Canadian Railroads > The Alberta-Alaska railway concept

See here:

http://www.downstreamtoday.com/news/article.aspx?a_id=37759



Allen

interesting concept

Mike Root
Madras, OR

Highly unlikely. Building north from Ft. Mac would involve new construction in a national park, as well as crossing several mountain ranges. Upgrading & extending the former BCR Dease Lake line would be far more practical.

I often wonder about these supposed "projects" that some of these companies come up with. Down east, there was a proposal done for opening a container port in the straight of Canso;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melford_International_Terminal

Haven't seen anything there yet and it seems unlikely because Halifax is at a reduced capacity.



Another is a planned construction of the "Acadian Railway" i New Brunswick;

http://www.traingeek.ca/v.php?article=acadianhome

Again, with the Newcastle sub in jeopardy, this seems unlikely as well.



Now, aren't alot of these feasibility studies paid for by taxpayer?

Seems unsettling for the public to be paying for peoples' pipe dreams.

Brian H.

"Development studies" are often cheap ways for politicians to "explore the opportunity to" do something that will likely never be done. It gives them the platform to show voters they're actively looking at growth, often at modest cost. They get some TV time, the construction unions like the ideas, etc.

Western Canada is awash in proposals and suggestions about how to get the coal, natural gas, and oil exported to folks who will pay the world price for those resources. Whether it's a ten dollar an MCF difference in the gas price between Canada and Korea, or a 15 dollar difference in Brent vs WTI oil prices, there's money to be made. With a pipe, rail line, slurry, etc.

Well, there's not much sense in building a pipeline or railroad all the way to Valdez, AK through difficult country when the traffic could use existing rail routes to existing ports and the pipelines could run to terminals in existing ports.

All this is just NIMBYism. Everybody wants gasoline for their SUVs. Nobody wants oil transfer facilities in their backyards. Tough. Can't have one without the other.

A railroad to Alaska doesn't make economic sense, as BCR found out. They actually graded the ROW all the way to Watson Like, on the Yukon border, but with no traffic prospects, only laid rail to Dease Lake. Now, they don't even operate that far north.

shoretower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, there's not much sense in building a
> pipeline or railroad all the way to Valdez, AK
> through difficult country when the traffic could
> use existing rail routes to existing ports and the
> pipelines could run to terminals in existing
> ports.
>
> All this is just NIMBYism. Everybody wants
> gasoline for their SUVs. Nobody wants oil
> transfer facilities in their backyards. Tough.
> Can't have one without the other.
>
> A railroad to Alaska doesn't make economic sense,
> as BCR found out. They actually graded the ROW
> all the way to Watson Like, on the Yukon border,
> but with no traffic prospects, only laid rail to
> Dease Lake. Now, they don't even operate that far
> north.



True....it is NIMBYism. And specifically, Alberta has all the oil but BC has all the ports. And all the First Nations peoples whose assent is required. So, Alberta needs the outlet and BC/natives aren't playing ball. Hence, a proposal to work around them.

BobE

BobE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> shoretower Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Well, there's not much sense in building a
> > pipeline or railroad all the way to Valdez, AK
> > through difficult country when the traffic
> could
> > use existing rail routes to existing ports and
> the
> > pipelines could run to terminals in existing
> > ports.
> >
> > All this is just NIMBYism. Everybody wants
> > gasoline for their SUVs. Nobody wants oil
> > transfer facilities in their backyards. Tough.
>
> > Can't have one without the other.
> >
> > A railroad to Alaska doesn't make economic
> sense,
> > as BCR found out. They actually graded the ROW
> > all the way to Watson Like, on the Yukon
> border,
> > but with no traffic prospects, only laid rail
> to
> > Dease Lake. Now, they don't even operate that
> far
> > north.
>
>
>
> True....it is NIMBYism. And specifically, Alberta
> has all the oil but BC has all the ports. And all
> the First Nations peoples whose assent is
> required. So, Alberta needs the outlet and
> BC/natives aren't playing ball. Hence, a proposal
> to work around them.
>
> BobE

The proposal to ship oil east to Hudson's Bay is a similar example of seeking some leverage. Few Canadian drillers like the idea of selling their product to the US at a steeply discounted price.

Didn't the northern pipe to Kitmat get an OK from the First Nations people in that northern area?

shoretower Wrote:
> A railroad to Alaska doesn't make economic sense,
> as BCR found out. They actually graded the ROW
> all the way to Watson Like, on the Yukon border,
> but with no traffic prospects, only laid rail to
> Dease Lake. Now, they don't even operate that far
> north.

I think the graded ROW ended at Dease Lake. The rail was only laid to a place called Chipmunk- some distance short of Dease Lake, right in the middle of nowhere!

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Didn't the northern pipe to Kitmat get an OK from
> the First Nations people in that northern area?


Maybe the tribe right in Kitimat ok'd it, but the Northern Gateway pipeline is still in a federal hearing process. Also, BC and numerous tribes whose lands would have to be crossed have declined to give approval. My understanding that without the First Nations on board, federal approval will be meaningless.

BobE

BobE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > Didn't the northern pipe to Kitmat get an OK
> from
> > the First Nations people in that northern area?
>
>
> Maybe the tribe right in Kitimat ok'd it, but the
> Northern Gateway pipeline is still in a federal
> hearing process. Also, BC and numerous tribes
> whose lands would have to be crossed have declined
> to give approval. My understanding that without
> the First Nations on board, federal approval will
> be meaningless.
>
> BobE

The BC elections yesterday put Christy Clark back in the saddle as premier. And, that means the provincial government will probably put more emphasis on the pipeline, moving oil, etc