VIA Rail

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Exactly. If the choice was build a new road or renew existing rail line, it would be a no-brainer to fix up the track. In this case, the provincial government will always maintain that road and the money spent on two could be used to deliver much higher frequency bus service.

I think there is a tendency for people to look at train tracks and assume that one is as good as any other.

The fact of the matter is that many rail lines that aren't main lines or secondary mains are pieces of shit. Old rails with poor carrying capacity, unstable roadbeds, old structures, no centralized traffic control, etc. This is reflected in the low speed limits many of them have. Upgrading them meaningfully would be a massive capital expense. A lot of VIA's remote routes operate on the railway equivalent to a pothole-ridden narrow gravel road.

I think in most circumstances, a bus is going to be a much better and more reliable transportation option than 60 year old VIA coaches trundling along on a decrepit railway track.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Provincial taxpayers. In all but the most remote areas they will make that investment anyway, regardless of whether there is a railway.

And they also pay for those airports in smaller cities, along with local and federal governments. So, why not pay for the rail too? Why should we ignore rail?

Originally Posted by acottawa

If your objective is to get heavy industry to locate on Vancouver Island or the Gaspé then the most direct route to a port. If a steel plant opens in Nanaimo it has no reason to ship steel by rail to Victoria (at least not in any quantity that would justify the line). It would locate near the port or where it could get a direct route to the port.

Let's pretend there was a feed plant in Duncan or a propane supplier up island...... Oh, wait those 2 heavily rely on rail already.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Have you ever been to either of these locations? It is not like there are rows of heavy trucks travelling between Nanaimo and Victoria. It mostly seems to be deliveries for stores, etc., which would travel by truck even if there was a better railway.

I have lived in Victoria. The Malahat is chocked full of trucks. So are the ferries.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Exactly. If the choice was build a new road or renew existing rail line, it would be a no-brainer to fix up the track. In this case, the provincial government will always maintain that road and the money spent on two could be used to deliver much higher frequency bus service.

In a country where the goal is to decarbonize transportation, and trucks are not easy to convert to electric, what would happen if say something that already was electrically driven, but used diesel to generate the power could be switched to something else? Point is, ignoring rail is not a good answer either.

[Truenorth00]

It's part of the general myopia of railfans. They are railfans not public transport advocates. As such, they have a hammer (trains) and every problem a nail (transport need). But if you care about good public services, you will want money spent effectively and efficiently. And sometimes this will mean bus service instead of rail.

Save the rail advocacy for the populated corridors (Q-W, C-E-L, SJ-M-H) where rail services can be offered at high frequencies, with lots of capacity, enough to genuinely be an alternative to driving and flying.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It's part of the general myopia of railfans. They are railfans not public transport advocates. As such, they have a hammer (trains) and every problem a nail (transport need). But if you care about good public services, you will want money spent effectively and efficiently. And sometimes this will mean bus service instead of rail.

Save the rail advocacy for the populated corridors (Q-W, C-E-L, SJ-M-H) where rail services can be offered at high frequencies, with lots of capacity, enough to genuinely be an alternative to driving and flying.

We already showed how buses can serve most places. Ban passenger air travel to anywhere that a 700 series or bigger can land and fill up with. Or admit that there is a much bigger issue with transportation.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

In a country where the goal is to decarbonize transportation, and trucks are not easy to convert to electric, what would happen if say something that already was electrically driven, but used diesel to generate the power could be switched to something else? Point is, ignoring rail is not a good answer either.

If your goal is to substantially cut emissions, you should target your investment to where the bulk of emissions are, not edge cases. And some freight traffic through Gaspé is most definitely an edge case.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

If your goal is to substantially cut emissions, you should target your investment to where the bulk of emissions are, not edge cases. And some freight traffic through Gaspé is most definitely an edge case.

Ok. Airplanes put out more GHG than other modes. Unless it is intercontinental, ban all air travel within Canada. Or maybe the problem is not that simple.Maybe the solutions are not that extreme.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Ok. Airplanes put out more GHG than other modes. Unless it is intercontinental, ban all air travel within Canada. Or maybe the problem is not that simple.Maybe the solutions are not that extreme.

While you're correct in a relative sense, in an absolute sense, aviation emissions are a rather small part of the pie in Canada.

To start with transport is not our biggest source of emissions:



And of transport, passenger aviation is not even close a major source of emissions:



Source: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-cli...indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html

So if you actually want to tackle emissions, the obvious conclusion from above is that other than the energy sector, the other big target should be passenger cars and light trucks in populated corridors.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

And they also pay for those airports in smaller cities, along with local and federal governments. So, why not pay for the rail too? Why should we ignore rail?

There are no federal subsidies on airports except when it is the only transportation available. In fact the feds extract a lot of money from airports. If provincial or local governments want to subsidize train services for their own reasons then that is up to them.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

Let's pretend there was a feed plant in Duncan or a propane supplier up island...... Oh, wait those 2 heavily rely on rail already.

Then the status quo is working.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I have lived in Victoria. The Malahat is chocked full of trucks. So are the ferries.

Trucks headed for the ferry are not likely to be diverted by rail. They are not going to unload trucks in Nanaimo, put the freight on a train for 120 km trip, ship to Victoria, unload there, and put the goods on another truck.

[casper]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

And they also pay for those airports in smaller cities, along with local and federal governments. So, why not pay for the rail too? Why should we ignore rail?



Let's pretend there was a feed plant in Duncan or a propane supplier up island...... Oh, wait those 2 heavily rely on rail already.



I have lived in Victoria. The Malahat is chocked full of trucks. So are the ferries.



In a country where the goal is to decarbonize transportation, and trucks are not easy to convert to electric, what would happen if say something that already was electrically driven, but used diesel to generate the power could be switched to something else? Point is, ignoring rail is not a good answer either.

You need to look at history of rail on Vancouver Island to understand what the issue are.

Most people think of BC Ferries. However Seaspan operates the cargo only ferries. Today the Seaspan ferries mostly carry transport truck trailers however the ferries that operate between Nanaimo and Mainland are capable of transporting railcars. The operator of these ferries before Seaspan was CP Rail.

Back in the day, CP Rail were primarily moving railcars with chemicals for the forest sector onto the island and forest products off the island. For various reasons that business has transformed itself. Given the number of logs exports from Vancouver Island through the industrial port facilities to Asia to be processed I think it has transformed for the worse.

Any focus on rail cargo on the island needs to be in the context of moving product on/off the island. Nanaimo port historically being the primary railyard and inter-modal facility on the island.

The Port of Nanaimo recently got the hand me down cranes from the port of Vancouver and can now handle loading/unloading containers from sea going cargo ships. In practice they are mostly used to load containers onto barges that to mainland.

I don't think cargo rail operations are going to make a lot of sense for point to point on the island.

Yes the Malahat has lots of trucks. Most of them are local delivery trucks. Coldstar has most of its cold storage in Victoria and dry storage in Nanaimo. They move a lot of the groceries on the island and going to be going up and down regularly. Most of fuel terminals are mid-island and fuel is going to have to trucked down to Victoria.

Far more of the freight would be coming from distributions centers in Metro Vancouver and that will go through either a south island or mid island ferry terminal.

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

While you're correct in a relative sense, in an absolute sense, aviation emissions are a rather small part of the pie in Canada.

To start with transport is not our biggest source of emissions:


And of transport, passenger aviation is not even close a major source of emissions:


So if you actually want to tackle emissions, the obvious conclusion from above is that other than the energy sector, the other big target should be passenger cars and light trucks in populated corridors.

If only there was a method for those from far flung areas going to the big cities to travel that could be decarbonized....

The next time I head to Toronto, it would be nice to leave my car or truck at home. I can't. The train that does go by can be quite late, so hard to rely on. It also does not run everyday, so hard to do short trips like on a weekend of which is most common for us.

However, take the Dayliner. If Via took it over and converted it to overhead wires and required only electric freight trains to service that along the line. That could mean that you could live in Naniamo and visit Victoria for the weekend all without using that gas powered car. See how nuanced it really is?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by acottawa

There are no federal subsidies on airports except when it is the only transportation available. In fact the feds extract a lot of money from airports. If provincial or local governments want to subsidize train services for their own reasons then that is up to them.

https://northernontario.ctvnews.ca/north...illion-from-federal-government-1.5759525
Explain this.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Then the status quo is working.

Those companies have had to threaten to close before the governments stepped in.

Originally Posted by acottawa

Trucks headed for the ferry are not likely to be diverted by rail. They are not going to unload trucks in Nanaimo, put the freight on a train for 120 km trip, ship to Victoria, unload there, and put the goods on another truck.

What if it was loaded on a train at the origination?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

However, take the Dayliner. If Via took it over and converted it to overhead wires and required only electric freight trains to service that along the line. That could mean that you could live in Naniamo and visit Victoria for the weekend all without using that gas powered car. See how nuanced it really is?

How many cars do you take off the road with this multi billion dollar electrification project? The Dayliner took 5 hours and had a negligible market share. Driving is 90 minutes, the bus is 2 hours.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

https://northernontario.ctvnews.ca/north...illion-from-federal-government-1.5759525
Explain this.

The program was temporarily expanded in 2021 because of COVID; airports like North Bay are not normally eligible.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

What if it was loaded on a train at the origination?

As far as I know Vancouver Island is still and island.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

If only there was a method for those from far flung areas going to the big cities to travel that could be decarbonized....

The existence of the method doesn't necessarily mean that it's automatically economically justifiable or a priority. The majority of emissions, after all, are not in far flung areas....

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

The next time I head to Toronto, it would be nice to leave my car or truck at home. I can't. The train that does go by can be quite late, so hard to rely on. It also does not run everyday, so hard to do short trips like on a weekend of which is most common for us.

And it would be nice for me to have the latest maglev Chuo Shinkansen style HSR in Ottawa, so I could visit my brother in Montreal and my parents in Toronto with ease. However, I know that this isn't really economically sensible, even if there was a willingness to spend an insane amount of money.

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

However, take the Dayliner. If Via took it over and converted it to overhead wires and required only electric freight trains to service that along the line. That could mean that you could live in Naniamo and visit Victoria for the weekend all without using that gas powered car. See how nuanced it really is?

Would that be nice for my cousin in Nanaimo? Absolutely. Is it a wise public investment? Probably not. We're a country that doesn't have frequent electrified service between any of our major centres, including in two corridors which are some of the busiest air and road corridors in the world. And you're worried about improving the weekend trips between the 16th and 35th largest CMAs? When your roof leaks, do you give equal priority to buffing the baseboards of the powder room?

[J81]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It's also low population. There's about 140k in Gaspé give or take. They aren't even concentrated in one urban centre. The level of ridership they would generate is ridiculously low, especially compared to the investment that would be required. They have road access. These places should be served by buses.

VIA doesnt have to pony up a penny on the Gaspe line. The Quebec government already took care of that. I believe they’ve committed up to 150 million already to upgrade the line and replace all the decrepit bridges that made the line impassable east of New Carlisle. As I understand it, this was done to facilitate growth in the windmill production facility near Gaspe as well as a Cement plant that both required rail service to get their products to their customers. With the line ending at New Carlisle the windmill blades had to be trucked Gaspe to New Carlisle and staged their before being loaded onto a train. Its all moot now though since the manufacturer starting building blades too long to load on a train so they will all be shipped by boat now. The cement plant was purchased recently by an outfit that has other plants in western Quebec so a lot of that traffic died as well. Whether the QC government continues to fund the repair of the line remains to be seen.

[J81]

Originally Posted by esquire

I think there is a tendency for people to look at train tracks and assume that one is as good as any other.

The fact of the matter is that many rail lines that aren't main lines or secondary mains are pieces of shit. Old rails with poor carrying capacity, unstable roadbeds, old structures, no centralized traffic control, etc. This is reflected in the low speed limits many of them have. Upgrading them meaningfully would be a massive capital expense. A lot of VIA's remote routes operate on the railway equivalent to a pothole-ridden narrow gravel road.

I think in most circumstances, a bus is going to be a much better and more reliable transportation option than 60 year old VIA coaches trundling along on a decrepit railway track.

The only run this may be the case on is the Sudbury-White River train and the Churchill Train. I dont know about you but given the choice between a train or a bus i will 100% of the time pick a train. There is no comparison.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J81

Whether the QC government continues to fund the repair of the line remains to be seen.

If the build the train line, that might change the math. Rolling stock, fuel and station maintenance is still expensive. Rebuilding it just for passenger service would be pointless though. $150M would buy a lot of buses.

[casper]

Originally Posted by acottawa

How many cars do you take off the road with this multi billion dollar electrification project? The Dayliner took 5 hours and had a negligible market share. Driving is 90 minutes, the bus is 2 hours.

If it is replaced with anything today it would be a hybrid commuter rail with inter city extension. Train would start in Duncan pickup passengers in Langford arriving into Victoria at the start of the word day. You would need a commuter run out in the afternoon. In the day perhaps an extension that went up island a bit, maybe not all the way to Nanaimo.

The Dayliner run in the wrong direction at the wrong time to provide viable commuter rail service.

This is a big if. There are groups proposing this kind of operation but I don't think they have very strong support.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by casper

If it is replaced with anything today it would be a hybrid commuter rail with inter city extension. Train would start in Duncan pickup passengers in Langford arriving into Victoria at the start of the word day. You would need a commuter run out in the afternoon. In the day perhaps an extension that went up island a bit, maybe not all the way to Nanaimo.

The Dayliner run in the wrong direction at the wrong time to provide viable commuter rail service.

This is a big if. There are groups proposing this kind of operation but I don't think they have very strong support.

If Vancouver Island wants a commuter rail service that may well be a good idea, but it should be run/funded by local authorities, not Via.