News   Apr 03, 2020
 7.8K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 8.8K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 2.9K     0 

EllisDon to Lead Prairie Link High-Speed Rail Partners - Edm-RD-Cal

SF - LA does not have HSR

Dallas - Houston does not have HSR

Philly-Pitts does not have HSR

Again, I'd be the first to use it, but we don't have the population, tourism demand, density or last mile(s).

Set aside the ROW for 3035 and call it a day.

Yet you think the YYC-Banff railway makes sense. Ok then
 
I think the challenge is that the HSR infrastructure has not yet been established (on a large scale). I believe that California is taking the early steps for HSR. I’m guessing that Alberta will be following HSR in the US and Ontario/Quebec before taking any steps.
 
SF - LA does not have HSR

Dallas - Houston does not have HSR

Philly-Pitts does not have HSR

Again, I'd be the first to use it, but we don't have the population, tourism demand, density or last mile(s).

Set aside the ROW for 3035 and call it a day.
This argument implies that because appropriate rail infrastructure hasn’t been built in what is arguably the most car oriented country on earth, we shouldn’t build it either.
 
Actually, between the two, yes, I do.
Ok. Please explain. How is the population between Calgary and Banff and better than between Edmonton and Calgary. How is the car culture different. How is winter different and the fear of train safety (your words). And the ‘last mile’ in Banff is good somehow? You need some consistency in your arguments, my friend
 
I think one reason for the high-speed rail between Calgary and Banff could be the number of international tourists that have taken high-speed rail. Of course, how many is that have visited Europe or Asia have taken HSR, and how many of us would advocate for it in North America?
 
Ok. Please explain. How is the population between Calgary and Banff and better than between Edmonton and Calgary. How is the car culture different. How is winter different and the fear of train safety (your words). And the ‘last mile’ in Banff is good somehow? You need some consistency in your arguments, my friend

The ROW is generally there right now, it's used for limited passenger service right now, it has an extremely captive audience, has the potential for a significant amount of the fares to be inflated tourist fares by way of operators and packages, there is a significant infrastructure problem/capacity for existing vehicular traffic, there are dozens of S,M,L bus operators to collect them once arrived and take them (as they do now) to various area destinations and 4-6million visitors to the Bow Valley to draw from on a yearly basis.


*Unlikely that this route will be true HSR
 
The ROW between YEG and YYC is not a problem. Inflated fares would be for biz travellers instead of tourists; same outcome. YEG metro area population is 1.3m, Banff 10k plus transitory population. Oh there are bus operatiors in Banff...game changer, lol. There might be a few of those in YEG too. Maybe even more varied 'last mile' options than in Banff.

If you dig into the Banff proposal you will also see that the vast majority of the revenue is going to be made from Calgary metro users (as in, rail customers that never even get into the mountains). That's because the commuter side is where the money is really at. And the YEG-YYC line has more potential there than the YYC-Banff. You also need to realize that the success of the YYC-Banff line is actually improved with a YEG-YYC line. The two benefit from each other.
 
The ROW between YEG and YYC is not a problem. Inflated fares would be for biz travellers instead of tourists; same outcome. YEG metro area population is 1.3m, Banff 10k plus transitory population. Oh there are bus operatiors in Banff...game changer, lol. There might be a few of those in YEG too. Maybe even more varied 'last mile' options than in Banff.
To add to your argument: YEG metro population is actually a lot closer to 1.5M than 1.3M, today. It was 1.42M in April 2021 (date of the Census data collection).
 
Some of you proponents must answer this question: What problem is high speed rail trying to solve?

Right now I see this project as more of a 'want' than a 'need'.

If you really think something like this should work then try something similar to GO Transit in Ontario. Use this service to see how much demand there is before upgrading to HSR.
 
You can't really argue the economics of this project the way I've read above. It's about economic development, and like the first railway, you have to see it's fruits by seeing what it can bring to
the province and country in the next 5-20-100-200 years.

High speed rail is the future of continental high speed transport, and if we are to build this, I only hope future plans are laid out for connecting to the rest of the country.
 
Some of you proponents must answer this question: What problem is high speed rail trying to solve?

Right now I see this project as more of a 'want' than a 'need'.

If you really think something like this should work then try something similar to GO Transit in Ontario. Use this service to see how much demand there is before upgrading to HSR.
Poor planning and execution, I think, is what makes GO Transit in Ontario not as popular as it should (i.e. suburban train stations that are literally surrounded by lots and lots of parking lots, inconsistent train schedules). It pretty much subsidizes the suburban way (car-centric) of living. So yeah, it isn't the best example either.
 

Back
Top