SkyscraperCity Forum banner
1 - 20 of 218 Posts

·
AUTOBANN.ED
Joined
·
80,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The Romanian Government is planning to revive an old project to make Bucharest a port to the Danube by digging a appprox. 60 km long channel to the Danube and building a port in the S region of Bucharest. The project has already been devised, and the government is preparing the tender for the feasibility study. The costs of the channel and port are estimated at 0.5 billion EUR, yet the government is planning to make it a PPP. Large unnamed investors are told to be very interested into the project.

The project will significantly decrease transportation costs to the capital of Romania, linking it to the main transportation route in Europe: the Danube river.

The port and the future airport to be built in close locations will boost S area of Bucharest as one of the most important hubs for investment in Romania.

Here's a map of the possible channel and port locations.

 

·
Basarabia e Romania
Joined
·
22,782 Posts

·
AUTOBANN.ED
Joined
·
80,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I think this thread should go to the "Projects and Construction" section?? If so, I would like to ask the mods to move it there. Sorry for this and thank you. :cheers:
 

·
Basarabia e Romania
Joined
·
22,782 Posts
The Danube-Bucharest Canal is a 73 kilometre-long canal project that is supposed to link Bucharest, Romania to the Danube via Argeş River.
The earliest plans, made by engineer Nicolae Cucu in 1880, sought to link Bucharest to the Danube at Olteniţa. In 1927, a study by Alexandru Davidescu was published at the Polytechnic School. Two years later, the Romanian parliament passed Law no. 2749 on the building of the Argeş–Bucharest–Danube canal and of a port in Bucharest; the law was published in Monitorul Oficial in August 1929. However, the world recession of the early 1930s prevented the government from investing large amounts of money in such projects. Various studies were published, but as World War II began, they were ignored.
New plans were made in 1982, the main goal being the regularization of the Argeş River, which flooded in 1970. Communist leader Nicolae Ceauşescu also wanted to have a direct link to Northern Europe, as Rhine-Main-Danube Canal was also built then. The building of the canal began in 1986, the project was supposed to have five locks and four hydroelectric plants (the only one that is currently working is the one at Mihăileşti). The final project was supposed to generate 62 GWh/year.
In February 1990, the building of the canal was stopped, although it was 60% completed. Currently, just the dam at Mihăileşti and the micro-hydro plant are functional. In 1997, Traian Băsescu, who was Minister of Transport at the time, announced that the finalizing of the canal would require about 400 million dollars and take four years, but the financing was not found at the time. In 2005, Adriean Videanu, the mayor of Bucharest announced that he intends to finish the work.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danube-Bucharest_Canal
 

·
off
Joined
·
7,789 Posts
Five companies interested in Danube – Bucharest Canal

Jacques Barrot: Constanta, a port with an important and strategic position for the EU.

http://www.nineoclock.ro/index.php?page=detalii&categorie=business&id=20080310-512144

At least five companies have shown interest in the development of the project addressing the Danube – Bucharest Canal, where important amounts would be invested, so that it becomes navigable, as recently declared, in Constanta, by Transport Minister, Ludovic Orban, The Money Channel informs.

“It is a project abandoned by post–revolution political factors, without any clear rationales, as this is a project that raises the interest of reliable companies which are active in the field,” the Transport Minister said.

At this visit made by Transport Minister in Constanta Port, the Vice-President of the European Commission, the European Commisioner for Transports, Jacques Barrot, also participated. He expressed his full support for the development projects in the field of transport infrastructure and mainly ports, as well as for those related to river transport, Rompres informs.

The official declared that the maritime transport has significant importance because it accounts for 80 per cent of the transport made by water, and Constanta has a strategic position, important for the EU.

In a press statement, delivered at the venue of Constanta National Company Administration of Maritime Ports (CNAPMC), Jacques Barrot, outlined that the company preoccupations and plans for development are coincidental with the EU strategy in the field. In his turn, Minister Ludovic Orban reminded that the evidence for the EU support of infrastructure projects on Constanta port platform results from the approval of providing funds to the operational sector programme, worth EUR 4.7 bln, where there are projects addressing the construction of a road bridge at Agigea Harbour Lock, upgrading and increasing the railway capacity in the area of barge port, along with expanding the dam into the sea, investments for completing the consolidation works of the Canal banks, improvement of navigation conditions along the Danube, between Braila and Calarasi. Romania supports the construction of a grand speed railway between Budapest and Constanta, which would contribute to regional development, according to a government press release. The construction of such links, between Constanta –Bucharest and Budapest, requires investments of around EUR 10 to 12 M per km. The intention of the Romanian authorities follows the emergence of a European project addressing grand speed rail construction to link Strasbourg in France with Budapest in Hungary.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
22,882 Posts
This seems a little dumb to me
Why not develop one of the so many towns on the danube that need jobs and opportunities?
Create a high speed link to Bucharest, if it's so close!
But to dig 60km of canals to make an already bustling Capital a port? why?
 

·
AUTOBANN.ED
Joined
·
80,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
^^ My understanding of the project is that Bucharest will actually have 2 ports: Oltenita, which is currently a rather small and insignificant port to the Danube (which will be upgraded to serve the needs of Bucharest and probably get a facelift of the current railway link to Bucharest) and a second larger port in the vicinity of Bucharest.

I also miss the actual reason behind the port on S of Bucharest (the gov is yet to order a feasibility study, and I haven't seen the draft Government Decision on the project which is about to be issued). But I think it is linked to the transportation costs to Bucharest, which will be significantly lowered, as well as to the idea that S Bucharest can be turned into a very strong manufacturing area in Europe, once the port is established. But I think these are not the only reasons. The draft Governmental Decision will have a resoning behind it, and once it is issued, we'll post more on the topic.
 

·
Basarabia e Romania
Joined
·
22,782 Posts
Why not?! This is the future of transportation: cheap and green ... and alternative to motorways ...besides ~60% of it has been constructed already
 

·
AUTOBANN.ED
Joined
·
80,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
^^ The same goes for the Danube-Black Sea channel: now it's a EU priority and secures Constanta's prime position as a port at the Black Sea.

I do not think the Bucharest-Danube channel is a stupidity. On the contrary. I think it's one of the best things to happen to Bucharest. :cheers:
 

·
Euro Mod
Joined
·
32,636 Posts
nebunul, AFAIK 70% of the whole project is completed. So why the hell not finish it? It may have well been a dream of "communist retards", but since they've almost built all of it, why leave it in ruins and not benefit from it?

So unless someone comes up with a well documented study that concludes that finishing the project would be counter productive and would not benefit Bucharest and the surrounding areas, I say BUILD IT!:cheers:
 

·
Basarabia e Romania
Joined
·
22,782 Posts
nebunul, AFAIK 70% of the whole project is completed. So why the hell not finish it? It may have well been a dream of "communist retards", but since they've almost built all of it, why leave it in ruins and not benefit from it?

So unless someone comes up with a well documented study that concludes that finishing the project would be counter productive and would not benefit Bucharest and the surrounding areas, I say BUILD IT!:cheers:
d69:nuts: is against ... I think is a very good idea :cheers:
 

·
Basarabia e Romania
Joined
·
22,782 Posts
^^ :cheers: I'd make it a priority for Bucharest ...
 

·
AUTOBANN.ED
Joined
·
80,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
^^ I think that IF this project gets completed (and the planned airport in S Bucharest), we are going to see something they we never dreamt of in S Bucharest: an explosion of the manufacturing industries all accross S Bucharest and in between Bucharest and Giurgiu, to the effect that Giugiu may become a suburbia of Bucharest, sooner than Ploiesti may turn into a Bucharest suburbia.

Add to that the fact that all car production facilities in S Romania (Renault, Ford and potentially Mitsubishi) will have a link to that port and thus will be able to transport their output (which is directed mainly to export) by water and not by train, and you have a pretty good outlook of the development that may ensue.

I think it's a very good idea. :cheers:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
617 Posts
They should offer the project to private companies through an auction. It'll be the best idea: you'll find out for sure if it's feasable and you'll actually do something with the saved money that has a low opportunity cost. Plus, you'll save the tax payers money by not having the state administer such project (we know how incompetent they are, no need for me to make a point here).

It's incredibile how many people actually support this though.
 

·
Bird in Space
Joined
·
18,757 Posts
I don't have anything against the project, but I think the main focus at moment should be highways. I can't believe how slowly the whole process is moving and I still don't think the polical class grasps just how important a good network of highways is for Romania. Moldova is quickly falling behind the rest of the country because of its nonexistant highway infrastrucutre. I think the canal is a good idea, but it can wait.
 

·
AUTOBANN.ED
Joined
·
80,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
They should offer the project to private companies through an auction. It'll be the best idea: you'll find out for sure if it's feasable and you'll actually do something with the saved money that has a low opportunity cost. Plus, you'll save the tax payers money by not having the state administer such project (we know how incompetent they are, no need for me to make a point here).

It's incredibile how many people actually support this though.
The Gov does make the project with private investors, which already showed a lot of interest. It's gonna be a PPP, much like Bucharest-Brasov highway.
 

·
AUTOBANN.ED
Joined
·
80,514 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Moldova is quickly falling behind the rest of the country because of its nonexistant highway infrastrucutre.
True! But the gov should speed up the PPPs in Moldova for highways. This way, little budget money will be used.

I think the canal is a good idea, but it can wait.
I don't think it's a good idea to postpone it. There's a very good trend of investments in EE right now and this project may bring a lot more investments to S Romania, which badly needs it.
 
1 - 20 of 218 Posts
Top