News   Apr 03, 2020
 7.7K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 8.5K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 2.8K     0 

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

We could focus on making Alberta the first region in the world to have a functioning automated car network.
hahaha, you can’t event fix the QEII ”highway”. Road infrastructure in Alberta is falling apart. Give another 4 billion gift to corps. and lower the taxes then we will look like Africa (no to offend anyone).
 
^ I do not have a 'backwards mentality', I am just struggling to see how this project can work. Since you brought up the subject of taxes, how much taxes will the Alberta taxpayer have to pay for HSR? How much are YOU willing to pay?
Stevey_G, you admit that 'expanding transportation choices' is the main reason for building HSR. Are you all personally going to use HSR everyday to travel to work in Calgary and back home in Edmonton? How is that environmentally friendly?

Most of you guys don't want to admit this but HSR is a vanity project, a toy to play with and make non-Albertans jealous. You want this built because Alberta can afford it.
- OR -
We could focus on making Alberta the first region in the world to have a functioning automated car network. Wouldn't it be nice to take a nap in your car while it drives to Jasper, go skiing and sleep in the car on the way home all by yourself? Every day, no matter where you go. Alberta can afford this option as well. Economic benefits and outside envy will be much greater than HSR will ever be.
In your first paragraph, you stated that you don't have a “backwards mentality” and then you brought up how it would be better for the environment to create an automated car network. The irony.
 
SF - LA does not have HSR
SF-LA - construction underway for half of the route and design/impact assessments underway for the other half https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail
Dallas - Houston does not have HSR
Dallas-Houston - had lots of momentum and seems to have cleared a big legal barrier, but conservative Texas politicians have dragged the project on (Trump listed it as a national priority though) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Central_Railway; https://www.texastribune.org/2022/08/30/texas-high-speed-rail-dallas-houston/
Philly-Pitts does not have HSR
Sure, but Amtrak already has the Acela Express linking Boston, Providence, New Haven, NYC, Newark, Philly, Baltimore, and Washington linked (and a few smaller stops).

There's actually a whole Wikipedia article on other US initiatives, if you're interested to learn more about the changing conversation for our neighbours down south: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_the_United_States

There's also a proposal for maglev in the northeast, but that's a bit off topic.
 
I don't see any mention of VIA, CN or CP rail. EllisDon is a construction company, not a transportation company and I don't see anything from them about managing a rail network when it is built. Private companies need to make money I am still dumbfounded as to why they aren't proposing this project in more heavily populated areas. The only conclusion I can think of is that Alberta has money and they want us to invest in it.

I know that automated driving technology has not mainstream but when it is there is a chance that it could make HSR obsolete. HSR will take at the bare minimum of 7 years to build, over 9 years more likely. Plenty of time for the technology to mature. I wouldn't be surprised if it starts out as a network similar to HOV lanes that expands as more people buy the proper cars. Alberta's 4 seasons would an excellent place to test it out. In the winter all the vehicles would report icy spot in real time to a computer, telling exactly where they are. An automated sanding truck would drive by and dump sand exactly where it is needed. The cars could travel 130 km/h bumper to bumper.
 
I don't see any mention of VIA, CN or CP rail. EllisDon is a construction company, not a transportation company and I don't see anything from them about managing a rail network when it is built. Private companies need to make money I am still dumbfounded as to why they aren't proposing this project in more heavily populated areas. The only conclusion I can think of is that Alberta has money and they want us to invest in it.

I know that automated driving technology has not mainstream but when it is there is a chance that it could make HSR obsolete. HSR will take at the bare minimum of 7 years to build, over 9 years more likely. Plenty of time for the technology to mature. I wouldn't be surprised if it starts out as a network similar to HOV lanes that expands as more people buy the proper cars. Alberta's 4 seasons would an excellent place to test it out. In the winter all the vehicles would report icy spot in real time to a computer, telling exactly where they are. An automated sanding truck would drive by and dump sand exactly where it is needed. The cars could travel 130 km/h bumper to bumper.
Companies like VIA Rail, CN, CP, give only the barest minimum to passenger travel. Their routes are often long, highly expensive, and poorly scheduled. There is simply no incentive or competition for them to offer a reasonable product. Their primary focus is on freight delivery.

Regarding an automated car network, this doesn't take into account basically any feasible logistics. Just the sheer amount of power and resources required for individual automated cars going bumper to bumper - each vehicle requiring a complex computer system, batteries, hardware, etc. One computer error or incorrect sensor reading out of countless vehicles travelling at 130 km/hr...I'm sure you can throw enough time and money to overengineer something to try and mitigate problems, but this is not something that makes high speed rail even remotely obsolete, even assuming perfect execution of such a network. Old HSR technology can still travel faster than private vehicles, takes up less space, costs less, is safer, and isn't as environmentally devastating.

This also doesn't factor the amount of wear and tear on roads and highways, and the heavy cost (both financial and environmental) of continuing to dump sand and de-ice roads quickly. There is a place for automated vehicles, but private vehicle ownership should ultimately not be the future of travel for the masses. As previously mentioned, the only ones who win from an automated network are car manufacturers, at the heavy expense of everyone else.
 
Companies like VIA Rail, CN, CP, give only the barest minimum to passenger travel. Their routes are often long, highly expensive, and poorly scheduled. There is simply no incentive or competition for them to offer a reasonable product. Their primary focus is on freight delivery.
I agree with you for the most part, except for the inclusion of VIA Rail. VIA is a federal crown corp that is solely mandated to deliver passenger services. Their service in the prairies is terrible, since all the rail is owned by freight companies. But out east it's a lot better, especially on portions where they own track.
Regarding an automated car network, this doesn't take into account basically any feasible logistics. Just the sheer amount of power and resources required for individual automated cars going bumper to bumper - each vehicle requiring a complex computer system, batteries, hardware, etc. One computer error or incorrect sensor reading out of countless vehicles travelling at 130 km/hr...I'm sure you can throw enough time and money to overengineer something to try and mitigate problems, but this is not something that makes high speed rail even remotely obsolete, even assuming perfect execution of such a network. Old HSR technology can still travel faster than private vehicles, takes up less space, costs less, is safer, and isn't as environmentally devastating.

This also doesn't factor the amount of wear and tear on roads and highways, and the heavy cost (both financial and environmental) of continuing to dump sand and de-ice roads quickly. There is a place for automated vehicles, but private vehicle ownership should ultimately not be the future of travel for the masses. As previously mentioned, the only ones who win from an automated network are car manufacturers, at the heavy expense of everyone else.
100%. And aside from the complexity of that system, due to all the components being involved, it's also super unsustainable... due to all the components involved. So many resources go into making each vehicle out there, from metals, to plastics, to electronics, and paint.

On average, around 39,000 gallons of water is used to make a single car. As of 2016, there were almost 700,000 vehicles registered in Edmonton. When you include the broader metro region, and fast forward to 2022, we'd probably be pushing one million at that point. If we round down to 900,000 vehicles, and assume each vehicle required 39,000 gallons of water during manufacturing, that comes out to 35,100,000,000 gallons of water. We see around 20,000 additional vehicles in Edmonton (not including the region), and that makes 780,000 gallons of water. And that's just for our humble little region of less than two million residents!

Compare that to ~1,000 buses and ~130 LRVs in Edmonton, and perhaps another ~150 buses in the metro region. Passenger rail here would maybe require one-two dozen engines, plus a few dozen cars to start. Sure, the latter vehicles are larger than the average personal vehicle, but it's still an astronomical difference. Not only would our cities have more breathing space if we had less personal vehicles (even autonomous ones), but so would our planet. Even if self driving vehicles were 100% electric and autonomous, they'd still be an unsustainable form of transportation compared to transit and trains.
 
The cars could travel 130 km/h bumper to bumper.
Self driving cars will never travel bumper to bumper at highway speeds, and if you think about it safety regs and tolerances will force them to keep a distance greater than many human drivers. Even autonomous trains running on fixed infrastructure need a large enough stopping distance between them.

And what's with the dismissal of rail transit in the corridor based on population? What two cities built new rapid transit systems at only 478,000 and 594,000 residents?
 
I'm not entirely convinced that autonomous cars are going to make HSR obsolete. If 130kph is the best they can do in ideal conditions it's still going to take about the same amount of time to get to Calgary as it does now where as modern HSR has no issue breaking 200+kph and is competing with air travel in terms of travel time (as far as actively travelling in the train anyways).

Self driving cars do solve the last mile issue mind you, but rail is still the better option for longer city to city travel I think.
 
hahaha, you can’t event fix the QEII ”highway”. Road infrastructure in Alberta is falling apart. Give another 4 billion gift to corps. and lower the taxes then we will look like Africa (no to offend anyone).
Luanda, Angola (Africa)

Libreville, Gabon (still Africa)
 
Actually, between the two, yes, I do.
I:we have been in Europe for the past few weeks and still here taking TGV and trains/trams in Madrid and France and are in Bordeaux this week. We took the TGV to Bordeaux from Paris on OUIGO - the low cost train service on very old TGV trains that SNCF were planning to send for scrap. The government directed SNCF to keep using them - and so SNCF created the bare bones OUIGO - no bar car, no food, no staff on board (none on any of the OUIGO trains we took), no reclining seats, only paid wifi not free, rarely cleaned as we saw including bathrooms on board with toilet paper missing and the lots of rust remains all over the exterior and sides. Our train to Bordeaux appeared to be sold out and the car has not an empty seat. OUIGO is popular for the prices offered. There is a step-up branded services also ran by SNCF called INOUI with bar, restaurants etc and then there is full service lux on the updated and newest SNCF TGV obviously with premium pricing. You choose the quality of service, time, price - you get what you pay for. The French are flocking to the cheapest TGV for distances under 3 hours. I doubt people in sufficient numbers will pay for premium or basic services from YYC to Banff or to Edmonton. A stripped down service appears the way to go. German operator Bahn and partner SNCF will apparently celebrate opening on the new Berlin to Paris route this December which no doubt be a success after the what SNCF has had on the Paris to Barcelona route they opened - long haul routes at 7 hours and will be premium service. SNCF is working on designs for a new no frills TGV train for routes under 3 hours and it will remain stripped of any creature comforts mindful of cost to build and operate. We leave Bordeaux tomorrow after a week here which includes a full day on the 4 tram routes to experience the connectivity - which were very busy in the central areas and easy to use. The government in Aquitaine announced a new metro, which I am assuming must be underground and to the airport- which is currently not connected or at least the maps and app does not show that. Bordeaux metro over 1 million. Back to Paris tomorrow on OUIGO for a week and then flying back to Madrid for another week and then home to Mexico. Be to our home town Edmonton in November and hoping for good weather.
 
Last edited:
you don’t have to prove anything, as I said I am not trying to offend anyone. But the real Angola and Gabon look a lot different for 99.9% of population.
I have worked and visited places in Africa such as Angola, Gabon, South Africa, Ghana, Mozambique and Morocco. From what I saw, a lot of their roads are well maintained and in good condition. Yes I've seen poor roads there, but the same can be said for North America as well.
 

Back
Top