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.