 |
Amazing how a sea level rise of 6 inches since the line was built is supposedly to blame
Author: Bean and sand counter
Date: 10-17-2022 - 11:29
Opening drama lines - Steve Lang can see catastrophic erosion worsened by climate change happening in real time along one of the world’s most scenic railroad lines, where the sea is swallowing homes, tracks and California’s beautiful beaches.
“Every day I come here and watch this, and it makes me want to cry,”
This appears to be a Philippines based news site, but reads like Gannett propaganda.
On the same rail line, authorities in nearby San Diego announced this year a $300 million project to relocate a portion of tracks further inland.
Isn't that just for the studies on a 3-4 billion project?
Sure they can do another expensive move inland. Or for a much lower cost they could build an actual seawall (like has been done all over the world), engineered to handle the underwater factors, followed by beach replenishment (also done elsewhere around the world.) Though beach replenishment will ultimately be an ongoing cost. Raise the rails maybe 5 feet or more, widen the ROW between the tracks and the seawall. Concrete engineered, not just loose rock. Reign in the CCC to allow for a practical, effective design instead of sunk by "It's not as pretty" nonsense.
That would be a whole lot less costly than moving inland. And would protect all the property behind it that otherwise would eventually be eroded away.
25mph? There's no reason a raised and stabilized ROW protected by a true seawall can't run at the 40 to 70 mph timetable speed limits in that section, maybe even higher for the upgraded sections. Slap on temporary slow orders for the occasional storm or the inevitable times when some instability issues arise until they are fixed. You don't need a perfect setting to continue to run a railroad, just commitment and money. 1-2 billion for a seawall to fix and upgrade the current seaside running is still much cheaper than 4-who knows how much billion for an inland route plus the many millions of certain intervention required to fight/slow erosion of what would then be unprotected property (though perhaps then a losing battle.)
“Every day I come here and watch this, and it makes me want to cry,”
This appears to be a Philippines based news site, but reads like Gannett propaganda.
On the same rail line, authorities in nearby San Diego announced this year a $300 million project to relocate a portion of tracks further inland.
Isn't that just for the studies on a 3-4 billion project?
Sure they can do another expensive move inland. Or for a much lower cost they could build an actual seawall (like has been done all over the world), engineered to handle the underwater factors, followed by beach replenishment (also done elsewhere around the world.) Though beach replenishment will ultimately be an ongoing cost. Raise the rails maybe 5 feet or more, widen the ROW between the tracks and the seawall. Concrete engineered, not just loose rock. Reign in the CCC to allow for a practical, effective design instead of sunk by "It's not as pretty" nonsense.
That would be a whole lot less costly than moving inland. And would protect all the property behind it that otherwise would eventually be eroded away.
25mph? There's no reason a raised and stabilized ROW protected by a true seawall can't run at the 40 to 70 mph timetable speed limits in that section, maybe even higher for the upgraded sections. Slap on temporary slow orders for the occasional storm or the inevitable times when some instability issues arise until they are fixed. You don't need a perfect setting to continue to run a railroad, just commitment and money. 1-2 billion for a seawall to fix and upgrade the current seaside running is still much cheaper than 4-who knows how much billion for an inland route plus the many millions of certain intervention required to fight/slow erosion of what would then be unprotected property (though perhaps then a losing battle.)
