7 ms·
Rising Waters Are Drowning Amtrak's Northeast Corridor
- hprotagonist 8y agoEven a decade ago, some long stretches through connecticut reminded me a lot of the tramway sequence in Spirited Away: https://vimeo.com/91985775 https://vimeo.com/91985775
- arethuza 8y agoThe train I get along the Fife coast on the way into Edinburgh is so close to the sea I often find myself wondering if you could jump from the train into the sea...
- abstractbeliefs 8y agoProbably could between Aberdour and Burntisland, as you pass silver sands
- peterhj 8y agoIn the Bay Area today, a section of Amtrak's Capital Corridor passes through the salt ponds and the Baylands marshes which is also quite reminiscent.
- mistrial9 8y agothe California reference document on this topic might be .. a 71 page April 2017 pdf .. "Rising Seas in California -- an Update on Sea-Level Rise Science" through California OPC_SAT
- koops 8y agoLink: http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/docs/rising-seas-in-california-an-update-on-sea-level-rise-science.pdf http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/pdf/docs/rising-seas-in-... It's a few pages before it becomes California-specific.
- koops 8y agoThe US east coast has post-glacial rebound and Atlantic meridional overturning circulation slowdown to compound their sea-level problems. But most the rise is nothing special compared the rest of the world, which is the worst part of this.
- jackcarter 8y agoWon't post-glacial rebound counteract rising sea levels?
- koops 8y agoUnfortunately no, not here. The metaphor I've heard is continent as couch cushion: the glacier was "sitting" on the upper part of North America, pushing up the edges. Now that weight is gone, the coasts are dropping slightly.
- zaroth 8y agoIt’s fantastic and even mildly hilarious that this is a real effect at such a massive scale.
- darkerside 8y agoIf it's sitting on top, wouldn't it push down? Or do you mean upper as in north?
- jackcarter 8y agoAh, that’s interesting and believable. Do you know where you heard that? I found this article, which talks about a slightly different effect: If Antarctic ice melts more quickly than arctic ice, then the Antarctic land rebound will shove southern-hemisphere water north, raising sea levels in the northern hemisphere. The opposite effect happens if arctic ice melts before Antarctic ice. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/01/cities-sink-sea-first-earth-submerge-coastline https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/01/cities...
- 8y ago
- mikejulietbravo 8y agoAs a very frequent Amtrak rider, I’m pretty conflicted here. On one hand, climate change is bad. On the other hand, giving the Amtrak fleet a bath, or altogether destroying it sounds pretty good to me.
- jeklj 8y agoCome on
- pavel_lishin 8y ago> On the other hand, giving the Amtrak fleet a bath, or altogether destroying it sounds pretty good to me. Why?
- ams6110 8y agoAmtrak is hands-down the worst passenger rail service I've ever used, out of services in four different countries. I will say I've never used Amtrak in the Northeast which I understand is somewhat better than the rest of the country, but that's not saying much.
- darkerside 8y agoNortheast corridor is not perfect, but very usable. Much preferred to flying between most of Boston, NY, Philly, DC, etc.
- 13of40 8y agoI've only used it on the west coast, but it seems like the service, cleanliness, etc. are comparable to European and Asian trains, but because the Amtrak trains are super slow and the distances here are so much greater, riding anywhere on it is a terrible experience. Not to mention the fact that it's almost as expensive as flying. (Just checked and it would cost me $79 to fly to Portland from Seattle and $53 to take the train. Kind of a no-brainer.)
- pavel_lishin 8y ago
- jonas21 8y ago> The report’s authors estimated the initial cost of protecting the study area to be $78 million, based on the premise that water levels around Wilmington would rise 2 feet by 2050. That's a drop in the bucket compared to Amtrak's $38 billion maintenance backlog or the $13 billion Hudson tunnel project. Out of all the potential effects of climate change, this seems like one of the least worrisome -- we even know how to fix it already!
- koops 8y agoThe $78 million is for ten miles of the 457-mile corridor for the sea-level rise estimated for 2050. And the rise will only accelerate after 2050. But yes, that does seem like a low figure.
- cabaalis 8y ago> based on the premise that water levels around Wilmington would rise 2 feet by 2050. I'm curious. I've been hearing about the expected effects of climate change for many years. At least since ~2005 or 2006. Are there any predictions of conditions in 2000, or 2020, which have panned out as predicted?
- koops 8y agoI don't know about sea level rise prediction accuracy, but temperature "hindcasts" hold up pretty well: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-m...
- cagenut 8y agoIt is astounding how spot on it has all been. The data is so crystal clear.
- rfinney 8y agoI keep seeing charts that say otherwise: https://cei.org/sites/default/files/Figure%201.JPG https://cei.org/sites/default/files/Figure%201.JPG . This suggests the models are not accurate. Who is right?
- CodeSheikh 8y agoBlessing in disguise here for Amtrack and a great opportunity to do an overhaul of a subset of the one of the oldest railroad infrastructure in the USA. Many lessons we can learn from European counterparts.
- caymanjim 8y agoIt's not easy to move a rail line. It's politically and economically infeasible. Amtrak hugs the coast in the northeast in part because that land is useless for anything else. Much like the subways, bridges, tunnels, roads, and every other piece of transit infrastructure in the northeast, the rail problems are systemic and it's a huge effort just to keep things moving at all. This isn't a blessing; it's a snapshot of one of dozens of problems that are just as urgently in need of investment.
- dmckeon 8y agoAmazing how most of the reactions equate “move” to “relocate to a different corridor” without offering the costs of “elevate the trackage in the same corridor”. Not cheap, to be sure, but avoids the land cost/urban planning morass of how to relocate major infrastructure. While we’re at it, make the elevated passenger trackage be serious high-speed rail, instead of the max. 125mph (~200kph) it is now.
- bobthepanda 8y agoAmtrak's long-term vision did involve moving away from the coast and swinging up future HSR via Hartford and western Massachusetts. I say "did", because politicians from eastern Connecticut and Rhode Island were understandably not thrilled about losing their existing high-ish speed services.
- CodeSheikh 8y ago"politically and economically" this is the problem right there. When people graciously justify (and subconsciously) roadblock to any advancement and progress economical and political issues. If Amtrack pauses its service segment-by-segment so they get to focus on re-building infrastructure then I believe It will not have that much of a negative impact on travelers, at least. People can always resort to other traveling alternatives(buses, cars, planes). Heck, it is economical to travel from NYC to DC by bus vs train. Train gets you in 3 hours for $200 and bus gets you in 4 hours for $19. For me, $200 is worth paying if I get to DC in an hour! Yes there will be job displacements while the overhaul is underway. But for numbers sake, more job will be created as part of the overhaul. By politics I assume you meant unions. It is a rabbit-hole debate but I will say this that unions have done more damage to the infrastructure progress than any other political entity in northeast USA.
- zachrose 8y agoI was on a road trip throughout a lot of different parts of America last month. A park ranger in Big Bend told me that a tributary creek of the Rio Grande was a hundred feet wide, when normally you can just jump over it. A lakeside highway rest area in North Carolina was flooded up to a permanently mounted bench and trash can.
- amvalo 8y agoHuh? Big bend is nowhere near sea level..
- moate 8y agoRising temperatures melting glacial/mountain ice more dramatically contributing to river water carry? I'm not saying that's specifically the case, just throwing out a possible hypothesis. Plenty of others exist (bad rainy season, tributary re-routing due to industry, removal of forested areas that would have previously soaked up water, etc). Could be a global warming thing, could be a seasonal thing, could be anything really.
- tbihl 8y agoAs a general rule, higher temperatures lead to atrophied snowmelt rivers because there's not as much accumulation. That's one of the contributing factors for water problems in a lot of Western (U.S.) areas.
- moate 8y agoGood point, but OP didn't mention if this was an isolated incident (the hot summer that burns off more cap snow which will never get replenished) or a sustained thing (this used to be a 4 foot stream, but for the last 5 years it's been 100 feet wide instead). Who knows what's actually going on in this story. I'm not saying it's anything one way or the other since this is a hyper-empirical piece of data to be working off of. Based on context I'm assuming OP meant to imply that this is a sign of rising water levels, but I was just posting some alternate theories.
- sailfast 8y ago> Water levels around Wilmington would rise 2 feet by 2050. That reflects the median of possible warming scenarios 2 feet is the median!? And things continue to accelerate? I thought I followed climate change issues but somehow did not know that in most people's lifetimes sea levels will rise multiple feet. I would've thought folks would be more... concerned? The maps of New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut look like they are going to cost us billions to trillions to mitigate between now and 2100.
- akiselev 8y agoWhen people talk about sea level rise, they usually mean the global average sea level, or the change in total amount of liquid water in the ocean. When talking about local sea level rise, they usually mean the change in maximum high tide. Given all the unique coastlines, gravitational/water tides, and temperature differences, an average global sea rise means different things to different regions. A shallow bay in the tropics that is right in the way of ocean currents, for example, can see an order of magnitude more change in high tide than the global sea level, let alone during surges and swells.
- throwaway7312 8y ago> I thought I followed climate change issues but somehow did not know that in most people's lifetimes sea levels will rise multiple feet. I would've thought folks would be more... concerned? According to Sir David King (head U.K. climate scientist) in 2004, all continents other than Antarctica will be uninhabitable by 2100 due to manmade global warming.[1] I wouldn't be worried about New York. I'd be on the next ship down to Antarctica to go stake my land claim right now before it all gets gobbled up. I mean, if this manmade global warming stuff is real, and it's as bad as they say it is. [1] http://web.archive.org/web/20100817023019/http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/why-antarctica-will-soon-be-the-ionlyi-place-to-live--literally-561947.html http://web.archive.org/web/20100817023019/http://www.indepen...
- superjan 8y agoKing is not stating that here. He just says that the earth was no fun place to be, the last time greenhouse gasses were as high as they’ll likely be in 2100.
- LiamMcCalloway 8y agoShould we talk about JFK being under water as well? see NY map.
- Pica_soO 8y agoSpeculation is when you bought cheap land where the next corridor will be. There is a tax on nearsightedness now.
- joering2 8y agoSpeaking of Amtrack with such fast news cycle, did they find out the cause of two recent crashes (I believe New Jersey /Connecticuit) ? Ine over some oassage-bridge. I cant find anything on it anymore.
- calebsurfs 8y agoThis is nothing compared to the estimated $3.5 billion to redirect the tracks underground in San Diego. Coastal bluff failures are occurring within several feet of the tracks on a regular basis. I spend time at this beach and I don't know how this track will be viable in a couple years, with or without rising sea levels. Once it is deemed unsafe, San Diego will be completely cut off by rail. https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sd-del-mar-bluffs-20181216-story.html https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sd-del-mar-bluf...
- CalRobert 8y agoGiven HN's general policy of disallowing paywalled links maybe we should also consider disalling GDPR-walled links. Sure, proxies and VPN's exist but it's a PITA just to read an LATimes article. And SD will still have the trolley from TJ at least.
- sillypuddy 8y agoIt will be interesting to see how fast Boring company progresses and if that will be a scalable solution. If there is going to be a large capital investment, it would be great if it also sped up travel times.
- tbihl 8y agoMisleading title: should be 'will drown.' Not once in the article was any current drowning of the infrastructure mentioned.
- a3n 8y agoRather than thinking like a train company, wondering how to protect or move the tracks, what if they thought like a transportation company, and figured out how to move the same and projected number of people? Although if climate inaction generally prevails, eventually the area won't be viable for that many people to live, work and commute. Problem solved.
- m0llusk 8y agoThis might be a good opportunity to rebuild the whole thing. It has always been slow because of basic problems anyway.
- igravious 8y ago“More than a year and a half later, Amtrak, a private company whose stock is primarily owned by the federal government and which depends on congressional funding to operate, has yet to repeat its analysis for the network as a whole.” So, _not_ a private company. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/2015/03/09/dd125130-c691-11e4-aa1a-86135599fb0f_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/2015/03/0... (From 2015 – Supreme Court says Amtrak is more like a public entity than a private firm) "" All the justices agreed to overturn the lower-court ruling in which the Association of American Railroads had prevailed at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: that Amtrak was a strictly private entity and as such Congress was wrong in 2008 to set up a system that allowed it to issue regulations. The lower court had based the decision on Congress’s command that Amtrak “is not a department, agency or instrumentality of the United States Government.” But Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said saying so does not necessarily make it so. The government puts all sorts of demands on Amtrak — maintaining service between Louisiana and Florida, for instance, or offering reduced fares for elderly or disabled passengers — not to mention giving it subsidies of about $1 billion a year, Kennedy said. “Amtrak was created by the Government, is controlled by the Government, and operates for the Government’s benefit,” Kennedy wrote. Thus, in working with the Federal Railroad Administration to issue the “metrics and standards” for performance, “Amtrak acted as a governmental entity for purposes of the Constitution’s separation of powers provisions.” "" In Ireland we call entities like this semi-state companies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_bodies_of_the_Republic_of_Ireland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_bodies_of_the_...
- JewsDidIt 8y agoClimate Change(tm): The biggest Chicken Little story of the 21st century!