Slashdot Mirror


'Elon Musk's Hyperloop Is Doomed For the Worst Reason' (bloomberg.com)

schwit1 quotes a Bloomberg column by Virginia Postrel: What makes Musk's Hyperloop plan seem like fantasy isn't the high-tech part. Shooting passengers along at more than 700 miles per hour seems simple -- engineers pushed 200 miles-per-hour in a test this week -- compared to building a tunnel from New York to Washington. And even digging that enormously long tunnel -- twice as long as the longest currently in existence -- seems straightforward compared to navigating the necessary regulatory approvals... The eye-rolling comes less from the technical challenges than from the bureaucratic ones.

With his premature declaration, Musk is doing public debate a favor. He's reminding us of what the barriers to ambitious projects really are: not technology, not even money, but getting permission to try. "Permits harder than technology," Musk tweeted after talking with Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti about building a tunnel network. That's true for the public sector as well as the private... SpaceX and its commercial-spaceflight competitors can experiment because Congress and President Barack Obama agreed to protect them from Federal Aviation Administration standards. usk is betting that his salesmanship will have a similar effect on the ground. He's trying to get the public so excited that the political pressures to allow the Hyperloop to go forward become irresistible. He seems to believe that he can will the permission into being. If he succeeds, he'll upend not merely intercity transit but the bureaucratic process by which things get built. That would be a true science-fiction scenario.

22 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. I know right by tylersoze · · Score: 5, Insightful

    God forbid there should be some oversight in building a ground level supersonic transport system.

    1. Re:I know right by hord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My uncle is a civil engineer that was asked to work on a show about the Hoover Dam. He said it couldn't be built today due to regulatory approval. It's weird how people aren't saying no oversight... they're saying reasonable oversight. We get stuff like Hoover Dam.

    2. Re:I know right by vadim_t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, let's see the details on what exactly those unsurmountable regulations are. The article contains zero detail on the specifics.

      Depending on what Musk intends to do, and where his stuff is going to go, and in what manner, it being unsurmountable may be perfectly reasonable. Or it may be not.

    3. Re:I know right by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      I can't imagine why people think that "move fast and break things" isn't a suitable standard for civil engineering. Must be communist influences.

    4. Re:I know right by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think it's important to note that Musk's tweet was related to his desire to build a bunch of tunnels under LA rather than about the coast-to-coast hype loop.

      Musk is used to running companies where they iterate fast and solve problems as they come up; but that doesn't seem like a good approach when it comes to digging tunnels under a populated and developed area.

      In the Seattle area, we've seen a lot of tunnel digging over the past several years (the best known had lots of well-publicised problems, but there have been several others which were mostly problem-free). The thing is... you're digging under skyscrapers, you're digging under bridges, you're digging under the permanent waterline, you're digging through man-made hills with neighborhoods built on top of them... there's a lot that can and does go wrong, and there's not much margin for error.

      While it's currently fashionable to rail against "unreasonable" and "insurmountable" regulations - the burden of proof here should be on the people complaining.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:I know right by vux984 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hydro electric power used to be one of the darlings of the energy sector. It was clean, it was safe, it was renewable. The only draw back was the local environmental effects of the dam, changing the river flow, creating a lake; but those were deemed acceptable.

      Now the environmental damage caused by building a dam is an all but insurmountable hurdle.

      Not to mention labour costs and standards increases that price such megaprojects out of reach.

      Oh... you probably wanted some cites right?

      https://www.marketplace.org/20...

      http://wizbangblog.com/2012/07...

      http://thehill.com/regulation/...

    6. Re:I know right by Balial · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why would you want to build another hoover dam today? California produces more than twice the power from the hoover dam from wind. 96 people died in the construction of the hoover dam.

      It's almost as if technology changes adjust the cost/benefit of various projects, obsoleting once acceptable ideas.

      To bring it back to the article: Digging vast tunnels under major metropolitan areas like LA, New York and DC without any oversight is ridiculous.

    7. Re:I know right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, let's see the details on what exactly those unsurmountable regulations are.

      "Insurmountable regulations" is just another way of saying "You won't allow us to maximize our profits by completely ignoring the safety of others". it is essentially the same as the currently popular phrase "job-killing regulations" which is repeated thousands of times daily despite zero evidence that any regulation has ever "killed" any jobs.

      When you buy food at your local grocery store you have never once worried that it would make you sick. When you turn on your television you have never once worried that it would explode and burn down your house. Plane crashes and bridges collapsing are so rare that they are a big story when they happen. You live a live that is very safe and comfortable and it's because of all those terrible regulations.

      But don't worry. Der Trumpenfuhrer will fix all that. He has vowed to eliminate all those terrible regulations. And when Elon Musk's hyperlloop damages your property, you''l just have to suck it up and stop being such a cry-baby liberal.

    8. Re:I know right by vtcodger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm a little surprised that musk doesn't seem to have anticipated the regulatory issue. More important, he doesn't seem to be familiar with Seattle's tunneling effort in its attempt to replace the Alaska Way Viaduct. That (expensive) project is WAY over budget and WAY late due largely to encountering a steel pipe where it didn't expect one. The pipe broke the boring machine which then required a secondary hole/tunnel be drilled to get access to the damaged machinery. Boring tunnels in modern urban areas is a lot more complex than folks (including Musk?) think.

      The other big relatively recent urban tunneling effort in the US was Boston's Big Dig which also was way late and way over budget. I think it was a "dig a huge ditch, put a transportation tube at the bottom then fill over it operation" not a tunnel bore. But here's a quote from Wikipedia.

      In addition to political and financial difficulties, the project faced several environmental and engineering obstacles. The downtown area through which the tunnels were to be dug was largely landfill, and included existing Red Line and Blue Line subway tunnels as well as innumerable pipes and utility lines that would have to be replaced or moved. Tunnel workers encountered many unexpected geological and archaeological barriers, ranging from glacial debris to foundations of buried houses and a number of sunken ships lying within the reclaimed land.

      Tunneling through urban areas does not seem to be a project for the faint of heart.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    9. Re:I know right by colin_young · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, that information does exist.

      And sometimes it's even accurate.

    10. Re:I know right by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3

      It's probably more to do with not running into other stuff buried underground than safety or environmental issues.

      The industry I work in (water) obviously has a lot of buried infrastructure, mostly pipes. They don't know exactly where a lot of it is... There are maps, many of them more than a century old, hand drawn and based on landmarks that don't exist any more. Probably weren't drafted with any great accuracy anyway.

      Okay, so you go deeper. Everyone is deeper than the last project.... Well, that doesn't really work either. And in any case, if you dig a tunnel under a building, you might affect that building in some way. Depends how tall it is, what the foundations are made of, what the ground under it is made of etc.

      That's why there are regulations. We found out the hard way that digging tunnels under cities carries some risks that we really need to try to mitigate.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  2. Says who by mattwarden · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Huh? My eyes roll for the technical challenges.

    1. Re:Says who by intellitech · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, the tunnel length alone. And then it needs to be almost airtight?

      Technical difficulty will far outweigh the bureaucratic difficulty.

      --
      vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat.
    2. Re:Says who by gweihir · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And that is just it. Europe and Asia have high-speed rail systems. They were really expensive. Don't you think alternatives were not looked at? Oh, wait, they were, for example the Transrapid. Turns out the alternatives are not commercially viable and are technologically problematic.

      My take here is the Musk has some inkling that he will fail on the tech side and is preparing a smokescreen. And, I have to admit, it is an excellent smokescreen as getting the permits needed here may well be infeasible as well.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  3. Useless article by vadim_t · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Damn straight permits are needed. Because even the biggest Elon Musk advocate would be screaming bloody murder if they found the Hyperloop would pass right through their living room, their farm, or that really scenic lake on their property.

    The question is then what permits, and are they bullshit or not? Some permits exist for obscure reasons, some because some things involve other people's property, some for safety reasons, and some because people get pissy when heavy earth moving equipment shows up in their backyard.

    Yes, of course before cities were built and when people were just moving into America, there weren't such problems, because there wasn't a crapload of infrastructure and settled people to object. But you can't have those times back, unless you like the idea of completely unrestrained forfeiture where you can be kicked out of your home to make room for a mall, and companies building housing that's going to sink into the ground in a decade or two.

  4. Not quite... by YuppieScum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem is with the regulators, not the regulations.

    Bureaucrats - and politicians - of every stripe want their fingers in big projects, partly for the reflected kudos and partly for the perks. The "working lunches" at your expense to iron out some sort of "paperwork glitch", permit fees, consultancy fees, introduction fees, and the bigger the project, the stickier their fingers...

    I think Musk's approach of shining a BIG spotlight on the process is to try and keep these "public servants" honest. I hope it works...

    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
  5. Need better mass transit however it's done by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the last century, a short-sighted if not outright evil power broker by the name of Robert Moses, never elected to any post, directly planned the transport system of New York city and the state around it, and vastly influenced the planning of other cities.

    One of Mr. Moses' nasty feats was to specify that all of the parkway bridges be built so low that it would be impossible to run trains under them, even though many were built with broad center islands.

    I grew up in one of the towns under his thumb. We literally had a 100-year-old railroad system that only went to one station for 3 large communities, with 100-year-old bridges, etc. No new train construction since New York's subways in the '30's and '40's, but lots of new roads for cars.

    America's cities still suffer under the dead hand of Robert Moses and people like him, who actively wiped out our railroads, never considering the problems automobiles would bring.

    Elon Musk's hyperloop is not the solution for this. The speed, confinement, and vacuum are obvious problems that make it more of a bomb than a train. But conventional high-speed rail transport is the solution.

    Most americans never spend time in Europe and learn about really good trains. Try Switzerland and you won't understand why people even want cars.

  6. Re:Also Doomed For the Best Reason by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Informative

    What's sad is - there are people who think the Clean Water Act constitutes government overreach.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  7. The article makes what would be a valid argument by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    in a world where you could put eight miles of new subway line in a major city without checking to see what's there first. But after hundreds of years of development, most without the benefit of geographic information systems, you can't be certain what kind of weird shit (or people) down there.

    The author seems shocked that it'd take ten years of planning before you could start workers digging. The reality is you need to figure out the impact on water, sewer, gas, electricity, telecom, peoples basements -- and chances are none of that stuff is all on one map; a lot of it is likely not mapped at all, or mapped incorrectly. Ten years before your break ground seems very reasonable to me.

    Likewise he's mortified that the Chesapeake Bay Tunnel project had to spend two years on geological and environmental impact studies before breaking ground. That's a twenty-three mile long complex of causeways and tunnels across the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay, one of the most important fisheries in the country as well one of the world's busiest shipping routes. Two years of study! He calls this a "run-of-the-mill highway". Sure, anything seems easy if you no abso-frickin' nothing about engineering. Bridges and tunnels are the most prestigious projects for a civil engineer to work on because they're ridiculously complex. Just look at all the pieces of the thing. Two years of preliminary geological and environmental study to build the thing sounds outstanding.

    This is just Dunning-Kruger run amok. These aren't cases of preliminary studies holding back engineering. Assessing the feasibility and impact of a project is a *major part* of civil engineering. Sure, you could start digging and hope you don't rupture a gas line, breech a high pressure water main, start a plague of rats in Manhattan's Upper East Side (average annual income $180K), damage a fishery that that brings in 290 million dollars per year, or find out the soil you're tunneling through won't support the weight above it. And then you'd be forced to stop and figure out how to fix it. In fact you'd almost inevitably be forced to stop and redesign your project.

    A basic principle of engineering project management is that it's waaay cheaper to anticipate a problem than to figure out what to do about it when you're halfway done.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  8. Technical Challenges by Kunedog · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's the vid, so everyone knows what we're talking about:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... He's made others since, but that's the first and most comprehensive. TL:DW technical challenges:

    * The tube would be the largest vacuum chamber in the world.
    * Any maintenance whatsoever in the tube requires depressurization and shutting down the line.
    * Vacuum seals must work repeatedly and reliably for passenger loading and unloading.
    * If a vehicle dies out in the field, it's unclear how they plan to evacuate passengers from either the vehicle or the sealed, elevated steel tube.
    * The tube has to deal with steel expansion in the daytime. The total expected variance (for the 370-mile California route) is three football fields, so you need lots of expansion joints (unless your loading platforms and pylons are going to be incredibly mobile), all of which must also be vacuum sealed. Also keep in mind the sun hits only the top of the tube so the expansion won't be uniform.
    * A breach in the system is likely to be catastrophic, with a torrent of air rushing in and propelling the first vehicle it hits at great speed into the next one, since there's no air cushion between the vehicles.
    * Anyone with a rifle along the impossible-to-guard 370-mile tube can cause one of those failures by penetrating the inch-thick steel.

    If these crushing technical challenges have been addressed, please do give us a link, because so far it looks a lot like solar roadways or Onlive.

    1. Re:Technical Challenges by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 5, Insightful

      * The tube would be the largest vacuum chamber in the world.

      And? So it would set a record. So what? On its own, that fact is meaningless.

      * Any maintenance whatsoever in the tube requires depressurization and shutting down the line.

      Overstated. Some types of maintenance would require depressurization and shutting down the line. Others would not. In particular, none of the required maintenance on the vehicles that traverse the tube requires depressurizing anything but the airlock already in hourly usage anyway. You take them out of the tube, perform maintenance, and put them back. For tube maintenance, you shut down. Consider it a snow day at an airport in the northeast, or a heat wave at an airport in Phoenix, except predictable and scheduled. No big deal. (And incidentally, completely impervious to snow.)

      * Vacuum seals must work repeatedly and reliably for passenger loading and unloading.

      Yes. And? Is this impossible? I doubt it. Does it require some engineering work? Yes. That work can be done.

      * If a vehicle dies out in the field, it's unclear how they plan to evacuate passengers from either the vehicle or the sealed, elevated steel tube.

      Unclear, but any idiot can imagine adding access ports to the tube at intervals, including removable sections large enough to allow removal of a failed vehicle. It's amazing what you can do with hydraulics.

      * The tube has to deal with steel expansion in the daytime. The total expected variance (for the 370-mile California route) is three football fields, so you need lots of expansion joints (unless your loading platforms and pylons are going to be incredibly mobile), all of which must also be vacuum sealed. Also keep in mind the sun hits only the top of the tube so the expansion won't be uniform.

      So it will have expansion joints. A two and a half foot expansion joint every mile would do it. Since it's not a very hard vacuum, designing an adequate expansion joint is entirely possible. I would build them much less than every mile and make them quite large, and double up the design as being both an expansion joint and the aforementioned rescue access. As for uniformity of expansion, steel is a very very good thermal conductor. The difference in expansion is negligible.

      * A breach in the system is likely to be catastrophic, with a torrent of air rushing in and propelling the first vehicle it hits at great speed into the next one, since there's no air cushion between the vehicles.

      Ridiculous. Railroads have had rail integrity sensing for decades now. The system requires both integrity sensors and pressure sensors along its entire length anyway. It's not like there's one giant vacuum pump at the end, with only one sensor. These are both safety and operational features. A breach in the system is a nonevent. It can be detected in a matter of seconds, and the information broadcast to all capsules in danger (a steel tube is basically a wave guide, making communication dirt simple), which can automatically engage emergency braking systems, which mainly means retracting the air skid pylons and letting the capsule drop onto its wheels. The wheel bearings will be ruined and have to be replaced, but the capsule will stop safely.

      * Anyone with a rifle along the impossible-to-guard 370-mile tube can cause one of those failures by penetrating the inch-thick steel.

      Uhm, no. Just no. Inch-thick steel is effectively armor. Very very good armor. You can legally buy armor-penetrating large caliber rifle ammunition in the United States (because 'Murica! Fuck yeah!) and while it does put a divot into inch thick steel, it does not penetrate. At all. Plenty of video on Youtube demonstrating. That lunatic in Texas tried it with all manne

  9. Not the Spin They're Looking For by Kunedog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But don't worry. Der Trumpenfuhrer will fix all that. He has vowed to eliminate all those terrible regulations. And when Elon Musk's hyperlloop damages your property, you''l just have to suck it up and stop being such a cry-baby liberal.

    TFS:

    SpaceX and its commercial-spaceflight competitors can experiment because Congress and President Barack Obama agreed to protect them from Federal Aviation Administration standards.

    If anything, when the overhyped and unworkable Hyperloop goes nowhere (based on its own merits), this sounds like a pretense to spin the failure as "Thanks Trump."