[tsimionescu]

Well, the best way to get very high speed rail is to abandon the pumps and tubes entirely and do it in open Air, e.g. Maglev. You won't see any significant energy efficiency gains until you get to pretty low pressures, and even then that will be entirely compensated by the effort of pumping out air if you can't maintain an excellent seal.

Basically, the only energy efficiency can come from the seals, since those essentially allow you to store the energy spent to move the air out of the way of the train ahead of time. Otherwise, whether you move the air by pushing the train through it, or move the air by pumping it out in front of the train, the total energy expenditure will be similar.

And again, the problem of maintaining even a somewhat low pressure in a hundreds of kilometers long above ground tube with no airlocks is well outside our current engineering capacity.

[panick21_]

I have not done the math on the energy required to create the original low pressure and maintaining it compare to how much you save.

You speak pretty confidently about that, can you actually show any of that?

It also depends on how high the utilization of the tunnel is.

Who says there are no airlocks?

The proposal has been simulated by both SpaceX and Tesla, I don't think they made some basic mistakes about it being impossible to sustain a low pressure tube.