The government will commission a feasibility study on the proposal to build an underwater tunnel between Malta and Gozo.
Parliamentary Secretary Chris Said has proposed the immediate launch of in-depth technical and financial assessments of the tunnel idea, which he is promoting.
Asked whether the government would commission such a study and who would do it, a spokesman only said a report would be drawn up.
The commissioning of a study is also what an informal group, which has been researching the project for the last year, wants. One of its members, Gozitan businessman Joseph Borg, who has been lobbying for the need of a “permanent link” for over a decade, maintained the report would have been done privately had the government not accepted to commission it. He also said private investment was available.
“The discussion has started and, now that the study will be conducted, we will have achieved what we wanted, irrespective of its findings,” he said.
The initiative was about ensuring Gozo benefited from and contributed to the country’s economy as much as possible, which was not the case now, he said, adding that “those who do not agree are not representative of the situation”.
Mr Borg is also worried about the near future – after the Gozo Channel ferries’ lifespan runs out in a maximum of 15 years.
“About a year ago, we discovered that subsea tunnels do not cost the earth. Of course, we need a specific study on the costs, which would be subject to change, depending on what we find below,” he said.
So far, a tentative figure of €150 million has been mentioned by Dr Said but not everyone has bought it.
Mr Borg insists the project is feasible, both technically and financially, based on international reports of similar constructions and the experiences of other countries. The 7.9-kilometre long Bomlafjord tunnel in Norway, for example, cost $61 million, he said.
A report on the Preliminary Feasibility Considerations on the Development of a Subsea Tunnel Between Gozo and Malta, which he drafted based on meetings with other businessmen and Dr Said, considers the construction of a 10-kilometre-long, three-lane tunnel at a depth of up to 100 metres, envisaged to last up to 150 years and requiring as little as eight minutes to traverse.
It takes into consideration a minimum rock cover of about 50 metres – the maximum in any of the undersea tunnels considered – and the 30 metres depth of the sea in the straight line between Malta and Gozo.
Among other advantages the tunnel would offer, according to the report, is relatively cheaper maintenance costs, the fact it would not disturb the isolation of Comino and that some roads would be relieved of traffic, with access points being inland.
It also argues the tunnel would be an ideal solution because it is the “most environment-friendly option since it in no way disturbs the seabed”.
That point is contested by environmentalist Alan Deidun and described as “hogwash”, especially when considering the blasting and trenching it involves, which would turn parts of it into a construction site.
Dr Deidun, a lecturer at the University’s Physical Oceanography Unit, said the area in question included a number of protected marine habitats, such as caves and reefs.
He said it was “a pity that whoever floated the idea in the first place did not even bother to include marine ecology considerations in the equation.
“One cannot fathom how such a hullabaloo is being stirred about the offshore wind farm, which is sorely needed, while few objections are being raised about the proposed tunnel.”
Experts have given it a lukewarm response and some shot it down, maintaining it is simply not feasible.
The report insists it is “important to define the geological and hydrogeological conditions that must be determined by investigation in situ to confirm the feasibility, the type of work and the optimum mode of execution”.