Comments:China to run low-cost maglevs by next year

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.

a little more indept and a photo of the owner would suspice.

It isn't "low cost" unless the track is low cost. The cost of the train is negligible compared to the cost of the track. How much does the track cost per mile??? Typical MagLev trains have never been used except on very short runs due to the enormous cost of Maglev track.

english page so why no unit conversion to say 100 k/hr=62 mph? also omits total emissions eg emissions at electricity plant

I did make sure, when fact-checking this during review, that our article wouldn't say it was zero emissions, merely that it claimed such.

Getting the data for China's emissions per kW/h, and usage by the new trains would likely be very difficult to do in the time constraints of news reporting.

However, an electrified rail network is more forward-looking as low-emission generating capacity can be brought online, or carbon sequestration technologies can be applied at existing plants.

Interest point to raise, but makes the kph snipe seem churlish in comparison.

perhaps there is a mistake but 100km/h? that doesn't sound like MagNev but like a steam engine.

• MagLev

Some maglev isn't high-speed (by rail standards). At high speeds, friction with the rails would be prohibitive, but at lower speeds it's still wasteful.

...Maglevs don't touch the rails.

Well, I checked the sources and they do say 100km/h. I rather suspect the low speed is connected to the 'low-cost' part. You get what you pay for.

I hope we see more of these in the United States!