TxDOT Proposes Raising I-10 near I-45

[Houston19514]

6 hours ago, editor said:

I find it amazing that they are publicly in favor of the expansion of fossil fuels when even the big oil companies like Shell and BP are getting out of that business.

That's pretty funny.  And it might come as a surprise to some of the folks at those companies.  In the today's Wall Street Journal:  Political uncertainty is clouding prospects for new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, but Shell SHEL 0.20%▲ PLC—the Gulf’s biggest producer—is still investing billions of dollars in its waters to pump oil for years to come. Shell’s continued ambitions in the Gulf are on full display in a sprawling fabrication yard in southeast Texas. There, the company is putting the finishing touches on Vito, its 13th major offshore project in the region, with a cost of around $3 billion,

[pablog]

I wish the title read, “TxDOT Proposes Razing I-10 near I-45

[TacoDog]

1 hour ago, pablog said:

I wish the title read, “TxDOT Proposes Razing I-10 near I-45

Why? What good would that be?

[iah77]

1 hour ago, TacoDog said:

Why? What good would that be?

This forum is honesty crazy with people literally praying for the demise of city's backbone industry. You will go crazy trying to tell them they are wrong when all the data shows people have a preference for cars and that energy transitions take a long time .. Every city they list as ideal is so expensive people can't afford to have kids there or have lower social mobility than here. 

[august948]

3 hours ago, pablog said:

I wish the title read, “TxDOT Proposes Razing I-10 near I-45

I wish the title read, , “TxDOT Proposes Raising Cane's Location I-10 near I-45

2 hours ago, TacoDog said:

Why? What good would that be?

If they razed I10 inside the loop to make it a double-decker, that would be awesome.  Maybe that's what he meant.

[pablog]

11 hours ago, TacoDog said:

Why? What good would that be?

I live in the suburbs. This would inconvenience me, but I would happily let it do so for a better, cleaner, safer, greener, more beautiful city.

I wish every highway inside the loop looked like Allen Parkway, tbh. It flows at a good speed with the occasional stoplight, without being a giant concrete scar.

[pablog]

9 hours ago, iah77 said:

This forum is honesty crazy with people literally praying for the demise of city's backbone industry. You will go crazy trying to tell them they are wrong when all the data shows people have a preference for cars and that energy transitions take a long time .. Every city they list as ideal is so expensive people can't afford to have kids there or have lower social mobility than here. 

Houston is the ideal city. It’s the closest thing to true capitalism in America (no zoning laws) which I why it is so affordable to live here and the most diverse city. I wouldn’t want to live in a copy of what Austin has become, although the hills would be nice. 
 

Also, data is a little misleading because I selected I preferred driving a car because I have no better alternatives right now coming from the suburbs. But my decision to live where I live shouldn’t reduce the quality of life of the people that live where they live.

[Houston19514]

36 minutes ago, pablog said:

Houston is the ideal city. It’s the closest thing to true capitalism in America (no zoning laws) which I why it is so affordable to live here and the most diverse city. I wouldn’t want to live in a copy of what Austin has become, although the hills would be nice. 
 

Also, data is a little misleading because I selected I preferred driving a car because I have no better alternatives right now coming from the suburbs. But my decision to live where I live shouldn’t reduce the quality of life of the people that live where they live.

If you are commuting from the suburbs to downtown, you do have an alternative.

[pablog]

2 minutes ago, Houston19514 said:

If you are commuting from the suburbs to downtown, you do have an alternative.

I am commuting from the suburbs to an office in the Heights.

The alternative is so bad that I don’t even think it can be considered as an alternative 😂

[editor]

On 7/8/2022 at 1:02 PM, Ross said:

If you ahve a source that says the Metro Light Rail costs are lower, I would be happy to look at it.

i have access to the Houston Chronicle print archives, and figures from there show that the Red line from Downtown going north, plus the Green Line, plus the Purple line came out to $149 million per mile. 

So, not $200- to $500 million per mile.  However, considering inflation and Houston's NIMBY can't-do spirit, I expect trying to do more today would creep into your $200 million window.

It seems from what I've read in the archives that the biggest costs were in the two overpasses.  The one on Harrisburg cost $30 million, alone.

This is from August 14, 2019: "Extending the Red Line light rail nearly six miles north to the North Shepherd Park and Ride, at an estimated cost of $634 million." — So, $105 million per mile for that.

The I-45 project is now expected to cost over $9 billion for 24 miles — $375 million per mile.

The TxDOT budget is larger than the GDP of 152 countries.  TxDOT's budget is larger than the budget for the entire government of Mexico.   It's double the entire budget of Saudi Arabia, Finland, and the UAE.  For that kind of money, I'd like to see more out of it than endless wastes of asphalt for a bunch of concrete cowboys to roll coal on.

[editor]

21 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

That's pretty funny.  And it might come as a surprise to some of the folks at those companies.  In the today's Wall Street Journal:  Political uncertainty is clouding prospects for new drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, but Shell SHEL 0.20%▲ PLC—the Gulf’s biggest producer—is still investing billions of dollars in its waters to pump oil for years to come. Shell’s continued ambitions in the Gulf are on full display in a sprawling fabrication yard in southeast Texas. There, the company is putting the finishing touches on Vito, its 13th major offshore project in the region, with a cost of around $3 billion,

That article does not refute what I wrote.  It talks about one piece of Shell's operations.  You may not have noticed, but Shell is a global company with all kinds of operations.  My observation isn't based on one quick article that was Googled out of the ether.  It's based on the dozens and dozens and dozens of articles in many newspapers over the last three years showing Shell's increased investments in wind, solar, and other energy sources, while reducing its overall plans for fossil fuels.  There was an article recently that Shell just bought a thousand gas stations with long-term plans to convert them into convenience store where people come to shop while they charge their electric cars. If you're in Houston, you can even buy your electricity from Shell now. 

[editor]

4 hours ago, Houston19514 said:

If you are commuting from the suburbs to downtown, you do have an alternative.

When I moved to Houston the first time, people would commute to downtown from The Woodlands and Spring by helicopter.  That stopped when the downtown heliport was closed.  I think it was to build Enron Field.

[editor]

15 hours ago, iah77 said:

This forum is honesty crazy with people literally praying for the demise of city's backbone industry.

There's no shortage of cities that clung to their backbone industry for too long, and because of it became relics of yesteryear.

Poughkeepsie, New York clung to IBM's mainframe business, and when that died, so did the town.

Lock Haven, Pennsylvania clung to paper mills and light aircraft.  They left, and the town pretty much died, and would have been closed if it wasn't for the college.

Green Bay, Wisconsin; Appleton, Wisconsin; Allentown, Pennsylvania; Pittsburgh; Paterson, New Jersey; Newark, New Jersey; and a hundred other places clung to a "backbone industry" for so hard and so long that they couldn't recover when it moved or was no longer needed.

Somewhere, some town was the world capital of buggy whip manufacturing.  Guess what happened there?

Houston is big enough and economically diverse enough that it will survive the trend of burning dead dinosaurs to go vroom.  Nobody on HAIF is rooting for all of the oil wells to stop pumping tomorrow.  But it's folly to pretend that the writing isn't on the wall.  We should all recognize that there needs to be a slow, orderly transition from one thing to another, and be prepared for the future through the continued expansion of the economy and infrastructure — including transportation. 

[Ross]

3 hours ago, editor said:

 

The I-45 project is now expected to cost over $9 billion for 24 miles — $375 million per mile.

The TxDOT budget is larger than the GDP of 152 countries.  TxDOT's budget is larger than the budget for the entire government of Mexico.   It's double the entire budget of Saudi Arabia, Finland, and the UAE.  For that kind of money, I'd like to see more out of it than endless wastes of asphalt for a bunch of concrete cowboys to roll coal on.

I am personally opposed to the I-45 project because I think it's poorly designed and over reaches with things like tearing down the Pierce Elevated and burying two freeways on the East side of Downtown.

Are you saying that TxDOT's budget is over $300 billion per year? Where do you get that number?  TxDoT's budget is something like $30 billion per year. 

[editor]

1 hour ago, Ross said:

I am personally opposed to the I-45 project because I think it's poorly designed and over reaches with things like tearing down the Pierce Elevated and burying two freeways on the East side of Downtown.

Are you saying that TxDOT's budget is over $300 billion per year? Where do you get that number?  TxDoT's budget is something like $30 billion per year. 

I'm on mobile, and can't find the source for the TxDOT numbers I was working with. And thinking about it, it does seem absurd. 
 

Until I can get back to a computer and find out what I was looking at (a couple of days), I rescind anything I said about TxDOT's budget. 

[august948]

4 hours ago, editor said:

There's no shortage of cities that clung to their backbone industry for too long, and because of it became relics of yesteryear.

Poughkeepsie, New York clung to IBM's mainframe business, and when that died, so did the town.

Lock Haven, Pennsylvania clung to paper mills and light aircraft.  They left, and the town pretty much died, and would have been closed if it wasn't for the college.

Green Bay, Wisconsin; Appleton, Wisconsin; Allentown, Pennsylvania; Pittsburgh; Paterson, New Jersey; Newark, New Jersey; and a hundred other places clung to a "backbone industry" for so hard and so long that they couldn't recover when it moved or was no longer needed.

Somewhere, some town was the world capital of buggy whip manufacturing.  Guess what happened there?

Houston is big enough and economically diverse enough that it will survive the trend of burning dead dinosaurs to go vroom.  Nobody on HAIF is rooting for all of the oil wells to stop pumping tomorrow.  But it's folly to pretend that the writing isn't on the wall.  We should all recognize that there needs to be a slow, orderly transition from one thing to another, and be prepared for the future through the continued expansion of the economy and infrastructure — including transportation. 

+1 for the mention of Appleton.  Don't see that come up very often.

The future is certainly moving away from burning dead dinosaurs to directly power your vehicle.  Not so likely is the move away from the personal vehicles themselves.  Thus roads of all sorts are still going to be king.

Even cowboys need to ride the concrete sometimes...

Yeehaw!

[pablog]

If anyone was confused by what I said, I never said “get rid of roads.”

I-10 is a not a road, it’s a 26-lane monstrosity that we should be embarrassed to have in our city.

I-45 will become another embarrassment with the small positives of the cap park and removing the pierce elevated.

Billions can be better spent building out transit throughout the core to reduce short trips.

[Ross]

1 hour ago, pablog said:

If anyone was confused by what I said, I never said “get rid of roads.”

I-10 is a not a road, it’s a 26-lane monstrosity that we should be embarrassed to have in our city.

I-45 will become another embarrassment with the small positives of the cap park and removing the pierce elevated.

Billions can be better spent building out transit throughout the core to reduce short trips.

There is nowhere to put that much transport within the core. I will take my car, thanks. Especially when going to Lowes, or Costco, or anywhere that sells larger items I want to buy.

[freundb]

8 hours ago, editor said:

Green Bay, Wisconsin; Appleton, Wisconsin; Allentown, Pennsylvania; Pittsburgh; Paterson, New Jersey; Newark, New Jersey; and a hundred other places clung to a "backbone industry" for so hard and so long that they couldn't recover when it moved or was no longer needed.

Thanks for the shout out! I spent the first 33 years of my life in Appleton before moving to Houston. I wasn't aware it didn't recover. Despite the entire area being largely sunk into the paper industry, the whole metro area has continued to grow despite all the plant closings. 

[Houston19514]

On 7/9/2022 at 2:26 PM, editor said:

That article does not refute what I wrote.  It talks about one piece of Shell's operations.  You may not have noticed, but Shell is a global company with all kinds of operations.  My observation isn't based on one quick article that was Googled out of the ether.  It's based on the dozens and dozens and dozens of articles in many newspapers over the last three years showing Shell's increased investments in wind, solar, and other energy sources, while reducing its overall plans for fossil fuels.  There was an article recently that Shell just bought a thousand gas stations with long-term plans to convert them into convenience store where people come to shop while they charge their electric cars. If you're in Houston, you can even buy your electricity from Shell now. 

The article actually does kinda refute what you wrote. Generally speaking, companies don't invest billions of dollars in businesses they are getting out of.

In any event, nothing in this follow-up post of yours remotely suggests that Shell is getting out of the fossil fuels business (which is what you claimed).

Edited July 13, 2022 by Houston19514

[Houston19514]

On 7/9/2022 at 2:32 PM, editor said:

When I moved to Houston the first time, people would commute to downtown from The Woodlands and Spring by helicopter.  That stopped when the downtown heliport was closed.  I think it was to build Enron Field.

To the extent the heliport was used for commuting, that (and the other oil-industry usage) stopped  because of the oil bust, not because the heliport closed.  It was located by the GRB on the  property where the Marriott Marquis now stands.  

Edited August 29, 2022 by Houston19514

[pablog]

11 hours ago, Ross said:

There is nowhere to put that much transport within the core. I will take my car, thanks. Especially when going to Lowes, or Costco, or anywhere that sells larger items I want to buy.

You can and should be able to take your car. I am not against you driving your car, .

There is surplus of space for transit… Memorial Drive, Allen Parkway, Washington, Shepherd, Richmond, Westheimer, Montrose Blvd, Heights Blvd, N Main, Holcombe, Hirsch/Waco, Lockwood, Cavalcade/West 20th 

It’s about the willingness to build transit.

[hindesky]

21 hours ago, editor said:

When I moved to Houston the first time, people would commute to downtown from The Woodlands and Spring by helicopter.  That stopped when the downtown heliport was closed.  I think it was to build Enron Field.

There was a guy who flew by the ship channel in his helicopter and when he got to the 610 Ship Channel bridge he would fly under it. Saw him do it several times while operating a tower crane close to the bridge. One time he didn't make it and hit the water. Had to pay to retrieve his helicopter while they shut down the ship channel.

[august948]

4 hours ago, hindesky said:

There was a guy who flew by the ship channel in his helicopter and when he got to the 610 Ship Channel bridge he would fly under it. Saw him do it several times while operating a tower crane close to the bridge. One time he didn't make it and hit the water. Had to pay to retrieve his helicopter while they shut down the ship channel.

You know you have money when you can do stunts in your own helicopter and then pay the damages when something eventually goes wrong.

[august948]

19 hours ago, pablog said:

If anyone was confused by what I said, I never said “get rid of roads.”

I-10 is a not a road, it’s a 26-lane monstrosity that we should be embarrassed to have in our city.

I-45 will become another embarrassment with the small positives of the cap park and removing the pierce elevated.

Billions can be better spent building out transit throughout the core to reduce short trips.

That's strange...I drive I10 inside the loop all the time and always thought it was a road.  A small one at that compared to how it is outside the loop.  If only it could actually be 26 lanes across inside the loop.

[Tumbleweed_Tx]

On 7/9/2022 at 9:01 AM, pablog said:

 

I wish every highway inside the loop looked like Allen Parkway, tbh. It flows at a good speed with the occasional stoplight, without being a giant concrete scar.

I would like to see every freeway intersection look like my favorite one, the I-10 East ramp to the East Loop North, but, realistically, it's not going to happen, and some urban scarring will have to be lived with.

[editor]

23 hours ago, august948 said:

That's strange...I drive I10 inside the loop all the time and always thought it was a road.

"Road" has a specific meaning when it comes to engineering, based on the speed and volume of traffic, as well as the access to and from the road.

This is very simplified, but here's a thumbnail sketch:

Roads -> Collectors -> Arterials -> Highways -> Freeways

Interestingly, frontage roads are a type of arterial.  I would have thought they'd be Collectors, but I guess not. 

[samagon]

On 7/9/2022 at 2:26 PM, editor said:

That article does not refute what I wrote.  It talks about one piece of Shell's operations.  You may not have noticed, but Shell is a global company with all kinds of operations.  My observation isn't based on one quick article that was Googled out of the ether.  It's based on the dozens and dozens and dozens of articles in many newspapers over the last three years showing Shell's increased investments in wind, solar, and other energy sources, while reducing its overall plans for fossil fuels.  There was an article recently that Shell just bought a thousand gas stations with long-term plans to convert them into convenience store where people come to shop while they charge their electric cars. If you're in Houston, you can even buy your electricity from Shell now. 

my cousin is a fairly high level VP at Shell, I visited him this past week and we chatted about some of the prospects of Shell besides oil. they have a lot of plays.

50% of my clients are O&G, every single meeting with those clients the topic of other energy products they are cultivating, and how I can help them to that end is discussed.

they are all still very interested in oil though, production and processing, and even making these processes more efficient than ever, and especially using oil to make different products than fuel, so even if in 15 years a lot of places will have banned the sale of new cars that use oil based products as their source of fuel, there will still be gasoline powered cars on the road for a long time to come, and there will still be plastics, and plenty of other products created by oil. gasoline and Diesel aren't the only thing oil is good for, and they are working to create more and more uses for it.

anyway, the easiest thing to do since all of these companies are publicly traded, just jump on a quarterly call and listen to where they are investing their money, or even look at their name and branding, none of them are calling themselves oil companies, they are all calling themselves energy companies.

Edited July 13, 2022 by samagon

[Amlaham]

Most car companies have already pledged that they will be fully electric within the next 10-20 years.

Companies going fully electric (will only make EV)

• Alfa Romero- 2027
• Audi- 2033
• Bentley- 2030
• Buick- 2035
• Cadillac- 2030
• Chevrolet- 2035
• Fiat- 2030
• GMC- 2035 
• Honda- 2040
• Hyundai- 2040
• Jaguar- 2025
• Kia- 2040
• Lexus- 2030
• Lotus- 2028
• Mazda- 2050
• Mercedes- 2030
• Mini- 2030
• Rolls Royce- 2030
• Toyota- 2033
• Volkswagen- 2040
• Volvo- 2030

It's obvious where the trend is going. 

Also, idk whats with the obsession older people have with obnoxiously large highways like i10. You guys are still stuck in traffic, 26 lanes wide. Whenever there is an example of poor planning, they always reference i10 and how expensive it was and how it's still a problem. Ya'll don't learn from mistakes? Also, the argument "well I'm still going to drive in my car and not use public transportation so I only car about highways and not about rail" is the definition of being selfish. You're only thinking of your self and if you had any authority in society, that society would fail. Same argument as "I don't walk so I don't care for sidewalks to be built." Can't argue with closed minded people still living in 1950s though 🤷‍♂️

[Tumbleweed_Tx]

I will make sure to point at you and laugh as I drive my gasoline powered car by you as you sit in the middle of nowhere recharging your electric hoopty at a diesel powered generator recharging station.

And... for sh!ts and giggles... take a lithium ion battery and drive a nail through it. You will want to stand back when you do that... That is what happens to electric cars when they get in an accident.

[iah77]

3 hours ago, Amlaham said:

Most car companies have already pledged that they will be fully electric within the next 10-20 years.

Companies going fully electric (will only make EV)

• Alfa Romero- 2027
• Audi- 2033
• Bentley- 2030
• Buick- 2035
• Cadillac- 2030
• Chevrolet- 2035
• Fiat- 2030
• GMC- 2035 
• Honda- 2040
• Hyundai- 2040
• Jaguar- 2025
• Kia- 2040
• Lexus- 2030
• Lotus- 2028
• Mazda- 2050
• Mercedes- 2030
• Mini- 2030
• Rolls Royce- 2030
• Toyota- 2033
• Volkswagen- 2040
• Volvo- 2030

It's obvious where the trend is going. 

Also, idk whats with the obsession older people have with obnoxiously large highways like i10. You guys are still stuck in traffic, 26 lanes wide. Whenever there is an example of poor planning, they always reference i10 and how expensive it was and how it's still a problem. Ya'll don't learn from mistakes? Also, the argument "well I'm still going to drive in my car and not use public transportation so I only car about highways and not about rail" is the definition of being selfish. You're only thinking of your self and if you had any authority in society, that society would fail. Same argument as "I don't walk so I don't care for sidewalks to be built." Can't argue with closed minded people still living in 1950s though 🤷‍♂️

What difference does an electric car make if the electricity still comes from a coal power plant?

Volvo says emissions from making EVs can be 70% higher than petrol models - and claims it can take up to 9 YEARS of driving before they become greener assuming you buy from a green provider. Volvo claims carbon-intensive production for battery and steel makes its C40 EV more polluting to manufacture than an XC40 with a petrol engine.

None of the science matches your "trend" but it sounds cool so it's what is being done. 

Doesn't electrification support the argument for more roads then as it shows personal vehicles aren't going anywhere?

 

 

 

 

[Ross]

It is far easier to deal with carbon from one source than from one million sources. That's why it doesn't matter as much as peopl think what the electricity source is.

[august948]

6 hours ago, Amlaham said:

Most car companies have already pledged that they will be fully electric within the next 10-20 years.

Companies going fully electric (will only make EV)

• Alfa Romero- 2027
• Audi- 2033
• Bentley- 2030
• Buick- 2035
• Cadillac- 2030
• Chevrolet- 2035
• Fiat- 2030
• GMC- 2035 
• Honda- 2040
• Hyundai- 2040
• Jaguar- 2025
• Kia- 2040
• Lexus- 2030
• Lotus- 2028
• Mazda- 2050
• Mercedes- 2030
• Mini- 2030
• Rolls Royce- 2030
• Toyota- 2033
• Volkswagen- 2040
• Volvo- 2030

It's obvious where the trend is going. 

Also, idk whats with the obsession older people have with obnoxiously large highways like i10. You guys are still stuck in traffic, 26 lanes wide. Whenever there is an example of poor planning, they always reference i10 and how expensive it was and how it's still a problem. Ya'll don't learn from mistakes? Also, the argument "well I'm still going to drive in my car and not use public transportation so I only car about highways and not about rail" is the definition of being selfish. You're only thinking of your self and if you had any authority in society, that society would fail. Same argument as "I don't walk so I don't care for sidewalks to be built." Can't argue with closed minded people still living in 1950s though 🤷‍♂️

Being stuck in traffic for a few minutes here and there isn't really that bad when you consider you've got your own personal space and can tune the interior environment and the music to whatever you like.  I'm sure it's nice to be so young and carefree that you don't have to go shopping for a family, take kids to schools, activities, dr appts, etc, involving multiple trip segments throughout the day and night, but the rest of us have mortgages, families to raise and things to get done.  I understand that's what the young whippersnappers call "adulting" these days.

The main problem with I10 is it widens to those 26 glorious lanes and then shrinks again on either end.  That's the real poor planning for you.  If all the highways were like the Katy outside the loop, with appropriate interchanges, things would flow much better.

[samagon]

14 hours ago, Amlaham said:

Most car companies have already pledged that they will be fully electric within the next 10-20 years.

Companies going fully electric (will only make EV)

...

I'm all about moving on from oil being used to run our cars. there are some pretty huge hurdles still to climb before it can be a reality though. every day I see in the news about overloaded grids, not just ERCOT, but everywhere. how are we supposed to pull more through the grid when the grid is already at/over capacity?

when you consider the data, the solution for the next 15-20 years should be PHEV. the average driver does less than 30 miles a day. the average PHEV can run on full electric for over 30 miles. most of the time the PHEV would be all electric. it takes 5x as much LI batteries to make a full BEV as it does a PHEV (let's not even get started on the new HUMMER travesty). you want to do more for the environment? make 5 cars that are going to be driven 99% of the time in battery mode, instead of 1 car that will be battery all the time. it just makes sense.

when you need to go on longer trips with that PHEV, you can just pull into any gas station to fill up, vs a BEV you have to plan your trip around the quick charging stations, hope they are operating (the uptime isn't great right now), hope there isn't a line of other people waiting to quick charge (20 minutes to get 80% vs 5 minutes to full is a big difference when you are looking at it from a perspective of servicing lots of vehicles quickly). 

anyway, gasoline is a huge problem, but BEV just isn't fully there yet, and won't be by the time some of these companies that have promised to be fully EV. it just seems like it's greenwashing at this point.

14 hours ago, Amlaham said:

Also, idk whats with the obsession older people have with obnoxiously large highways like i10. You guys are still stuck in traffic, 26 lanes wide. Whenever there is an example of poor planning, they always reference i10 and how expensive it was and how it's still a problem. Ya'll don't learn from mistakes? Also, the argument "well I'm still going to drive in my car and not use public transportation so I only car about highways and not about rail" is the definition of being selfish. You're only thinking of your self and if you had any authority in society, that society would fail. Same argument as "I don't walk so I don't care for sidewalks to be built." Can't argue with closed minded people still living in 1950s though 🤷‍♂️

what doesn't make any sense to me is that the selfish person who wants to drive should be pushing for these other modes. people who have choices will go to the path of least resistance, so if you build out great alternatives to driving, people will get off the road, leaving you alone to do whatever you want in your car. 

Edited July 15, 2022 by samagon

[Amlaham]

12 hours ago, iah77 said:

What difference does an electric car make if the electricity still comes from a coal power plant?

Volvo says emissions from making EVs can be 70% higher than petrol models - and claims it can take up to 9 YEARS of driving before they become greener assuming you buy from a green provider. Volvo claims carbon-intensive production for battery and steel makes its C40 EV more polluting to manufacture than an XC40 with a petrol engine.

None of the science matches your "trend" but it sounds cool so it's what is being done. 

Doesn't electrification support the argument for more roads then as it shows personal vehicles aren't going anywhere?

 

 

 

 

1. Sweden (who makes Volvo), doesn't even have coal plants. Sweden has done an amazing job generating electricity from NON-COAL plants. They're actually extremely advanced in the sense that all their buses and electricity is generated from recycling trash (its actually interesting, look it up) :) Your argument about coal plants is an American problem. Also, your argument about the C40 causing more pollutants to make than a gas XC40 ignores the entire polluting process of generating gas itself. 

2. "None of the science matches," maybe due some more research? Pollution in our own city was significantly down during the pandemic because people weren't driving their cars. Your argument sounds like "global warming is fake." Won't argue with someone with that mindset.

3. My argument about electrification of vehicles was in reference to the O&G industry, and my argument about highway fanatics was in reference to not expanding other modes of transpiration.......not about eliminating personal vehicles. My statement wasn't even complex, idk what made you think that? I never said personal vehicles are going anywhere, and if you REALLY read my statement, you would understand that i meant we need to expand transportation, NOT eliminate one or the other.  

[august948]

1 hour ago, samagon said:

what doesn't make any sense to me is that the selfish person who wants to drive should be pushing for these other modes. people who have choices will go to the path of least resistance, so if you build out great alternatives to driving, people will get off the road, leaving you alone to do whatever you want in your car. 

The problem is there isn't an alternative that, in the aggregate, gives you more freedom than a personal vehicle on roads, regardless of how it's powered.  Unless you are proposing to greenfield the entire city and redevelop it around public transit, it's always going to be preferable to use a car (once again in the aggregate).  The only way you will ever get to a point where the majority of trips are done by public transit is if you induce demand by severely limiting the ability of someone to own and use a private vehicle.

[Amlaham]

9 hours ago, august948 said:

Being stuck in traffic for a few minutes here and there isn't really that bad when you consider you've got your own personal space and can tune the interior environment and the music to whatever you like.  I'm sure it's nice to be so young and carefree that you don't have to go shopping for a family, take kids to schools, activities, dr appts, etc, involving multiple trip segments throughout the day and night, but the rest of us have mortgages, families to raise and things to get done.  I understand that's what the young whippersnappers call "adulting" these days.

The main problem with I10 is it widens to those 26 glorious lanes and then shrinks again on either end.  That's the real poor planning for you.  If all the highways were like the Katy outside the loop, with appropriate interchanges, things would flow much better.

• Again, you're only thinking about yourself, typical 
• "Young and carefree" 😂 you're literally a contradiction dude, I'm carefree? I'm literally thinking about others who can't afford a car, who can't drive from place to place and sit and listen to "whatever music you like." You do realize this activities can still be done even if other modes of transportation exist right? You do realize this don't have this problem in NYC, Chicago, all of Europe, and many asian countries right? You do realize there's a world outside of your bubble right? 
• You don't even know me dude, you making false assumptions is so on brand with every single one of your posts. You don't know that I have every single one of those things you mentioned 😂 but your tactics are obvious at this point, deflect, deflect, and deflect from that actual topic. 
• That's obviously not the problem with i10 and you clearly don't know what you're talking about. For someone soo "seasoned" you really have a hard to grasping logic. "If all highways were like Katy fwy outside the loop, things would flow better"....... literally a 10 year old would even question, what about as soon as they all exit the highway into the 2-3 lane streets? You can't just make every highway 26 lanes then keep the streets 2-3 lanes. Also, I thought its also common sense that not every highway is expandable because of the neighborhoods around it, should we just tear up have the Galleria and those skyscrapers? Oh maybe we can tear down the Ion district they just built! Wait wait no actually, lets tear up memorial park on both sides so we can expand the 610 and i10 to 26 lanes :) Is it really that hard to grasp? 

I'll end with this, the difference between the "young" and the "I like to listen to music in my car" generation is that, the young want to improve the quality of life. The older generation only care about big businesses that literally do not care about anyone. 

[Amlaham]

2 hours ago, samagon said:

what doesn't make any sense to me is that the selfish person who wants to drive should be pushing for these other modes. people who have choices will go to the path of least resistance, so if you build out great alternatives to driving, people will get off the road, leaving you alone to do whatever you want in your car. 

Completely agree, I legit do not understand why drivers wouldn't want to get more people off the road and into other modes of transportation. It would literally help them in the end too. But its their fear mongering attitude, that we're just going to go door to door and take their cars and highways away 💀

[august948]

40 minutes ago, Amlaham said:

• Again, you're only thinking about yourself, typical 
• "Young and carefree" 😂 you're literally a contradiction dude, I'm carefree? I'm literally thinking about others who can't afford a car, who can't drive from place to place and sit and listen to "whatever music you like." You do realize this activities can still be done even if other modes of transportation exist right? You do realize this don't have this problem in NYC, Chicago, all of Europe, and many asian countries right? You do realize there's a world outside of your bubble right? 
• You don't even know me dude, you making false assumptions is so on brand with every single one of your posts. You don't know that I have every single one of those things you mentioned 😂 but your tactics are obvious at this point, deflect, deflect, and deflect from that actual topic. 
• That's obviously not the problem with i10 and you clearly don't know what you're talking about. For someone soo "seasoned" you really have a hard to grasping logic. "If all highways were like Katy fwy outside the loop, things would flow better"....... literally a 10 year old would even question, what about as soon as they all exit the highway into the 2-3 lane streets? You can't just make every highway 26 lanes then keep the streets 2-3 lanes. Also, I thought its also common sense that not every highway is expandable because of the neighborhoods around it, should we just tear up have the Galleria and those skyscrapers? Oh maybe we can tear down the Ion district they just built! Wait wait no actually, lets tear up memorial park on both sides so we can expand the 610 and i10 to 26 lanes :) Is it really that hard to grasp? 

I'll end with this, the difference between the "young" and the "I like to listen to music in my car" generation is that, the young want to improve the quality of life. The older generation only care about big businesses that literally do not care about anyone. 

Eram quod es; eris quod sum

[samagon]

4 hours ago, august948 said:

The problem is there isn't an alternative that, in the aggregate, gives you more freedom than a personal vehicle on roads, regardless of how it's powered.  Unless you are proposing to greenfield the entire city and redevelop it around public transit, it's always going to be preferable to use a car (once again in the aggregate).  The only way you will ever get to a point where the majority of trips are done by public transit is if you induce demand by severely limiting the ability of someone to own and use a private vehicle.

nope, you don't need greenfield, you just need time and desire. but the desire isn't there. primarily because we as a society have been convinced by the industries that profit from single occupant vehicles, that single occupant vehicles are the best and highest form of transit. 

until a majority of society decides that single occupant vehicles are not the highest form of transit, it won't change. 

[iah77]

5 hours ago, Amlaham said:

1. Sweden (who makes Volvo), doesn't even have coal plants. Sweden has done an amazing job generating electricity from NON-COAL plants. They're actually extremely advanced in the sense that all their buses and electricity is generated from recycling trash (its actually interesting, look it up) :) Your argument about coal plants is an American problem. Also, your argument about the C40 causing more pollutants to make than a gas XC40 ignores the entire polluting process of generating gas itself. 

2. "None of the science matches," maybe due some more research? Pollution in our own city was significantly down during the pandemic because people weren't driving their cars. Your argument sounds like "global warming is fake." Won't argue with someone with that mindset.

3. My argument about electrification of vehicles was in reference to the O&G industry, and my argument about highway fanatics was in reference to not expanding other modes of transpiration.......not about eliminating personal vehicles. My statement wasn't even complex, idk what made you think that? I never said personal vehicles are going anywhere, and if you REALLY read my statement, you would understand that i meant we need to expand transportation, NOT eliminate one or the other.  

You are right, Sweden actually gets almost all of its energy from nuclear and dams which would never happen here .. They have 14 reactors for 10 million people and I think we have 4 for 29 million. Again it's a policy issues where electric cars are being promoted yet there isn't enough funding to update the electric grid to support it (on top of the massive population growth here I'm assuming) 

Volvo has been Chinese for for over a decade now so I would not tie the two so closely together. I guess the main issue is that the government at federal, state, and local levels has no common direction and as a result everything is being done poorly. Houston will never have density to warrant real public transportation at the rate we are going due to parking minimums and ridiculous setbacks. Most of the old buildings people like would be illegal to build under current building setback codes, especially after Ashby where the setback is super high against residential structures for tall buildings. I guess I don't disagree with your vision but more about how it's totally incompatible with local regulations in their current state. It's like forcing puzzle pieces together violently, so until other factors change I think heavy emphasis on public transport is not the best use of funds instead of say education etc.  

[august948]

1 hour ago, samagon said:

nope, you don't need greenfield, you just need time and desire. but the desire isn't there. primarily because we as a society have been convinced by the industries that profit from single occupant vehicles, that single occupant vehicles are the best and highest form of transit. 

until a majority of society decides that single occupant vehicles are not the highest form of transit, it won't change. 

So what would be the highest form of transit if not a personal vehicle that can go from any point to any point while carrying multiple passengers and goods?

[editor]

Some of the rhetoric posted here is getting a little unhinged; including a few of my posts that I ended up editing.  Let's get this back on track and talk about the I-10 project, and anyone who wants to continue with the burning dinosaurs vs. rainbows and unicorns debate can create a new thread to do so.

[emmanume]

TxDOT “leaked” the video ahead of the public meeting next week https://youtu.be/sdHpW4BrcTQ

$347M

 

Edited July 24, 2022 by emmanume
Added estimated costs

[Avossos]

This seems totally unneeded. And the road noise and visual pollution of more raised highways is A huge negative.

the only positive would be potentially fixing the houston ave bridge that constantly gets hit.

if they do this, we should demand the quiet road treatment they have put on 290 and i10 near memorial to reduce noise pollution.

[editor]

A few notes:

• While I think it's great that the public meeting notices were published in The Leader, and La Voz and Community Impact, I think it's strange that TxDOT didn't publish them in the Chronicle.  It's an interstate highway.  Both in funding, and in use it impacts people far beyond the immediate neighborhoods.  That's the whole purpose of an interstate highway.  It feels (to me, and I'm happy to be wrong) that TxDOT habitually under-notifies people of public events, and has very few public hearings compared with comparable agencies, or even lowly Houston Metro.  The more I observe TxDOT, the more it seems to do the very bare minimum required to get public input.  It either just wants to do its own thing, or its internal culture is just not used to handling or valuing public input.
• Along those lines, postcards were mailed to adjacent property owners.  That's it? In other cities where I've lived, I'd expect everyone within two miles of the freeway to get something in the mail. 
• There are no additional lanes proposed, just an elevation of the the highway.  To me, this is surprising.
• Current ROW: 550-720' wide - New configuration is only expected to be just a smidge wider, at the Houston Avenue overpass.
• Not expected to make things worst for Olivewood Cemetery.
• Cost: $347,000,000
• Construction start: 2024.  No end date given.
• The video gives instructions to find the project web page. Those instructions don't work.  In addition, the QR code that's supposed to take you to the project page just goes to the web page about the meeting that you just watched: https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/072622.html  Another bad look that makes it seem like TxDOT is not interested in hearing from the people who fund it.

 

[editor]

On 7/24/2022 at 9:29 AM, Avossos said:

This seems totally unneeded. And the road noise and visual pollution of more raised highways is A huge negative.

the only positive would be potentially fixing the houston ave bridge that constantly gets hit.

if they do this, we should demand the quiet road treatment they have put on 290 and i10 near memorial to reduce noise pollution.

According to the presentation, this is all about getting the road out of the flood plain during big storms, presumably so people can evacuate.

But you're right — there are a lot more people living in this area than out on 290, so they should do something to make it quieter.

I remember a decade or two ago, there was a big kerfuffle in New Jersey because a highway was renovated and the poor neighborhoods all got sound barriers, while the rich ones didn't.  The Biff and Muffy complained, NJDOT told people that it puts up sound barriers based on population density, and if the McMansion crowd wanted some, they could pay for it themselves.

Sometimes the system works.

[Houston19514]

2 hours ago, editor said:

A few notes:

• While I think it's great that the public meeting notices were published in The Leader, and La Voz and Community Impact, I think it's strange that TxDOT didn't publish them in the Chronicle.  It's an interstate highway.  Both in funding, and in use it impacts people far beyond the immediate neighborhoods.  That's the whole purpose of an interstate highway.  It feels (to me, and I'm happy to be wrong) that TxDOT habitually under-notifies people of public events, and has very few public hearings compared with comparable agencies, or even lowly Houston Metro.  The more I observe TxDOT, the more it seems to do the very bare minimum required to get public input.  It either just wants to do its own thing, or its internal culture is just not used to handling or valuing public input.
• Along those lines, postcards were mailed to adjacent property owners.  That's it? In other cities where I've lived, I'd expect everyone within two miles of the freeway to get something in the mail. 
• There are no additional lanes proposed, just an elevation of the the highway.  To me, this is surprising.
• Current ROW: 550-720' wide - New configuration is only expected to be just a smidge wider, at the Houston Avenue overpass.
• Not expected to make things worst for Olivewood Cemetery.
• Cost: $347,000,000
• Construction start: 2024.  No end date given.
• The video gives instructions to find the project web page. Those instructions don't work.  In addition, the QR code that's supposed to take you to the project page just goes to the web page about the meeting that you just watched: https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/072622.html  Another bad look that makes it seem like TxDOT is not interested in hearing from the people who fund it.

 

Quick correction, the video says postcards were mailed out to all "project adjacent mail routes", not just to adjacent property owners.

[JLWM8609]

On 7/25/2022 at 10:43 AM, editor said:

According to the presentation, this is all about getting the road out of the flood plain during big storms, presumably so people can evacuate.

But you're right — there are a lot more people living in this area than out on 290, so they should do something to make it quieter.

I remember a decade or two ago, there was a big kerfuffle in New Jersey because a highway was renovated and the poor neighborhoods all got sound barriers, while the rich ones didn't.  The Biff and Muffy complained, NJDOT told people that it puts up sound barriers based on population density, and if the McMansion crowd wanted some, they could pay for it themselves.

Sometimes the system works.

TxDOT has been giving most of the recent freeway rebuilds the quiet treatment with longitudinally tined pavement.

[crock]

the single raised Bus lane is audible where I live, ~6 blocks south of i10@houston, and I cannot imagine what 5xing the amount of raised highway would do to the passive noise level of the First Ward. 

the "this is for evacuations" is bullshit because 288 floods intentionally and every version of the i45 plan has them deciding to nullify any ability for i45/i59 through central houston to be functional during a storm, this portion of i10 would not have any traffic to move north/west by TxDot's already stated plans.