ByeByeBaby
Active Member
It's a great graphic. It could also do a great job of illustrating why Alberta HSR is not a particularly strong project:
Alberta is neat, since Alberta is a straight line, so the cities generate way more traffic between them than if they were in a grid. From 2021:It could also do a great job of illustrating why Alberta HSR is not a particularly strong project
There is some in the economic reports the province did in the late 2000s.
The main thing to visualize is most of the USA is in a grid. So urban-urban trips are generated in all directions between all centres.
4 cities in a grid, 1 million each. Think of each arrow as 4,000 trips each day, each direction.
View attachment 338235
In Alberta due to our relative isolation from other centres, our relative prosperity for a long time (running what may have been close to the densest air service on the planet in the 70s between the cores of each city, building a 4 lane highway decades before it was 'needed' to speed up travel significantly), and the development of specialization over time we have much stronger links.
Even if only 70% of trips are now taken due to a variety of factors, we have this instead:
View attachment 338240
It might still be, though - it's not that different on a passengers per km basis than the Maçon-Marseille stretch. I'm sure there's a lot less in the way, as well. (Although our material and labour costs are still huge).It could also do a great job of illustrating why Alberta HSR is not a particularly strong project
It's a great graphic. It could also do a great job of illustrating why Alberta HSR is not a particularly strong project:
View attachment 608654
I've heard this from time to time (not just from you), where Calgary-Edmonton have some crazy outlier of demand. And I've been wondering if this is one of those stories that people tell because they've heard it from other people, repeated from civic booster to politician, but there's not any actual underlying facts. So I decided to dig into it a little. The federal government does a survey of intercity travellers, called the TSRC. I happen to have some old data kicking around (2011,13 and 14). I looked at all of the trips in Canada that were between CMAs (bidirectionally, so I'm adding say Winnipeg to Thunder Bay and Thunder Bay to Winnipeg together for a single point).Alberta is neat, since Alberta is a straight line, so the cities generate way more traffic between them than if they were in a grid. From 2021:
I don't know much about the feasibility of this...but is it possible to utilize the existing Calgary to Edmonton freight line for a passenger rail service? Obviously you'd have to twin the track where needed and grade separate the track where needed. But can a high speed passenger train share a rail with freight?Alberta is neat, since Alberta is a straight line, so the cities generate way more traffic between them than if they were in a grid. From 2021:
The Acela in the US share some freight rail, so it slows down in certain sections. The Quebec-Windsor Hight Frequency Rail is also using shared freight rails, which also won't be HSR speeds. I don't think we can run HSR or even HFR on EDM-CGY because it will be owned by freight companies which will inevitably lead to delays as they prioritize freight traffic. The NEC with Acela is owned by Amtrak and they let freight use the rails as additional revenue but they prioritize Acela service.I don't know much about the feasibility of this...but is it possible to utilize the existing Calgary to Edmonton freight line for a passenger rail service? Obviously you'd have to twin the track where needed and grade separate the track where needed. But can a high speed passenger train share a rail with freight?
There could be two services.
Service 1 - High Speed Calgary to Edmonton (stops below)
Calgary Downtown
Calgary Airport
Red Deer
Edmonton Airport
Edmonton Downtown
Service 2 - Calgary to Edmonton (stops below)
Calgary Downtown
Calgary Airport
Airdrie
Crossfield
Car Stairs
Didsbury
Olds
Bowden
Innisfail
Bowden
Red Deer
Blackfalds
Lacombe
Ponoka
Wetaskiwin
Millet
Edmonton Airport
Edmonton Downtown
Maybe Service 2 could only operate three times per week and increase with more demand,
The province studied this in the 80s, and the cost for redeveloping the track for enough capacity was forecast as so high, that a Greenfield service with even higher speed (and higher revenue) evolved into the preferred option.I don't think we can run HSR or even HFR on EDM-CGY because it will be owned by freight companies which will inevitably lead to delays as they prioritize freight traffic.
I suspect this effect would be very small; you could live in Carstairs today, get affordable housing and take a 45 minute commute to downtown Calgary. Yet almost no one does this; almost no one even lives in Crossfield for a 30 minute commute. And sure, sitting on a train is easier than driving. But you could also live in Airdrie, Okotoks, Cochrane or Chestermere and have a roughly 45 minute transit commute to downtown Calgary - with nearly door-to-door service. There are 180,000 people living in these places, and only 11 buses need to be run every morning to handle the demand; I don't think all of the buses are full, either. Maybe 0.3% of the people in these places choose to do this commute.I wonder about future job mobility. If you can live in red deer and take a 45 minute commute on 300km/h HSR to Calgary or Edmonton, what does that mean for where people would choose to live? How does that affect affordability? It is an extension of the regional rail to outlying communities question.
I think this was the reason the old dayliner shut down back in the 80s. Remember watching it go through town but basically empty most of the time.The province studied this in the 80s, and the cost for redeveloping the track for enough capacity was forecast as so high, that a Greenfield service with even higher speed (and higher revenue) evolved into the preferred option.
There's a lot of reasons for differences. The biggest one is that I was using a measure of household trips, not person trips. About 40% of the trips were by one person, about 30% by two people and about 30% by 3+ person parties, bringing it much closer to the numbers you have here. The TSRC is also a tourism focused survey, so it does not include regular work commuting and other routine trips like shopping, medical appointments, moving, religious observances, funerals and so on - this would affect Red Deer travel much more I suspect. I was interested in comparing between places within the survey, where these exceptions are all consistent; it's definitely different when comparing to external data.There is some divergence data wise, with the TSRC having 1.8, 1.9 million trips between Calgary and Edmonton.
Instead of a survey, the province installed license plate cameras to attempt to capture all auto trips for selected times (this was harder to do with the technology of the time), and then worked with schedules and surveys for bus companies and air travel. This was done to reduce fears that while AADT was high, trips that traveled between CMAs was low, and to compare available seats versus occupied seats.
Here is the model that the provincial data collection yielded for 2006:
View attachment 608888
Here is 2005 AADT, more just for interest sake.
It is quite something that no study used by Alberta transportation had demand anywhere close to as low as TSRC:
Given how reliable the high-level 10 year old estimates for constructing a greenfield rail line in Calgary have proven to be, I'm not sure I would want to rely entirely on 40 year old construction cost estimates as the basis for a decision today.The province studied this in the 80s, and the cost for redeveloping the track for enough capacity was forecast as so high, that a Greenfield service with even higher speed (and higher revenue) evolved into the preferred option.