Without a doubt Trump is catering to his own self interest here. Anticipating the fruits of global warming, he has no doubt been buying up huge tracts of beachfront property, in preparation for his next go round of resort development. The rail link becoming a vital conveyor belt filled with patrons. [:o)]
Shades of Lyndon LaRouche?
There probably are such possible uses for the railroad. But these possiblities have been used to promte the dream of this rail expansion for many years. And this sort of pie-in-the-sky dreaming sounds exactly like what we are hearing from this current promotion by A2A RAIL today. It sounds to me like they are promoting the dream in hopes of raising the money to build it. The test of the dream will be whether private investors are willing to take the risk of investing. And if they won’t take the risk, maybe the U.S. and Canadian governments will. But, in my opinion, the governments taking the risk will not be proof of viability of the railroad.
Perhaps our respective governments will guarantee A2A’s bonds, as they have for so many past rail projects through remote territory…
I don’t believe the protests have had any effect on the route, and A2A has made a point of emphasizing their ongoing talks with the various Native groups along the route.
The currently proposed route starts at or near Fort McMurray, AB, and travels in a northwesterly direction, crossing CN’s former Great Slave Railway line at or near High Level, AB and connecting with the northernmost point of the former BC Rail system at Fort Nelson, BC. It does not pass through Whitehorse (too far north) but appears to go through the Dawson City area, before continuing northwest to the end of the current Alaska Railroad system.
If the oil traffic from Fort McMurray was not desired, Fort Nelson would be the most logical spot to start a railroad to Alaska from. The ex-BC Rail line there is still in operation, though it only sees a train once every week or two these days, and is most likely suffering from deferred maintenance. It used to be much busier, BC Rail once ran 100+ car lumber and chip trains out of there, using their unique MLW M420B’s as DP remotes.
I think $20 billion is far too low an estimate for the cost of the A2A project, and it reminds me of the Grand Trunk Pacific and National Transcontinental proj
I am not so sure that Schlimm knows what either an explosion or a temper tantrum are. If he did, he would see that neither were present in Greyhound’s post.
There was a bit of a tantrum in NKP’s op though…
SD60MAC9500 said in part: "…Well it seems I’m ignorant of the political face-off going on between Alberta, and B.C at the moment… I found the story you linked with included map, and the DLE is off the table… Considering this is the best way north as the DLE RoW travels through the relatively flat Rocky Mountain Trough. Maybe when elections come up in B.C. things could change.
A few items … Not sure how concerned Canada would be with DoD movements by rail to Alsaka and vice-versa. So in that regard this link could be a strategic move for any arctic aggression (Russia) that might transpire. Last item. Based on current information and drilling samples from over the years. Alaska is potentially sitting on over 600 trillion cubic feet (Yes 600 trillion) of recoverable natural gas in the form of shale gas and hydrates. Rail could be the mover of NG out of Alaska for sometime until pipeline capacity catches up. Which would have to go through many hurdles with First Nations, Inuit, and so forth…"
To SD60MAC9500: When I posted the link the Globe&Mail article was an open Internet posting. Sorry they “paywalled” it.[banghead]
You had commented and asked as follows: “…Well it seems I’m ignorant of the political face-off going on between Alberta, and B.C at the moment…”
[continued] “…I found the story you linked with included map, and the DLE is off the table… Considering this is the best way north as the DLE RoW travels through the relatively flat Rocky Mountain Trough. Maybe when elections come up in B.C. things could change…”
Samfp1943 responded: As you mentioned; As you noted…, I, as well, have no knowledge of the current politics on the Provinces of Alberta and British Columbia. All I have ever remember reading was of the contentiousness that happened i
“Greyhounds: You seem to be misinformed…The two projects are totally different in funding but you conflate them in your blind hatred of the president.”
Well, I think I do understand the contextual semantics of all those words. NKP expressed his opinion, as is still his right, though I would agree that he did probably did express his thoughts with excessive anger over a minor situation that will probably never reach fruition. For that act, Greyhounds misconstrued (deliberately?) what NKP had said as a snide putdown stemming from his inability to tolerate any negative statement regarding the current occupant.
This is great! Very entertaining.
Here is the original:
Here is Charlie’s take:
Here is greyhounds’ comment:
Here is Charlie’s take:
So, Charlie, NKP “probably did express his thoughts with excessive anger,” but greyhounds was led “to explode with a temper tantrum.”
I don’t want to really get into Canadian politics here (why disrupt yet another American political thread), but suffice it to say that interprovincial Canadian infrastructure projects like A2A are federally regulated, and no single Province or Territory can unilaterally stop such a project. Same goes for Native bands. Over the last year both of these positions were reaffirmed by our Supreme Court in rulings related to the Trans-Mountain pipeline expansion, whose construction is currently going full steam ahead.
Our two militaries have a long history of cooperation and alliance. The only times that transportation of war material would be an issue would be if the U.S. became involved in a large war and Canada wished to remain neutral. The opposite situation actually did occur during the early years of both World Wars, when CP’s International of Maine line could not be used to transport war materials to Canada’s Atlantic ports, as it crossed the then-neutral U.S.
[quote user=“York1”]
This is great! Very entertaining.
Here is the original:
NKP guy
How typical of this man & his so-called administration that he will “call for” extending a rail link to Alaska before giving a green light to the Gateway project with its much-needed tunnel under the Hudson River. Like his always-threatening lawsuits, nothing will come of this. Why should it? Where’s the need? Or the market to support it? He must think all of us are suckers & losers. After all, “We don’t pay taxes. The little people pay taxes,” as another of his ilk once said.
Here is Charlie’s take:
charlie hebdo
NKP expressed his opinion, as is still his right, though I would agree that he did probably did express his thoughts with excessive anger over a minor situation that will probably never reach fruition.
Here is greyhounds’ comment:
greyhounds
The two projects are totally different in funding but you conflate them in your blind hatred of the president.
Here is Charlie’s take:
charlie hebdo
Your blind allegiance to the person in the
I apologize.
Since I’m not a degreed and licensed psychologist, I didn’t realize that probable excessive anger and exploding temper tantrums were terms I didn’t understand because of my fanatical position.
One thing I do know: Kalmbach could probably make money charging a fee for reading the entertaining threads like this one.
I think that it is about time for a rail link between Alaska, Canada and the lower 48 states. This idea has been talked about for years. It will not happen for the following reasons.
- Even if the EPA, the army Corp of engineers and other federal agencies approves the building of the connection between the Alaska railroad and the Canadian border. would it pass all of these hurdels?
A. The tree huggers in the US who would tie the project up in court for ever.
B… Would the Canadian government approve the deal, since the connection is north of Vancouver, BC through wilderness to Alaska?
C. Would the tree huggers in Canada tie it up in court as well?
D. Who would pay the billions of dollars to build it? The US tax payers, Canadian taxpayers or the railroads who would benefit from the project?
Caldreamer
NKP Guy is a decent human being. So is Ken Greyhounds. So are you, John. The problem in USA is we are more divided than ever and folks become intemperate and snide online, even on here. There are many reasons but one factor seems to animate that discord. Sad.
As are you, Charlie. Thanks.
kumbaya
I find it puzzling that A2A maps don’t show canadian lines, but a large chunk of all the rail lines in the US/Mexico. It appears their preferred terminus is Edmonton (larger arrow).
CP has a line into Minaret, BC which is quite a ways north of Prince Rupert. That would be the logical jumping off point for a rail connection to Alaska. Seee the attached CP rail network map.
https://www.cpr.ca/en/choose-rail-site/Documents/cp-network-map-2020.pdf
The former BC Rail Dease Lake extension (now CN’s Takla Subdivision) has not seen a train past Fort St. James in about 15 years, and will have received next to zero maintenance during that time. More recently CN has placed this line on their “intent to discontinue” list.
Minaret is simply a named station along the line, there is no town or settlement there, a temporary logging camp would be the most that has ever existed up there.
I stand by my earlier statement that Fort Nelson is the most logical starting point for a railroad to Alaska.
The layout of British Columbia’s rail network means an all-BC route will involve heavy grades (on the ex-BC Rail line both north and south of Prince George) and mileage approaching that of a route through Alberta, along with the congestion of Vancouver. Traffic to and from the west coast would of course take this route, but traffic to and from the Midwest and eastern North America would more logically be routed through Edmonton.
The protests are not relevant in this discussion.
Euclid, I respect your position, and you may be correct. I cannot claim any gtrater knowledge on ths subject than you have.
I should add wood, forest-products to the list.
Could not your analysis have been applied to the wesytern trasnscons before construction?