Fehmarnbelt Tunnel: Denmark - Germany 17.6 km

[goschio]

^
I am sure high speed rail (ICE) will go to Kopenhagen once the bridge is finished. You don't need completely new tracks for it. Perhaps 200km/h?

[MonsieurAquilone]

Just a small question regarding investment and 'geopolitics'. The article states that Denmark essentially spearheaded the creation of this project and as such will take the brunt of the cost. Obviously Germany will take advantage of the fact as it will mean there will be little investment needed on the German side. That aside, (thinking from the Danish government's perspective), is there anywhere in the agreement that may let Denmark compel Germany to pay its share in the construction of the bridge? The bridge is obviously particularly significant for the Danish side but the Germans will also benefit as well. Will Germany give a helping hand?

[onetwothree]

I don't think we can make them pay any of it, no. Germany didn't want to spend money on the bridge right now, so if we wanted it, we would have to pay it ourselves. Because of this I don't think they'd accept a deal where they could be forced to pay some of it

[Dan]

Personally I don't see how this bridge is worth it to Denmark, given the huge costs that Denmark has to shield. The big winner with this bridge, IMO, is Sweden and traffic going between Germany (in particular) and Sweden.

[MonsieurAquilone]

How critical will this bridge be then? Obviously (most definitely) sea and air transport have been means by which people have been to and from Germany/Denmark/Sweden. In constructing this bridge, at what seems to be a considerable cost, how much will travel be diverted to the road and rail offered by it? I for one would come to travel across the bridge for the sake of it being there but would readily take to seas as I like to travel from Germany to Denmark this way.

[droneriot]

Well, the bridge would be far more convenient for mobile homes/RVs compared to sea transport. Same with trucks in general, I suppose. Normal car users would be FAR better off (financially) just to take a cheap flight to their destination and rent a car there.

[DiggerD21]

Originally Posted by MonsieurAquilone

Obviously Germany will take advantage of the fact as it will mean there will be little investment needed on the German side.

The infrastructure on german soil leading to the bridge is currently rather poor. The railway line between Hamburg and Lübeck is one of the last important not electrified stretches in the german railway net. This is currently changing with the electrification, however it ends in Lübeck. The remaining part from Lübeck to the bridge (ca. 80km) is just a non-electrified single track not suitable for fast traffic. The Autobahn A1 currently ends 30km before the bridge, from there it is just a single lane national road. The bridge connecting Fehmarn Island with mainland germany is also just a single lane bridge. It would have to be either replaced or a second bridge to be built.

[MonsieurAquilone]

Originally Posted by DiggerD21

The infrastructure on german soil leading to the bridge is currently rather poor. The railway line between Hamburg and Lübeck is one of the last important not electrified stretches in the german railway net. This is currently changing with the electrification, however it ends in Lübeck. The remaining part from Lübeck to the bridge (ca. 80km) is just a non-electrified single track not suitable for fast traffic. The Autobahn A1 currently ends 30km before the bridge, from there it is just a single lane national road. The bridge connecting Fehmarn Island with mainland germany is also just a single lane bridge. It would have to be either replaced or a second bridge to be built.

Thank you for the information. So, were this bridge to go ahead as it seems to show signs of doing; the German side, quite separately, could start to establish updated rail infrastructure to complement the new bridge and (more or less) 'finish off' the electrification of the entire German network - one would logically reason. Sorry for sounding so slow, I just need to get my head around the particular infrastructure capabilities that this part of Europe (with which I am not overly familiar) has. Thanks again.

[MonsieurAquilone]

Some maps courtesy of Wikipedia and the project's website, showing the route.

[MonsieurAquilone]

Originally Posted by TooFar

Environmentalists have attacked the project, saying seabirds and migrating birds will either collide with the bridge or be frightened by it. A German nature-protection group, NABU, said Wednesday it would challenge the plan in the courts.

That would then necessitate the construction of an undersea tunnel at a higher cost, surely making the project far from viable - given the already high tolls being suggested for the bridge option. A tunnel option was cited as an alternative, but the following through with the bridge will mean that the opposition of the environmentalists will need to be seen to. This very detailed report undertaken in 2005 shows that the simple measure of installing spotlights on the bridge lessens the chances of migratory birds making unforseen contact with bridge.

Obviously, the welfare of the birds (some of which are endangered) will merit consideration but from the reading of the report, the bridge's construction and subsequent use seems to mitigate any problems with birds.

[:jax:]

Originally Posted by TooFar

The project closes one of the last bridgeable gaps in the landmass occupied by the European Union. Fixed links already exist, but they involve a detour via Denmark's Jutland peninsula, which is part of the European mainland.

You also have the Gedser-Rostock bridge. If the Fehmarn bridge is of marginal profitability, a Gedser-Rostock bridge would fare worse, it would be twice as long and less traffic. However there is a kind of a pattern that when one connection is built, the other is built some 15-50 years later. Witness the talk of more tunnels under the English Channel.

A likely scenario is that when the Fehmarn is mostly paid down, the toll is extended to pay for the Gedser bridge during construction, and then on both bridges for a few decades more when it opens.

Me, I prefer the ferries. When I've travelled past this region, be it by car, bus, or train, it's been a long travel. Walking around, or for the longer routes a short nap, on the ferry is what makes the journey a little more bearable. Most of the time I'd rather take a plane whereever I'd want to go. Of course, if I lived in say Hamburg it would have been different.

[:jax:]

I followed my own link to an article in Jyllands-Posten, translating a choice portion into English:

Consultant Christoph Stroschein from the German Traffic Ministry welcomes the proposal.

"The whole Fehmarn project is a Cold War project from the time when this was the only way to get from Denmark down to the rest of the continent. The idea belongs to the old Europe. Today we have a new Europe with a very different situation with new economic powers in Central and Eastern Europe. A bridge from Gedser to Rostock would make the trip from Copenhagen to Berlin 130 km shorter than via Femer, while there would be saved 160 km on the trip to Munich and 230 km towards Poland," concludes Christoph Stroschein.

Traffic economist Uffe Jacobsen is of the same opinion.

"Gedser-Rostock is the most future-oriented project and gives greater improvements than a connection over Fehmarn. I think that many Germans would see this as a better solution than a connection over Fehmarn, and I'd imagine as well that someone in the EU Commission would see more possibilities in a Gedser-Rostock connection than in a Fehmarn bridge. Neither is there any doubt that Poland would be very interested in such a bridge" says Uffe Jacobsen.

I kind of doubt that a Rostock bridge is realistic now, but such a bridge would make a difference to my travels, something the Fehmarn bridge wouldn't.

[DiggerD21]

I think one of the main reasons for Denmark to build the Fehmarn-Bridge is to get better access to the ports of the north-sea-range (Hamburg-Bremen-Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerpen-Le Havre) and therefore to the overseas markets. Although Denmark has Esbjerg at the north sea, its port can't handle much and is a bit off the beaten traffic paths. It is merely a feeder port to exactly those big ports mentioned above. And a Gedser-bridge wouldn't fit to this intention.

[ØlandDK]

Here's another thread for this project:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=492488

[H123Laci]

Originally Posted by DJZG

60 euros is way too much for 20km... even for a bridge...

this toll is not for 20km, this is for the CROSSING of the strait...

to jugde this price you have to compare it to the alternatives:
ferry and detour...

another issue which has to be taken into consideration:
how much economic demage is caused by discouraging the use of the crossing...

[mgk920]

I would expect the bridge toll to be roughly equal to that of the current ferry tolls. That was the case when the Confederation Bridge was opened in Canada a few years back (linking Prince Edward Island with the mainland) as well as with the Mackinac Bridge (USA) when it opened back in 1957 (I-75 between Michigan's two peninsulas).

Mike

[ØlandDK]

Just checked the price for the ferry today. It's 61€. So there really isn't any difference from now.

From: http://www.scandlines.dk/DKFront/Front_COM

[MonsieurAquilone]

Originally Posted by ØlandDK

Just checked the price for the ferry today. It's 61€. So there really isn't any difference from now.

From: http://www.scandlines.dk/DKFront/Front_COM

Which probably makes the toll oddly sensible.

[goschio]

60EUR is ok.

When the bridge is finished it will probably be around 80EUR or even higher. Its not like people use the bridge for daily commuting.

[goschio]

Originally Posted by droneriot

Well, the bridge would be far more convenient for mobile homes/RVs compared to sea transport. Same with trucks in general, I suppose. Normal car users would be FAR better off (financially) just to take a cheap flight to their destination and rent a car there.

Depends on how many people sit in the car and from where you travel.