News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.7K     0 

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


  • Total voters
    72
Don't forget Ken that there is two-way traffic which would cut your numbers in half in terms of usage in one direction -- 16 pods going south; 16 coming north. Still it is an ambitious number!
i think using $150 probably allows for the two way count as one way coach is only $90 and one way business class was $150 and the maximum capacity per pod (presumably without business class or other amenities is 50). probably inexact in my preference for nice round numbers but i'd still say probably closer to 30 than 16 and that's still before freight pods are factored in.

it's also worth noting that from an engineering perspective this might be more intriguing than a hyperloop system but the downside is that you can't make longer trains - each unit has to be an independent pod so you can't increase capacity beyond what headway will allow.

at the end of the day however, the hypotheticals don't really impact the fact that there simply isn't enough density or ridership between edmonton and calgary to make sense of this whether the this is transpod or hyperloop or true high (or even medium) speed rail. transpods efforts in europe are likely to be much more successful than even the toronto - hamilton corridor which they don't seem focused on anymore. from transpod's perspective, it doesn't really matter where they build and you have to wonder if alberta isn't simply the most attractive place to build their test track rather than an attractive place to build an actual operating loop.
 
Last edited:
I agree with your notion of population density in terms of usage. The advantage for "trial" comes from the same notion -- fewer people as in the space between Edmonton and Calgary means lower acquisition costs. There is the potential for a head-fake here where they use the western corridor for proof of concept, looking at denser areas for a customer base. They did mention France in the article.
 
i don't think the head-fake will ever be a $30 billion dollar proof of concept link between edmonton and calgary. that's the carrot for ric mcivor who has always been a railway buff. in reality, even if it happens the test track for the head-fake won't be any longer than the 10 km stretch initially dedicated for it by the ndp (strange how that earlier commitment by the government of alberta wasn't acknowledged by the current government of alberta) but the first actual corridor if the test-track validates the concept is likely to be in the south of france or italy based on their ownership structure and office locations etc.
 
The report is there for you to read in the news release. You need to download it to your email address.
 
^
from their own reports, marseilles to nice makes way more sense than edmonton to calgary.
 
i don't think the head-fake will ever be a $30 billion dollar proof of concept link between edmonton and calgary. that's the carrot for ric mcivor who has always been a railway buff. in reality, even if it happens the test track for the head-fake won't be any longer than the 10 km stretch initially dedicated for it by the ndp (strange how that earlier commitment by the government of alberta wasn't acknowledged by the current government of alberta) but the first actual corridor if the test-track validates the concept is likely to be in the south of france or italy based on their ownership structure and office locations etc.
Regarding the test track, it won't be Edmonton-Calgary. According to the article, they want to do testing on a 20km stretch from EIA to Edmonton from 2022-2027, and start construction on the Calgary leg in 2025. I personally doubt they'll start testing next year though, given they still need to build the darn thing.

*Actually, I might have misinterpreted the test track's location. Their news release says that they're working with the province to identify suitable land for it. Here's the quote from the article which mentions the EIA, make of it what you will.

"Then we'll start the process of looking at the land acquisition or land agreements between the Edmonton airport and the city and public consultation, construction permits and environmental assessments."
 
Last edited:
I just can't see how Alberta can be the best place to do the first application. There are so many more economic corridors that don't have high speed rail and are congested to the point of collapsing (California and Texas just in North America) on top of the south France and Italy locations already mentioned.

I really think it's great that the proof of concept is done here, we have smart engineers and a good reputation around the world for safety standards, there should be a nice spillover effect to this effort in the area.
 
I just can't see how Alberta can be the best place to do the first application. There are so many more economic corridors that don't have high speed rail and are congested to the point of collapsing (California and Texas just in North America) on top of the south France and Italy locations already mentioned.

I really think it's great that the proof of concept is done here, we have smart engineers and a good reputation around the world for safety standards, there should be a nice spillover effect to this effort in the area.
Maybe it's a mixture of the Provincial government's eagerness, and the relatively straightforward Geography? I get that there's hills and ditches, but it's basically a flat straight line between the two cities. I'm not sure how Texas and California compare in these regards.
 
Maybe it's a mixture of the Provincial government's eagerness, and the relatively straightforward Geography? I get that there's hills and ditches, but it's basically a flat straight line between the two cities. I'm not sure how Texas and California compare in these regards.
dallas has a population of about 1.4 million, fort worth has a population of close to 1 million they have an international airport that includes a large duty free zone about half way between them. they're about 40 miles apart.

if you wanted a test track, you could do one there that could test use ridership as well as physical possibility.

from there its about 240 miles sse to houston; 195 miles ssw to austin; and 165 miles from austin to houston to complete the triangle.

their terrain is pretty much flat as a pancake although there are some lovely rolling hills around austin that make you think of tennessee (much like the foothills only better treed).
 
This is exciting news! I'm still not sure about hyperloop as a concept in of itself, but it's nice that TransPod seems to still be working on their proposal here in Alberta. I'm still wondering where the Edmonton station will be in the final design. It'd be cool if a downtown location could be identified but even Strathcona would be okay imo, however I recall reading somewhere that TransPod only worked out 4 stations from downtown Calgary to EIA. If this is really the plan then that is completely unacceptable. Edmonton can't possibly get the short end of the stick here and, as more info about the design comes out, the City and citizens need to push hard for a central-city station, no matter the cost.
 
I think the Hyperloop might work better as an Interstate-style rail. It could slow down at nodes like Red Deer if there's a stop, and can switch tracks or bypass the node.
 
I wouldn't invest a single penny into this project, this includes the high speed rail option. This technology will be obsolete soon due to self driving cars. Who wants to be cooped up in a box with strangers when they can relax in their own private vehicle.
 
I wouldn't invest a single penny into this project, this includes the high speed rail option. This technology will be obsolete soon due to self driving cars. Who wants to be cooped up in a box with strangers when they can relax in their own private vehicle.
Not everyone can afford their own vehicles. Some people don't want to be near strangers, but others don't want to deal with the hassle of owning a vehicle and paying for insurance, maintenance, etc. Plus mass transit helps to reduce traffic congestion. Maybe self driving cars could help avoid traffic jams, but they're still less efficient crowd movers.
 

Back
Top