Proposed fixed sea links between Great Britain and Ireland
Possible routes
North Channel (Galloway) route
This route, a distance of 21 miles (34 km), has been proposed variously as either a tunnel or a bridge.[1] A 2010 report by the Centre for Cross Border Studies estimated building a bridge between Galloway and Ulster would cost just under £20.5 billion.[2] The proposal would see passengers board trains in Glasgow then cross on the bridge via Stranraer and alight in Belfast or Dublin. A longer bridge already exists between Shanghai and Ningbo in East China. Some political parties in Northern Ireland have included the bridge in their manifesto for some time.[3] However, because of the Beaufort's Dyke sea trench which is approximately 1,000 feet (300 m) deep,[4] this route would be deeper than the southern routes between Wales and Ireland. The sea trench was also used for dumping munitions after World War II, and so would require an expensive cleanup operation.[2] Ronnie Hunter, former chairman of the Institute of Civil Engineers Scotland, suggested that the project was a "stretch but doable". He cited the lack of "soft rock, the chalk and sandstone" as a challenge compared to the construction of the Channel Tunnel.[3] He also suggested that the change in rail gauge between Ireland and Great Britain might pose further concerns. Such a project was considered by railway engineer Luke Livingston Macassey in the 1890s as "a rail link using either a tunnel, a submerged "tubular bridge" or a solid causeway".[5] The north channel crossing was the subject of a 2020 study by the United Kingdom government.[6][7]
North Channel (Kintyre) route
This is the shortest sea route at around 12 miles (20 km), between Kintyre and County Antrim, but would include either the three hour drive on the A83 road around Loch Fyne and over the landslip-prone Rest and Be Thankful mountain pass, or two further new sea crossings via either the Isle of Arran or Cowal.[8][9]
Irish Mail route
This route (from Dublin to Holyhead in Anglesey, Wales) would be about 50 miles (81 km) long.[8] Avoiding the Saint George's Channel immediately to the south of the route would keep the sea depth less than 300 feet (100 m).
Tuskar route
The Institution of Engineers of Ireland's 2004 Vision of Transport in Ireland in 2050 imagines a tunnel to be built between the ports of Fishguard and Rosslare. This route would be approximately twice the distance of the English Channel Tunnel at 45 miles (72 km).[10] A new container port on the Shannon Estuary linking a freight line to Europe is included. This report also includes ideas for a Belfast–Dublin–Cork high-speed train, and for a new freight line from Rosslare to Shannon.
Proposal history
Pre-20th century proposals
The failure of the Union Bill 1799 (which succeeded, the next year, as the Act of Union 1800) prompted a satirical description of a proposal by "architect" William Pitt "to build a bridge from Holyhead to the Hill of Howth."[11]
As part of the unionist movement, various roads were built across Great Britain heading towards Ireland; In 1803 William Madocks started building earthworks for a road to Porthdinllaen; this was rejected by Parliament in 1810 in favour of a London to Holyhead road, which was authorised in 1815, built by Thomas Telford, and opened in 1826.
Between 1886 and 1900, proposals for a link to Scotland were "seriously explored by engineers, industrialists, and Unionist politicians".[12] In 1885, Irish Builder and Engineer said a tunnel under the Irish Sea had been discussed "for some time back".[13] In 1890, engineer Luke Livingston Macassey outlined a Stranraer–Belfast link by tunnel, submerged "tubular bridge", or solid causeway.[14] In 1897 a British firm applied for £15,000 towards the cost of carrying out borings and soundings in the North Channel to see if a tunnel between Ireland and Scotland was viable.[15] The link would have been of immense commercial benefit, was significant strategically and would have meant faster transatlantic travel from the United Kingdom, via Galway and other ports in Ireland.[citation needed] When Hugh Arnold-Foster asked in the Commons in 1897 about a North Channel tunnel, Arthur Balfour said "the financial aspects ... are not of a very promising character".[16]
20th century proposal
In 1915, a tunnel was proposed by Gershom Stewart as a defence against a German U-boat blockade of Ireland but dismissed by H. H. Asquith as "hardly practicable in the present circumstances".[17] In 1918, Stewart proposed that German prisoners of war might dig the tunnel; Bonar Law said the Select Committee on Transport could consider the matter.[18]
The Senate of Northern Ireland debated a North Channel Tunnel on 25 May 1954.[19] In 1956 Harford Hyde, Unionist Westminster MP for North Belfast, raised a motion in the UK House of Commons for a tunnel across the North Channel.[20][21] In 1980, John Biggs-Davison suggested European Economic Community involvement in a North Channel tunnel; Philip Goodhart said no tunnel was planned.[22]
In 1988, John Wilson, the Irish Minister for Tourism and Transport, said his department estimated an Irish Sea tunnel would cost more than twice as much as the English Channel Tunnel and generate less than one-fifth of the revenue, thus being economically unviable.[23] In 1997–98, the Department of Public Enterprise refused to fund a feasibility study requested by the engineering firm Symonds to build an immersed tube tunnel.[24][25]
21st century proposal
Symonds revived the plan in 2000, with an £8 million feasibility study and a £14 billion construction cost estimate.[24] In 2005, the Irish Minister for Transport said he had not studied A Vision of Transport in Ireland in 2050, published in September 2004 by the Irish Academy of Engineering, a report which included a Wexford–Pembroke tunnel.[26]
The proposal of building a bridge between Northern Ireland and Scotland is supported by members of several UK political parties.[27][28] DUP MP Sammy Wilson compared the idea to the approved Channel Tunnel and HS2 projects. The party made a feasibility study into a tunnel or enclosed bridge a precondition to coalition support in the event of a hung parliament in the 2015 election, and again reiterated the potential for a sea bridge in January 2018.[29][30] In January 2018, leading figures in the Democratic Unionist Party revived calls for a bridge or tunnel between Larne in County Antrim and Dumfries and Galloway;[30] the estimated £20 billion cost of the 25 miles (40 km) project would make it among the biggest infrastructure projects in UK history. The link was proposed by Wilson and Simon Hamilton, a former minister for the party in the Stormont administration.
The idea has been further endorsed as a potential solution to boost the economies of Scotland and Northern Ireland after Brexit.[31]
Late 2010s "Celtic Crossing" and Stranraer–Larne Sea Tunnel proposal
|
Main article: Irish Sea Bridge |
The idea for a Scotland to Northern Ireland Bridge, sometimes branded in the press as the Celtic Crossing or Irish Sea Bridge, was revived in 2018, by Professor Alan Dunlop at the University of Liverpool.[33] He proposed a combined road and rail crossing between Portpatrick, in Dumfries and Galloway, and Larne in Northern Ireland, stating that "the coastline between each country is more sheltered and the waterway better protected" than the English Channel, where, as Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson had proposed a bridge. He suggested that this would create a 'Celtic powerhouse' due to the potential for an increase in trade between the two countries, and the increase in investment from the construction of the project which he put at between £15 billion and £20 billion (a fraction of the £120 billion cost of the proposed bridge over the English Channel).[34][31]
By 2020, the British government had begun to officially undertake scoping into the possibility of an Irish Sea Bridge.[35]
In February 2021, the Secretary of State for Scotland announced his support for a 25-mile (40 km) sea tunnel from Stranraer to Larne, citing the weather impact on bridge opening and the need to avoid Beaufort's Dyke munitions dump as reasons for favouring a tunnel over a bridge.[36][37][38] This proposal also received the support of the High-speed rail in the United Kingdom industry group.[39] In September 2021, it was announced that the entire proposal has been abandoned.[40]
It was also reported in February 2021 that a proposal was considered by the government relating to an underground roundabout to be built under the Isle of Man to link Liverpool, Heysham, Stranraer and Larne.[41][42]
The Hendy Review published in November 2021 which looked into the proposals claimed that the cost of the fixed link, in either a bridge or tunnel form, was "impossible to justify" in this area given the sea depth, Beaufort's Dyke, and though noted "the economic viability of the provision of such a link is not within the scope of [the] study", recommended that it would regardless take too long to recoup the costs to justify further research.[43]
2020s Holyhead–Dublin tunnel proposal
In May 2021 the then British Transport Secretary Grant Shapps discussed the case for a tunnel between Holyhead and Dublin along the Irish Mail route.[44]
The proposed tunnel would be a rail tunnel designed to work in much the same way as the Channel Tunnel, with (on the UK side) a main terminus in Liverpool (similar to London St Pancras International) and another in Anglesey (similar to the Eurotunnel Folkestone Terminal). Via the Northern Powerhouse Rail network and High Speed 2 Phase Two extension, the rail line would be able to connect up with the rest of the UK's High-Speed rail network. On the Irish side the train would terminate in a new purpose-built station in Dublin.[45][46]
Although the tunnel would be longer than the length of the proposed Irish Sea Bridge, the water in this area is shallower, and there are less obstructions (such as Beaufort's Dyke). The tunnel would be 50 miles in length (approximately twice the length of the Channel Tunnel and around 20 miles longer than the Seikan Tunnel) and the depth would only need to be around 100m (the Ryfylke Tunnel in Norway reaches 292m below sea level). Rail upgrades or a new line would be needed along the north Welsh coast, as the current North Wales Coast Line is not electrified or suitable for high-speed rail. Depending on the route additional crossings may need to be considered over the River Dee. A platform or cofferdam may also be required in the middle of the tunnel to aid with ventilation and access.[47][48]
Given that this rail link would connect the Republic of Ireland to mainland Europe via the UK, eliminating some of the need for rail and ferry crossings, it has received support from some commentators in Ireland.[49]
