3 ms·

> more expensive and slower to build per km than the channel tunnel Channel Tunnel: ~$22B / 31mi ~ $700m/mi LVCC: $47m / 1.7mi ~ $28m/mi ??

orwin 2y ago
You're correct, but eurotunnel cost was 4.6B in 1985 English pound, which seems to be half of $22B. I think the 22B figure is the total project cost, including the not-tunnel part. Your point is correct though, I don't see where eurotunnel can be cheaper than... Any tunnel in fact. [edit] you could also compare total costs: 22B for the eurotunnel, 106 for the Las Vegas loop. It's around the same difference proportionally.
- Veedrac 2y ago
  As far as I'm aware LVCC cost $53m, which includes tunnels and stations. Where did you get $106m?
  - orwin 2y ago
    Sorry, I don't find it back, but I remember distinctly reading about 106 millions for 2.2 miles (and not 53 for 1.7). It was quite recent (like two weeks ago). Aren't they opening new tunnels/stations? Maybe the difference in our data is there. It was just pedantery anyway, the cost are still an order of magnitude below the eurotunnel. [edit] weirdly I can't find cost nowhere. Everywhere it is said that it cost LVC 52.5 millions to build the first 3 stations and 1.7 miles, now there is 5 stations and 2.2 miles, they upgraded all the cars and the cost is still reported as 52.5 millions. There is also no report on what cost what either, this is really obfuscated. I don't care about the exact labor/material cost, but I'd like to know if the subterranean station did cost as much as the tunnels? less? How much? What about the outside stations? Did you find anything yourself ? I was never interested in that company, now I find the lack of transparency baffling.
    - Veedrac 2y ago
      Thanks. I haven't found better information, I think it's likely all the best details would be buried in formal filings that are more effortful to dig up and dig through. I wouldn't expect detailed breakdowns though, Boring Company is private and isn't likely to want to reveal more of their private finances than contracting requires of them.

orwin 2y ago

You're correct, but eurotunnel cost was 4.6B in 1985 English pound, which seems to be half of $22B. I think the 22B figure is the total project cost, including the not-tunnel part. Your point is correct though, I don't see where eurotunnel can be cheaper than... Any tunnel in fact. [edit] you could also compare total costs: 22B for the eurotunnel, 106 for the Las Vegas loop. It's around the same difference proportionally.

Veedrac 2y ago
As far as I'm aware LVCC cost $53m, which includes tunnels and stations. Where did you get $106m?
- orwin 2y ago
  Sorry, I don't find it back, but I remember distinctly reading about 106 millions for 2.2 miles (and not 53 for 1.7). It was quite recent (like two weeks ago). Aren't they opening new tunnels/stations? Maybe the difference in our data is there. It was just pedantery anyway, the cost are still an order of magnitude below the eurotunnel. [edit] weirdly I can't find cost nowhere. Everywhere it is said that it cost LVC 52.5 millions to build the first 3 stations and 1.7 miles, now there is 5 stations and 2.2 miles, they upgraded all the cars and the cost is still reported as 52.5 millions. There is also no report on what cost what either, this is really obfuscated. I don't care about the exact labor/material cost, but I'd like to know if the subterranean station did cost as much as the tunnels? less? How much? What about the outside stations? Did you find anything yourself ? I was never interested in that company, now I find the lack of transparency baffling.
  - Veedrac 2y ago
    Thanks. I haven't found better information, I think it's likely all the best details would be buried in formal filings that are more effortful to dig up and dig through. I wouldn't expect detailed breakdowns though, Boring Company is private and isn't likely to want to reveal more of their private finances than contracting requires of them.