So Elon Musk's announcement of a high-speed near-ground transportation came and went. He wasn't interested in funding it, but felt the need to make a grand announcement anyway. In case you missed the details, you can read about it here, here, or here. But briefly, the idea is to build a giant series of tubes (not the internet, Senator Stevens), similar to the type that you might use at a drive-through bank teller, but instead of money, the canisters inside the tubes would carry a few people - at speeds of up to 760 mph. This would mean you (or, actually, he - Elon Musk) could get from LA to San Francisco in 35 minutes. This (supposedly) could be built for a fraction of the cost of the California High Speed rail (HSR) system now being pushed. Musk's numbers reveal that the system would cost $6 Billion for a passenger-only system LA-San Francisco, while the planned HSR is said to cost $70-$100 Billion - at least ten times more.
The distance for the route LA to San Francisco is 382 miles along US Interstate Route 5 (Google Maps). Using this with the max speed of 760 mph conveniently works out to almost exact 30 minutes (30 minutes and 9 seconds). Add in his proposed 5 minutes for unloading (hopefully no one is travelling with small kids or elderly), and you get the 35 minute trip. For reference, Buffalo to NYC along the NYS Thruway is 440 miles, or 438 miles from Amtrak Exchange Street to NY Penn Station (8.5 hours on Amtrak). A Hyperloop from Buffalo to NYPenn would take only 35 minutes + 5(!) minutes to unload. Of course, this assumes no stops - and this is true for his LA to San Francisco route as well. This is catch #1.
Catch #2 is the number of people per hour the hyperloop can carry. According to Matt Johnson, the number of passengers per hour for this is 3360 under ideal conditions. A more realistic, if still fantastical, estimate is just around 1300 people per hour. Again, this is for a direct trips only (Rochester to NY Penn? You need another tube). Again, according Johnson, the California HSR would have capacity of 12,000 people per hour, about 10 times more, and it can make intermediate stops.
The desire for very fast, convenient, city center to city center transport is understandable, and desired by many. However, the Hyperloop is not the solution. It is a pie in the sky idea at "personalized pod transport" that, when taken to its extreme (have tubes that branch off, to allow for intermediate stops and pods that detach and coast into stations, etc), become high speed rail-like. The problem isn't HSR, it is the lack of it in the US. There is a fair amount of smoke around HSR in various corridors, but still not much fire. Acela is the closest, but it is not truly high speed compared with Europe or Japan. The US HSR Association has a Toronto-Buffalo-Rochester HSR corridor target for 2020, with top speeds of 220 mph. This would be extended across NYState by 2025. Political will aside, it is certainly achievable. The New York State corridor west of Utica is flat and straight by rail standards (deviations from true east-west runs to Rome and Rochester are gradual). Grade crossings are the primary stumbling blocks, as is integration with freight - but there is capacity on the existing right of way since there are now only two tracks when there once was three or four.
So, forget the Hyperloop hype. Let's look at ways to make real transportation progress in NY State, which will be the focus of follow-on posts.
Posted with Blogsy
No comments:
Post a Comment