[drum118]

Here is what Stockholm Express train looks like. There are more up on site as I am finally up to date on uploading my video thanks to Stockholm. Up loaded 100 in less than an hour compare to the 15 hr in Copenhagen for a 30 second one. First place with real speed for the net since Glasgow.

Going to try to get an on board video before I leave. I have photos, but months away from being on line.
[video=youtube;2n99xK_wh6Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n99xK_wh6Y[/video]

 

[Jaye101]

Perhaps because it would be a benefit to health issues, to get more people off the roads in their polluting cars, and into trains. Even a non-clean diesel train which takes hundreds of cars off the road, produces less emissions than those cars.

I live near, and downwind the Lakeshore East/Stouffville corridor, which currently carries far more trains than the Barrie/Kitchener corridor combined. I've been pushing GO hard to increase service. To try and discourage train use is simply NIMBYism, and will lead to more cancers and deaths. I can't even begin to comprehend the mindset of those who are opposing this project. I can only assume that ignorance are paranoia are factors.

You think that's the whole story? It's funny you should say the word NIMBY, I think that's the first time someone's called me that.

1. You claim you want GO trains to run more frequently, if this was so you'd be all for this. You may not have known but electric trains can run more efficiently, at higher speeds and with more stops.

2. This means that you'd actually be able to ride these trains integrated with TTC service on headways that actually make sense for urban and suburban commuters. This invalidates your point about pollution entirely, as more ridership will be supported - less cars on the road, and no local pollution along the routes.

3. We're all paying for it, and whether they want to do it now or ten years from now makes a huge difference in cost and lost economic expansion.

And you call me a NIMBY? I think we may be working with two different definitions.

What I'd call ignorant is asking for an increase in service through your own area, which would see a net growth in pollutants far more toxic and poisonous that gasoline exhaust, with archaic technology that doesn't provide service as effective or efficient as Electric. We are all ignorant to the long term effects of this, so you shouldn't be so quick to make Lakeshore one of the most heavily used Diesel train lines through an urban area on the planet. Especially when the World Health Organization just placed Diesel fumes up there with Mustard Gas. And you call me ignorant? I think we may be working with two different definitions.

 

[nfitz]

What I'd call ignorant is asking for an increase in service through your own area, which would see a net growth in pollutants far more toxic and poisonous that gasoline exhaust ...

That's just absurd. There would be a net reduction in pollutants. You forgetting (or perhaps choosing to ignore), that the emissions from a GO train are less than the cars it takes off the road.

Sure, electric would be better. But diesel trains are far better than no trains at all.

And really ... odour issues? It's not like you can smell much, even standing on the platform. No where near as bad as standing on a busy road.

I'm not sure if you have some strange motive here, or are simply suffering from paranoia and delusions. But either way, your so completely wrong it's not funny. I just sickened that these people are wasting taxpayer money on needless lawsuits.

Sure, campaign and push GO to electrify eventually. But these tactics are tantamount to terrorism.

 

[Jaye101]

That's just absurd. There would be a net reduction in pollutants. You forgetting (or perhaps choosing to ignore), that the emissions from a GO train are less than the cars it takes off the road.

Sure, electric would be better. But diesel trains are far better than no trains at all.

And really ... odour issues? It's not like you can smell much, even standing on the platform. No where near as bad as standing on a busy road.

I'm not sure if you have some strange motive here, or are simply suffering from paranoia and delusions. But either way, your so completely wrong it's not funny. I just sickened that these people are wasting taxpayer money on needless lawsuits.

Sure, campaign and push GO to electrify eventually. But these tactics are tantamount to terrorism.

There would be a net reduction in local pollution in your neighbourhood? How do you figure? In urban neighbourhoods the increase in diesel train traffic would not significantly reduce the amount of cars on the road as these trains are not designed for any local travel, whatsoever. So the local pollution along the lines will be much higher than before. Regardless of what you believe, traffic levels will not fall and if they do it will not be by much. The idea is to provide alternatives. We live in a growing city, intensification will occur and more people will take transit. That doesn't mean less people are going to drive. If our road capacity is at a certain level today, chances are that they will remain there as that is the only way transit will actually be perceived as an effective alternative.

Regardless, the argument that you're supporting is diesel trains instead of cars. While the argument that I am supporting is Electric Trains, as opposed to Diesel Trains.

People are going to drive anyways.

As the city develops even with all the transit expansion realized over the next few decades I'd expect the % of the population using transit to rise, that doesn't necessarily mean that the actual numbers of cars on our roads is going to decrease. Especially with such archaic technology as an alternative for at least the next decade, no matter how frequent. It does not provide as effective an alternative to driving especially for commutes outside of rush hours to areas outside of the downtown core.

This idea of a commuter rail system that is based on such a limited technology will by far increase the local pollution levels over the next few years when population growth is taken into account. Especially considering the fact that:

1. The capacity is significantly lower
2. It will relieve little, if any transit/local congestion within the 416.
3. Pollution will be much higher in Urban neighbourhoods who are less likely to drive, and who the lines do not even serve in their current form.

 

[Dan416]

Maybe a troll has hijacked Jaye107's account? I find it hard to believe someone who joined the forum 4 years ago would be so completely and utterly wrong.

 

[doady]

It's funny how people in the 416 focus their attack on transit when it comes to congestion, noise and pollution. The protesters in Etobicoke did the same thing to Mississauga Transit many years, blocking the buses, and convincing the City of Toronto to ban MT from Islington Station and force MT to cut service from Burnhamthorpe - all in the name of reducing traffic congestion, noise and pollution.

 

[nfitz]

There would be a net reduction in local pollution in your neighbourhood? How do you figure? In urban neighbourhoods the increase in diesel train traffic would not significantly reduce the amount of cars on the road as these trains are not designed for any local travel, whatsoever.

Where do you think the air pollution from the 401, 427, Eglinton, Black Creek goes?

Your intellectual dishonesty is as shocking as your willingness to support the wing-nuts who are behind this anti-transit NIMBYism.

 

[ssiguy2]

The OTrain is basically the same technology that the Airlink will be. They may not have people in Ottawa bitching about the fumes and noise in Ottawa but there is one very important difference............the OTrain is a transit service and the Airlink isn't.

 

[k10ery]

Where do you think the air pollution from the 401, 427, Eglinton, Black Creek goes?

Your intellectual dishonesty is as shocking as your willingness to support the wing-nuts who are behind this anti-transit NIMBYism.

Oh, come on. Jaye's main arguments are sensible - and not at all "dishonest". More commuter trains will NOT reduce highway usage - that's the induced demand phenomenon. As Jaye said, the case for public transit is about giving people options, and preparing for a future in which driving is much more expensive. And it is certainly true that Metrolinx's expansions are doing nothing for people in the 416.

These are good arguments, but I think not good enough. Electrification won't pass a cost benefit test until we have more trains and more stops than today. And clearly the CTC's lawsuit is frivolous - hopefully Judge Ted Matlow won't be assigned the case this time.

 

[nfitz]

Oh, come on. Jaye's main arguments are sensible - and not at all "dishonest". More commuter trains will NOT reduce highway usage - that's the induced demand phenomenon.

Induced demand is locational. Creating rail capacity doesn't increase employment. And it does create modal shift. Somewhere in the GTA there will be less car driving. Jaye's issue is his/her backyard ... not the bigger picture.

And really, some of the stuff he/she says are absurd. There's a lot in there about the current smell of the diesel trains in the neighbourhood. This is just a massive deception. I live near and downwind a corridor that is busier than the 2 corridors in question combined. There is no smell. Heck, I don't even notice anything walking along the road next to the tracks, when 2 trains pass simultaneously, one accelerating out of the station. Which I do quite frequently, as I typically get off a train and start walking home, 5 minutes before the next train arrives from the opposite direction. Then I walk parallel to the tracks for a kilometre, often with a train passing.

And these are regular diesels ... not the much lower emission DMUs being used for the Airport Train.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

So diesel causes cancer... What about diesel trucks, diesel buses (gasp!), diesel cars (et tu das auto?), diesel generators for back up power, etc etc. Let's ban all of these. Why the focus solely on trains?

 

[ShonTron]

I'll give the Westonites credit for a lot - opposing the SNC-Lavalin conflict of interest, getting a more sympathetic treatment through Weston, pushing for GO electrification. The continued plan for a premium, exclusive airport rail link still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, as does Metrolinx's lack of interest in proper rail service on the Georgetown/Kitchener line.

But they just don't know when to stop. I'm hopeful though that continued pressure forces better transit for the corridors, but don't want to stop construction. Just change the service model.

 

[Jaye101]

Where do you think the air pollution from the 401, 427, Eglinton, Black Creek goes?

Your intellectual dishonesty is as shocking as your willingness to support the wing-nuts who are behind this anti-transit NIMBYism.

Anti-transit NIMBY-ism? How is that so? Just because you would like to settle for an older technology, that will cause local pollution and I have higher standards for my city you automatically label me a NIMBY? How ignorant of you. I'm arguing for something that is going to happen anyways, not for something that is fantasy or far out. Yet you all think of it as NIMBYism. How humourous.

I love the line about me worrying about what's in my backyard. And how you can so easily dismiss the claims about pollution when you do not know their effects. You are ignorant to the effects of this technology so don't go around encouraging something that can effect you and your family negatively when there is a cleaner more efficient technology out there. What exactly have I said that was far out? My issue is not in my backyard. It's a greater issue that covers many rail corridors throughout the city. If you do not see this you are blind.

GO trains will not make a significant contribution to the inter-connectivity of the GTA until Electrification is realized. Until then GO trains will simply be geared towards Downtown bound traffic with no local component whatsoever. But it seems you all are fine with this.

Ssiguy, the fact that "the O-Train is the same technology" is irrelevant. And my bitching is for a superior transit model that will support higher ridership and more efficient travel for transit users.

Doady, buses on a main street are a different issue entirely. This issue focuses on the Electrification of GO trains on more than one corridor sooner rather than later.

I don't oppose increasing GO train frequencies today, I oppose the delay in electrifying GO train lines.

It's funny, I guess most of you are willing to settle for less. I assumed the majority of you were progressive. People who would support the best option that would also serve Urban commuters needs. I actually find the responses to my posts extremely humourous, actually. As if Electric trains weren't already considered the optimal solution to the issue surrounding inter-regional transit in Toronto.

Then you all bitch about the fact that Transit in Toronto is has little connectivity to the growing exurbs that surround it. Seems pretty hypocritical to me. But then again, you are the ones who vote for these people, so I'd assume that their opposition to modernization are the fruits of your desires.

It's a pitty, you know. Sometimes I feel as if our city holds itself back. You all set the bar far too low. But it's expected, I suppose.

 

[Jaye101]

Induced demand is locational. Creating rail capacity doesn't increase employment. And it does create modal shift. Somewhere in the GTA there will be less car driving. Jaye's issue is his/her backyard ... not the bigger picture.

And really, some of the stuff he/she says are absurd. There's a lot in there about the current smell of the diesel trains in the neighbourhood. This is just a massive deception. I live near and downwind a corridor that is busier than the 2 corridors in question combined. There is no smell. Heck, I don't even notice anything walking along the road next to the tracks, when 2 trains pass simultaneously, one accelerating out of the station. Which I do quite frequently, as I typically get off a train and start walking home, 5 minutes before the next train arrives from the opposite direction. Then I walk parallel to the tracks for a kilometre, often with a train passing.

And these are regular diesels ... not the much lower emission DMUs being used for the Airport Train.

Creating rail capacity increases DENSITY, and provides ALTERNATIVES to the current transportation available in the city. What you fail to realize is that people who chose not to take GO transit do not do so because they are at capacity. They do not because they are not an efficient mode of travel that is integrated into a local system. They do not offer the freedom or connectivity that a car does, even if frequencies were increased. They are an archaic mode of transportation that is outdated in a city like Toronto.

"There's a lot about the smell in there."

There is one line about the smell moving through the neighbourhood. Ofcourse a smart guy like you would know that much of what effects people over the long term is odourless. It's just a sign of how the fumes move throughout the neighbourhood.

"Somewhere in the GTA there will be less car driving"

Because of a few extra trains per day some of these GO lines that carry they same amount of people as a bus route in Toronto will be able to carry 10,000 more people. Whoopie. I'm talking orders of magnitude capacity increases that will completely shift these corridors from Commuter rail to Rapid transit. Get on my level.

To effectively improve transit service in the GTA, the electrification of GO trains is probably the single most significant investment that could ever be made in Toronto's modern history.

I am not just posting about the local effects of diesel fumes, I am speaking on the lost economic expansion that will be a result of waiting to invest in this region changing initiative. I am speaking on the fact that the busiest GO train carries little more than a Toronto bus route with 12 car trains. The GO system will be underutilized until it reflects the travel patterns of our city. Whether you'd like to acknowledge this or not, it is true. The GO system can be the framework of intensification throughout the Metro area, but it's not. And until it modernizes, it never will be.

 

[MisterF]

There is one line about the smell moving through the neighbourhood. Ofcourse a smart guy like you would know that much of what effects people over the long term is odourless. It's just a sign of how the fumes move throughout the neighbourhood.

I used to live right next to a major CN and CP mainline with 150 car freight trains going by every 20 minutes. There was no smell. That argument is ridiculous.

I completely agree that the GO network should be electrified, and that it would be the most important infrastructure investment we could make (along with the DRL). But trying to stop the airport link doesn't accomplish that.