An undersea passage across the Gulf of Finland?

The Helsinki-Tallinn rail tunnel plans are still alive, just about

print this

By Anna-Riitta Sippola
     
      Entering the train in Helsinki’s Pasila, passengers would be whisked to Tallinn in less than an hour. In other words, Helsinki and the neighbouring capital of Estonia would be in the same commuting area.
      Moreover, it would take only five hours to travel to Berlin. No queuing at the airport, no sulphur emissions from ships, no weather worries.
      Tractors from a factory in Central Finland would be carried by train directly to fields in Poland, without transshipment.
      Naturally this is all on the condition that Rail Baltica, the rail link from Tallinn to Poland, would have been completed.
     
The idea to build a rail tunnel between Helsinki and Tallinn is alive and well, at least inside mining engineers’ minds.
      It also continues to be one of the alternatives when civil servants are trying to imagine future traffic arrangements between the two cities.
      ”It is nothing more peculiar than building a metro line in a tunnel”, says Regional Director Keijo Nenonen of the Geological Survey of Finland.
      The same hard rock that is being blasted during the construction of the western extension of the Helsinki Metro continues to Naissaari, an island off Tallinn.
     
In Finnish geology circles, it is believed that the planned rail connection between Helsinki and Tallinn will be completed at some point between 2030 and 2050, Nenonen notes. He is a mining engineer in the third generation.
      Excavation techniques have also developed, Nenonen points out. A gigantic boring mill could be used to crush rock, after which the dug-out grit would be carried away from the tunnel on a long conveyor belt.
      When it comes to geological circumstances, the best terminus station in Estonia would be Muuga, east of Tallinn.
     
In Finland, it has been customary to build tunnels by blasting. According to Nenonen, the boring technique is three times faster than blasting.
      Either way, the pace is not exactly the 100 metres dash. If the rock is hard, like granite and gneiss, it is possibe to dig about a couple of metres in an hour.
      On the Estonian coast with its soft sediment rock, tunnel boring is the only useful method, according to Nenonen.
      Even with several full-profile machines, the work would last as much as ten years.
      However, when it comes to the 13-kilometre-long Western Metro line, the blasting work alone will take three years, Nenonen compares.
     
Only trains would run in the tunnel, carrying people and goods.
      Not people’s own cars, then. Nenonen says that there are already too many cars rumbling around. However, the actual reason is security. A car accident in the tunnel could be bad news indeed. In addition, the ventilation of the exhaust fumes produced by cars would be a major operation.
      This is a question of a long-term investment: It has been calculated that the service life of the planned tunnel would be a couple of centuries.
      What about the price-tag? EUR 3.0 billion, if the standard of construction is the same as in the Port of Vuosaari's rail tunnel, or EUR 5.0 billion, if in compliance with the Western Metro level of quality.
      A nuclear power plant would cost as much, Nenonen compares.
     
The tunnel project also has a number of opponents, however.
      ”A huge sum of money”, feels Harri Pursiainen, Chief of Staff at the Ministry of Transport and Communications.
      Because of the price ticket of at least EUR 3.0 billion, Pursiainen does not regard the project as realistic.
      The entire annual budget ot the Ministry of Transport is slightly more than EUR 2.0 billion, and investments in the development of road and rail networks amount to approximately EUR 400 million a year, he compares.
      ”I wonder whether it could ever be sensible, given the estimated traffic volumes”, Pursiainen asks.
      Moreover, the harbours and shipping companies also have their own financial interests to oppose the planned tunnel project.
      One of the disadvantages woud also be the fact that the tunnel and Rail Baltica would direct foreign trade to pass through Helsinki to the exclusion of other ports.
     
In 2009, the tunnel project ran into trouble, as the European Union denied the funding sought for a feasibility study by Helsinki Mayor Jussi Pajunen and Tallinn Mayor Edgar Savisaar.
      Helsinki officials speculated that the main reason was linked with Estonian politics, as relations between Savisaar and the country’s government were not the best possible.
     
At the same time, the proposed Rail Baltica project has been granted substantial funds by the European Union. The goal of the Baltic states and the EU is that the new rail link from Tallinn to Warsaw would be completed by 2022.
      The route of Rail Baltica would run from Tallinn via Pärnu to the border of Lithuania and Poland. From there the connection should continue towards the metropolises in Central Europe.
      However, the project is hardly likely to progress without problems. For example in Latvia, the rail link has become a hot political issue. Some people think that a rail link between Riga and Moscow would be more important.
      Moreover, there is uncertainty about whether Poland will take care of its share of the proceedings.
     
     
Helsingin Sanomat / First published in print 6.2.2012


Previously in HS International Edition:
  Train tunnel between Helsinki and Tallinn would cost around EUR 3 billion (24.10.2011)
  Transport problems revive interest in Helsinki-Tallinn tunnel (30.4.2010)

See also:
  No EU funding forthcoming for Helsinki-Tallinn train tunnel (13.1.2009)

Links:
  Geological Survey of Finland

ANNA-RIITTA SIPPOLA / Helsingin Sanomat
anna-riitta.sippola@hs.fi