If people don't want high income earners get even more then why are they so vehemently against removing negative gearing & introduce Flat Tax & a National Service ?
Because they're just as selfish & greedy as those they condemn ! Hypocrites the lot !

Yes, Bazz, but that's KWs not extreme high voltage.

I believe a test track loaded with a simulated peak traffic example is how it could be done and by the positioning of many multiples of SMRs along the line of long distant travel given that'd be the cheapest option in the long run. And as nuclear waste burning MSRs. Which would mean we could build the deleted expletive lot with other folks dollars and allow local co-ops to own and operate them almost as if they were highway service stations competing for your dollar.

And doable if the ones supplying the lowest cost energy via efficiency, got the longest stretches for their own underlay. There'd be short breaks where only stored battery power would operate, to ensure a really competitive model prevailed, left right and centre.

Trams and trains don't currently need overhead wires but can use an inground system. Suggest it be located at every stop and such amenity be completely cover and strategically placed so as to avoid water intrusion.

If a high load is a problem? then the solution is more input circuits rather than upping the voltage. Except where the thing is related to grid distribution, which could also be region-specific microgrids?

Not completely adverse to overhead wires. Just prefer systems less available to, high metal booms, etc, morons and or saboteurs. The more we can put underground regardless of type or system, the better I like it for the sake of enduring reliability.
Cheers, Alan.

Alan, I still do not understand how your suggestions long under road
conductor is going to couple to the vehicles without large losses
where there are no vehicles. How do you stop it radiating all the power away ?
Also just what would be mounted on the vehicles ?
A coil ? or a capacitor ?
The whole idea seems impractical.

Yes Bazz, just like nuclear fusion, it will only be perpetually only 10 years off. Don't hold your breath.

I haven't a clue how Alan B's concept is supposed to work but I imagine using the rails as a kind of earth/ground & the actual train being a positive perhaps ?
Maybe hydrogen could be used to power trains ? I'd say let's lay the tracks or better, start by building mono rail track infrastructure now & all else will be a matter of whatever is invented first. Main thing is the infrastructure in progress & the employment & economy are in full swing !

Individual,
Hydrogen can be used to power trains, and may be regarded as a practical alternative to diesel in the not too distant future.

Only the lunatic fringe support national service nowadays, and most people rightly regard a progressive tax as better than a flat tax.

________________________________________________________________________________

Bazz,
What Alan and others envisage uses induction coils. I presume the coils in the road would only be powered up (beyond a low level used for detection) when it's detected the vehicles are where they can be charged that way.

I can't see it being economic, despite the reduction in need for battery capacity (which I've heard is the single biggest cost for EVs).

________________________________________________________________________________

David Leyonhjelm,
Excessove means testing is bad policy for two reasons:
firstly it creates perverse incentives. Were better off not replicating the USA's anti-aspirational system.
Secondly, excluding people from the benefits of what they pay taxes for increases their resentment of paying tax. That may suit you politically, but it's strongly against the national interest.