Railway locomotives or trains (there is a difference!) fuelled similarly, are under development too; ideally for routes that have not been electrified.
(Much of the UK's railway network has been electrified, some more than 100 years ago; but there are still hundreds of miles still needing Diesel traction: discrete locomotives for goods trains, multiple-unit or similar trains for passengers.)
The British agricultural and earth-moving machine builder JCB is developing hydrogen-fuelled versions but I do not know if by fuel-cells or internal-combustion engines.
How did the railway's designer not consider such hazards as deep foundations and earthquakes?
The tunneling machine belongs to Elon Musk! 🤣
Musk moved Tesla out of California because everything cost too much! And into Texas because of no minimum wage, no environmental protections and far far less legal fees!
The reasoning is no different. More profits for him no matter how it's done. Even with the legal issues because it's now stalled. Pick up the tunneling machine and go anywhere else around the world. It's a prototype anyway. One of the first in the USA.
He's making money off a machine that has never been fully tested. I bet he is happy just how far it has gotten. He can now advertise it elsewhere at a profit for less after making a huge profit from California.
I would give better sources if they weren't subscription sources. Like Bloomberg or Forbes. Pretty much the same articles are there.
I don't recall either pass being difficult to obtain. The bus one lasts for five years but my Railcard is a one-year type. Had I bought it on-line instead of at the local ticket-office it would be three-years.
Different documentation is needed for every situation. And often that documentation is hard to get with waiting periods of over a month. Monthly that documentation must be shown. And it's never in person and mostly done online.
Those with disabilities, the elderly and anyone with privacy concerns don't want to do anything online!
@DeWayfarer I might have guessed Elon ("Just call me King Midas") Musk was involved!
It seems to me he has boundless optimism and enthusiasm but does not know the limits of his technical knowledge; nor how to match idea to need.
I doubt his tunnelling machine is saleable. This scheme might be different but major tunnel-boring operations often use custom-made machines not really useable anywhere else as each tunnel and its surrounding geology, are unique.
I believe those used for the Channel Tunnel between France and England, almost entirely through a hard clay-like rock called the 'Chalk Marl', are still in there. The operators simply drove side-galleries to park them in, and abandoned them. It would have cost more than they were worth to remove, they had paid for themselves, and would not be much use anywhere else.
'
Peter Muller, an autonomous transportation system consultant, told Fortune. "[Pretty much] no public transportation system in the US makes money."
I think that is largely true everywhere, not only the USA, and irrespective of type of transport. The commercial bus, train-operating and air companies do make big profits; but the roads and railways have to be considered as expensive public-service items that cannot make money themselves.
Many countries' railways are heavily State-subsidised or fully State-owned, and to help fund it some go and set up "Train Operating Companies" in other nations that let them That includes Britain: the profit element of the fares for the main service from the South-West to North-East of England and on to Scotland, goes to the German state-owned railways. .
Regarding the Nevada case, are business owners liable under US law personally as well as their companies, for employee health and safety?
Two incidents particularly led to the law on responsibility being tightened considerably in the UK. One was the deaths of several canoeists off the Southern English coast, during a commercial adventure-holiday. The other was the capsizing of the Herald of Free Enterprise ferry when it left port fully-laden with the bow-door still open, so the bow-wave violently flooded the car-deck. The latter especially led to the offence of "Corporate Manslaughter" being created; but also to senior directors or owners of the businesses being personally as liable as the impersonal entity that is the company.
Musk's reported contempt for the environment in Texas, as well as for his workers' safety, does not surprise me. Effectively he has shown any large enough US company can just ignore any such responsibility, at least in some States. I wonder if he moved his operations there, and started to build a town, because he knew the State's legislation would not stand up to him as perhaps they might in other States.
One aspect that report does not raise, is the effect on the Colorado River of Musk putting large factories and hundreds of homes on its banks. The River Authority does it best to protect it, but it is already stretched to capacity by abstraction, I understand to the point that the hydroelectric power stations on it sometimes cannot operate. I have even seen a photograph of the river's estuary bone-dry - no water reaching the sea - but I do not know if this was a one-off event in a particularly dry year.
Regarding the Nevada case, are business owners liable under US law personally as well as their companies, for employee health and safety?
This is more a state by state issue than a federal issue. Mostly because certain states laws allow them to get around federal laws.
I can give a example of Texas State laws because I lived and worked there for three years.
Nevada I just can not give a example because I have only been there about a dozen times, not worked or lived there. Nevada though is considered a swing state. So I must assume it isn't as bad as Texas.
I wonder if he moved his operations there, and started to build a town, because he knew the State's legislation would not stand up to him as perhaps they might in other States.
This I can address!
I both lived and worked around San Antonio for three years. Worked day labor jobs because I was stuck there.
Texas, as a whole, probably has some of the most offensive laws regarding labor. And it's because of these laws they can get around a number of EPA and OSHA (safety) Federal laws.
When I said:
Musk moved Tesla out of California because everything cost too much! And into Texas because of no minimum wage, no environmental protections and far far less legal fees!
This is how they get around the federal laws.
In Texas they have a misnomer named law called "the right to work". It basically gives the employer the right to not give work to the employee. Not necessarily firing them yet you better not come back to work. They can say there is no work for you to do.
This was the situation that I went under.
I worked at the CAT factory installing insulation on a massive three story wall. We started around with a crew of twenty. Being pretty good at the job I was the last one there!
Why did they like me so much? Because I was the only one that would work outside of OSHA regulations.
They didn't need to say don't follow federal OSHA regulations. They just said that we don't need you one by one by one! Until I was the last one and the job was mostly completed!
Texas unlike other states doesn't have state run safety laws. Like California has Cal OSHA.
I worked without a lanyard on outside of a ten man scissor lift three stores up... ALL BY MYSELF! Not even a supervisor watching!
The wall was ¾ insulated when I was told "we don't need you tomorrow"!
The rest was made following federal OSHA laws! Just to appease federal OSHA. Probably took them a couple of weeks to finish our three weeks of work!
Time is money!
Note; That scissor lift was the first piece of heavy equipment I ever worked! They hired me with no experience, which is illegal even under federal OSHA laws. They just never looked or asked. They are not required to under Texas law. You either can or you can not! The later case "you are not needed"!
The moment you say you're not qualified, then you are not needed.
The same applies even better to federal EPA laws. Don't ask, don't tell. You tell then "we don't need you"!
Problem for now is that most hydrogen is made from natural gas at scale. So hydrogen gets at peak performance when it gets made by separating water through clean electricity
@Tracos what most don't understand is this process doesn't use all the hydrogen. Yes some of it converts to water. Yet what is leftover gets reused over and over until depleted. Then you need to put in more hydrogen and oxygen.
The output is water! Not exactly pure enough to drink yet it can easily be use as grey water!
@DeWayfarer I don't disagree with you at all on which is the better technology.
But the future is EVs. That decision has been made. The market is moving.
My parents built a new house and they were required to put in a much bigger electric service than they needed because the town or the state or whoever decided already that the future is EV.
It does not matter that fuel cells are cleaner and safer. The decision's been made, the fix is in. We are going electric.
@DeWayfarer just like heat resistant tiles for starship could be a sintered blend of BeO and U2O and it could withstand 5000°F no problem. Only thing is it would be radioactive and poisonous AF.
@MarmeeMarch you better start crawling to OPEC! That's were we get our oil for cars. Our oil is too expensive for the USA to use! That's why we sell our oil overseas! Every drop of it goes overseas for decades!
