News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.4K     0 

What do you think of a Hyperloop between Edmonton and Calgary?

  • Total voters
    72
No, Ken, I am not referring to any specific Hyperlink proposal because we don't know the final details as yet -- I am just saying that since it is a private development, privately funded why try to tear it apart... let's see what comes of this -- the technology is valid; let's see how it comes together. Surely we don't have to continue arguing in vague etherspace.
 
Archited, the THEORY is valid, the technology is unproven so far. This is just like fusion energy, it is still a long way from being reality.

If Alberta gets it first, it will be a shitty one similar to the Model-T for cars.
 
itom987 said:
Archited, the THEORY is valid, the technology is unproven so far. This is just like fusion energy, it is still a long way from being reality.

If Alberta gets it first, it will be a shitty one similar to the Model-T for cars.
Click to expand...

Dream big, it's the most Edmonton thing you can do *eyeroll* yeah the Model-T sure never did anything for the world. I'm sure Michigan laughed at Ford and ridiculed his unproven technology too. An open mind is too much to ask for in this city sometimes. Come to this city only if you bring ideas that have been done a thousand times over in other places...revolutionary thinking not allowed.
 
Didama said:
Dream big, it's the most Edmonton thing you can do *eyeroll* yeah the Model-T sure never did anything for the world. I'm sure Michigan laughed at Ford and ridiculed his unproven technology too. An open mind is too much to ask for in this city sometimes. Come to this city only if you bring ideas that have been done a thousand times over in other places...revolutionary thinking not allowed.
Click to expand...
i'm not sure how valid that comparison is but if you want to make it there are more similarities than you might think...

as far as i am aware, if hyperloop does proceed it will require right of way of an indeterminant width from edmonton to calgary. it is unclear whether that needs to be acquired by hyperloop or whether it will be acquired and provided by the province. also unclear is what will be provided - and at whose cost - in terms of access to the entire line for emergency response teams as well as maintenance.

as far as using the model t as a comparable, while it's true enough that michigan may well have initially laughed at ford and ridiculed the unproven technology, the public cost in supporting that technology in terms of roadways and infrastructure and public health and municipal design etc. in the last 115 years has been pretty substantive. while these have been externalities from ford's perspective, they probably shouldn't have been in terms of securing and maintaining public support.

if you want to use how north america in particular has dealt with the automobile as a reason for north america to support hyperloop, hyperloop would never see the light of day. that's not to take a position against dreaming either big or small, just noting that just because someone can dream something doesn't make it achievable and doesn't make it practical even if it is achievable. :)
 
Besides all the impracticality of betting the horse on an unproven technology when HSR does exactly what we need with none of those concerns.

I think the biggest reason I would hate to see the Hyperloop actually become reality instead of HSR is all the concepts always seem to use opaque tubes.
Riding a train all the way down to Calgary and not even being able to watch the prairie rip by would be so lame!
 
I think you are all missing my point. The Model-T example is the vehicle's capabilities only, not the infrastructure. It was underpowered and not very reliable compared to today's cars.
 
kcantor said:
i'm not sure how valid that comparison is but if you want to make it there are more similarities than you might think...

as far as i am aware, if hyperloop does proceed it will require right of way of an indeterminant width from edmonton to calgary. it is unclear whether that needs to be acquired by hyperloop or whether it will be acquired and provided by the province. also unclear is what will be provided - and at whose cost - in terms of access to the entire line for emergency response teams as well as maintenance.

as far as using the model t as a comparable, while it's true enough that michigan may well have initially laughed at ford and ridiculed the unproven technology, the public cost in supporting that technology in terms of roadways and infrastructure and public health and municipal design etc. in the last 115 years has been pretty substantive. while these have been externalities from ford's perspective, they probably shouldn't have been in terms of securing and maintaining public support.

if you want to use how north america in particular has dealt with the automobile as a reason for north america to support hyperloop, hyperloop would never see the light of day. that's not to take a position against dreaming either big or small, just noting that just because someone can dream something doesn't make it achievable and doesn't make it practical even if it is achievable. :)
Click to expand...

Why not welcome the company to build a test track? As far as I know that's the first step being proposed and (presumably) said company isn't about to pump billions of dollars into building infrastructure between Edmonton and Calgary unless it has solid proof of concept. I guess I just don't understand why everyone is freaking out over a private company wanting to spend their own money to build a test track for a technology that *could* be truly revolutionary. Why are we so afraid of everything new in this city?
 
^
except it isn’t really a private company spending its own money... if my memory is correct, even the test track was being financed from within china, primarily by a chinese manufacturer. it would have utilized their equipment and their intellectual property on a go forward basis on a sole source basis. this is similar to their initial “silk road” infrastructure investment in asia and africa and is a dangerous place to play for the recipients of what is set up to look like largesse. if successful they have obtained a monopoly here and a competitive advantage elsewhere. if not they have made an attractive currency play and downloaded the risk… as with most things, the devil is in the details and we’re being fed lots of hype and very few details.
 
Didama said:
yet the lack of details isn't stopping many from panning this right from the get go.
Click to expand...
i'm not so sure about that. there are in fact many details that are available including:
  • existing air passenger traffic between the cities
  • existing bus traffic between those cities
  • existing car traffic between those cities
  • projected passenger counts
  • proposed fare structures for those passengers
  • potential row alignments (none of which actually connect their cores)
  • number of pods required to meet daily passenger projections
  • maximum headway times required to meet daily passenger projections
all of these can easily be found (ie passenger projections) or calculated (maximum headway times if they are going to carry that many passengers). what isn't available is how those things are going to be met/satisfied and at what cost or by who. expecting answers to that without simply being fed and accepting more hype(r) is not panning.

i'm also not sure how hyperloop is expected to compete with/against hsr or vice versa but if neither of them seems to make economic sense on its own, i'm pretty sure doing both of them would be a twin boondoggle.
 
Don't get me wrong, a healthy dose of skepticism is good. I don't disagree that HSR appears to make a lot more sense. But why not give this group a chance to present to city council, which they are apparently doing in February? When I said details I didn't mean traffic counts between cgy and yeg. That's all public info. I meant more along the lines of what would be required from the city and province, what are the timelines of the project, who is on the hook to removed infrastructure if the project fails etc. etc. In my mind those are questions that need to be answered asap. It may well be that when that information is released the project will deserve the criticism it has already received, but personally I prefer to know more before I pile on.
 
Didama said:
Don't get me wrong, a healthy dose of skepticism is good. I don't disagree that HSR appears to make a lot more sense. But why not give this group a chance to present to city council, which they are apparently doing in February? When I said details I didn't mean traffic counts between cgy and yeg. That's all public info. I meant more along the lines of what would be required from the city and province, what are the timelines of the project, who is on the hook to removed infrastructure if the project fails etc. etc. In my mind those are questions that need to be answered asap. It may well be that when that information is released the project will deserve the criticism it has already received, but personally I prefer to know more before I pile on.
Click to expand...
asking questions and wanting answers isn't "piling on". :)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top