A pod carrying a bunch of people whizzing through low pressure tubes at a 1000 kilometres per hour. The idea, though seemingly simple comes with its own set of challenges. Of course, anytime technological innovation (especially one of this magnitude) comes through, it must pass several hurdles. The concept touted as Elon Musk’s brainchild has been taken up by numerous big names in the industry. Virgin Hyperloop One, Hyperloop Transportation Technologies (hyperloop tt), Arrivo, Hardt Hyperloop, Zeleros, TransPod, DGW Hyperloop and Musk’s own ‘The Boring Company’ are the key players in the race to secure first mover’s advantage in this novel sector.
The system, if executed perfectly will be nothing short of magical. Proponents of the idea hold up bold claims of the system enabling faster than rail transportation with less than half the carbon footprint of aircraft in addition to being innately safer than cars. At first glance, it seems like a no brainer from a climate change perspective. A magic pod that can transport you ridiculously long distances in minutes while running on clean energy; what’s not to like? Apparently, quite a bit. A number of experts have voiced their concerns against these ambitious plans. The apprehension stems from the fact that any project of this scale will bring with it issues that might not necessarily be evident on preliminary analysis.
Crunching the numbers
In his white paper published on SpaceX website detailing hyperloop transportation technologies, Musk estimates a cost of $6 billion for a project connecting Los Angeles and San Francisco. This figure has faced criticism, citing that similar scale slow speed rail projects cost at least 10 times as much not accounting for the fact that hyperloop technologies are in their nascent stages.
According to the study, ‘Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Analysis’ prepared for the US Department of Transportation, “The construction costs of hyperloop’s fixed capital assets per mile of infrastructure are lower than the traditional high speed rail and substantially lower than the costs of a maglev system.” Hyper tube builders can dodge massive land acquisition costs by relying on elevated systems constructed on pylons. Builders would only need to purchase “air-rights” which are substantially cheaper than plain land acquisition expenses. We can assume that if hyper tubes are built along existing highways, costs would come down even further.
Considering the point that the tech is still conceptual however, there is uncertainty in infrastructure requirements and operational costs. If tubes are potentially made larger (as per some proposals floating around), previous estimates will have to be redrawn. Another issue put forth is that of net connectivity. The hyperloop speed system will be required to merge with existing transport networks. Modifying current networks to accommodate the scheme can turn out to be a very costly affair.
Running off clean energy
Chinese architects MAD in collaboration with Hyperloop TT came up with a full environment friendly concept for hyperloop technologies. The tubes would be covered by solar panel skins and the paths would include wind turbines that would produce the energy required to run the system. According to Virgin Hyperloop One, if a significant portion of short-range flights are replaced by hyperloop systems, the corresponding carbon footprint can be reduced to less than half of current values. As with electric cars, the overall footprint of the system eventually comes down to where the energy is sourced. Providing undisrupted electric supply to a system on such a scale will be a mammoth task. Only if attention is paid to keeping the source energy clean, will we get a fully green hyperloop train network.
Clean materials
Companies are under scrutiny now not only with respect to their emissions but also on the environmental impacts of their operational practices and materials used.
Construction using lightweight hyper tube materials should potentially be far cheaper than the costs of heavy steel required for conventional rail roads. Although per unit charges for materials like carbon-fibre composites maybe higher, at scale they may turn out to be cost efficient. Lifecycle of materials used is another matter of concern. With new materials and infrastructure, another question arises of how long the systems can function without the need for reconstruction or modification.
These light pods will be suspended using magnets placed in a special configuration along with ‘air bearings’ placed along the length of the track. The high-power magnets required for this purpose can sometimes include rare earth elements. If care is not taken to ethically source them, we will be looking at another line of environmental impact. According to the study ‘Sustainability of the Rare Earths Industry’, “It is recognized that new techniques, processes and governance systems are required to ensure more environmentally benign RE operations”. The same issue extends into battery procurement. Lithium Ion batteries although imperfect, seem to be the top contender for this use case. With the increased shift onto renewable energy, there is immense pressure on the industry to deliver. When the demand for such materials increase, associated mining practices can also turn dirty, the consequences of which cannot be ignored.
Disruption to the environment
Elevated tracks shouldn’t pose much of a problem to the environment or wildlife. Closed hyperloop train tunnels are much safer for animals compared to wildlife highway crossings. Even from the angle of noise pollution, experts say that hyperloop systems will be fairly silent. In areas where underground tunnels must be built however, new challenges may arise. The impact of tunneling mechanisms and construction activities on aquifers needs to be analysed. Chemicals must not be allowed to leach into water and cause contamination.
Endnote
Questioning innovation is only of second nature to us no matter the promised rewards. Impeccable solutions arise out of educated discussions among parties who view the problem from multiple standpoints. Eliciting such conversations is a by product of truly disruptive technology. In the end we need to weigh the cons against the potential gains whilst giving the benefit of the doubt to the innovators; for great feats like climbing Mount Everest or landing on the moon were secured not by the people who questioned why but why not.