sequoia (both built in the US for the US market) are extremely profitable vehicles, as are the V-6 and other V-8's in the Toyota line. The company made a killing, going from nowhere in large truck sales to a solid number three behind Ford and Chevy.

Honda is a different story. They blew their technology lead in hybrid vehicles and had to license in Toyota technology to stay abreast. They also positioned themselves to make money off their V-6's and their Ridgeline and Pilot vehicles. But Honda is so small compared to Toyota, and they will never have the capacity to make big trucks, their continued push into the hybrid market, as well as the hydrogen market, appears to be more than just economically motivated.

I, too, WANT one of the hydrogen cars, although I am not aware of any infrastructure in Georgia (my home) that would allow me to drive it much. I would just like to play with the technology.

delts145 · #**688** Posted **Jun 21, 2008, 1:40 PM**

If you guys hadn't already caught this, I thought we ought to check it out. A lot of attractive features. Metro Sacramento and Metro Salt Lake City are pretty much the same in terms of population. I would assume the pressure to expand SLC Int. is even greater than Sac. because of it's hub importance. Perhaps, Skyguy and a few others can clue us in on how the two markets compare. Also, what features of Sac. Int. would be an attractive addition to SLC.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urban_encounter

Airport launches giant expansion project (Sacramento)
By Tony Bizjak - [email protected]
Published 12:00 am PDT Friday, June 20, 2008
Story appeared in METRO section, Page B1

After eight years of planning, Sacramento officials on Thursday ceremoniously launched what they say may be the county's biggest project ever – a $1.27 billion expansion of Sacramento International Airport.

"This is going to be a fabulous front door" to the Sacramento region, airport executive Terry Schutten said during a groundbreaking event at the airport's Terminal B parking lot. After eight years of planning, crews begin preliminary work next month on a four-story, steel-and-glass terminal to replace undersized and outmoded Terminal B.

Airport director Hardy Acree said the expansion will establish the Natomas facility as the "airport of choice" for Northern California.
The project will be paid for by airport revenues, including airline fees and rents, parking fees, concession rents and passenger ticket surcharges. Airlines have criticized the project as too large and expensive, and complain the timing is bad. The airline industry is reeling from skyrocketing gas prices. In response, airlines have increased ticket prices and baggage fees and are reducing flights nationally, including some in and out of Sacramento.

But Sacramento County officials say the expansion is appropriate for a region expected to grow substantially in coming decades. "You have to look forward 20 years," said Jimmie Yee, chairman of the county Board of Supervisors. "You can't build a major project in the context of this month's news; you have to build in the context of decades," Supervisor Roger Dickinson added.

At the end of July, the on-site Host Airport Hotel will be closed and demolished to make room for the new terminal. Both terminals A and B will remain open throughout construction. Some airport roads will be redirected next month to make room for the project, officials said. Crews will begin building new airplane parking spots early next month to replace space that will be eliminated when a new concourse is constructed.

The new terminal, which will house a mid-rise hotel, should be under construction by the end of the year.
The new terminal is projected to open at the end of 2011. The existing Terminal B then will be torn down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85Rmpf1_Wj8
Corgan Presentation Video

(All renderings from Corgan Associates)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85Rmpf1_Wj8
Corgan Presentation Video

Current Configuration:

Planned Configuration:

Future Build out 2020 and beyond

i-215 · #**689** Posted **Jun 21, 2008, 3:36 PM**

Ah man! I thought for a second those were renderings for our airport. The whole set-up letting the LRT drive right into the terminal is awesome!!! I hope SLC does that when we're done.

RFPCME · #**690** Posted **Jun 22, 2008, 1:32 AM**

Delts: Thanks for the post on the Sac airport...The renderings are wonderful! I hope SLC gets the same vision!

skyguy414 · #**691** Posted **Jun 22, 2008, 2:17 AM**

The Sacramento renderings look very nice indeed. For a US airport, that is some nice architecture. Building the terminal with seperate levels for check-in and baggage claim is smart and saves lots of space. SLC will do the same when they decide to build.

The layout they chose is ok for a non-hub airport like Sacramento, but would not be good for airports like SLC. The plans for SLC would attach one concourse to a single large terminal and then have an underground train running from the terminal/main concourse to a seperate satellite concourse, similar to the Denver airport but with one less concourse.

delts145 · #**692** Posted **Jun 23, 2008, 12:59 PM**

Three million pounds in motion along Utah's I-80

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700237176,00.html

Construction workers prepare the way for the first of seven bridges being moved as it crosses 1300 South on Saturday. The work will result in traffic restrictions on I-80 through the first week of August. (Geoffrey Mcallister, Deseret News)

Hundreds watch Saturday as a bridge is slowly moved from 1300 East to Highland drive. The project was delayed because of concerns about a beam. (Geoffrey Mcallister, Deseret News)

.

delts145 · #**693** Posted **Jun 27, 2008, 12:33 PM**

a cheaper commute - Study shows hybrids, bikes, trains on a roll in Utah

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_9714565?source=rv

Ruthann Shurtleff exits a TRAX car filled with other bike commuters after she stopped driving last December and sold her car last month. With the price of gas skyrocketing more commuters are using alternate forms of transportation. (Francisco Kjolseth/The Salt Lake Tribune)

Ruben Schoenefeld, of Midvale, who recently took delivery of a Smart car, shows off his gas sipping investment Thursday in Salt Lake City. The 6-foot-9 computer programmer with the Utah Department of Transportation says the small Smart car is very comfortable. He waited a year on a waiting list to get hold of his car that averages about 36 miles per gallon. (Jim Urquhart/The Salt Lake Tribune)

^^^

I don't know about you guys, but I'm thinking a car that looks like that, should be averaging at least 50 miles to the gallon, not 36.

.

Neuroguy · #**694** Posted **Jun 27, 2008, 2:02 PM**

Yeah that seems like poor mileage for a "smart car." After all, I get about 34 mpg (hwy) with my 2000 Jetta, and it is completely paid for. My bike works great for around town. That seems pretty smart to me.

delts145 · #**695** Posted **Jun 27, 2008, 2:11 PM**

Aaaaamen Neuroguy!!!

SLC Projects · #**696** Posted **Jun 27, 2008, 5:22 PM**

I wounder what is the top speed of a smart car? They look like death traps to me if you were to get in to a crash in one.

urbanboy · #**697** Posted **Jun 27, 2008, 8:50 PM**

Here Projects, I found a Smart Car crash test video on youtube: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s

After watching this, I don't think it's any more of a death trap than most automobiles.

delts145 · #**698** Posted **Jun 27, 2008, 8:59 PM**

I still wouln't call it a 'smart car' at least not until they are smart enough to up the mileage by a significant amount. There are too many 'almost new,excellent condition' car models out there with as good of gas mileage, far more comfort and passenger room, and at a better price.

Neuroguy · #**699** Posted **Jun 27, 2008, 11:37 PM**

If any are interested here is a link to the IIHS report on the Smart Car.

http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr051408.html

Interesting to note that it did remarkably well, but this is one key factor not to overlook:

"The Institute's test results generally demonstrate how well vehicles stack up against others of similar size and weight. Frontal ratings can't be compared across weight classes, meaning a small car that earns a good rating isn't safer than a large car that's rated less than good."

As a commuter option it would probably be fine, but I'd still worry about all these high standing trucks and SUV's whose bumpers (not to mention trailer hitches) would probably be about face height when seated in this thing. That would be quite the way to go wouldn't it, impaled by a trailer hitch and having the last thing you see is some dude's truck balls heading for your face!

SLC Projects · #**700** Posted **Jun 28, 2008, 6:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanboy

Here Projects, I found a Smart Car crash test video on youtube: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s

After watching this, I don't think it's any more of a death trap than most automobiles.

Thanks. Looks like both cars in that test took about the same beating.