China's Idiotic Elevated Bus Concept Turned Out to Be a Scam

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky
china s idiotic elevated bus concept turned out to be a scam

Beijing, like most major metropolitan areas, has a problem with traffic. For a time, Chinese officials thought they had been sent a solution to gridlock in the form of a futuristic-looking urban conveyance dubbed the Transit Elevated Bus (TEB-1).

While not technically a bus at all, the vehicle acts as more like a catamaran on rails, moving a few hundred people over traffic as a colossal trolley. The concept for the TEB has been in existence since the late 1960s, however, no country had ever bothered to build one before China — and for good reason.

After sitting in development hell for most of the decade, a prototype was deployed last August and tested near Beijing in the industrial area of Qinhuangdao. It technically worked but seeing the TEB at full-scale helped to highlight some of the criticisms many had been prodding Huaying Kailai, the company behind the project, with since its earliest scale models. Even a cursory consideration of the TEB should have caused government officials to wonder how it could possibly cope with a clogged intersection, pedestrian overpasses, turning, or overtaking vehicles of above average height.

While some did raise those sorts of questions, it wasn’t enough to keep the cities of Shijiazhuang and Wuhu from applying for financing to implement the project after its unveiling, or another four Chinese cities from following suit over the next five years.

“The elevated bus would just get stuck in traffic and make things even worse,” suggested Shen Gang, an urban transport expert at Tongji University in Shanghai in an interview with NPR. “The idea was absurd, childish.”

Over the last few months, Chinese news media outlets and investors of the project began raising additional questions about where the money was going. It’s estimated that over half a billion dollars had been funneled into the TEB project after potential investors were promised returns of 12 percent.

“We are just a private tech company. We are not a briefcase company for illegal fund-raising,” Zhang Wei, the director of development and planning for TEB Tech, the Huaying Kailai subsidiary that developed the bus, told The New York Times last year. “Everything we do is approved by related departments in the government, and if we are an illegal company with financial issues, why are the local governments still interested in us?”

Those local governments lost their appetites last fall, after public scrutiny of the project began to swell. Tempered by some glowing praise, the Chinese media has been highly critical of the TEB. The Beijing News was claiming fraud as early as 2010 — going so far as to call the project a “Ponzi scheme” and a “fake-science investment scam.”

Earlier this week, at least 32 Huaying Kailai employees were arrested — including Bai Zhiming, the entrepreneur who bought the patents for the elevated bus and owns a majority share of TEB Tech.

Chinese authorities have launched an official investigation into the fundraising practices of a firm, with police stating they were working to recover the funds involved in this case and protect investors’ legal interests. Apparently, issues like this are all too common in China and burned investors often take to the streets in anger. Government officials are keen to avoid protests resulting from the TEB fiasco.

However, it’s almost impossible to believe that anyone saw this monstrosity and thought it would be the solution to any city’s traffic problems. The elevated rail provides a pathetic amount of clearance and would have surely obstructed the view and movement of anyone unlucky enough to be caught beneath it. The TEB also requires elevated loading platforms and a minimum of two lanes in which to operate. However, none of that matters since it never would have made it through a busy intersection or over a supply truck in the first place.

[Image: New China TV]

Join the conversation
4 of 12 comments
  • Baconator Baconator on Jul 07, 2017

    The prototype will eventually be worth big money at some auction, just like the GM Futurama bus. I think it would be hilarious to take it out to the Bonneville Salt Flats or some other location where it can trundle around, unimpeded.

  • Cdrmike Cdrmike on Jul 09, 2017

    Let's hope those commie bastards keep wasting our Walmart dollars on dumb ideas instead of smart weapons.

  • Alan The Prado shouldn't have the Landcruiser name attached. It isn't a Landcruiser as much as a Tacoma or 4 Runner or a FJ Cruiser. Toyota have used the Landcruiser name as a marketing exercise for years. In Australia the RAV4 even had Landcruiser attached years ago! The Toyota Landcruiser is the Landcruiser, not a tarted up Tacoma wagon.Here a GX Prado cost about $61k before on roads, this is about $41k USD. This is a 2.8 diesel 4x4 with all the off road tricky stuff, plus AC, power windows, etc. I'm wondering if Toyota will perform the Nissan Armada treatment on it and debase the Prado. The Patrol here is actually as capable and possibly more capable than the Landcruiser off road (according to some reviews). The Armada was 'muricanised and the off road ability was reduced a lot. Who ever heard of a 2 wheel drive Patrol.Does the US need the Prado? Why not. Another option to choose from built by Toyota that is overpriced and uses old tech.My sister had a Prado Grande, I didn't think much of it. It was narrow inside and not that comfortable. Her Grand Cherokee was more comfortable and now her Toureg is even more comfortable, but you can still feel the road in the seat of your pants and ears.
  • Jeffrey No tis vehicle doen't need to come to America. The market if flooded in this segment what we need are fun affordable vehicles.
  • Nrd515 I don't really see the point of annual inspections, especially when the car is under 3 years (warranty) old. Inspections should be safety related, ONLY, none of the nonsensical CA ARB rules that end up being something like, "Your air intake doesn't have an ARB sticker on it, so you have to remove it and buy one just like it that does have the ARB sticker on it!". If the car or whatever isn't puking smoke out of it, and it doesn't make your eyes water, like an old Chevy Bel-Air I was behind on Wed did, it's fine. I was stuck in traffic behind that old car, and wow, the gasoline smell was super potent. It was in nice shape, but man, it was choking me. I was amused by the 80 something old guy driving it, he even had a hat with a feather in it, THE sign of someone you don't want to be driving anywhere near you.
  • Lou_BC "15mpg EPA" The 2023 ZR2 Colorado is supposed to be 16 mpg
  • ToolGuy "The more aerodynamic, organic shape of the Mark VIII meant ride height was slightly lower than before at 53.6 inches, over 54.2” for the Mark VII."• I am not sure that ride height means what you think it means.Elaboration: There is some possible disagreement about what "ride height" refers to. Some say ground clearance, some say H point (without calling it that), some say something else. But none of those people would use a number of over 4 feet for a stock Mark anything.Then you go on to use it correctly ("A notable advancement in the Mark VIII’s suspension was programming to lower the ride height slightly at high speeds, which assisted fuel economy via improved aerodynamics.") so what do I know. Plus, I ended a sentence with a preposition. 🙂