Hyperloop is an innovative system that could significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the transport sector in Europe. For the polluting aviation sector, no sustainable solutions have been found yet and the current high-speed rail (HSR) network is an inadequate replacement. Hyperloop could bridge the gap between HSR and aviation and provide a sustainable alternative to short-haul flights. As a sustainable, energy-efficient, and high-speed transportation system, it can be seen as the fifth mode of transportation, alongside road, rail, water, and air transport, complementing the current transport system. To reach its potential, it is important that a European network is developed, requiring strong collaboration between European countries. However, as hyperloop is a completely new technology, there is still a lot of uncertainty about how to approach the implementation of a hyperloop network. There is no clear vision of what is needed for hyperloop to be adopted as a new mode of transportation.
Research Design
The main socio-economic challenges that hyperloop faces are acquiring sufficient funds, setting up a system for operation, and collaboration between European countries. These challenges are similar to those that were faced when the European HSR network was developed. Hyperloop can be compared to HSR in terms of speed, capacity, cost, energy consumption, and the required cross-border infrastructure. As the hyperloop sector needs guidance for the development of a European network, this knowledge gap is closed by analyzing the earlier experiences with HSR to learn lessons for the future. Because of the complexity of implementing a new mode of transport, the political economy model of transport innovations is used to frame the problem. This model is used as a baseline for explaining what is needed for hyperloop to be adopted as an innovation. The analysis is structured by dividing it into three core themes: political support, governance of infrastructure, and funding of infrastructure. Within each theme, experiences with previous HSR projects are used to identify lessons. In addition, insights from experts are gained to determine what is needed for hyperloop to be adopted. The objective of this research is addressed in the following research question:
How should the implementation of hyperloop in Europe be approached based on lessons learned from HSR and insights from experts?
This question is divided into the following two sub-questions:
- What lessons can be derived from the development of HSR in Europe concerning political support, governance of infrastructure and funding of infrastructure?
- How should the implementation of hyperloop be approached based on the insights from experts?
The first sub-question is answered using both a literature study and expert interviews. The extensive literature on the development of HSR in Europe is used to identify important factors and possible lessons that can be learned. By conducting semi-structured interviews with relevant experts, insights are gained into which lessons are most applicable to hyperloop, and additional information is retrieved. The second sub-question is answered using only expert interviews, as the literature is insufficient to provide the necessary information. Conducting expert interviews allowed for more in-depth research, and the implementation of hyperloop could be emphasized. By interviewing a diverse group of experts, insights are gained into what is needed for hyperloop to be adopted as a new mode of transportation.
Political support
European countries started with their own HSR networks for prestige, economic growth, and better connectivity. Decisions were often political rather than rational, lacking economic rationality. To achieve political support for hyperloop, three main factors are identified. First, a hyperloop project needs to be attractive to politicians, meaning that the added value of hyperloop needs to be clear. Hyperloop needs to differentiate itself from current modes of transportation and prove that it is economically viable and beneficial for society. To increase the opportunity of hyperloop projects being put on the political agenda, the scope and duration of the projects need to be kept small. Second, not only the project itself, but also the political context is an important factor in achieving political support. The political context could provide both threats, such as sustainability becoming a less important topic, and opportunities, such as a shift toward more European cohesion. Third, the support of the public is an essential aspect of obtaining political support. Experiences with HSR projects have shown that involving the public in both the development process and the decision-making phase is important for gaining public support.
Governance of infrastructure
Regarding the governance of hyperloop infrastructure, there are several aspects on which lessons can be learned from HSR. First, the HSR network is developed on a national level, leading to an incoherent network. For hyperloop to reach its potential, it is therefore important that the implementation is initiated from a European perspective, creating one international network. Second, the European HSR lines all made use of national systems that were incompatible with each other. The later attempt of replacing these systems by a standardized system experienced major difficulties due to the system not being accepted in all countries. Following these experiences, the lesson can be learned that a standardized hyperloop system should be developed from the start. This standardization process should occur through European collaboration to ensure the standardized system is accepted in all European countries. Third, the development of the HSR market structure and insights from experts have shown that the optimal market structure depends on the way the system looks. The envisioned hyperloop system that is taken as a starting point for this research – high frequency of pods, short travel times, open ticketing system – allows for a market structure with one operator on a specific piece of infrastructure. This suggestion is made for three reasons: there is little ground for operators to differentiate themselves, multiple operators in an intensely used system increase complexity, and multiple operators could impede the efficiency of the system.
Funding of infrastructure
HSR infrastructure is mostly funded by public parties, because of the long investment horizon and the societal benefits not being expressed in monetary returns. This also applies to hyperloop: projects are unlikely to be attractive to private parties, which is partially due to the high investment costs and high risk. As cross-border hyperloop lines transcend national interests, a significant share of EU funding is unavoidable. Similar to HSR, no return on infrastructure costs can be expected. To ensure the economic viability of the operation of hyperloop, polluting modes of transport need to be priced fairly, and a clear business case needs to be found. Once more experience has been gained with the realization of hyperloop projects, there are more opportunities for private parties to fund parts of the project. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) can be constructed in which both benefits and risks are divided between public and private parties. Experiences with PPPs for HSR projects have shown that it is important that an adequate estimation of the risks is made and a fair division between public and private parties is agreed upon.
Adoption of hyperloop
The theoretical model that is used as a baseline for this research is adjusted and expanded based on the lessons learned from the three themes discussed above. The adjusted model consists of four prerequisites for the adoption of hyperloop: technical feasibility, economic feasibility, social feasibility, and political feasibility. These requirements are all dependent on many factors, showcasing the complexity of the adoption of an innovation. Only if all of the four feasibility requirements are met, there is a chance of hyperloop being adopted as a new mode of transportation.
Conclusion
Hyperloop has the potential to become a fast and sustainable mode of transportation, complementing the current European transport network. However, adopting an innovative mode of transportation is complex and hyperloop is still facing many challenges. The results indicate that the system brings the most value when a comprehensive European network is built. This continental network should be divided into several smaller projects, allowing for the network to be gradually implemented. This eases political decision-making and keeps the size of the projects manageable.
This research concludes that the development of HSR in Europe has shown both valuable experiences that can be used and lessons that can be learned. To guide the future implementation of a hyperloop network, this research provides three key recommendations. First, a network should be developed at a European level. Second, a standardized system should be established from the start. Third, all European countries should be fully committed and the costs need to be shared through a European fund. Taken together, the analysis suggests that only a coordinated, standardized and jointly financed European approach can translate the hyperloop’s concept into a practical system that contributes to sustainable transport.
No responses yet