Alto - High Speed Rail (Toronto-Quebec City)

[nfitz]

Good grief - talk about campaigning to the base.

Perhaps Ontario and Quebec should separate (Maritimes, Manitoba, and BC too).

It will be fun watching PP oppose an Edmonton-Calgary train.

 

[lenaitch]

This would be a great flip flop. I wonder if they get it approved whether it will change things regarding separation?

Why. They've watched Quebec dangle the separatism sword in front of the feds - and the country - for decades, to good financial effect.

 

[StreetcarRider]

Their own, and they made a point about private investment - but I'm sure they will want equal treatment re funding from Ottawa.

Genuinely interested in how/if this works out in Alberta. There is potential for projects entirely within the province of Ontario, which the province could be expected to take the lead on developing rather than the federal government. An Alberta deal could provide some lessons. Also, it's politically a good idea to develop something outside of the Ontario-Quebec area.

Former CPC Peterborough MP Dean Del Mastro has come out and criticized Poilievre's announced opposition today.

No matter what you think of this person as an individual, he worked consistently for like 20 years to get passenger rail back into Peterborough. Near the end of his time as an elected MP, he chaired a non-partisan parliamentary committee that backed a high-speed rail project. To see his own party take the position of opposing the project, before public consultations have even ended, must feel like a deeply frustrating betrayal.

 

[ash_iwn95]

Good grief - talk about campaigning to the base.

Perhaps Ontario and Quebec should separate (Maritimes, Manitoba, and BC too).

It will be fun watching PP oppose an Edmonton-Calgary train.

Alberta Conservatives are about to release their masterplan for an Edmonton Calgary HSR soon, it will be hilarious to see PP try to juggle that one

 

[desperateAmbassador]

People (I think) are missing the point. This was always going to be a political wedge issue (PP or someone else) because it's $90 Billion dollars. Obviously politicians will seize on that.

I love HSR. I think it should be built. But the overton window among transit/urbanist types has shifted so far that we've lost complete touch with regular people.

Yes that's lifetime capital costs blah blah blah but the fact remains that is an enormous, asinine and wholly unreasonable amount of money. Over 2x more expensive than remotely comparable European projects, enough money to build and fund dozens of hospitals, thousands of housing units, or a million other priorities that regular people compare things too. Hell... Spacex (idiot CEO aside) built a rocket that does backflips and lands itself for a fifth of the total funding of this project.

If we don't fix the core issue: that the way we plan, cost and build transportation projects in North America is fundamentally broken, things will never be built because they will simply be too easy of targets to kill for the next guy in charge.

 

[micheal_can]

Why. They've watched Quebec dangle the separatism sword in front of the feds - and the country - for decades, to good financial effect.

You're on the same track as I am thinking. AB will whine, Canada gives them something, they get a little quiet, but still whine...However, it is still not a pipeline to where ever they want.So, I am not sure whether it will quiet them or not.To be honest, with them, I feel so long as they think a penny is going anywhere but AB, and a conservative is PM, they won't be quieted.

Still will be fun to see PP do that dance.

Reporter: "Why did you say it is not a good idea in ON and QC to build ALTO, but you think it is for AB?"

 

[micheal_can]

People (I think) are missing the point. This was always going to be a political wedge issue (PP or someone else) because it's $90 Billion dollars. Obviously politicians will seize on that.

I love HSR. I think it should be built. But the overton window among transit/urbanist types has shifted so far that we've lost complete touch with regular people.

Yes that's lifetime capital costs blah blah blah but the fact remains that is an enormous, asinine and wholly unreasonable amount of money. Over 2x more expensive than remotely comparable European projects, enough money to build and fund dozens of hospitals, thousands of housing units, or a million other priorities that regular people compare things too. Hell... Spacex (idiot CEO aside) built a rocket that does backflips and lands itself for a fifth of the total funding of this project.

If we don't fix the core issue: that the way we plan, cost and build transportation projects in North America is fundamentally broken, things will never be built because they will simply be too easy of targets to kill for the next guy in charge.

There exists many divides in our country. Many of these divides have existed for decades and no politician seems to want to remove them. Instead, they use them to get elected. Or, they use them for other purposes to further their wants.

Using ALTO as a great example, do you think that if, along with ALTO being announced, it was also stated that no cuts to existing service between Toronto and Quebec City would happen, and the line would have a local service to service the communities along it at a frequency of once a day each way, that there would be the same push back? Of course, there will always be push back, but adding things like what I suggested would have limited that push back to things that may actually matter.

 

[McGillicuddy]

Using ALTO as a great example, do you think that if, along with ALTO being announced, it was also stated that no cuts to existing service between Toronto and Quebec City would happen, and the line would have a local service to service the communities along it at a frequency of once a day each way, that there would be the same push back?

Yes, there would be much the same pushback. Kingston and Cornwall would still be demanding a station, rural landowners would still be hopping mad about expropriation, and the same political forces would be trying to wield this as an urban-vs-rural wedge issue.

 

[micheal_can]

Yes, there would be much the same pushback. Kingston and Cornwall would still be demanding a station, rural landowners would still be hopping mad about expropriation, and the same political forces would be trying to wield this as an urban-vs-rural wedge issue.

I guess I don't see it that way. For example, the push back from Kingston seems to be less about the connection on the HSR line and more about the current frequency they already have to T-O-M. Because nothing has been stated,they are assuming they will lose that frequency. I cannot blame them as the history of Via shows that is a real possibility. Communicating what the plan will be 15 years from now when ALTO is built could have reduced some of that.

The Urban Rural wedge will always be there so long as rural issues are 'ignored'.

 

[nfitz]

People (I think) are missing the point. This was always going to be a political wedge issue (PP or someone else) because it's $90 Billion dollars. Obviously politicians will seize on that.

$90 billion over 15 yearsish? That's only $6 billion a year. Where's the wedge about the GTA spending similar amounts on transit over a decade? In the meantime, we are spending about $600 billion over 10 years for defence with the promise to increase defence spending - which would add about $450 billion more over a 10-year period. Which, unlike infrastructure, leaves us little non-term assets (though I suppose an expensive-to-maintain naval base in Nunavut is an asset).

Over 2x more expensive than remotely comparable European projects, enough money to build and fund dozens of hospitals

More expensive? $90 billion for 800 km of high-speed? That's about $110 million per kilometre. HS2 in Europe is costing over $185 billion for 230 km. That's 7 times HIGHER, at over 800 million per km!

 

[Urban Sky]

It does bring benefits by reducing carbon emissions from trips that would otherwise be done by car or by air

Again, these benefits disproportionally fall onto metropolitan rather than urban rural dwellers, who currently live far from highways or airports…

Imo the issue is not that some ppl oppose the line, that was always going to happen, but at least they're following a tried and true processes of consultation...

Consultations are only meaningful if all details of planning are on the table and there is a willingness to assess any suggestions of the public on the same criteria as the current reference route was assessed and to adopt them if they are shown to score better on these transparent criteria. Showing 10-km wide corridors on a map would have been laudable 3-5 years ago; doing the same mere months before theroute is supposed to be finalized is a slap in the face to anyone forced (by ALTO) to live under such uncertainty!

More expensive? $90 billion for 800 km of high-speed? That's about $110 million per kilometre. HS2 in Europe is costing over $185 billion for 230 km. That's 7 times HIGHER, at over 800 million per km!

You have to compare the construction cost estimates at a comparable stage. Between 2011 and 2014 (i.e. 8-5 years before construction started in 2019), the cost estimates increased from £15.8-17.4 billion (for 190 km) or £30.9-36 billion (for 540 km) to £56.6 billion. Nobody seems to know what ALTO’s current scope is, but experience with other Canadian projects suggests that unit costs won’t be dramatically less than for HS2 and CAHSR…

In short, we really need more cautious voices like @desperateAmbassador who warn us that the shocking inaptitude of the federal government, the CIB, ALTO and Cadence to rein in the rampant scope creep is critically harming the political viability and social acceptability of this project, as long as descoping is still the more propable off-ramp for politicians faced with this already eyewatering and still ever-escalating pricetag than killing the entire project…

 

[urbanclient]

More expensive? $90 billion for 800 km of high-speed?

Why have Alto themselves said 1,000 km? Are they just erring on the super safe side? Seems like optimal route would be in the 800s.

My assumption is CAD$ 100 billion for 1,000 km i.e. $100 million per km. Which is not awfully expensive when you compare to whatever is happening with GO Expansion.

 

[Urban Sky]

Why have Alto themselves said 1,000 km? Are they just erring on the super safe side? Seems like optimal route would be in the 800s.

I believe they once said 4000 km of steel rails, which would be in line with 850 km of double tracked lines (400 km TO + 180 km OM + 270 km) plus additional platform tracks, sidings and yard tracks…

My assumption is CAD$ 100 billion for 1,000 km i.e. $100 million per km. Which is not awfully expensive when you compare to whatever is happening with GO Expansion.

It is awefully expensive once you compare the cost and benefits per passenger or per minute travel time (or ton of carbon emissions or air pollutant) saved…

 

[micheal_can]

It is awefully expensive once you compare the cost and benefits per passenger or per minute travel time (or ton of carbon emissions or air pollutant) saved…

It will never be this cheap again.

 

[urbanclient]

People (I think) are missing the point. This was always going to be a political wedge issue (PP or someone else) because it's $90 Billion dollars. Obviously politicians will seize on that.

I love HSR. I think it should be built. But the overton window among transit/urbanist types has shifted so far that we've lost complete touch with regular people.

Yes that's lifetime capital costs blah blah blah but the fact remains that is an enormous, asinine and wholly unreasonable amount of money. Over 2x more expensive than remotely comparable European projects, enough money to build and fund dozens of hospitals, thousands of housing units, or a million other priorities that regular people compare things too. Hell... Spacex (idiot CEO aside) built a rocket that does backflips and lands itself for a fifth of the total funding of this project.

If we don't fix the core issue: that the way we plan, cost and build transportation projects in North America is fundamentally broken, things will never be built because they will simply be too easy of targets to kill for the next guy in charge.

The economy-wide returns for local transit and even HSR is supposed to exceed other types of infrastructure investments. I think the numbers published by Alto are actually huge underestimates of the true economic and social gains.

But leave it to us Canadians to somehow screw up a slam dunk win. I wouldn't be too surprised if there are commercial deficiencies regarding ticketing and pricing.

Economic impact of infrastructure investments across asset categories in Ontario

This report examines the long-term quantitative economic impacts of Ontario’s infrastructure investment across a range of asset categories.

www.ontario.ca

It is awefully expensive once you compare the cost and benefits per passenger or per minute travel time (or ton of carbon emissions or air pollutant) saved…

That's fair to say. But IMO the cost per km should not be the same, if not more expensive for GO Expansion. GO should cost less per km.

Regional rail is supposed to cost proportionally less for more (local) benefits than HSR.