[generalcanada]

What other projects? Sure they contributed a bit more to transit than the CPC. But pre-Covid this amounted to something like $1-2B more per year. This government's biggest infrastructure project to date is buying what was supposed to be a $13B pipeline that industry didn't want to build and getting it done for $34B. Of the $100B in new debt they accumulates pre-Covid, at best maybe 20% can be attributed to infrastructure spending. Remember when the promise was 3-4 small deficits of $10B per year for mostly infrastructure? Instead, the got in and promptly ran large deficits on social programs with just a bit more than lip service on infrastructure.



Sure. But good things don't happen if you don't actually prioritize and work on them. And my personal anger comes from the exact same crew (Telford, Butts, etc) who were at Queen's Park doing the exact same bait and switch with HSR at the national level that they did in Southern Ontario. This kind of politicking doesn't deliver. And if we don't criticize it, it will never go away.

In this case, why the heck do they they need 5+ years for co-development, if the last half decade was supposedly productive? They should be aiming to get shovels in the ground before 2030. It doesn't bode well that construction decisions will have to be made two governments from now (potentially). And that's a choice.

So were simply equating "funding" to prioritization. I dont think id agree with that. Infrastructure is more than just throwing money at the problem and breaking ground.

Why do they need 5 years? Well read through the last 25 pages to see that all we have is a line on a map. Theres so many unanswered questions. How do you work around Peterborough? What about the mount royal tunnel? What about Kingston.

Remember not even 6 months ago this was HFR running 200kph trains. It was up to the bidder to tell the government whether to do HFR or HSR. Via in 2016 wanted HFR.

The bidders themselves are conducting the environmental studies putting down the best way to do this.

We dont even know the cost because the alignment can change at any time increasing or lowering the cost. How can we do what CAHSR do and have a set budget?

 

[Urban Sky]

Why do they need 5 years? Well read through the last 25 pages to see that all we have is a line on a map. Theres so many unanswered questions. How do you work around Peterborough? What about the mount royal tunnel? What about Kingston.

They need 5 years because they are kicking down the can the toad to delay making any capital funding decisions for as many elections as possible. If they were serious, they would have separated the easy segment with virtually all questions answered (Montreal-Ottawa) from those where solving the routing questions in an economically and commercially viable way is challenging, though feasible (Ottawa-Toronto) or all but impossible (Quebec-Montreal). But no, just like the Wynne Liberals, the scope is constantly expanded to justify delaying any capital funding decisions further until they finally lose an election and can blame the suceeding government for nixing the insincere plans and undoing years of progress (consisting mostly of photo-ops)…

 

[Dévidapro]

Hello to Hungary (if I recognize the language of your previous post correctly!), we won’t know the answers for at least another 5 years and it won’t really matter as long as no investor (private or governmental) has committed a single Dollar towards construction…

Then we'll have to wait. Thanks for the answer!

 

[generalcanada]

They need 5 years because they are kicking down the can the toad to delay making any capital funding decisions for as many elections as possible. If they were serious, they would have separated the easy segment with virtually all questions answered (Montreal-Ottawa) from those where solving the routing questions in an economically and commercially viable way is challenging, though feasible (Ottawa-Toronto) or all but impossible (Quebec-Montreal). But no, just like the Wynne Liberals, the scope is constantly expanded to justify delaying any capital funding decisions further until they finally lose an election and can blame the suceeding government for nixing the insincere plans and undoing years of progress (consisting mostly of photo-ops)…

I think yall misunderstand what the bidding process was for? It wasnt only to build it, it was a full contract to design a high-speed railway. Like renderings, architectureal drawings roll-plans. All of that is included in this contract. As I said before. these detailed design documents whether or not we get actual construction done is the closest to implementation we have ever been

This isnt some simple feasibility study, this design phase with give us an exact price of what we will be paying.
And no giving a blank cheque isnt a good idea either which it seems like youre suggesting. Like how can we give funding for a project we dont even know the pricetag of?

Thats exactly what happened with CAHSR and HS2. You target a specific pricetag, then act suprised and angry when after detailed designs its so much more expensive

Separating it out into multiple separate projects also was never on the table. Remember HFR was simple, easy to do and cheap. HFR could have been done in a few years time as its not even super advanced.

The bidders were the one saying "HFR is shite don't do that it won't work" "do this instead" and overcomplicated things with HSR

HSR wasnt even on the table until the RFP's came out.

 

[Urban Sky]

I think yall misunderstand what the bidding process was for? It wasnt only to build it, it was a full contract to design a high-speed railway. Like renderings, architectureal drawings roll-plans. All of that is included in this contract. As I said before. these detailed design documents whether or not we get actual construction done is the closest to implementation we have ever been

This isnt some simple feasibility study, this design phase with give us an exact price of what we will be paying.
And no giving a blank cheque isnt a good idea either which it seems like youre suggesting. Like how can we give funding for a project we dont even know the pricetag of?

Thats exactly what happened with CAHSR and HS2. You target a specific pricetag, then act suprised and angry when after detailed designs its so much more expensive

We’ve known since the Ecotrain Study that the cost of building HSR far exceeds the amounts any government in Canada would be willing to pay and again multiplying its price tag by adding more detail to all figures won’t help with that inevitable result.

Separating it out into multiple separate projects also was never on the table. Remember HFR was simple, easy to do and cheap. HFR could have been done in a few years time as its not even super advanced.

The biggest (and most counter-productive) misconception about HFR was that it was intended to act as a substitute for HSR rather than the first incremental step towards it, by creating a service quality which resembles the semi-fast and roughly hourly intercity services which preceded HSR in Italy, Germany and the Northeast Corridor. Mercilessly scopecreeping HFR into HSR just represents the elimination of the first few steps towards the same goal while optimistically hoping that we’ll be able to jump four steps at once and then run the remainder of the stair up.

The bidders were the one saying "HFR is shite don't do that it won't work" "do this instead" and overcomplicated things with HSR

There are only two reasons why any consortium of developers and investors would still participate in this scope creep orgy, despite the clear lack of governmental will and ability to even fund half of the $80+ billion price tag: either because they really believe that they will be able to finance $40+ billion for this mega project or because the termination fee is the more juicy target. I increasingly suspect it’s the latter for Cadence, especially given the rumours I’m hearing from the HFR-TGF (now: ALTO) corner, which is why I’m inclined to say that the stated preferences of the bidders won’t matter at all because neither the governments nor their investors can possibly commit the scale of capital funding required for such a hopelessly overambitious project…

 

[generalcanada]

We’ve known since the Ecotrain Study that the cost of building HSR far exceeds the amounts any government in Canada would be willing to pay and again multiplying its price tag by adding more detail to all figures won’t help with that inevitable result.

you sure about that? thats wildly wrong on many levels. Not only did it use the kingston corridor, The cost wasnt even that high, though we were in recession times then.

Updated Feasibility Study of a High Speed Rail Service in the Québec City – Windsor Corridor

tc.canada.ca

2011 Updated Feasibility Study of a HSR Service Windsor_Quebec City Final Report.pdf

drive.google.com

Oh hey look at that 8 years of design and permitting. VERRY INTERESTING

Why would there be a cancellation clause in this? The government isnt required to go ahead at all once detailed design is done. Are you saying theyre required to pay Cadence money is they say no? Thats news to me and quite a big deal

 

[Urban Sky]

you sure about that? thats wildly wrong on many levels. Not only did it use the kingston corridor, The cost wasnt even that high, though we were in recession times then.

Recessions are exactly the times where governments find it the least difficult to justify big scale infrastructure projects, to stimulate the economy, even if these supposedly “anti-cyclic” projects become “pro-cyclic” by the time they advance to the labour-intensive construction stage…

Updated Feasibility Study of a High Speed Rail Service in the Québec City – Windsor Corridor

tc.canada.ca

2011 Updated Feasibility Study of a HSR Service Windsor_Quebec City Final Report.pdf

drive.google.com

Oh hey look at that 8 years of design and permitting. VERRY INTERESTING
View attachment 635676

How does that contradict anything I wrote?

Why would there be a cancellation clause in this? The government isnt required to go ahead at all once detailed design is done. Are you saying theyre required to pay Cadence money is they say no? Thats news to me and quite a big deal

The official timeline explicitly states that the project only goes ahead if the “final decision” provided by the federal government gives the green light at the end of the “co-development phase”, which you correctly conclude implies the possibility of the project getting canned despite all the work made. This obviously means that no consortium would bid for such a project if it wasn’t guaranteed to recover all its planning and design costs - at or near market rates, i.e., with healthy profits to offset their opportunity costs. How such payment mechanisms are structured (e.g., funded through ALTO or reimbursed in the case of a cancellation) is not pertinent to the fact that there might be strong incentives to milk this project as much as possible, even (or should I say: especially?) if they are aware that it is bound to fail…

 

[generalcanada]

How does that contradict anything I wrote?

The ecotrain study:
- uses the Kingston corridor not Peterborough as we are now
- shows that planning phase would take 8 years much longer than the 5 we were promised here.
- a cost that is definitely manageable and worthwhile

Pretty sure I mentioned this before but projects like pipelines and nuclear projects are also very long-time frames. There is definitely a sentiment lately that "build it at any cost" is growing for projects like these. I would include HSR in this.
Hell, even look at fords $100 billion 401 tunnel where people literally shrug at the cost

This obviously means that no consortium would bid for such a project if it wasn’t guaranteed to recover all its planning and design costs - at or near market rates, i.e., with healthy profits to offset their opportunity costs

What do you think the $4 billion is for? take a look at that chart again i posted and think $4 billion worth that exact same work over a faster time frame.
Again, What is this "cancellation payment" you mentioned? They only get $4 billion that's it. unless you're aware of extra penalties?

 

[hw621]

Congrats on making the table less readable. Also the tool misread at least one number.

For those hard of sight:
View attachment 634792

2043?! LOL the next Liberal government may come back in time for ribbon cutting...

 

[innsertnamehere]

2043?! LOL the next Liberal government may come back in time for ribbon cutting...

I mean Phase 1 is scheduled to open 2039.. which is 14 years from now. It's not as far away as it may initially seem for an infrastructure project this size.

Of course, I fully expect it to be delayed.

 

[hw621]

I mean Phase 1 is scheduled to open 2039.. which is 14 years from now. It's not as far away as it may initially seem for an infrastructure project this size.

Of course, I fully expect it to be delayed.

I know it is impractical to compare, but China built Beijing–Shanghai HSR (1,318 km) in 4 years (2008–2011), about the same length and on similar (flat) terrains...

We won't be able to do the same, but doubling that (8 - 9 years) would not be unreasonable. Oh well...

 

[mettle]

Ezra Klein talked about high-speed rail in California. it was pretty depressing. I'm guessing Canada probably faces some of the same challenges.

 

[generalcanada]

Ezra Klein talked about high-speed rail in California. it was pretty depressing. I'm guessing Canada probably faces some of the same challenges.

Kinda, He tried to target it to USA only and its leadership but the criticisms of CAHSR is obvious. Definitely didnt know about the stop work order on the freight rail tracks. Thats crazy.
The amount of "change orders for changes in design has long been theorized as a big reason why its been so hard to build especially with every person basically strong-arming the authority into doing what they want

 

[Urban Sky]

The ecotrain study:
- uses the Kingston corridor not Peterborough as we are now
- shows that planning phase would take 8 years much longer than the 5 we were promised here.
- a cost that is definitely manageable and worthwhile

Pretty sure I mentioned this before but projects like pipelines and nuclear projects are also very long-time frames. There is definitely a sentiment lately that "build it at any cost" is growing for projects like these. I would include HSR in this.
Hell, even look at fords $100 billion 401 tunnel where people literally shrug at the cost

Mostly correct, but again: how does that contradict anything I said?

What do you think the $4 billion is for? take a look at that chart again i posted and think $4 billion worth that exact same work over a faster time frame.
Again, What is this "cancellation payment" you mentioned? They only get $4 billion that's it. unless you're aware of extra penalties?

The $4 billion takes the place of the kind of “cancellation payment” I was referring to. These $4 billions will be a good part of what the project partners behind Cadence will have to show to their respective owners if this project fails. Milking ALTO as much as possible might be a very attractive consolation price if the ALTO project collapses under its own weight…

 

[generalcanada]

We’ve known since the Ecotrain Study that the cost of building HSR far exceeds the amounts any government in Canada would be willing to pay and again multiplying its price tag by adding more detail to all figures won’t help with that inevitable result.

This is what you originally said. Im saying thats not true, We dont know the cost of building the system, nor have we actually done detailed design for this route and any kind of efficiencies you can find with it. Whether you remove at grade crossings, build overpasses/underpasses or not things like that. That is what you need the 5 years of design for.

The $4 billion takes the place of the kind of “cancellation payment” I was referring to. These $4 billions will be a good part of what the project partners behind Cadence will have to show to their respective owners if this project fails. Milking ALTO as much as possible might be a very attractive consolation price if the ALTO project collapses under its own weight…

Youre thinking is that theyre only in this for the entire thing? I would think of this as 2 separate projects, a 4 billion design contract and a 60 billion BFOM contract.
You act as if they arent satisfied with the former, if that was true, then this project is very risky for them.

Remember they got compensated for tens of millions for putting together the proposal in the first place.