I mean, yeah, sure, maybe, but electrification is a proven, efficient technology. It’s just not as impractical as you make it out to be. It’s used in low density and moderate density areas all around the world with no problem

If you electrify the Windsor-Quebec city corridor along with the GO-trains and Exo trains, that would be a pretty significant electric system. I can say this for sure, if that kind of corridor existed in the Nordic (except for maybe Denmark) it would without a doubt be electrified, Toronto and Montreal are large cities an intermediate distance apart

I mean, most countries run on a mix of diesel and electric. Japan isn’t all electric. Both Germany and France are only half electrified. Switzerland is basically the only moderately large network which is entirely electrified

Firstly, countries such as Sweden, Finland and Norway also have low densities, not all of Europe is is the Rhine valley or Southern England. secondly, most Canadians live in a relatively small part of it anyway, meaning that densities are similar to modestly populated parts of Europe in a lot of Ontario and Quebec. Thirdly, Australia has much more electrification and much more well used passenger rail in spite of being even sparser. Sure, the distance between Perth and Sydney is impractical for high frequency rail, but that doesn’t mean that there can’t be climate friendly, efficient transport in the dense areas

Yeah, but Sweden has roughly the same amount of railway per capita, and yet it is 84,2 % electrified, more electrified than South Korea and Japan, whereas Canada is 0,2 % electrified, and Sweden and Canada are roughly as wealthy. Australia is also roughly as wealthy, even sparser, culturally closer, and yet it has large, well used electrified commuter rail systems similar to those in Europe and Asia, whereas Canada does not

No, Ä has been used for longer than that