The tunnel wouldn't only carry passengers. See, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&refer=home&sid=a0bsMii8oKXwArcanaNoir said:First of all, US citizens would have to travel through a lot of Canada to get there, Canadians would have to go through the US, and, who the heck lives in that part of Russia anyway?
It would have the capacity to carry some 100 million tons of goods and materials. Energy links would be created. And, not only are Russia and America interested in the project. There's Korea, Japan, China, and Canada.Nor do I see commercial use as a practical means, the volume of traffic would have to be quite large, and thus the tunnel would have to be quite large.
Russia and the U.S. may each eventually take 25 percent stakes, with private investors and international finance agencies as other shareholders, Razbegin said. ``The governments will act as guarantors for private money,'' he said.
I have yet to see any response on the US's part regarding this. It seems the interest Korea, Japan, etc... have is in bidding on the building of the tunnel.Willowz said:The tunnel wouldn't only carry passengers. See, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&refer=home&sid=a0bsMii8oKXw
It would have the capacity to carry some 100 million tons of goods and materials. Energy links would be created. And, not only are Russia and America interested in the project. There's Korea, Japan, China, and Canada.
Can you post a link to that?Willowz said:Well a couple of benefits that I have read out were mostly reducing energy security concerns and closer ties with Korea, Japan and Russia.
Well, that's just from the Russian's sales pitch "we'll power the tunnel" and then maybe there's something left over. I don't see anything that shows any US interest.Willowz said:It's in that old link, "The project envisions building high-voltage power lines with a capacity of up to 15 gigawatts to supply the new rail links and also export to North America."
Umm. It's not like the investment will pay off in one year or so. Any, I find it odd that you just happen not to see any benefits for America. Can you elaborate or at least try and justify your position a little more?Evo said:Well, that's just from the Russian's sales pitch "we'll power the tunnel" and then maybe there's something left over. I don't see anything that shows any US interest.
There are no quantified benefits for the US, only vague isinuations, what actual studies have been presented? Show me studies and actual data. You're asking me to prove that you don't have an invisible purple elephant on top of your head. If you want to claim that there are real benefits to the US, then the onus is on you to furnish the data to back your claims up.Willowz said:Umm. It's not like the investment will pay off in one year or so. Any, I find it odd that you just happen not to see any benefits for America. Can you elaborate or at least try and justify your position a little more?
turbo said:Then there is the little matter of seismic activity in the region.
Like I said it's all up in the air. And studies would be conducted once there is some agreement on both sides as to the benefit for this undertaking. I just mentioned the idea.Evo said:There are no quantified benefits for the US, only vague isinuations, what actual studies have been presented?
Umm, I seriously doubt the US would become energy dependant on Russia overnight or even after a decade. If anything the US would further diversify its dependency on middle eastern oil.Proton Soup said:becoming dependent on russia for an energy source seems a little questionable. certainly explains investing in pipelines that aways, tho. and might explain some of that environmental crap about not drilling in alaska, too.
otoh, if we could buy cheap land in siberia, maybe have a summer dacha there...
And great migrations!Pythagorean said:bring back the land bridge!
DoggerDan said:The Chunnel connects two nearby regions of high commerce and tourism. It makes good economic sense given the heavy traffic, particular as the English Channel is rife with shipping traffic (bridges and heavy shipping - not a good combo).
The Bering Strait Tunnel is a proposed transportation project that would connect Russia and Alaska via an underground railway tunnel beneath the Bering Strait. It would be the longest undersea tunnel in the world, spanning over 50 miles. The tunnel is significant because it would create a direct link between Asia and North America, reducing travel time and costs for both passengers and freight.
While the concept of a Bering Strait Tunnel has been discussed for over a century, there has been limited progress towards its actual construction. Feasibility studies and preliminary designs have been conducted, but there are numerous challenges that need to be addressed before the project can move forward, such as funding, engineering difficulties, and political considerations.
The Bering Strait Tunnel has the potential to bring significant economic and social benefits. It would create new trade and transportation routes between Asia and North America, boosting international trade and commerce. It would also provide employment opportunities and stimulate economic growth in the regions surrounding the tunnel.
There are several obstacles that need to be overcome before the Bering Strait Tunnel can become a reality. The most significant challenges include the high cost of construction, estimated to be around $100 billion, as well as the complex engineering and logistical difficulties involved in building an undersea tunnel in such a remote and harsh environment. Additionally, there are political and environmental concerns that must be addressed.
While there is no official timeline for the construction of the Bering Strait Tunnel, experts estimate that it could take anywhere from 10 to 15 years to complete, assuming all necessary approvals and funding are secured. However, given the numerous challenges and uncertainties surrounding the project, it is difficult to predict an exact timeline for its completion.