Jump to content

      



























Photo

E&N Railway (VIA Rail) discussion


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
1261 replies to this topic

#21 UrbanRail

UrbanRail
  • Member
  • 2,114 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 06 January 2008 - 09:15 PM

Thankyou van-island, I will add those to my railcar manufacturer list.

#22 van-island

van-island
  • Member
  • 92 posts

Posted 09 January 2008 - 11:23 AM

I'm interested to know why you think DMUs are good for the E&N. They are similar to electric trolleys -vs- diesel buses in that despite the cheaper up-front cost of the latter, the long-term costs of fuel (especially in today's market) will eventually outstrip any costs to electrify the E&N Corridor. This is before any consideration of the environmental costs of operating a fossil-fuel based system.

What a legacy that would be - an electrified E&N Corridor with hourly service!

Also, a comment on what I noticed about train stations while in Japan: Despite the huge size and capacity of Tokyo Station, Shibuya Station, etc., the majority of train stations I encountered while living there were basically two concrete platforms with fare gates. Where densities permit (like the above mentioned stations) larger stations are built, however the majority are simple (and cheap). Canada does not have the densities needed to build large stations for a system like the E&N, and to assume that we NEED a fancy and expensive station right off the bat is, in my opinion, a fallacy. What we NEED is an operating rail line that is economically viable, and until sufficient ridership and density is achieved, our stations should be as simple and functional as possible. Rebuilding of elaborate stations can come later, when rail re-emerges as our most important transportation system (after walking and cycling of course!)

#23 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 09 January 2008 - 12:06 PM

I'm interested to know why you think DMUs are good for the E&N. They are similar to electric trolleys -vs- diesel buses in that despite the cheaper up-front cost of the latter, the long-term costs of fuel (especially in today's market) will eventually outstrip any costs to electrify the E&N Corridor. This is before any consideration of the environmental costs of operating a fossil-fuel based system.

What a legacy that would be - an electrified E&N Corridor with hourly service!

Also, a comment on what I noticed about train stations while in Japan: Despite the huge size and capacity of Tokyo Station, Shibuya Station, etc., the majority of train stations I encountered while living there were basically two concrete platforms with fare gates. Where densities permit (like the above mentioned stations) larger stations are built, however the majority are simple (and cheap). Canada does not have the densities needed to build large stations for a system like the E&N, and to assume that we NEED a fancy and expensive station right off the bat is, in my opinion, a fallacy. What we NEED is an operating rail line that is economically viable, and until sufficient ridership and density is achieved, our stations should be as simple and functional as possible. Rebuilding of elaborate stations can come later, when rail re-emerges as our most important transportation system (after walking and cycling of course!)


What is environmentally friendly about an electric train?

From BC Hydro:

One of our other generation strategies is thermal. The Burrard Thermal Generating Station contributes 7.5 per cent (of BC's power requirements), and the remaining 14.5 per cent of the electricity requirement was supplied by purchases and other transactions


And you can bet that purchased power is at least 50% from coal or gas fired plants in the US and Alberta. So any additional electric demand placed on BC's system is likely to come from burning fossil fuels.

#24 ressen

ressen
  • Member
  • 539 posts

Posted 09 January 2008 - 02:56 PM

By the time we get an electric train system, local tidal power will be generating all the electricity that we will need.

#25 Nparker

Nparker
  • Member
  • 40,409 posts

Posted 09 January 2008 - 04:34 PM

By the time we get an electric train system, local tidal power will be generating all the electricity that we will need.


So you are suggesting sometime late in the 22nd century...

#26 Coreyburger

Coreyburger
  • Member
  • 2,864 posts

Posted 09 January 2008 - 06:17 PM

What is environmentally friendly about an electric train?

From BC Hydro:

And you can bet that purchased power is at least 50% from coal or gas fired plants in the US and Alberta. So any additional electric demand placed on BC's system is likely to come from burning fossil fuels.


Even if you take an electric vehicle and drive it as much as much as a gas/diesel one and 100% of that power is coal, you are still using a cleaner vehicle than a gas/diesel one. See this study . Now factor in that is talking about a car not an electric tram/streetcar, which is more effecient per km per passenger than an electric car (costs less to manufacturer per passenger with a lower electricity bill per passenger). And BC still gets a great deal of its electricity from hydro, although BC Hydro might try and resurrect that bloody cogeneration plant idea up island again.

#27 van-island

van-island
  • Member
  • 92 posts

Posted 09 January 2008 - 08:00 PM

What is environmentally friendly about an electric train?

From BC Hydro:

And you can bet that purchased power is at least 50% from coal or gas fired plants in the US and Alberta. So any additional electric demand placed on BC's system is likely to come from burning fossil fuels.


I didn't say they were environmentally friendly, but I'm willing to bet that they have less of an impact than diesel units. Maybe I'm wrong though.

#28 UrbanRail

UrbanRail
  • Member
  • 2,114 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 09 January 2008 - 11:03 PM

I'm interested to know why you think DMUs are good for the E&N.


Based on cost, they are easier to implement. There are electric versions of the same DMUs, and I cant confirm this, but there could be hybrid versions as well.

I would love to see electric trains running on the E&N, but the current government isnt going to pony up hundreds of millions of dollars and neither are the FEDs. Imagine the E&N trains running on electric power generated by wind turbines or ocean waves. :)

Stantec Consulting, did a study on the Malahat, and estimated that to upgrade the E&N from Duncan to Victoria to commuter rail standards, would cost in the neighbourhood of $250million (that was based on using the Westcoast Express equipment). I believe this was based on a single track mainline with passing sidings. But the study didnt go into too much detail. Besides you wouldnt have to double track the entire line, as the Swiss have proven, you can still offer efficient rail service with a single track main line and stragetically located passing sidings at the stations and at points in between. It is may be possible to electricfy the E&N for perhaps the same price, but I dont know.

What one could do is have the DMUs built to allow conversion to EMUs when more money is available.

Where densities permit (like the above mentioned stations) larger stations are built, however the majority are simple (and cheap). Canada does not have the densities needed to build large stations for a system like the E&N, and to assume that we NEED a fancy and expensive station right off the bat is, in my opinion, a fallacy.



Obviously not every station on the E&N has to be big and fancy. For most station locations along the route, that is simply not viable (at least at the moment). Stations similar to the current downtown one, could be built at other major stops; Esquimalt, View Royal and perhaps a multi-use facility at Langford, down the road. These could be part of new transit/rail villages, similar to what is being proposed at the roundhouse site in VicWest. But we do need a proper transportation multi-modal terminal for the downtown core. Now I dont mean a Grand Central Station like in New York or a St Pancreas in London. The current one on Store St, is cute, but cute doesnt attract passengers. A multi-purpose facility that includes office, retail, etc, would be beneficial. This allows the facility to be used by commuters and non-commuters alike, so its not just a train station. The location at Centennial Square, has the advantage of being located by the busiest corridor in the region, and the busiest transit corridor. This could also be the location of a new library as part of the overall design. As to the actual design of the multi-use complex, its hard to say.

What is possible is using the designs similar to what I have posted from the 1984 study at the Centennial Square site, then expand it later on. But there needs to be a serious discussion on extending the line closer to Douglas St, with a better terminus.

But at the same time, you want to welcome commuters to the rail line by building sufficient shelters, not just little bus stops.

What we NEED is an operating rail line that is economically viable, and until sufficient ridership and density is achieved, our stations should be as simple and functional as possible. Rebuilding of elaborate stations can come later, when rail re-emerges as our most important transportation system (after walking and cycling of course!)


I completely agree. Now what I am suggesting wont happen overnight, but the discussion has to start now. I have heard that there is the possibility of commuter rail on the E&N within a couple of years, so we need to start planning for the future.

This region needs a better vision when it comes to transportation planning. Density along the E&N can happen sooner, rather than later, if developers see that the regions politicans and local citizens are serious about commuter rail.

#29 UrbanRail

UrbanRail
  • Member
  • 2,114 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 09 January 2008 - 11:10 PM

van-island I understand what you are saying, but I look at things not just in the short term, but also in the long term when it comes to transportation planning, something that has been lacking in the past 60 years. :) After all, wouldnt it be nice to see something that represents the long historical relationship the E&N and the city have had over the past 121 years? A beautiful station in the downtown core. For the 150th anniversary of Victoria, that would be a great legacy.

#30 UrbanRail

UrbanRail
  • Member
  • 2,114 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 04 March 2008 - 07:37 PM

I attended the press and support gathering at City Hall this afternoon. Pretty much everyone that has a stake in the railway was there (including the SRY and ICF).

Here is the website.

www.ourcorridor.ca

#31 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 83,184 posts

Posted 04 March 2008 - 08:13 PM

What's the SRY and ICF, again?

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#32 UrbanRail

UrbanRail
  • Member
  • 2,114 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 04 March 2008 - 08:23 PM

What's the SRY and ICF, again?


SRY or SRVI (Southern Railway of Vancouver Island) which is a division of Southern Railway of BC (Washington Group). It is the operator that runs the freight on the island and provides crews for the Via train.

ICF (Island Corridor Foundation) is the owner of the E&N corridor (victoria to Courtenay, Parksville to Port Alberni, welcox yard in Nanaimo, and the old abandoned branch to Cowichan Lake. They took control in 2006 after CPR (Canadian Pacific Railway) and RA (Rail America) donated their shares of the E&N to the ICF, in return for tax receipts.

:)

#33 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 04 March 2008 - 08:35 PM

$104 million needed to fix E&N tracks

commuter rail on the Langford to Victoria and Duncan to Victoria routes could remove the equivalent of 280,000 passenger trips a year and result in almost 700 fewer cars a day on the road.


"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

#34 amor de cosmos

amor de cosmos

    BUILD

  • Member
  • 7,116 posts

Posted 04 March 2008 - 08:48 PM

At least the federal government is interested/receptive... I wonder if part of that could come from their ecoTRUST fund. The provincial government might be interested also if they're willing to spend many billions in Vancouver.

#35 UrbanRail

UrbanRail
  • Member
  • 2,114 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 04 March 2008 - 09:17 PM

The feds have earmarked funds for short line railways across canada (so far in Manitoba, Ontario an Quebec). The ICF is pursuing the money for the E&N.

#36 amor de cosmos

amor de cosmos

    BUILD

  • Member
  • 7,116 posts

Posted 04 March 2008 - 09:36 PM

I didn't think of that. I knew about the short-rail lines in Quebec but not the ones in Manitoba & Ontario. They could sure pay for part of the E&N upgrade then.

#37 van-island

van-island
  • Member
  • 92 posts

Posted 05 March 2008 - 08:41 AM

The provincial gov't... bah! I say tell them to get lost after they basically snubbed the E&N in the corridor study. No money and no interest for how long? And then all of a sudden once OTHER funding and interest is secured, Gordo will toss a few pennies in and show up at the opening ceremony to cut the ribbon like he was responsible.

#38 Nominalis

Nominalis
  • Member
  • 31 posts

Posted 05 March 2008 - 09:21 AM

I believe I'm on record for accusing the previous 30 million dollar estimate as being criminally lowball. This is Victoria, we could spend 100 million dollars having studies, focus groups, town meetings, planning sessions, field trips and at the last minute finding-out the public isn't satisfied and having to start the entire process all over again.

We were having this E&N discussion 30 years ago and will still be having it 30 years from now. And BTW, rail isn't the future, it's desperately holding onto the past.
There's no bad weather, just the wrong clothes.

#39 Nominalis

Nominalis
  • Member
  • 31 posts

Posted 05 March 2008 - 09:41 AM

Not being purposely antagonistic here but there are things I don't understand. With all this freight AND commuter rail being promised for the E&N tracks I don't see how a single track system can handle the load. Does this mean we'll have to twin the tracks at some locations so that the various trains can move freely back and forth? Add another 60 million or so to the price tag. And they haven't even started talking passenger and freight infrastructure beyond simply repairing the existing tracks. My estimate, for the record, half a billion before the first train is running to and from these low density areas.
There's no bad weather, just the wrong clothes.

#40 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,800 posts

Posted 05 March 2008 - 10:02 AM

Well 2 things:

There is already both freight and passenger service running on the line together, just at low capacities.

Also you don't technically need to twin the entire line but instead have strategically located sidings. There are already a few of these sidings on the line.

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users