[AJhyett]

This person did not even author the Citizen Research report claiming $142/143 billion Alto vs. $28 billion HPR (HFR-like alternative), the $142 billion number is plausible, the $28 billion is not. Citizen Research made a reference-class forecasting model that depends on subjective, internally developed index scoring. It's not a validated cost model, it's not academically rigorous, it's not peer-reviewed (and won't be in the future), but it should not be wholly dismissed.

Link to report: https://citizenresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/ALTO-ECI-CFI-Multivariate-Report-2.pdf

As for @AJhyett , please ignore them. Citizen Research makes none of these Dunning Kruger claims below:

Thanks for your email. Also https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Aj-Hyett/research. Please send me your research portfolio.

 

[Mihairokov]

9000 people live in your building?

I don't know if a limited service station in that area is a good idea or not, but high speed rail stations in rural areas to serve nearby small towns aren't unheard of. Smiths Falls, Perth, and Carleton Place have a combined population of around 30,000.

It's a bad idea. What's the point in having a high-speed train to get from major city to major city if it's going to stop in, pardon my language, every podunk town along the way? We ALREADY have a train service that does this and should continue to provide for local service into the future. HSR is not being built so people can go from Peterborough to Smiths Falls.

Someone else mentioned it upthread but part of the reason why we never end up with anything is because some people want everything and some people want nothing. All of this consultation and deliberation brings us nothing.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

It's a delicate balance, and not to be overused, I agree.... but in principle, if the odd zig or zag avoided a particularly problemmatic objection, or saved a great deal of money in avoiding a particularly expensive or technically difficult straightening, say around rock formations or ecologically sensitive areas, I would say it's the right decision.

It's always interesting to drive around Southern Ontario and note where a very straight hydro transmission line makes an abrupt turn or diversion around something. We may have forgotten who or why that happened, but there was likely a reason - in some cases the result of court challengers. The more of that we can avoid, the better, even if it costs a few minutes end to end.

- Paul

But again this is not what the anti Alto people are proposing... You're talking about the odd zig or zag due to geography, not multiple jogs to avoid going through some farmers field. Which is what the critics seem to be proposing (well actually they are proposing not even building the ALTO line through the region)

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

It's a bad idea. What's the point in having a high-speed train to get from major city to major city if it's going to stop in, pardon my language, every podunk town along the way? We ALREADY have a train service that does this and should continue to provide for local service into the future. HSR is not being built so people can go from Peterborough to Smiths Falls.

Someone else mentioned it upthread but part of the reason why we never end up with anything is because some people want everything and some people want nothing. All of this consultation and deliberation brings us nothing.

Layering of service. NOT every train needs to stop at EVERY station along the way. In Italy the Milan-Rome route has multiple service variatons.
- Layer 1: Direct non stop service between Milan-Rome
- Layer 2: Limited stops (2 - 3 additional stops) situated in the suburbs of the two cities, or at a major mid point city (Bologna, Florence)
- Layer 3: Limited stops at medium sized cities
- Layer 4: All (or most) stops
- Layer 5: Conventional rail

 

[CapitalSeven]

I had a look into the area of Saint-André-d'Argenteuil (pop. ~3050) which I had occasion to drive through last year on my way from Laval to the Carillon Dam. It's a geographically interesting and diverse area. Among the features is a network of hydro corridors, related unsurprisingly to the generating station.

I mapped these out on Google Earth. The top image shows the two corridors that converge on the way to towards Laval/Montreal. The top one comes from the dam, while the lower one crosses the Ottawa further south, below the settlements on both sides of the river. While the northern branch is straighter, following it would mean crossing 6-7 km of wetlands, not to mention the dam itself, so I think it's not really in the running. Below that I've shown the southern route straightened out to 7km radii. It's by no means a flat topography, but it mostly avoids settlements and the amount of farmland it crosses is limited and not all that disruptive. A fair number of trees would die, but it's balanced. I added a blue dot where the route crosses the highway about 3 km south of town. A microstation could be built in the village of small huts there (which is truly a bizarre sight).

There seem to be northern and southern routes east of Ottawa, just as there are to the west, if you piece together the clues such as environmental studies and land access. This one connects to a potential route south of the Mer Bleue and Alfred bog reserves. Both are viable and relatively close in length and contour. I think the northern route, using the Prescott-Russell trail and crossing to the vicinity of the Quebec Gatineau Railway, is likely simpler but we'll find out in the fall which one ALTO prefers.

 

[micheal_can]

Layering of service. NOT every train needs to stop at EVERY station along the way. In Italy the Milan-Rome route has multiple service variatons.
- Layer 1: Direct non stop service between Milan-Rome
- Layer 2: Limited stops (2 - 3 additional stops) situated in the suburbs of the two cities, or at a major mid point city (Bologna, Florence)
- Layer 3: Limited stops at medium sized cities
- Layer 4: All (or most) stops
- Layer 5: Conventional rail

If we use this idea
Layer 1 Direct non stop Toronto -Ottawa.
Layer 2 Limited stops at Peterborough and Smiths Falls.
Layer 3? Stops at all smaller communities.

 

[reinventingthewheel]

I had a look into the area of Saint-André-d'Argenteuil (pop. ~3050) which I had occasion to drive through last year on my way from Laval to the Carillon Dam. It's a geographically interesting and diverse area. Among the features is a network of hydro corridors, related unsurprisingly to the generating station.

I mapped these out on Google Earth. The top image shows the two corridors that converge on the way to towards Laval/Montreal. The top one comes from the dam, while the lower one crosses the Ottawa further south, below the settlements on both sides of the river. While the northern branch is straighter, following it would mean crossing 6-7 km of wetlands, not to mention the dam itself, so I think it's not really in the running. Below that I've shown the southern route straightened out to 7km radii. It's by no means a flat topography, but it mostly avoids settlements and the amount of farmland it crosses is limited and not all that disruptive. A fair number of trees would die, but it's balanced. I added a blue dot where the route crosses the highway about 3 km south of town. A microstation could be built in the village of small huts there (which is truly a bizarre sight).

View attachment 734252

There seem to be northern and southern routes east of Ottawa, just as there are to the west, if you piece together the clues such as environmental studies and land access. This one connects to a potential route south of the Mer Bleue and Alfred bog reserves. Both are viable and relatively close in length and contour. I think the northern route, using the Prescott-Russell trail and crossing to the vicinity of the Quebec Gatineau Railway, is likely simpler but we'll find out in the fall which one ALTO prefers.

Most ideal Ottawa River crossing (ie least environmentally sensitive) is near Hawkesbury. And I have fingers crossed for the Prescott-Russell trail alignment.

 

[CapitalSeven]

I read through the museum report quickly after posting and it's a pretty reasonable document. It doesn't say the project should not go ahead, just that they should recognize what is there and take it into account.

In addition to the two lines on the images I presented, there is the idea of crossing in the area of Chute a Blondeau, to the north west, and as far west as Hawkesbury. I really don't think Hawkesbury is great as it's a fairly big town with no clear route through, it makes the route longer, and then you have to deal with Lachute. Chute a Blondeau has more empty bits of field and shore, and while it passes by some of the sites mentioned by the museum (most are near the dam) they are pretty easy to avoid.

 

[AJhyett]

To brush up Urbanclient on his economics where is suggests that the primary sector is only 7% of the economy. We're not selling a lot of Tim Hortons double-doubles to china. The canadian equivalent of Nvidia has not been doing well. Nation building projects need to be about wealth creation, not wealth destruction.

I would suggest that Alto is a project that should be funded from and contribute to our "national piggy bank".

 

[Ward8]

It's a bad idea. What's the point in having a high-speed train to get from major city to major city if it's going to stop in, pardon my language, every podunk town along the way? We ALREADY have a train service that does this and should continue to provide for local service into the future. HSR is not being built so people can go from Peterborough to Smiths Falls.

It wouldn't though. I don't necessarily have a position on other possible stations, but running non express trains every so often is very common on other HSR networks. Having a station does not mean all trains stop at it. The Shinkansen is riddled with small town stations and it's still amazing and fast.

 

[urbanclient]

Thanks for your email. Also https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Aj-Hyett/research. Please send me your research portfolio.

I've messaged you. If you want your Alto paper peer-reviewed and published, here is some advice. Your expertise is in rock mechanics and geotechnical instrumentation, not HSR cost forecasting, systems engineering, (transportation) economics, or procurement etc.... Don't mistake your narrow field of expertise with authority on all fields. Stay within the limits of what you can substantiate.

Again, don't mistake expertise in one narrow domain for authority over the full range of engineering, economic, and other domains involved in high speed rail.
-----------------------------------------

Screenshotting AI slop instead of doing a modicum of research is not a convincing argument. If you sent your rants to any Econ faculty in Canada, you would not be taken seriously to say the least.

To brush up Urbanclient on his economics where is suggests that the primary sector is only 7% of the economy.

As for the 7% claim, here is the context and what I actually said, so you don't strawman me:

That said the real kicker is, without a social license, community friction rises, project uncertainty drives borrowing costs and politically its over. We'd all like a nice shiney thing, but lets be honest and admit that this is discretionary decision. Unlike China's manufacturing sector, our resource sector can't supply the wealth required and the urban wealth (a big underachiever by international standards) is all locked up in real estate rather than wealth driving creating innvoation. Canada's increasingly urbanized population has only delivered a single company in the worlds 100 biggest corporations by market cap and its a low-tech bank (RBC around position 70) The highest ranking are banks not technology companies. Hence during an existential national challenge it all about Canad's natural resources not Toronto's "MIA" tech sector. Building a CAD143B railway will not kickstart the innovation.

You are obviously wrong about the "manufacturing sector [supplying] the wealth required" for China's HSR. Or that our resource sector must "supply the wealth required" for Alto.

Urban wealth in China is proportionally more locked up in real estate than Canada's urban wealth.

Canada only having one company with a market cap in the top 100 in the world has no bearing on project financing or the economic returns of high speed rail.

What is this "existential national challenge" you speak of? And why is this challenge "all about Canad's natural resources?" The primary sector is less than 7% of Canada' economy, 10-15% if we really push the definition to include downstream activities. Canada's tertiary sector is 75%, and Canada has an outsized financial services sector for a country of its population size.

Country, 2024	Primary sector	Secondary sector	Tertiary sector
China (National Bureau of Statistics)	6.80%	36.50%	56.70%
Canada (StatsCan)	6.91%	18.23%	74.87%

World Bank 2024 puts China's manufacturing at 24.9% of total GDP (within secondary sector).

 

[Mihairokov]

It wouldn't though. I don't necessarily have a position on other possible stations, but running non express trains every so often is very common on other HSR networks. Having a station does not mean all trains stop at it. The Shinkansen is riddled with small town stations and it's still amazing and fast.

I'm fully aware of layering service and how it works. I don't think it makes a ton of sense for a small town the size of Smiths Falls which also already benefits from local train service. Anyone want to take a swing on how big the population centres are of Shinkansen Stations? Spoiler: They're not 10K spread out around a stop.

I support layering service for Toronto East/Peterborough/Fallowfield(?)/Mirabel/Laval whatever, but building additional stops in every town of 10K along the route is going to mean this thing isn't built until the 2050s.

 

[McGillicuddy]

I'm sure we can find a compromise here. What we're looking for is a reliable, standard-speed service that can serve these smaller communities without disrupting high-speed uses.

I've looked at some maps, and I think I see an existing CN alignment along the north shore of the St. Lawrence and Lake Ontario. If we opened a passenger rail service along this alignment, this would allow us to serve places like Smiths Falls, Brockville, Port Hope, Belleville, Cobourg, Trenton, etc. with minimal additional expense. We just need the will to build it.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Dude, criticize the arguments, but criticizing someone's publication record – especially on a public forum – is a bad look, in my opinion

I think it's fair to attack someone's appeal to their own authority when they don't have the authority in the field their commenting on. Having a PHD in basket weaving doesn't give me authority to speak about quantum mechanics.

*Note* I'm not exactly an expert in this field either

 

[urbanclient]

You're trolling needs to be permanently banned.

We don't give a shit about who you think has opinions. Also "rail engineer" = "locomotive operator" who will have no real expertise on designing railway systems. They aren't an actual engineer in the professional sense.

Trying to refute the 7% primary sector stat (which comes straight from StatsCan by the way) with a bad faith out of context quote, backed by AI slop...

The problem is the rants are so incoherent, most people are not reading them. Also a 35 year tenure railway engineer from Bombardier in Eastern Ontario, at best, has little to no practical experience with high speed rail.

And any "expert", be it AJ or this Bombardier (P.Eng) engineer, would not suggest elevated viaduct as a way to "solve problems", or save on capital costs for Alto. Quote below:

I have been working with a well published railway engineer who worked for 35 tears at barbardier in eastern Ontario. He suggests that in winter reliable speeds above 200km/h will be impossible without intensive maintenance. Raising a railway solves many problems in terms of cold weather engineering and this has been the Chinese approach.

------------------------------------

I actually agree with "Citizen Research", that Alto could easily cost $140+ billion CAD. But I don't agree that an HPR alternative would cost $28 billion based on a regression-forecasting model that hinges on subjective scoring for two indices, not independently observed variables.

Nearly half the "engineering complexity index" values are imputed (see below), while all "community friction index" values are author-scored using said internally developed rubric.

"Both indices are analytical instruments developed by the Initiative and applied internally by the research team. Neither has been externally peer-reviewed."
Page 5/38: https://citizenresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/ALTO-ECI-CFI-Multivariate-Report-2.pdf

Changing the scores would give wildly different results.

If you give different scores under those indices, AJ here will say your scores are wrong, his scores are more accurate, therefore his estimated costs are more accurate. You literally cannot disprove this borderline circular logic, to say nothing of the circularity with the community friction index itself.

High cost / escalating projects may score high on CFI partly because the CFI already includes “cost-scope escalation signals". That creates a circularity problem: the model is using a predictor that partly contains evidence of the outcome it is supposed to explain.

In other words, CFI may appear to predict high costs partly because high cost or escalating projects are already scored as high friction.

That itself does not necessarily invalidate the whole thing, but it weakens any claim that CFI independently causes high cost.

Page 3/38: "community friction is a measurable, independent cost driver".