On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 19:50:33 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Martin writes:
    >> His opinions on global warming are strongly influenced by 24/24 all
    >> year round central heating and his string underwear.
    >There is a considerable amount of evidence for global warming, and
    >warming in France in particular.

Why France in particular? It's global warming not just French warming.
--
Martin

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 19:52:18 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Martin writes:
    >> and the occasional disastrous train crash as has been proved.
    >Most crashes are the result of human error, not a lack of maintenance
    >or other mechanical failure.

The human error was not to do maintenance in UK.

    >> What about all the non-green energy used?
    >What about it? The energy can come from anywhere. And if it were not
    >used to power trains, a lot more would be required to power other
    >forms of transportation.

The claim was that it was ecologically friendly.
--
Martin

"Martin" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
news:[email protected]...
    > On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 19:39:52 GMT, "Lennart Petersen"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>"Martin" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
    >>news:[email protected]. ..
    >>> On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 17:55:19 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>>Martin writes:
    >>>>> Why are they ecologically sound?
    >>>>They require far less energy than most other types of transportation.
    >>>>Steel wheels on steel rails are very energy efficient.
    >>> Making steel isn't ecologically friendly.
    >>>>The form of a
    >>>>train is extremely aerodynamic. Electrical motive power can use
    >>>>electricity generated by any means, including ecologically safe means.
    >>>>Trains
    >>> We are discussing TGV type trains not any old train.
    >>>>also produce less noise
    >>> Odd that the Dutch find it necessary to bury the TGV in a tunnel to
    >>> avoid noise pollution.
    >>>>and occupy less space than roads or
    >>>>airports or aircraft,
    >>> High speed trains carry substantially less passengers than a motor
    >>> way.
    >>--------------
    >>Complete wrong. Just count on a double TGV duplex each 5 minute each
    >>way
    >>and compare with a motorway. And besides the LGV double track needs
    >>much
    >>less the wide of a motorway.
    > There isn't a double duplex TGV each 5 minutes.
------------------
que ? Is the motorway 100% occupied all the time ?
It's because of demand naturally.
But you can run a double duplex TGV each 5 minute.

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 19:59:32 +0200, Mxsmanic <[email protected]>
wrote:

    >Martin writes:
    >> Making steel isn't ecologically friendly.
    >Neither is burning fifteen tons of kerosene or more to move a hundred
    >people a few hundred miles.

How many tons of coal are burnt to move a few hundred people a few
hundred miles by TGV?

    >> We are discussing TGV type trains not any old train.
    >The TGV trains are especially aerodynamic.
    >> Odd that the Dutch find it necessary to bury the TGV in a tunnel to
    >> avoid noise pollution.
    >I agree.
    >> High speed trains carry substantially less passengers than a motor
    >> way.
    >A single TGV Duplex unit carries about 550 passengers; running two
    >units raises capacity to 1100 passengers. TGVs pull about six
    >megawatts under maximum load, IIRC, which works out to 5500 watts per
    >passenger. An individual automobile will pull perhaps 150 kw at high
    >speed; with one person per car, that's 150,000 watts per person. With
    >four people per car, that's still 37,500 watts per person (7.5 times
    >more than a TGV).

High speed trains carry substantially less passengers than a motor
way.

    > A bus with 40 passengers consuming about 400 kw is
    >still consuming 10,000 watts per passenger, twice that of a TGV.
    >> Directly!!!
    >If they are powered by electricity produced by a non-polluting
    >generating plant, they produce no pollution at all.

but they aren't. They are powered by electricity generated by coal
natural gas or in the case of France by nuclear power.

    >> Have you tried getting to Australia with the TGV.?
    >Have you tried getting from Paris to Nantes by air?

Have you tried travelling within Paris by TGV?
--
Martin

On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 21:32:37 GMT, "Lennart Petersen"
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >"Martin" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
    >news:[email protected].. .

    >> There isn't a double duplex TGV each 5 minutes.
    >------------------
    >que ? Is the motorway 100% occupied all the time ?

It appears to be in this part of the world.

    >It's because of demand naturally.
    >But you can run a double duplex TGV each 5 minute.

They could, but they don't.

I think the plan for the route between Adam and Paris is one an hour
during the day. Hardly a justification for the enormous amount spent
and the disruption caused building it.
--
Martin

Martin writes:

    > Why France in particular? It's global warming not just French warming.

France is one of a number of spots that have warmed much faster than
the overall trend.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Martin writes:

    > How many tons of coal are burnt to move a few hundred people a few
    > hundred miles by TGV?

Since most of the power comes from nuclear plants, there may not be
any coal burned at all.

    > High speed trains carry substantially less passengers than a motor
    > way.

They can carry substantially more passengers than a motorway, and they
can do it with less energy and at higher speeds.

    > but they aren't. They are powered by electricity generated by coal
    > natural gas or in the case of France by nuclear power.

Nuclear power is quite clean.

    > Have you tried travelling within Paris by TGV?

There are no TGV routes within Paris.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Martin writes:

    > There isn't a double duplex TGV each 5 minutes.

There isn't usually, but there can be.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Martin writes:

    > It appears to be in this part of the world.

You need more TGVs.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"tile" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > yes
    > they have awebsite
    > www.tav.it ( in english as well )

Thanks, Tile. I managed to find this site just after reading the original
post. It's not very informative, unfortunately, with no additional info when
following the link for the new record, which appears to have been set by an
ETR 500 high-speed EMU. The site in English doesn't appear to have been
updated in ages.

Alan Harrison

On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 00:23:23 +0200, Mxsmanic
<[email protected]> wrote:

    >Martin writes:
    >> Why France in particular? It's global warming not just French warming.
    >France is one of a number of spots that have warmed much faster than
    >the overall trend.

Maybe they warmed faster, but in absolute terms you may find
this map interesting:
http://earthtrends.wri.org/maps_spat...ct=484&theme=3


Cheers, Alan, Australia

Alan S writes:

    > Maybe they warmed faster, but in absolute terms you may find
    > this map interesting:
    > http://earthtrends.wri.org/maps_spat...ct=484&theme=3

Interesting indeed, but only slightly surprising. It confirms that
countries like Russia and China are up-and-coming polluters, and India
isn't far behind. The only surprise is that so many European
countries are lower on the scale (the fact that Germany is near the
top does not surprise me, although the UK's position there did
somewhat).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Martin" <[email protected]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[email protected]...
    > On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 21:32:37 GMT, "Lennart Petersen"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > >"Martin" <[email protected]> skrev i meddelandet
    > >news:[email protected].. .
    > >> There isn't a double duplex TGV each 5 minutes.
    > >------------------
    > >que ? Is the motorway 100% occupied all the time ?
    > It appears to be in this part of the world.
    > >It's because of demand naturally.
    > >But you can run a double duplex TGV each 5 minute.
    > They could, but they don't.
    > I think the plan for the route between Adam and Paris is one an hour
    > during the day. Hardly a justification for the enormous amount spent
    > and the disruption caused building it.

In that case, you have been misinformed. As well as the hourly through
TGV-type train each way Amsterdam-Paris, numerous other fast trains (up to
10/hr) will be running on parts of the HSL-Zuid line, including one
replacing the present hourly Amsterdam - Brussels service (see
www.hsl-zuid.nl for details). But as I explained previously, new
rolling-stock with 25 kV power and ERTMS signalling is needed for this
purpose, and that is why such a long test period is needed (just like the
new Rome-Naples HSL about which this thread began).

Regards,

- Alan (in Brussels)

Mxsmanic wrote:

    > Nuclear power is quite clean.

The residents of Chernobyl, Windscale, Three Mile Island etc. might
disagree.

G;

Mxsmanic wrote:

    > There are no TGV routes within Paris.

So?

G;