Australia

3846 readers

32 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
Politics, post it to Australian Politics
World News/Events, post it to World News
A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

‘The cheap option’?: why the Gold Coast may be on track to build the most expensive light rail in the world (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Alon Levy, co-lead of the transportation and land use program at New York University’s Marron Institute, has spent years studying why some countries are able to build transport infrastructure cheaply and others aren’t.

Though the preliminary business case of the expansion of Gold Coast light rail includes few details, Levy estimates that the project may ultimately cost as much as 10 times more than comparable European infrastructure.

Those include, Levy says, a lack of contracting transparency, over-engineering, politicisation, poor allocation of cost risk – and above all, contracting out to the private sector.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Rentlar 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

To move the same number of people you need several times more buses, which means more engines that can fail, wonky acceleration profiles from the variability of road traffic conditions wears engines and physical road conditions wear tires. The lifetime of a rail system is at least 3x as long as a bus. Many metro systems across north america are still running some trains from the 80s that are only just being replaced. Chips and burrs on metal wheels can easily be ground down then replaced after many, many repair cycles, whereas worn or blown tires can only be replaced when the train wears.

So you're right, buses can can be set up faster and are more versatile on our existing road networks and lower upfront capital costs. In the long term, trains are cheaper to maintain and operate and provide a better rider experience.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0gZPTC15M0