Forums

[Anonymous]

What are your thoughts on the viability of a rail tunnel connecting Asia and North America via the Bering Strait? If we could get the gauges all standardized internationally, it might be efficient to have a rail line running from Europe, through Asia, to North and South America. Maybe we could even link Japan somehow. Imagine the intermodal potential. I have to believe a container would move a lot quicker by rail from Singapore to Toronto, or from Brazil to Seoul (faster yes, but it may be hard to make it cheap enough to make sense).

I don't believe there is any technological reason we could not build such a tunnel and rail line. No doubt it would be extremely expensive to build and it would be quite costly to maintain and keep open a heavily-trafficked rail line in the harsh conditions of these extreme northern latitudes. It all comes down to cost-benfit and making the business case work.

I was not surprised to see there is actually a group advocating this very concept (so, while I came up with it independently, I'm sure many have had similar thoughts). Check out http://www.arctic.net/~snnr/tunnel/

Looking forward to some lively debate...bring it on!

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

This is another situation of what looks good on the map is not so good in practice, like using the Aleutians as air bases against Japan in WWII.
Standardization of gauge isn't going to happen any time soon, Australia is a prime example. Russian railroads, apart from gauge, would need to be rebuilt to support the larger and heavier North American equipment. Also, the Bering Strait is a long way from anywhere and a lot of new railroad would have to be built on both sides just to get there.
Considering that an all-rail route by way of a Bering Sea tunnel would be appreciably longer than a more conventional rail-sea route, I'm not sure that it would be faster, especially for the endpoints mentioned above.
The environmental effects of building such a tunnel and the railroads required to connect it with the rest of the world would be appreciable and also would have to be addressed.
Where would the money come from???

[Anonymous]

With the heavy heavy ice that fills the strait during most of the year, one can only work for a few months. It would take forever to build. Who would pay for it? Russia? US? I can think of better ways to spend the money!!

[CG9602]

Another question: where is the demand for traffic that would require such a tunnel? As noted earleir, many shippers feel content with the current set-up. Of course, if it were built, there might be shippers and others who might ask "why didn't we do this earlier?"
I think we have to relegate this project to the same category as the canal across the Kra Peninsula in SE Asia, and the canal plans across Nicaragua or Mexico. It will take something on the order of the drive for the Chunnel or the drive to get to the Moon before you see any action on this subject. It sounds like an interesting idea, though.

I think, though, that the route wouldn't be longer than the current rail-sea route in use currently. If you look at a globe and make measurements, and not a flat map, the Great Cirlce Routes are frequently the most direct routes. This route might be a closer approximation than the current route, however, the cost of blazing a new roadbed, with the tunnel itself, is what would be prohibitive, I think. We're obviously discussing a topic on the scale of the Panama Canal, and that is the scale, obviously, in which this project must be perceived. We can do it, but is it necessary when our countries have so many other more pressing needs?

[CG9602]

Here are a couple links that found relating to this project: www.theglobalrailway.com/pressbureau/features/TheBeringStraitProjectCollectedPapers.htm

http://home.att.net/~Berliner-Ultrasonics/strunnel.html

http://www.headway.us/read.php?i=146

these should give some overview of what the project would probably entail.

[Anonymous]

if it was built it would take forever to get to Europe. We should expand passenger service here before we do in internationaly.

[Overmod]

IIRC this tunnel would cross an active seismic zone -- anyone forgotten the Alaska earthquake in the 1960s?

This doesn't necessarily rule out a tunnel vs. bridge (which was the first thing I saw proposed for the Straits) but would clearly affect both the design and implementation of a tunnel operation. Sections of such a 'tunnel' might resemble a 'submerged bridge', a continuous sealed tube above the seabed with controlled near-neutral density and both passive and active staying. Differential GPS now provides inexpensive tech for locating and maintaining alignment on such structures using distributed control.

Of course, the infrastructure on both sides of this tunnel needs to be developed -- substantially -- before it makes much sense economically. Passenger traffic is not a particularly effective justification. North Slope oil to Chinese and other Far-Eastern markets would likely be via pipeline included in the tunnel structure, rather than by unit train... and I would be interested to see the economics of coal unit trains from Powder River et al. going by way of such a tunnel rather than by transshipment at all-year ports in the 'lower 48'.

I look forward to seeing a 'test' of Mr. Berliner's 'strunnel' technology as a replacement for his Orient Point Bridge... ;-}