U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-18-2015, 09:58 PM
 
Location: In transition
10,131 posts, read 11,869,273 times
Reputation: 4423

Advertisements

I'm wondering if this would be feasible at least for the summer months and maybe year round with an icebreaker. I see that the Newfoundland government funds a summer ferry that runs to Nain on the Northern Labrador coast and it only has a population of 1200. Why not extend the ferry further north to Iqaluit which has a population of 6700 which is 5 and a half times the size of Nain. At least that way all territorial capitals will be connected by road or ferry to the North American highway network. From a financial point of view it makes no sense to serve a town of 1200 but not one more than 5 times bigger further north. Perhaps the Nunavut government could look into funding a ferry that would run from Iqaluit to Nain
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-18-2015, 11:20 PM
 
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
11,265 posts, read 13,150,322 times
Reputation: 13459
I don't think it's feasible. Not right ow, anyway. Don't forget that ferry stops at 8 other communities before it gets to Nain. It's another 900kms from Nain to Iqaluit, through dangerous water.

Right now, I don't believe Iqaluit harbour is deep enough at the moment to accommodate the ferry. As it stand right now, any thing that comes in by ship has to be off loaded onto a barge.

No, I believe Iqaluit is currently better served by air, as it has a WW2 era runway that can take just about anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2015, 12:20 AM
 
Location: In transition
10,131 posts, read 11,869,273 times
Reputation: 4423
The problem with only bringing in things by air is it makes things way too expensive for people in Iqaluit and more broadly for Nunavut in general. Have you seen what the cost of living is like there? It's ridiculous. I think the Canadian and/or Nunavut government should either find cheaper transportation options to make it easier to ship goods up there or subsidize the cost of living so that prices are on par with places like Toronto or Montreal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2015, 07:32 AM
 
Location: Hougary, Texberta
8,576 posts, read 11,065,012 times
Reputation: 10280
a) People are already subsidized for living in the Arctic.

b) If you want to have the comfort and expenses of living in Toronto or Montreal, live there.

Air is the cheapest method if you consider time and safety. It's expensive to run a ship of size through 900 miles of open water to service a tiny population. One aircraft could make literally dozens of trips for the same cost, and with no wait.

A ferry runs about 15 knots providing seas aren't bad. Best case scenario that's 60 hours. But Nunavut doesn't have an adequate port, so schedule a few hundred million to create one. Add a another hundred million or so for a dedicated boat. Of course it won't work in the winter, and you don't really need a ferry, as Nunavut doesn't really have "traffic" for cars.

Just keep dreaming.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2015, 10:00 PM
 
Location: In transition
10,131 posts, read 11,869,273 times
Reputation: 4423
Maybe we should just abandon Nunavut then and give it to the Russians... it seems we don't want to try to do anything with it or help the people that live there. I'm sure the Russians could do much better with developing the area... after all there are several cities built on permafrost in Siberia with railways and roads...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2015, 01:04 AM
 
Location: Alberta, Canada
2,164 posts, read 1,749,261 times
Reputation: 2623
You might as well ask why we don't build a double-tracked freeway across northern Ontario: because it would cost much more than it would benefit.

The people in Iqualuit don't seem to be bothered much by the lack of road access to the rest of Canada. They have cars they use in their city, and out of town as well. If they need to get to Toronto or Montreal or anywhere else, they can fly; and rent a car when they get there. Heck, I can drive to Toronto (and have), but I most often fly and rent a car when I get there. It's faster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2015, 02:44 AM
 
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
11,265 posts, read 13,150,322 times
Reputation: 13459
Quote:
Originally Posted by deneb78 View Post
Maybe we should just abandon Nunavut then and give it to the Russians... it seems we don't want to try to do anything with it or help the people that live there. I'm sure the Russians could do much better with developing the area... after all there are several cities built on permafrost in Siberia with railways and roads...
Oh, well now you're thinkin, deneb. Railway to Iquluit.

Seriously, give it to the Russians? No need for dramatics. Do WHAT with it?? What do you do with solid granite, muskeg, and permafrost?? I don't know if you really have a good idea of how difficult it is, or how expensive it is to build a road, never mind a railway in these conditions, nor the cost to maintain them.

Yes, the Russians would definitely do a much better job developing the area. Why, here's one of those magical Siberian superhighway's now!







^^^ That, is FEDERAL HIGHWAY M58 (from Moscow to Yakutsk). It was only paved last year. Bet you it reverts back to the above within 20 years.

That "highway", was started in 1925, and wasn't complete until 1964!

Can you find me one of the Russian roads you speak of, that isn't the Trans-Siberian, and isn't basically a wagon trail?

Yakutsk, is one of those cities built on permafrost that you mentioned. It's the largest, actually. The fun fact of it is though, because as you mentioned, the Russians care for their northern dwelling brethren much more than we do, and develop their northern communities, is that if Yakutsk didn't supply a FIFTH of the worlds diamonds, and a whole lot of other minerals, that were quickly developed during Stalin's industrialization, and, oh yeah, FORCED LABOUR CAMPS......the place would likely be a small little hamlet, very similar to our typical Inuit communities.

Here is a map of the railways in the world. Note, how the Arctic is avoided, even in glorious Russia.



We do have railways running to Churchill, Manitoba, and to Hay River, NWT. Hay River is the northern most railhead in Canada. Not so sure if they can go any further.

BUT, just so you are aware, there is, at the very least, a highway proposal on the table right now, to build an 1,100km highway from Sundance Manitoba, to Rankin Inlet, Nunavut. It'll cost $1.2 billion dollars, and cost $3 million p/year to maintain. Considering the GDP of Nunavut is smaller than a lot of Canadian cities, I guess everyone else will be paying for this road that next to nobody will use. That's an 11 hour drive, just from Sundance, to Rankin Inlet. There's "nothing" in either of those places. God help the person who's car breaks down on that road. A tow truck will be along in about 12 hours, from Winnipeg. (that's assuming you broke down in Sundance)

Rankin Inlet only has 2,500 people in it, and there are only about 4,000 vehicles in the whole of Nunavut, but what the hell. Why not?

Last edited by Magnatomicflux; 07-21-2015 at 03:17 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2015, 10:54 AM
 
2,557 posts, read 2,176,886 times
Reputation: 1810
Quote:
Originally Posted by deneb78 View Post
Maybe we should just abandon Nunavut then and give it to the Russians... it seems we don't want to try to do anything with it or help the people that live there. I'm sure the Russians could do much better with developing the area... after all there are several cities built on permafrost in Siberia with railways and roads...
I highly doubt any of the other NAFTA or NATO countries would agree to this, even if the Canadian parliament votes unanimously to give everything to Russia. Seriously, Russia taking eastern Ukraine is already a huge security headache for America and NATO, and now you want to give northern Canada to Russia? In fact, if this were to happen, I am almost certain that America will send military intervention to Canada to stop it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2015, 08:24 PM
 
Location: In transition
10,131 posts, read 11,869,273 times
Reputation: 4423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnatomicflux View Post
Oh, well now you're thinkin, deneb. Railway to Iquluit.

Seriously, give it to the Russians? No need for dramatics. Do WHAT with it?? What do you do with solid granite, muskeg, and permafrost?? I don't know if you really have a good idea of how difficult it is, or how expensive it is to build a road, never mind a railway in these conditions, nor the cost to maintain them.

Yes, the Russians would definitely do a much better job developing the area. Why, here's one of those magical Siberian superhighway's now!
I was being sarcastic but also making a point. What's the point of having a chunk of land the size of Europe and just leave it sit there to do nothing. I know how difficult it is and expensive to build a road or rail in these kinds of conditions but it is technologically feasible and why shouldn't we? We need to develop and populate Nunavut and building roads and infrastructure is the best way to do it. There are probably just as many mineral resources in Nunavut as in a good chunk of Siberia. How do you think Yakutsk and Norilsk got built? Did they appear out of thin air? The Russians were wanting to develop Siberia and built several cities there and they are in a much better position to develop their resources than we are.


Quote:


^^^ That, is FEDERAL HIGHWAY M58 (from Moscow to Yakutsk). It was only paved last year. Bet you it reverts back to the above within 20 years.

That "highway", was started in 1925, and wasn't complete until 1964!

Can you find me one of the Russian roads you speak of, that isn't the Trans-Siberian, and isn't basically a wagon trail?
At least the Russians tried to build highways in Yakutia even if it wasn't easy. What has Canada done in Nunavut?


Quote:

Yakutsk, is one of those cities built on permafrost that you mentioned. It's the largest, actually. The fun fact of it is though, because as you mentioned, the Russians care for their northern dwelling brethren much more than we do, and develop their northern communities, is that if Yakutsk didn't supply a FIFTH of the worlds diamonds, and a whole lot of other minerals, that were quickly developed during Stalin's industrialization, and, oh yeah, FORCED LABOUR CAMPS......the place would likely be a small little hamlet, very similar to our typical Inuit communities.

Here is a map of the railways in the world. Note, how the Arctic is avoided, even in glorious Russia.
What about roadways though? Much more practical to build roadways anyway.

Quote:

We do have railways running to Churchill, Manitoba, and to Hay River, NWT. Hay River is the northern most railhead in Canada. Not so sure if they can go any further.

BUT, just so you are aware, there is, at the very least, a highway proposal on the table right now, to build an 1,100km highway from Sundance Manitoba, to Rankin Inlet, Nunavut. It'll cost $1.2 billion dollars, and cost $3 million p/year to maintain. Considering the GDP of Nunavut is smaller than a lot of Canadian cities, I guess everyone else will be paying for this road that next to nobody will use. That's an 11 hour drive, just from Sundance, to Rankin Inlet. There's "nothing" in either of those places. God help the person who's car breaks down on that road. A tow truck will be along in about 12 hours, from Winnipeg. (that's assuming you broke down in Sundance)

Rankin Inlet only has 2,500 people in it, and there are only about 4,000 vehicles in the whole of Nunavut, but what the hell. Why not?
But you are missing a key point here. Once that highway to Rankin Inlet is built, that whole area will attract development and population along it. Build it and they will come as they say... so that 1,100km highway won't stay empty for long. There will be settlements built along it to take advantage of the infrastructure available.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2015, 11:41 PM
 
Location: British Columbia ♥ 🍁 ♥
7,216 posts, read 6,570,009 times
Reputation: 14141
Quote:
Originally Posted by deneb78 View Post

..... We need to develop and populate Nunavut .....
Why?

.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top