GUEST COMMENTARY BY FRANCESCO RAMELLA
In this case the investment would be about 20% of that necessary for building the rail line and the cost could be entirely paid by users and not by taxpayers (and if users don't want to pay for a higher level of service and better safety, why build it?). The impact on the territory would be much more limited. No new infrastructure would be built along the valley that leads to the tunnel: present traffic along the existing four-lane highway is a tiny percent of its capacity. The lacked transfer of freight traffic from road to rail would not have any relevant impact in terms of atmospheric pollution: emissions will largely decrease anyway thanks to technological improvement (the emissions of today vehicles are about one fifth those of ten years old trucks and future vehicles will pollute even less). Even if greatly cut down, a minimal impact of traffic on the local population will last occur: the best way to deal with it seems to be increasing tolls and give the money collected to the affected people. Let's think again.
Note: The Frejus Tunnel is a two lane facility between Turin, Italy and Lyon, France, which connects the Italian Autostrada A-32 to the French Autoroute A-43 (European route E-70). It is one of the three principal routes between France and Italy (the others being the Mount Blanc Tunnel, also two lane, to the north and the coastal motorway between Nice and Genoa. 10 June 1005 francesco.ramella@libero.it
| are undertakings of WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY P. O. Box 841 - Belleville, IL 62222 USA Telephone: +1.618.632.8507 - Telephone or Email to Fax Send E-Mail
|