Puttgarden-Rødbyhavn fixed link approved

Started by mgk920, August 07, 2015, 03:28:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

mgk920

I just caught this snippet from a couple of week ago, reporting on final EU approval of the planned 19 km road/rail tunnel between Puttgarden in Germany and Rødbyhvn in Denmark, expected to open in 2024.

https://euobserver.com/tickers/129756

(Why can't the USA 'go BIG' like this anymore????    :banghead: )

Mike


english si

#1
Is there anywhere in the US that needs this, and is possible? Long Island - Connecticut?, but while Long Island is populous, it's not the whole of Norway + Sweden + half of Denmark, nor is Connecticut and the places in that direction 'almost everywhere else in Europe'.

It's shallow and cuts about hundred miles off the route from Copenhagen/Norway/Sweden to Hamburg. It must be the third busiest cross-sea international route in Europe: after the Dover-Calais corridor, and the Copenhagen-Malmo corridor.

It's pretty shallow too - they are using immersed tube to build it, which only works with shallow waters.

Chesapeke Bay Bridge is almost the same, though a little bit shorter (IIRC - it's late and I'm not that sober, so can't be assed to measure and wouldn't trust it if I did) and doesn't like to anywhere that's that populous/important.

If the Ireland-Britain fixed link happens, then is the time to go "wow".

Chris

The project is now dependent on the German approval process, which is much lengthier than in Denmark. Until recently they cited a construction start in 2015 and opening in 2021. The entire link is paid for by Denmark.

Another factor for Germany is a treaty which obliges the country to upgrade the hinterland infrastructure, mostly rail, but also the Fehmarnsund Bridge, which is a medium-sized arch bridge. There were originally no plans to expand it to four lanes, but they recently found out its structural condition is very poor (like nearly all 1960s bridges in Germany) and needs to be demolished and replaced anyway. Environmentalists want a tunnel, but that's not likely given Germany's very tight road funding budgets.

The hinterland infrastructure is not directly a part of the Fehmarn Belt Tunnel construction phase, but needs to be expedited after the tunnel is completed. Denmark's hinterland infrastructure also requires upgrades to the railroad and a new Storstrøm Bridge which will be a large cable-stayed bridge for the railroad and a secondary road.

In Denmark, the motorway ends directly at the port of Rødbyhavn. In Germany, the Autobahn A1 ends at Heiligenhafen, a good 20 kilometers short of the tunnel.

SP Cook

Quote from: english si on August 07, 2015, 08:19:11 PM
Is there anywhere in the US that needs this, and is possible?

I cannot think of one.    Maybe some things in Atlantic Canada, but in the USA?   Cannot think of one that doesn't already exist. 

mgk920

#4
Quote from: SP Cook on August 08, 2015, 09:37:24 AM
Quote from: english si on August 07, 2015, 08:19:11 PM
Is there anywhere in the US that needs this, and is possible?

I cannot think of one.    Maybe some things in Atlantic Canada, but in the USA?   Cannot think of one that doesn't already exist.

I would think that a Cape May, NJ - Lewes, DE fixed crossing would be very useful as an I-95 bypass.

A few others that I can think of include a cross New York Harbor (Brooklyn-New Jersey) freight rail tunnel, a deep-bored New Jersey-Queens trans-Manhattan highway tunnel to bypass the Lincoln and Midtown tunnels (and Manhattan streets) and a true high-speed passenger rail line to bypass the über-curvy NEC between NYC and Boston.

Mike

Chris

The project is delayed significantly due to the slow plan approval process on the German side. Up until recently construction was planned to start in 2015, with an opening in 2021. That's not feasible anymore, the opening date has moved up to 2024.

The tunnel is about 50/50 in Germany and Denmark. The Danish final EIS had 1655 pages. The German final EIS had a staggering 11,000 pages!

DAL764

Quote from: Chris on August 15, 2015, 06:47:28 AMThe tunnel is about 50/50 in Germany and Denmark. The Danish final EIS had 1655 pages. The German final EIS had a staggering 11,000 pages!

Which is sadly more or less standard in Germany these days, especially in this here state of Schleswig-Holstein, as not only is this state more or less broke, but the level of complaints against any new infrastructure is rivalling the old Autobahn-Killers in Baden-Württemberg. Any project gets complained about because it will cause more noise, more emissions, and generally endanger every living, breathing thing within a 50-kilometer area of the project. Heck people are already causing a major stink about a replacement for the Rader Hochbrücke on the A7 which was closed for months last year due to major cracks found in it, and the A7 is the most important north-south Autobahn in the whole country.

And to be honest, at this point, I will be surprised if the entire project will be finished before 2027, heck the new Fehmarnsundbrücke may take until 2030 possibly.

IMHO, it will be question of which will open first between 2025 and 2030, the new Belt crossing, the A20 Hamburg northwestern bypass, or the new Berlin Airport.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: DAL764 on August 16, 2015, 07:43:57 AM
Quote from: Chris on August 15, 2015, 06:47:28 AMThe tunnel is about 50/50 in Germany and Denmark. The Danish final EIS had 1655 pages. The German final EIS had a staggering 11,000 pages!

Which is sadly more or less standard in Germany these days, especially in this here state of Schleswig-Holstein, as not only is this state more or less broke, but the level of complaints against any new infrastructure is rivalling the old Autobahn-Killers in Baden-Württemberg. Any project gets complained about because it will cause more noise, more emissions, and generally endanger every living, breathing thing within a 50-kilometer area of the project. Heck people are already causing a major stink about a replacement for the Rader Hochbrücke on the A7 which was closed for months last year due to major cracks found in it, and the A7 is the most important north-south Autobahn in the whole country.

And to be honest, at this point, I will be surprised if the entire project will be finished before 2027, heck the new Fehmarnsundbrücke may take until 2030 possibly.

IMHO, it will be question of which will open first between 2025 and 2030, the new Belt crossing, the A20 Hamburg northwestern bypass, or the new Berlin Airport.

I thought Denmark was funding the cost of the crossing with little or no help from Germany?

I thought Germans knew better than this (automatic opposition to highway network improvements)?

Is this related to the political power of the Green Party in Germany?

The emissions argument is one that should be ignored. Vehicle emissions (especially the bad ones, like lead, SOX, NOX and CO) have been on a steady decline for many years.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

DAL764

Quote from: cpzilliacus on August 16, 2015, 01:01:01 PM
I thought Denmark was funding the cost of the crossing with little or no help from Germany?

I thought Germans knew better than this (automatic opposition to highway network improvements)?

Is this related to the political power of the Green Party in Germany?

The emissions argument is one that should be ignored. Vehicle emissions (especially the bad ones, like lead, SOX, NOX and CO) have been on a steady decline for many years.

Denmark is funding the cost for the Fehmarnbelt tunnel, but no matter how much the tunnel will improve travel, it is still bound to funnel cars onto a two-lane road across a structurally inefficient bridge because the people in charge in Germany can't get things done in time.

And yes, we should know better than this, BUT, much like in other countries like the UK or US, we have more and more NIMBYs that only think of the themselves and don't give a damn about what's actually good for the overall infrastructure and industry. Plus plenty of nature protection groups that use every possible method the German law allows them to block or at the very least delay every larger project. Worst example of this being the A26 southwest of Hamburg that has had construction delayed massively because some green guy *heard* some rare corncrake. Yup, *heard*, not seen, and the entire lawsuit etc delayed progress by 2 years and required a completely new EIS after the ruling was made, adding another year of delay.

But to be fair, it is not just NIMBYism or Nature BS, in quite a few cases it is also people simply not having any trust left in politicians getting a large scale project done on time and on budget (again, Berlin-Brandenburg International being the most recent and overall worst example for this).

Chris

Quote from: DAL764 on August 16, 2015, 05:38:59 PMBut to be fair, it is not just NIMBYism or Nature BS, in quite a few cases it is also people simply not having any trust left in politicians getting a large scale project done on time and on budget (again, Berlin-Brandenburg International being the most recent and overall worst example for this).

I understand that sentiment.

Many projects, both large and small, tend to take much more time than in other countries. Even small projects like a single carriageway bypass or bridge replacement often requires an exceptionally long construction time.

For instance, it took 5.5 years to construct the 2.5 km long three-lane bypass of Waake (B27 in Lower Saxony). There is nothing remotely complicated that it couldn't be done in 1.5 - 2 years.

Another example is the Stör Bridge replacement near Itzehoe (A23) in northern Germany. It took 2.5 years to construct the original 1960s bridge, but a mind-boggling 9.5 years to replace it. Again, this is not a complex or expensive project at all, it's a 1 km long bridge with a 120 m main spain. They just built a new span beside it (3.5 years), then torn the original bridge down and replaced it with a new span (5 years), after which an adjoining section needed upgrade, bringing to total duration for this 7 km project to 9.5 years (January 2007 - June 2016).

DAL764

Quote from: Chris on August 17, 2015, 10:35:56 AM
Quote from: DAL764 on August 16, 2015, 05:38:59 PMBut to be fair, it is not just NIMBYism or Nature BS, in quite a few cases it is also people simply not having any trust left in politicians getting a large scale project done on time and on budget (again, Berlin-Brandenburg International being the most recent and overall worst example for this).

I understand that sentiment.

Many projects, both large and small, tend to take much more time than in other countries. Even small projects like a single carriageway bypass or bridge replacement often requires an exceptionally long construction time.

For instance, it took 5.5 years to construct the 2.5 km long three-lane bypass of Waake (B27 in Lower Saxony). There is nothing remotely complicated that it couldn't be done in 1.5 - 2 years.

Another example is the Stör Bridge replacement near Itzehoe (A23) in northern Germany. It took 2.5 years to construct the original 1960s bridge, but a mind-boggling 9.5 years to replace it. Again, this is not a complex or expensive project at all, it's a 1 km long bridge with a 120 m main spain. They just built a new span beside it (3.5 years), then torn the original bridge down and replaced it with a new span (5 years), after which an adjoining section needed upgrade, bringing to total duration for this 7 km project to 9.5 years (January 2007 - June 2016).
Yeah, I know that bridge all too well, because I drive over it to work every day. Well, except for the days when they have to close it due to an accident or to paint new temporary markings, the latter of which has seemingly happened on a monthly basis.

And then you get a politician stating in a newspaper interview that he was happy with how the whole construction has progressed, which just shows how far removed from reality politicians can be.

And of course, if the overall construction progress wasn't delayed enough, earlier this year construction was delayed for some 6 months because the company that came in second in the construction bidding decided to sue because they felt the bidding didn't go according to regulations.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.