By Susan Quinlan
Alberta
Although varying opinions exist regarding benefits of a high-speed rail service between Calgary and Edmonton, the Alberta government is considering the project, given the province’s growing economy and population.

“It certainly is in our plans and something the government is looking at; it’s on that radar,” said Tammy Forbes, communication spokesperson for Alberta Transportation.   

Although no official commitment has been made, the provincial government commissioned a report on high-speed rail service to examine projected ridership, revenues and demand for service.

The report revealed an average annual growth rate in the Calgary-Edmonton corridor of more than three per cent over the past decade.

Given this projected growth rate, researchers estimated high-speed rail ridership would increase by about 35 per cent between 2021 and 2031, and by 43 per cent from 2031 to 2051; that the faster the high-speed train the greater the ridership and revenues; and people were willing to pay fares ranging from $56 to $120 for a one-way trip based on slowest to fastest high-speed rail technologies.

Given that high-speed train would affect rural communities in the region between Calgary and Edmonton, the Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties (AAMDC) has planned to investigate those effects.

Gerald Rhodes, executive director of the AAMDC, said the association’s 69-member municipalities passed a resolution earlier this year to have the organization investigate the economic effect a bullet train would have on local economies.

“High speed rail, depending on how it’s configured, will no doubt cut off certain transportation routes affecting agricultural movement,” he said. It will allow less vehicle traffic an opportunity to stop, deterring people from visiting those areas.

“The concern is that it is much like a sewer pipe going through your property that you can’t tie into. Everyone along it gets absolutely no use of it,” said Rhodes.

Boarding stations would be set up in Calgary and Edmonton alone.

Ron Craik, president of Alberta Bullet Train Ltd., said the main benefit Albertans and others would reap from the train is directly related to the shorter travel time involved between the province’s two major cities.

“Everyone in Alberta has to go up Highway 2 at some point and that’s half a day of windshield time.”

A 300-kilometre an hour bullet train would cut the journey down to 84 minutes.

For those using air travel, there’s time involved getting to and from the airport, and check-in time as well to consider, said Craik.

According to Craik’s research, the estimated price of a one-way ticket would be $65; the entire project would cost about $2.2 billion and take five years to complete; it would include three stops in Calgary, one in Red Deer and two in Edmonton; and there would be hourly departures and each train would transport 300 to 400 people. That would provide high-speed rail access to 70 per cent of the province’s population.

Benefits of a high speed train are many and varied, said Craik. It would enable Albertans to successfully bid on international sporting events, given that ticket buyers could move quickly between sporting venues in both major cities. It would also attract big name artists with the tourism industry creating enticing packages which could include admission, transport and accommodation.

As well, said Craik, “every stretch (of land) where there’s a bullet train, land values have gone up and there are permanent jobs for the next 50 years. We have the people trained because they’re already running Calgary’s C-train, and the C-train runs on green energy.”

Beyond those benefits, Craik said the train could eventually extend to Fort McMurray alleviating a number of that area’s social problems, as workers could travel home to their families in Edmonton or Calgary on days off, more easily access medical care, etc.

Further to the medical benefit, Craik said Albertans needing to see specialists in Edmonton and Calgary could accomplish this with greater ease, easily making the round trip to a larger center within a single day. When rail expands to include Red Deer and Lethbridge, benefits extend to residents in those areas as well.

Craik said those currently resisting the bullet train idea are not unlike those who resisted the idea of Calgary’s C-train, but its current acceptance is almost unanimous.

“Once people started riding it, they realized it was a dream. Now everyone accepts that it’s the way to go.”

Craik said currently, the biggest objection to the bullet train is its $3 billion price tag, where some believe the money could be better spent on health care.

“Until you fix the health-care system, it’s just a black hole with scamming and thievery going on, whereas the bullet train will be there for 100 years.”

It will provide daily high-speed travel plus employment.

As to funding for the project, Craik said various options could be considered including public-private partnerships, partnerships between the provincial and federal governments along with the cities of Calgary, Red Deer and Edmonton, or low-interest loans from the Heritage Fund, in place to care for future generations.

To date, Craik said land has been purchased by the Alberta government for right of ways and stations, and further, all the province’s political parties favour a bullet train. He suspects it will be an election issue.

Another company planning to vie for the eventual bullet train contract is Alberta High-Speed Rail (2005), who have been planning their project since 1999, said William Cruikshank, president.

Cruikshank said an Alberta government study revealed a $90 billion benefit from construction of a bullet train, given taxation revenues and increased production from workers given reduced travel time.

“The average day for a worker travelling to either city is six hours of travel and three hours of productive time. The train will reverse that ... Where else can you spend this kind of money and get that amount ($90 billion) of return?” asked Cruikshank.

Among other benefits, Cruikshank pointed out fewer environmental toxins and efficient use of land, as high speed rail moves 16,000 passengers per hour on a track that’s 35 metres wide while a four-lane divided highway moves 10,500 passengers per hour and takes up 120 metres.

Having attended a high-speed rail conference in Ottawa earlier this year, Cruikshank said projects discussed included one that would traverse the Canadian Shield and another to be developed in California. By comparison, given Alberta’s near absence of natural disasters and its undeniably flat topography in the area between Edmonton and Calgary, it is near perfect for this mode of transportation.

Cruikshank said he appreciated at the present time, the Alberta government has other financial concerns to address, but he has planned to further discuss high-speed rail with government this summer.

“There are various funding models to consider, and I’m open to all suggestions,” said Cruikshank.

In the July 2009 press release which announced completion of the initial assessment of a high-speed rail project for the province, Alberta Transportation said as it plans for the province’s future transportation needs, it is looking at different

options to support the economy and communities.

“In keeping with our government’s priority of building the infrastructure Alberta needs for the future, we will continue to investigate various transportation solutions. We have not made a decision on a high-speed rail project, however, this report is a good first step. We will continue to look at all options in order to support Albertans and the province’s economic future,” said Minister of Transportation, Luke Ouellette.