Hyperloops in Canada

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by esquire

You lucky bastard. I was born just before the Turbo went out of service, but I was always fascinated by it. A kid at my preschool had a lunch box with a picture of the CN Turbo on it and I think that's where it began. I sorely wish I could have taken a trip on it... VIA's LRCs just aren't the same!

I was disappointed by the LRC when it was launched, relative to my memories of the Turbo. It was still miles ahead of the "Rapido" which, despite its name, was not fast, and used vintage 1865 rolling stock. The turbo was completely open between the different cars, so you could see right down from one end of the train to the other. It tilted. It was low-slung. It was a beautiful train. But there were derailments, and I think a lot of wear on either the tracks (which weren't welded back then) or the wheels, or both.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Doug

Why does it matter? No government money going into this. I guess the Province could get stuck with a bill to demolish and dispose of anything that does get built.

The proponent is claiming to be able to generate the energy equivalent required to run the system from solar panels on the roof, which layers on even more suspension of disbelief.

Since it is obviously never going to work, someone has to waste money. What has Alberta given them that elsewhere hasn't? I agree that if this is entirely paid for by the private sector from install to tear down, then there is no loss, but what is more likely is they build it then go bankrupt and we become Ogdenville, Brockway or North Haverbrook.

[milomilo]

Transpod CEO: "Aww, it's not for you, it's more of a Saskatchewan idea"
Kenney: "Now wait a just minute, we're twice as smart as the people of Saskatchewan! You just tell us your idea and we'll vote for it!"

[Taeolas]

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

HSR probably isn't even coming to Canada in the next 50 years.

Which means we should be good for another 5 to 10 HSR studies to make sure we stay a world leader in HSR studies.

[scryer]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Since it is obviously never going to work, someone has to waste money. What has Alberta given them that elsewhere hasn't? I agree that if this is entirely paid for by the private sector from install to tear down, then there is no loss, but what is more likely is they build it then go bankrupt and we become Ogdenville, Brockway or North Haverbrook.

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

I think it should be called what it really is: HypeLoop. Or, Pie-in-the-sky-Loop. Or, Loop-Line-and-Sinker.

Like some unmentionable forumer (forumers, as there is more than one) that poo-poos global warming as a fraud, or even if it exists, no worries, "we'll have the technology to completely reverse it" (which is a gigantic steaming pile of hypothetical horseshit).

Originally Posted by milomilo

HSR is only a fantasy because our politics don't want it to happen - there's no technical reason it could not be built in Canada, it would be easier to build here than many other places. Hyperloop, OTOH, is a fantasy because it's a pack of lies.

Guys, it's literally just a study right now .

I, for one, think that this is quite reminiscent of the backlash in Canada for developing the world's first automated metro system (Vancouver's Skytrain) or the general backlash for any other technological advancement. I support the notion to invest in studying the feasibility of a new technological way to travel and I will also support what the data finds.

In theory from my un-professional-no-PHD-in-physics opinion (which is something a lot of you share in common with me) IF a hyper-loop was going to function successfully anywhere in Canada then the Edmonton-Calgary route is a solid candidate for a few reasons:

1. It would be a straight route.
2. It is relatively flat.
3. There is demand on the route for the transport of goods.
4. There is demand on the route for passengers as indicated by the number of drivers and flyers between the two cities.

From the outside looking in, it seems that the route is a perfect match to test in Canada as Canada's first hyper-loop.

I do feel that the study into the feasibility of hyper-loop technology is worth it since widespread technology of that magnitude is necessary to reduce CO2 emissions from commercial and freight flights, as well as freight trains. It is time to stop thinking about technological limits like we are back in 2010; it's a new decade and a new generation that will need to invest in new technologies to keep up with the world.

And all of the HSR studies were dummied by red-tape and politicians IMO.

[milomilo]

"Studying" this (it's not a government study, it's a location for a test track) is a distraction that will cost us money when it fails and lets the government off the hook of building us infrastructure that will actually be helpful. It's been about 8 years since Elon first mentioned hyperloop and the technology has moved backwards, it isn't real.

Did you invest in Bitcoin?

[Mister F]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Transpod CEO: "Aww, it's not for you, it's more of a Saskatchewan idea"
Kenney: "Now wait a just minute, we're twice as smart as the people of Saskatchewan! You just tell us your idea and we'll vote for it!"

There ain't no hyperloop and there never was!

[Truenorth00]

There's actually ways to judge how ready technology is. It's called Technology Readiness Levels (TRL).



And generally beyond funding for R&D purposes, governments don't fund infrastructure below TRL 7. And the parts of the Hyperloop is TRL 4 at best.

This might be defensible if there weren't already mature technologies to transport people. And if Canada was actually getting patents out of this.

[scryer]

For the record: my plan was just to monitor this thread until it got back on track (pun intended) but since I've been called back .....

Originally Posted by milomilo

"Studying" this (it's not a government study, it's a location for a test track) is a distraction that will cost us money when it fails and lets the government off the hook of building us infrastructure that will actually be helpful.

Can you formulate an objectively-toned post that quotes and links resources (outside of opinion-based sources) that points to the guarantee of it failing? Don't get it twisted: I'm not calling your credentials into question but I am genuinely curious about the resources that inform your justification for it failing.

Speaking of which - this is generally how good science works; you fail a lot until you are successful and then everyone forgets about the plethora of failures that lead to the breakthroughs.

It is going to be a test-track because this kind of technology hasn't been developed yet. Just like how trains were tested before allowing passengers onboard; like how cars were tested before being purchased by the public; and like how planes were tested before we flew anyone commercially. It is nothing short of exciting that Canada has taken a bold step to possibly foster a future technology never seen before in the world. But then again, Canada has dropped the ball before like with the marijuana manufacturing industry, so....

Originally Posted by milomilo

It's been about 8 years since Elon first mentioned hyperloop and the technology has moved backwards, it isn't real.

Maybe not Elon Musk per say but right now it seems that each Hyperloop company is vigilant about getting the legalities and documentation in order.

Transpod - "European Countries Agree to Establish Common Standards for hyperloop Systems" February 11th, 2020

Virgin Hyperloop - "The US department of Transportation unveiled guidance documentation for the regulation of Hyperloop..." July 23rd, 2020

Virgin Hyperloop Test Ride Video - July 12th, 2017

Having governments come together including various European nations to draft legislation and regulations based on this new technology is legitimate progress. They wouldn't have been able to have these types of laws and policies created IF they didn't have data and figures to back it up since you have to present your findings to the government in order to make it legal. Nor do governments waste their time entertaining everyone's groundbreaking big-project ideas either.

Originally Posted by milomilo

Did you invest in Bitcoin?

Do all of your posts hold this kind of hollow intellectual merit or was this ad-hominem attack just a one-off?

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

And generally beyond funding for R&D purposes, governments don't fund infrastructure below TRL 7. And the parts of the Hyperloop is TRL 4 at best.

This might be defensible if there weren't already mature technologies to transport people. And if Canada was actually getting patents out of this.

Also true. We are still very much in the beginning of the R&D of this kind of technology to say the very least. Although the benefits have yet to be confirmed with real-world results, Hyperloop technology possesses an enormous potential for future transportation needs.

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by scryer

For the record: my plan was just to monitor this thread until it got back on track (pun intended) but since I've been called back .....



Can you formulate an objectively-toned post that quotes and links resources (outside of opinion-based sources) that points to the guarantee of it failing? Don't get it twisted: I'm not calling your credentials into question but I am genuinely curious about the resources that inform your justification for it failing.

Speaking of which - this is generally how good science works; you fail a lot until you are successful and then everyone forgets about the plethora of failures that lead to the breakthroughs.

It is going to be a test-track because this kind of technology hasn't been developed yet. Just like how trains were tested before allowing passengers onboard; like how cars were tested before being purchased by the public; and like how planes were tested before we flew anyone commercially. It is nothing short of exciting that Canada has taken a bold step to possibly foster a future technology never seen before in the world. But then again, Canada has dropped the ball before like with the marijuana manufacturing industry, so....




Maybe not Elon Musk per say but right now it seems that each Hyperloop company is vigilant about getting the legalities and documentation in order.

Transpod - "European Countries Agree to Establish Common Standards for hyperloop Systems" February 11th, 2020

Virgin Hyperloop - "The US department of Transportation unveiled guidance documentation for the regulation of Hyperloop..." July 23rd, 2020

Virgin Hyperloop Test Ride Video - July 12th, 2017

Having governments come together including various European nations to draft legislation and regulations based on this new technology is legitimate progress. They wouldn't have been able to have these types of laws and policies created IF they didn't have data and figures to back it up since you have to present your findings to the government in order to make it legal. Nor do governments waste their time entertaining everyone's groundbreaking big-project ideas either.

There are a number of reasons Hyperloop obviously is not what is claimed:

Cost:
Hyperloop is claimed to be cheaper than HSR and anyone with half a brain should be able to see this is nonsense straight off the bat. It's a more complicated, new technology that requires a straighter alignment. It is simply impossible that the infrastructure could be cheaper than HSR, and that destroys most of the case.

Expansion:
A steel tube will lengthen by hundreds of metres over the 300km of track between Calgary - Edmonton when undergoing the ~70C temperature swings it will be subject to. Adding expansion joints capable of withstanding that while sealing a vacuum is not going to be easy and there is no indication any thought has been put into this.

Safety:
One puncture, like from a rifle, and the entire system is destroyed and everyone dies.

Energy efficiency:
First, there's the fluff about solar panels. You could do this just the same with roads and railways, so that claim is trash. And how much energy are we talking to depressurize 600km of tube?

To name a few. And the technology has regressed - the claims to begin with are now less impressive than they were 8 years ago. Despite multiple test tracks being built.

I don't think Hyperloop is impossible (though maybe above surface it practically is), but I do believe it impossible to do in a way that is even close to cost competitive with HSR, or maglev for that matter. If maglev can't compete with HSR on cost, there's no chance Hyperloop could.

Originally Posted by scryer

Do all of your posts hold this kind of hollow intellectual merit or was this ad-hominem attack just a one-off?

I give posts the level of respect they deserve. Anyone that laps up obvious BS like hyperloop is the type that would have believed Bitcoin, Theranos or solar freaking roadways.

[scryer]

Alright I guess we are going to do this dance... I'll take you for a twirl only once since this is getting off-topic. However my observation is that the last 4-5 pages have been nothing but triggered toxic logical fallacies being ping-pong'd back-and-forth...

Originally Posted by milomilo

There are a number of reasons Hyperloop obviously is not what is claimed:

Cost:
Hyperloop is claimed to be cheaper than HSR and anyone with half a brain should be able to see this is nonsense straight off the bat. It's a more complicated, new technology that requires a straighter alignment. It is simply impossible that the infrastructure could be cheaper than HSR, and that destroys most of the case.

Expansion:
A steel tube will lengthen by hundreds of metres over the 300km of track between Calgary - Edmonton when undergoing the ~70C temperature swings it will be subject to. Adding expansion joints capable of withstanding that while sealing a vacuum is not going to be easy and there is no indication any thought has been put into this.

Safety:
One puncture, like from a rifle, and the entire system is destroyed and everyone dies.

Energy efficiency:
First, there's the fluff about solar panels. You could do this just the same with roads and railways, so that claim is trash. And how much energy are we talking to depressurize 600km of tube?

To name a few. And the technology has regressed - the claims to begin with are now less impressive than they were 8 years ago. Despite multiple test tracks being built.

I don't think Hyperloop is impossible (though maybe above surface it practically is), but I do believe it impossible to do in a way that is even close to cost competitive with HSR, or maglev for that matter. If maglev can't compete with HSR on cost, there's no chance Hyperloop could.

In Red is all of your passive aggressive personal attacks. An ad-hominem logical fallacy if you will.

In green are all of your strawman logical fallacies.

In yellow are all of your appeal to ignorance fallacies

In blue are all of your false dilemma fallacies.

And I just decided to bold a plain-old classic exaggeration.

My point here is that you have yet to supply links and resources (that are not opinion based) to your claims; and that you are liberally lacing your posts with logical fallacies trying to insinuate that because someone has a different opinion on this matter that they should be labeled as someone to purposefully disrespect on these forums. Quite frankly there is enough of that in the world so why should we continue that narrative here? Continuing the narrative that has mostly been used for the last 4-5 pages is actually diminishing the intellectual value that the discussion of this technological study, should hold.

With facing the new implementation of this kind of technology, as regular citizens we owe it to the future to make decisions based off of data, not emotions and logical fallacies. I kindly asked you in my last post to source non-opinion based material to support your statements and I have yet to see that here and I am honestly genuinely curious (because I came to this thread in hopes of reading quality-discussion) to see the data that supports your claims.

There is a legitimate point that the cost of implementing the technology may outweigh the benefits of the hyper-loop system however where is the source and the data that supports this claim? You also have to keep in mind that as these hyperloop companies continue to develop their systems that data can in fact change over time as further hypotheses are tested. Right now it might be unfeasible to cost effectively implement a full-blown hyperloop system however as scientists continue to science, new break-throughs can possibly emerge. One of the reasons why studies exist in the first place is so that we can put a financial limit on the R&D aspect so that we aren't overspending.

Originally Posted by milomilo

I give posts the level of respect they deserve.

Lol it wasn't a one-off then, it was just natural behaviour. You should probably take your own advice and write your own posts more respectfully yourself; hence all of the ad hominem attacks being highlighted in red. You might be able to debate better with properly sourced claims.

Because I am going to check out of this thread for a few days: you are more than welcome to try and point out the logical fallacies that I used. I gave you the link on the articles that I googled so you are more than welcome to continue the off-topicness of it all. However I am done participating trying to convince someone who doesn't want to hear anything but their own voice that they need to supplement their judgements and statements with actual sources (not attacks or fallacies).

For those that are willing to participate in a discussion that develops more knowledge on this exciting topic: I am excited to read all about your opinions and the data that supports them .

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by scryer

Alright I guess we are going to do this dance... I'll take you for a twirl only once since this is getting off-topic. However my observation is that the last 4-5 pages have been nothing but triggered toxic logical fallacies being ping-pong'd back-and-forth...



In Red is all of your passive aggressive personal attacks. An ad-hominem logical fallacy if you will.

In green are all of your strawman logical fallacies.

In yellow are all of your appeal to ignorance fallacies

In blue are all of your false dilemma fallacies.

And I just decided to bold a plain-old classic exaggeration.

[...]

Because I am going to check out of this thread for a few days: you are more than welcome to try and point out the logical fallacies that I used. I gave you the link on the articles that I googled so you are more than welcome to continue the off-topicness of it all. However I am done participating trying to convince someone who doesn't want to hear anything but their own voice that they need to supplement their judgements and statements with actual sources (not attacks or fallacies).

For those that are willing to participate in a discussion that develops more knowledge on this exciting topic: I am excited to read all about your opinions and the data that supports them .

Just because you can find buzz-word-heavy excuses to refuse to acknowledge or address any of the arguments which are presented to you, does not mean that these arguments are invalid or don't even exist. Unless you have the ability to debunk the article of the "Institute of Mechanical Engineers" which was presented to you this morning, every word you further contribute to this discussion is wasting precious lifetime of everyone bothering to read it...

[milomilo]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Just because you can find buzz-word-heavy excuses to refuse to acknowledge or address any of the arguments which are presented to you, does not mean that these arguments are invalid or don't even exist. Unless you have the ability to debunk the article of the "Institute of Mechanical Engineers" which was presented to you this morning, every word you further contribute to this discussion is wasting precious lifetime of everyone bothering to read it...

Good to have you back

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

There's actually ways to judge how ready technology is. It's called Technology Readiness Levels (TRL).



And generally beyond funding for R&D purposes, governments don't fund infrastructure below TRL 7. And the parts of the Hyperloop is TRL 4 at best.

This might be defensible if there weren't already mature technologies to transport people. And if Canada was actually getting patents out of this.

More of a 2 isn’t it? None of the “tests” have actually tested the thing hyper loop is supposed to do (they have either not been in a vacuum or at ridiculously low speeds for ridiculously short distances). It would be like calling the Goddard experiments of the 1920s a test of the Saturn V.

[Urban_Sky]

Originally Posted by acottawa

More of a 2 isn’t it? None of the “tests” have actually tested the thing hyper loop is supposed to do (they have either not been in a vacuum or at ridiculously low speeds for ridiculously short distances). It would be like calling the Goddard experiments of the 1920s a test of the Saturn V.

For certain essential aspects, it’s not even TRL 2:

Yet bringing a new transport system into service is a formidable task that requires all parts to be at technology readiness level (TRL) 8, which means undergoing active commissioning.

In tests in a 500m tube, the maximum Hyperloop pod speed achieved to date is 387km/h. Such research facility testing is at TRL 4. Moreover, many aspects of the system are only at the stage of establishing basic principles (TRL 1). These include vehicle suspension, air locks, vacuum-tight tube expansion joints and switches.

Switches are required for proposed Hyperloop networks that need to route pods between tubes. Yet neither Musk’s paper nor any of the Hyperloop companies describe how their switches would work at 600km/h, the turnout speed needed to maintain the capacity of the system.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

More of a 2 isn’t it? None of the “tests” have actually tested the thing hyper loop is supposed to do (they have either not been in a vacuum or at ridiculously low speeds for ridiculously short distances). It would be like calling the Goddard experiments of the 1920s a test of the Saturn V.

I was being extremely generous.....

But yes, this thing is not close to any level of deployment and it's highly offensive that Hyperloop fanatics like to pretend it's just a few years away, if we just put a little research money into it. It can decades to go from TRL 4 to TRL 8 sometimes. Especially if the business case collapses, as is happening for Hyperloop.

[Alegan]

Originally Posted by Urban_Sky

Just because you can find buzz-word-heavy excuses to refuse to acknowledge or address any of the arguments which are presented to you, does not mean that these arguments are invalid or don't even exist. Unless you have the ability to debunk the article of the "Institute of Mechanical Engineers" which was presented to you this morning, every word you further contribute to this discussion is wasting precious lifetime of everyone bothering to read it...

The fallacies are not buzz-word excuses, and it is correct to catch them in a proper debate. It is also correct to provide refuting evidence as well. So, a pox on both your houses
As for discussing what was in that article, I don't see a problem with allowing studies for a technology that will come online in a few decades. We have to think both short-term and long-term with our infrastructure anyway, and in a world where everything is in chaos, I personally would like as many options on the table as possible.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Alegan

As for discussing what was in that article, I don't see a problem with allowing studies for a technology that will come online in a few decades.

Ever hear of "Opportunity Cost"? There's a real cost to deploying funds on this instead of something else. Alberta would literally be better off funding a detailed intercity rail study than reserving dollars to tear down Transpod's track in a few years.

Originally Posted by Alegan

We have to think both short-term and long-term with our infrastructure anyway, and in a world where everything is in chaos, I personally would like as many options on the table as possible.

Governments shouldn't be funding things based on what is trendy. That is not their job. And more to the point, Canada gets nothing out of helping to develop this (if we can even can call something at this low a TRL development), since Musk open sourced the patents. So no IP development. This is literally pissing away taxpayer dollars against the advice of actual engineers who know the TRL is too low to justify investment.

You want options? Just wait for Musk to develop it and we can discuss it in 50 years if feasible. We don't need to pay for test tracks tight now.

[Doug]

Originally Posted by milomilo

Since it is obviously never going to work, someone has to waste money. What has Alberta given them that elsewhere hasn't? I agree that if this is entirely paid for by the private sector from install to tear down, then there is no loss, but what is more likely is they build it then go bankrupt and we become Ogdenville, Brockway or North Haverbrook.

Alberta provided free land to construct a demonstration. Not many other jurisdictions could do so close to a major transpiration corridor.

I can only envision two outcomes:
1) some other idea, possibly a good one, comes out of this one
2) government gains experience in how to structure and execute the kinds of arrangements and attracts other future experiments

Beyond distracting the PR department, this carries zero opportunity cost:
1) HSR stands no chance in Alberta, at least not for many decades, so whatever this project turns out does not threaten. The population is nowhere even close to large enough
2) Beyond possibly being under cultivation, what other immediate uses would better suit this land?

[milomilo]

Free land? Where do I get some?

Land has value. If Transpod are forced to put down the money up front to completely rehabilitate it after it fails, fine, but given this province's poor performance on oil well liabilities that's not a sure thing. That said, the outcome I most expect will happen is that as negotiations move along, it will turn out Transpod are asking for more than claimed, the province rejects it, and it quietly falls off the radar.

We've built 2x 100km ring roads in the last 20 years, so I don't think this gives us any new experience in land assembly for new projects. I haven't seen any new technology come out of hyperloop in the time of it's existence, all it has done is proved what many of us saw when it was unveiled.