Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Arawn-ap-Hywel · Apr 20, 2007, 02:09 am

Russia plans $65bn tunnel to America underneath Bering Strait-News-World-Europe-TimesOnline

Quote:

Russia has unveiled an ambitious plan to build the world’s longest tunnel under the Bering Strait as part of a transport corridor linking Europe and America via Siberia and Alaska.

The 64-mile (103km) tunnel would connect the far east of Russia with Alaska, opening up the prospect of the ultimate rail trip across three quarters of the globe from London to New York. The link would be twice as long as the Channel Tunnel connecting Britain and France.

This will a tremendous engineering feat and open up superb trade opportunities.

Slevin57 · Apr 20, 2007, 02:40 am

They have been talking about this for a while.

Unfortunately the part of Alaska/Russia is very nasty almost all year round.

I couldn't see trains running in the winter up there.

tman_ndsu08 · Apr 20, 2007, 08:49 pm

Why not?

Just because it's cold?

-40 degrees F is actually quite hot compared to 0 K.

gw120 · Apr 22, 2007, 12:09 am

There'll be like two people using the tunnel daily.

Kamehameha34 · Apr 22, 2007, 02:11 pm

I don't see any reason for it. What will we be able to accomplish after this that we couldn't accomplish before?

I don't think the novelty of taking a trainride through three continents qualifies as necessary.

Milton Bradley · Apr 22, 2007, 02:56 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Kamehameha34

I don't see any reason for it. What will we be able to accomplish after this that we couldn't accomplish before?

I don't think the novelty of taking a trainride through three continents qualifies as necessary.

They would be able to truck cargo directly from China, minus the boat ride.

saltinespike · Apr 22, 2007, 03:05 pm

Where to begin on the future troubles on this.

Wildlife, for one. We'd see the ocean's ecosystem change, especially if they built over some sort of wildlife's habitat or route. Shrimp season and other things would have to be changed or expelled.

Unless they build something like a highway tunnel, then a car crash would be VERY hard to clear out, especially with backed up traffic.

Pollution from the vehicles would build up not only inside the tunnel, but would be leaking out either end.

If something massive enough destroys this thing (it is in the middle of the ocean after all), it will claim thousands of lives. Or if the walls go brittle from the salt water and crack, it could result in huge disaster.

I had another, but I forget. I'll post or edit when I think of it.

Kamehameha34 · Apr 22, 2007, 03:36 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Milton Bradley

They would be able to truck cargo directly from China, minus the boat ride.

How long would it take for the amount saved to amount to 65 billion dollars?

5010 · Apr 24, 2007, 02:47 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Kamehameha34

How long would it take for the amount saved to amount to 65 billion dollars?

There is more to it than train vs ship. From the report cited by the OT:

Quote:

The project could save Siberia and the US $20 billion a year in electricity costs, according to Vasily Zubakin, deputy chief executive of Hydro, a subsidiary of Russia’s main electricity producer, Unified Energy Systems. The company plans to build two giant tidal plants in the Far East to supply tengiga-watts of electricity by 2020.

So based on the above projection: under 4 years. I admit it sounds like hype, so don't shoot the messenger.

Night · Apr 25, 2007, 12:17 am

Quote:

Quote by: saltinespike

Where to begin on the future troubles on this.

Wildlife, for one. We'd see the ocean's ecosystem change, especially if they built over some sort of wildlife's habitat or route. Shrimp season and other things would have to be changed or expelled.

Why would that be? Its just a tunnel...

Quote:

Quote by: saltinespike

Unless they build something like a highway tunnel, then a car crash would be VERY hard to clear out, especially with backed up traffic.

It would be a highway tunnel, there would be 3 lanes each direction, a crash could be moved over to the third lane.

Quote:

Quote by: saltinespike

Pollution from the vehicles would build up not only inside the tunnel, but would be leaking out either end.

Ventilation could easily take care of this...ever heard of the Chunnel?

Quote:

Quote by: saltinespike

If something massive enough destroys this thing (it is in the middle of the ocean after all), it will claim thousands of lives. Or if the walls go brittle from the salt water and crack, it could result in huge disaster.

And what would that be? Not many massive disasters could destroy it, it could be built to withstand earthquakes and obviously would be built to withstand saltwater...

Slevin57 · Apr 25, 2007, 02:39 am

Also, I'm not a geologist but the permafrost is only drivable 70 days out of the year in Alaska.. I don't think much heavy construction could take place, and even after the rail/highway was in place there would be support issues for the massive road system that would have to be in place in Alaska and Siberia for transit to be anywhere near safe.

saltinespike · Apr 25, 2007, 09:16 am

Quote:

Quote by: Night

Why would that be? Its just a tunnel...

But think of how wildlife is affected when we put other things is the ocean. Reefs, for example. But we would be placing this in the middle of the ocean. Many species would be affected.

Plus, what's the point? What would this achieve, other than an engineering feat?

Apr 20, 2007, 02:40 am	#2 (permalink) (top)
Slevin57 Igneous Magma Posts: 419	They have been talking about this for a while. Unfortunately the part of Alaska/Russia is very nasty almost all year round. I couldn't see trains running in the winter up there. -Chris "I guess we are the people our parents warned us about."

Apr 22, 2007, 12:09 am	#4 (permalink) (top)
gw120 Stabbed By Satan Location: Toronto, Ontario Posts: 247	There'll be like two people using the tunnel daily. Economic Left/Right: -9.25 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.79 Reality is fantasy; Facts are perception.

Apr 22, 2007, 03:05 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
saltinespike 20-20 Atheist Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 466	Where to begin on the future troubles on this. Wildlife, for one. We'd see the ocean's ecosystem change, especially if they built over some sort of wildlife's habitat or route. Shrimp season and other things would have to be changed or expelled. Unless they build something like a highway tunnel, then a car crash would be VERY hard to clear out, especially with backed up traffic. Pollution from the vehicles would build up not only inside the tunnel, but would be leaking out either end. If something massive enough destroys this thing (it is in the middle of the ocean after all), it will claim thousands of lives. Or if the walls go brittle from the salt water and crack, it could result in huge disaster. I had another, but I forget. I'll post or edit when I think of it. Torture is the gradual elimination of emotions.

Apr 25, 2007, 02:39 am	#11 (permalink) (top)
Slevin57 Igneous Magma Posts: 419	Also, I'm not a geologist but the permafrost is only drivable 70 days out of the year in Alaska.. I don't think much heavy construction could take place, and even after the rail/highway was in place there would be support issues for the massive road system that would have to be in place in Alaska and Siberia for transit to be anywhere near safe. -Chris "I guess we are the people our parents warned us about."

Apr 20, 2007, 08:49 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	Why not? Just because it's cold? -40 degrees F is actually quite hot compared to 0 K.

Apr 22, 2007, 02:11 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
Kamehameha34 The dingos! Posts: 4,419	I don't see any reason for it. What will we be able to accomplish after this that we couldn't accomplish before? I don't think the novelty of taking a trainride through three continents qualifies as necessary.