The Arctic - Resource Exploitation, Development and Population

[Underway]

Churchill railway gets a reprieve.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/churchill-port-lentils-1.4808227

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/churchill-raiway-sale-omnitrax-1.4807450


Combined with new port facilities being built in Iqaluit it might be cheaper to ship stuff to/from the arctic through Churchill over the summer months.  Hopefully they can make it economically viable.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Agreed. It would be a confidence building measure to have the government ship materials for the Arctic out of Churchill, even if a tad more expensive. They could make it a prerequisite of any contract that materials must be shipped out of Churchill (just make sure they have the loading capability beforehand).

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

With all due respect, Colin, that would not be a smart way of doing thing. Not to mention - considering it would be more expensive - it would smack of political interference in the economy at taxpayer's expense, solely to "justify" Churchill's existence.

As I have indicated before, Churchill may have made some sense for shipping grain to Europe, but in practice, where the NW Passage is concerned, the navigational passages in the Arctic are such that it's just as long to travel at points in the Arctic to/from Churchill as it is to travel to/from St-Johns, or Sept-Iles, Qc. Once you are in Sept-iles, it's only four or five hundred nautical miles more to go to Quebec City or Montreal harbours. Considering most of the stuff consumed in the Arctic in terms of materiel, and a large portion of the food, come from Quebec and Southern Ontario, it makes no economic sense to somehow transport it all to the Peg, then rail it up North to Churchill, just to save those few extra hundred Nautical miles.

 

[Xylric]

You know, it occurs to me that airships and other rigid lighter-than-air craft would be quite useful in the Arctic, presuming certain modifications to deal with the climate. Would make spotting submarines and other foreign craft crossing through the archipelago much easier, as well.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

With all due respect, Colin, that would not be a smart way of doing thing. Not to mention - considering it would be more expensive - it would smack of political interference in the economy at taxpayer's expense, solely to "justify" Churchill's existence.

As I have indicated before, Churchill may have made some sense for shipping grain to Europe, but in practice, where the NW Passage is concerned, the navigational passages in the Arctic are such that it's just as long to travel at points in the Arctic to/from Churchill as it is to travel to/from St-Johns, or Sept-Iles, Qc. Once you are in Sept-iles, it's only four or five hundred nautical miles more to go to Quebec City or Montreal harbours. Considering most of the stuff consumed in the Arctic in terms of materiel, and a large portion of the food, come from Quebec and Southern Ontario, it makes no economic sense to somehow transport it all to the Peg, then rail it up North to Churchill, just to save those few extra hundred Nautical miles.

I was thinking more bulk products, fuel, concrete, steel.

 

[daftandbarmy]

You know, it occurs to me that airships and other rigid lighter-than-air craft would be quite useful in the Arctic, presuming certain modifications to deal with the climate. Would make spotting submarines and other foreign craft crossing through the archipelago much easier, as well.

Except for the near hurricane force winds that scour the area year round most of the time, I guess.

 

[Xylric]

Except for the near hurricane force winds that scour the area year round most of the time, I guess.

That's just an engineering problem no one's bothered to solve yet.  ;D

 

[Underway]

With all due respect, Colin, that would not be a smart way of doing thing. Not to mention - considering it would be more expensive - it would smack of political interference in the economy at taxpayer's expense, solely to "justify" Churchill's existence.

As I have indicated before, Churchill may have made some sense for shipping grain to Europe, but in practice, where the NW Passage is concerned, the navigational passages in the Arctic are such that it's just as long to travel at points in the Arctic to/from Churchill as it is to travel to/from St-Johns, or Sept-Iles, Qc. Once you are in Sept-iles, it's only four or five hundred nautical miles more to go to Quebec City or Montreal harbours. Considering most of the stuff consumed in the Arctic in terms of materiel, and a large portion of the food, come from Quebec and Southern Ontario, it makes no economic sense to somehow transport it all to the Peg, then rail it up North to Churchill, just to save those few extra hundred Nautical miles.

True, but shipping by... ship is much cheaper then shipping by train for those few hundred miles.  If a case can be made for cheaper shipments for some items then it will be used.  A pipeline to Churchill.  You heard it here first!  No need for Energy East anymore and cuts Quebec right out of the picture.

 

[daftandbarmy]

That's just an engineering problem no one's bothered to solve yet.  ;D

I recall that the Airborne Regiment used to train to jump into the Arctic in the event of them having to respond to an airliner crashing, or something like that.

I'm not sure that was well thought out either

 

[Colin Parkinson]

True, but shipping by... ship is much cheaper then shipping by train for those few hundred miles.  If a case can be made for cheaper shipments for some items then it will be used.  A pipeline to Churchill.  You heard it here first!  No need for Energy East anymore and cuts Quebec right out of the picture.

I have seen government waste money on far less important things. Contracting some of the materials out of Churchill is a way of subsidizing port revitalization in a indirect fashion, creating jobs and revenue to be invested back in. The hope would be that improved cargo handling will eventually make the port more self sufficient. There are some other ways as well to got goods flowing through, but this would be a statement about the governments commitment about the port. 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

You know, it occurs to me that airships and other rigid lighter-than-air craft would be quite useful in the Arctic, presuming certain modifications to deal with the climate. Would make spotting submarines and other foreign craft crossing through the archipelago much easier, as well.

Having operated up there in a multi-engine aircraft, I'm going to have to disagree in general and specifically in the 'spotting submarines' aspect.

Space assets and other sensors work fine with the surface vessels piece.

 

[Xylric]

Having operated up there in a multi-engine aircraft, I'm going to have to disagree in general and specifically in the 'spotting submarines' aspect.

Space assets and other sensors work fine with the surface vessels piece.

Fair enough. I've only been in one a long, long time ago.