Hyperlooping and Planetran

There has been considerable fanfare this week over the Hyperloop idea, put forward by Elon Musk. In this concept, which was, in this case developed by engineers at Tesla and SpaceX, trains would travel in evacuated tubes at speeds of up to 800 miles an hour.

The Hyperloop concept (Tesla motors)

The concept itself is not new. Back when The Oil Drum was first started I wrote a piece on Planetran, based on an article in the Ecyclopaedia Britannica 1980 Science and the Future yearbook. (And it also was mentioned in one of Robert Heinlein’s books, though I have forgotten which).

Figure 2. The Planetran Concept as illustrated in the Encylopaedia Britannica in 1980.

The concept at the time (it dates back to an idea in 1957 at Lockheed) was to drill high speed tunnels and after they were lined evacuate them. The trains would be magnetically elevated (Maglev) and with little air in the tubes could be accelerated using the surrounding magnets at an acceleration of 1 g.

Planetran "trains" would consist of lightweight cars which are "floated" by magnetic repulsion between vehicles and guideway. These repelling magnetic fields would be phased so as to produce a traveling wave along the guideway. This magnetic wave would provide both vehicle support and propulsion (or braking.) Planetran tunnels would follow the Earth's curvature and would be generally located several hundred feet below the surface in rock structures. Besides evacuated tubes for high-speed Planetran travel the tunnels would also house conventional railroad lines and power lines, communication links, and pipelines. This shared usage would help defray tunnel costs, which are the major element in Planetran's overall expense.

The tunnels are expensive, but when comparing costs consider that it is can be relatively cost competitive to drive a tunnel under a city, relative to the price of surface construction.

To give some idea as to how this might change life consider:

Instead of two-way local service in a four-tube tunnel, planners have considered operating locals in one direction only. Because of the high speeds achieved, passengers could go the long way around to their destination. An example is the New York City - Boston link with local traffic to Hartford. By running local traffic only in the NYC to Boston direction, a traveler from Hartford to NYC would go by way of Boston. Hartford to Boston on the local would take 7 minutes, and Boston to NYC 11 minutes, for a total of 18 minutes.

Some 30-plus years later the technology plans to use a linear induction motor for propulsion, and light-weight materials such as those used as in aircraft construction. However the tube will not be evacuated, and instead will rely on pulling air into the front of the train and ejecting it underneath the train to provide suspension. (This is a technology that works quite well as an air bearing in moving heavy loads. The project description notes that these have been proved to work at speeds up to Mach 1.1 – higher than those planned for this system (which will remain sub-sonic).

Figure 3. Hyperloop car, showing the air compressor at the front, and the air bearing support.

By covering the top of the tube with solar panels it will be possible to provide more than enough energy for the system, and by mounting it on pylons along the Interstate land costs can be minimized. This takes away from the need to drive tunnels (although in time these may still be needed for the in-town sections), which is a pity since that was one of my main reasons for being interested. However the development of new technologies has resolved some of the existing problems and lowered the cost considerably. It is now estimated to cost only $6 billion to connect San Francisco and Los Angeles, and Mr Musk is apparently willing to invest his own money in further development. This could get quite interesting since this is, in a sense, competing with the High-Speed Rail Projet that California has started.

P38. Pick Points

Half-a-dozen or so stories of interest:

Until recently if you had tried to talk to me about solar cars, I would have only been able to think of the cars in the American Solar Challenge, a biennial race that takes cars built by university students in races that last started in Dallas and finished in Calgary. Our office has a small glass memento for helping Principia College, who finished second last year (well OK, our car finished 7th). But these are all flat, single person vehicles that can reach (and exceed) the speed limit, but are fragile enough to require protective chase cars. Thomas Friedman describes driving around New Delhi this weekend in an electric car, with solar panels on the roof and 3 other folk in the car. The car is a plug-in electric with a 90 mile range which had just finished a 3,500-km road tour though when you see the size of the car, rather them than me. (The car sells for Rupees 399,343. ($8,196). That does not include the modifications needed for the road trip). The Tesla electric car that is to be made in the United States is waiting for a $450 million federal loan to get started. It is expected to come from the $25 billion loan program for retooling U.S. factories and they hope to get the money in the next “four to five months.” The current plan is for cars to be on the market by 2011 – for a mere $109,000. They have a thousand customers on their waiting list. (If that’s a tad much you might want to chat with John Hendrickson, who made one out of a rusty VW, it does 50 miles per charge and uses gel batteries).

India continues to move ahead with its planned expansion of nuclear power , with two new plants as part of a 2.000 MW expansion being announced as part of a move towards 20,000 MW targeted for 2020, as a way of supplying a country that is currently short about 16% of demand at peak hours. By 2030 the target will rise to 60,000 MW. Uranium will largely come from Russia , though U.S. firms are anxious to become involved, and French firms hope to be able to do some reprocessing since some of the uranium will come from there. Apparently Pakistan was getting some help from Japan as well as China with their nuclear program. Russia is also helping Turkey with its plan for four new nuclear reactors. China is also switching its power emphasis more towards nuclear .

Even the Russians are now taking heed of energy efficiency, though at the moment it appears more of an editorial opinion than a set of programs, though the Germans have been brought in as part of a collaborative program . They also have just opened production at a new oil complex in Western Siberia at Uvat, some 1,250 east of Moscow. (You can see it on Google Earth). Collectively it will produce, in time, some 200,00 mbd roughly. Russian auto production was down 80% in January, but it should be remembered that they take their Christmas break in January, and to help with lagging demand some factories just extended the holiday. Others have been waiting for parts. But this is a y-o-y drop. Natural gas dropped 10% and coal 18%. Checking back in on the most recent numbers relative to those I quoted on the 6th: oil production on the 14th was 1,325,000 tons, (9.71 mbd) in-country refining was 658,000 tons (4.8 mbd); they produced 1,721 million cu m of natural gas, and 739,000 tons of coal. Oil is about the same, but natural gas and coal are down over the last week. Had it not been for the Yuzhno-Khilchuyu production coming on line then Lukoil production would have peaked.

In a move to corner more of the coal bed methane properties in Australia BG Group has raised its offer for Pure Energy Resources. The gas is in north-east Australia and would provide feedstock for LNG facilities that would market the product into Asia. Shell who partnered with Arrow Energy, the BG rival in the bid, is planning a new LNG facility in the region. Japan meanwhile is signing more contracts with Indonesia for future LNG supplies and is being reassured by Gazprom that it can count on it for the supplies from Sakhalin Island. At least this doesn’t go through a Ukrainian pipeline. BG may, however, have another market in mind, since they have just leased an import terminal in India which, as noted above, is greatly in need of more energy. It should be ready to import cargoes by the end of March. In the United States, a new design has been submitted to the FERC for the terminal at Weavers Cove in Massachusetts.

The value of Norwegian gas exported in January was 29.4% higher than the comparable figure last year. And last year at this time they hit a record also. The difficulties in expanding production into the Barents Sea are not seen as a barrier.

More stories can be found at The Energy Bulletin and Drumbeat at The Oil Drum.