Elon Musk's Hyperloop moving forward

[Johnnypenso]

We, of course, know how to magnetically levitate trains. We know how to build sealed capsules and vacuum chambers.

There is nothing in this technology that is beyond what we are capable of, at this point.

The big question is "hamachizzit?"

An apt analogy isn't orbiters to a moon landing.

More like from sub-orbital flight to planting a colony on Mars.

On the face of it, a vacuum train will give you the best cost per mile in terms of fuel/electricity anywhere.

It's the other costs that will be killer.

Every mile of that tunnel is going to cost a fortune in induction coils, vacuum seals, sensors and safety equipment. (Looking it up in Google, it's between $100 million to $150 million per mile of tunnel.)

This is not far out of line with what regular high speed rail costs. But the basic problem is the same: Demand versus ROI.

I don't know of any major high speed rail system that does not rely on subsidies. There are supposedly some subways and metros in Japan that are not directly subsidized, except through loans, but... have you tried riding one of those? "Packed like sardines in a can" is an insult to the fine, spacious accomodations most packaged fish get.

-

If it gets built, the Hyperloop will be a luxury project, will offer airline level speed and convenience, will cost an arm and a leg to ride (if I recall, our Shinkansen tickets a few months back were comparable to air fare), and will probably not make money without subsidies... or at all.

-

Still, I hope he builds the damn thing. I'd like to try it myself, if just once.

I know your post is in English but I thought I'd offer a little translation. $100-150 Million per mile of tunnel translates to $200-500 million per mile of tunnel when taxpayers are paying for it.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I don't care how long it takes to get built, what I want to know is how much taxpayers money will be eaten up in the process and has anyone ever worked out whether travel is economically viable in this contraption.

What else can we list that our money is wasted on currently. (avoiding the fact that this hyperloop stuff is all currently privately funded) Shall we start with the so-called president's trips to his resort?

 

[Johnnypenso]

What else can we list that our money is wasted on currently. (avoiding the fact that this hyperloop stuff is all currently privately funded) Shall we start with the so-called president's trips to his resort?

Oh I can think of a million things and the President's golfing trips would be on that list. My own provincial government, for example, has flushed $37 Billion down the drain on green energy already and the independent office of the Auditor General forecasts a total of $170 Billion wasted by 2032 as a result of "haphazard planning and political meddling". But this is the hyperloop thread, not the government waste thread. Just because money is wasted in other areas doesn't mean it's ok to waste money on this as you seem to infer with your comment.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Just because money is wasted in other areas doesn't mean it's ok to waste money on this as you seem to infer with your comment.

My point was that there are worse things. (and that it's currently privately funded which you seem to ignore)

 

[BobK]

My point was that there are worse things. (and that it's currently privately funded which you seem to ignore)

Do you seriously believe that if/when an actual, passenger-carrying hyperloop is built (not just a five-mile proof-of-concept) that there will not be massive government subsidies?

 

[Johnnypenso]

My point was that there are worse things. (and that it's currently privately funded which you seem to ignore)

Your point is there are worse things therefore it's ok to blow money on this? I don't ignore that it's currently privately funded, I'm asking the question as to what this is going to cost the taxpayers in the end. If the answer is zero, great, you've got my vote. If not, I think there needs to be some accounting to the citizenry as to how their money is going to be spent, will it pay for itself and how soon etc., no different than I'd say about any other big government program or even the small ones.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Do you seriously believe that if/when an actual, passenger-carrying hyperloop is built (not just a five-mile proof-of-concept) that there will not be massive government subsidies?

My point was that there are worse things. (and that it's currently privately funded which you seem to ignore)

You missed that.

Your point is there are worse things therefore it's ok to blow money on this?

I don't get why moving people and goods across the country at a much faster rate is such a bad thing. This is just the next logical step when it comes to your typical rail based train. We don't advance as a species if we just sit on our ass and say "we should have done that".

 

[Johnnypenso]

You missed that.

I don't get why moving people and goods across the country at a much faster rate is such a bad thing. This is just the next logical step when it comes to your typical rail based train. We don't advance as a species if we just sit on our ass and say "we should have done that".

So you're not concerned at all if it's economically viable and that shouldn't enter into the equation? Because so far you've completely ignored those concerns.

 

[CodeRedR51]

So you're not concerned at all if it's economically viable and that shouldn't enter into the equation? Because so far you've completely ignored those concerns.

We've funded the railroad to get it to where it is now. Why not this? Hyperloop is just the next step.

 

[novcze]

So you're not concerned at all if it's economically viable and that shouldn't enter into the equation? Because so far you've completely ignored those concerns.

IMO it looks more viable to ditch oil based transportation than creating something like hyperloop, but at least it's not as utterly ridiculous as solar freakin' roadways

 

[Johnnypenso]

We've funded the railroad to get it to where it is now. Why not this? Hyperloop is just the next step.

So economic viability doesn't matter then? It's next therefore fund it?

 

[CodeRedR51]

So economic viability doesn't matter then? It's next therefore fund it?

Why not? I mean you don't even live here so why does it matter to you?

 

[BobK]

You missed that.

Actually I didn't miss that at all; that's why I specifically exempted the most ambitious current project.

Meanwhile, you have failed to address my question, so I'll ask it again:

Do you seriously believe that if/when an actual, passenger-carrying hyperloop is built (not just a five-mile proof-of-concept) that there will not be massive government subsidies?

I don't get why moving people and goods across the country at a much faster rate is such a bad thing. This is just the next logical step when it comes to your typical rail based train. We don't advance as a species if we just sit on our ass and say "we should have done that".

I don't get why moving people and goods across the country at a much faster rate would be a bad thing either, and I wonder why you're making that statement given that nobody has suggested it would be a bad thing.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Why not? I mean you don't even live here so why does it matter to you?

So economic viability doesn't matter. Check. And I shouldn't comment on anything outside of Canada. Check.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Do you seriously believe that if/when an actual, passenger-carrying hyperloop is built (not just a five-mile proof-of-concept) that there will not be massive government subsidies?

Depends on if the government decides if it's a viable project.

I wonder why you're making that statement given that nobody has suggested it would be a bad thing.

Arguing for reasons why it shouldn't happen (money being the biggest) are enough.

So economic viability doesn't matter.

It does, and it could.

And I shouldn't comment on anything outside of Canada.

That's not what I said. I'm just curious why our taxes mean so much to you when you don't even pay them anyway.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Arguing for reasons why it shouldn't happen (money being the biggest) are enough.

Can you please quote anyone that has said that it shouldn't happen? I see people asking for some numbers and other people discussing the history and viability of this technology. I don't see anyone declaring that it shouldn't happen.

 

[zzz_pt]

The Large Hadron Collider was build underground despite being way more expensive - because is safer and stable (temperature fluctuations are a lot smaller). Unless all the hyperloop connections are underground, I'm very skptical about its safety but building it exclusively underground means the price per mile goes up really fast.

___

Deleted this part because there's different things written online about the hyperloop and they're different from one another, so there's no point in putting something here and then finding somewhere else that's not the case anymore, even if their website says so.

For example, Elon Musk's white paper (base for the Hyperloop but it changed already) says:

4.2.2.
Tube Construction
In order to keep cost to a minimum, a uniform thickness steel tube reinforced with stringers was selected as the material of choice for the inner diameter tube Tube sections would be pre-fabricated and installed between pillar supports spaced 100 ft (30 m) on average, varying slightly depending on location.

The spacing of the Hyperloop pillars retaining the tube is critical to achieve the design objective of the tube structure. The average spacing is 100 ft (30m), which means there will be near 25,000 pillars supporting both tubes and solar panels.


And the Hyperloop One FAQ says:

What is the spacing between columns? Spacing will be extremely route-specific but will range from 45 to 100 meters. Passenger and freight Hyperloops could have different requirements and terrain would affect the number, as well.

But the test track has 19 pillars in 500m (~25m). Which is what this website (started by an hyperloop engineer who supports the idea, of course) says is best.

___

Also took a look into this. It looks a bit amateurish (look at those two pictures illustrating the hyperloop instalation ^^). :/ That's the only think they link to as a cost study in the FAQ.

"There are various ways to finance the project and different models are possible. However, since legal considerations, government approvals and other governmental interactions are needed throughout the project, we are preliminary of the opinion that the best way forward is a cooperative alternative between Sweden/Finland, Hyperloop One and maybe other parties as well."

I'm sure they have the same opinion for the USA. Money has to be put forward by the gov. There's no other way to do it imo (I just think it won't be done).