Opponents to the Lower Thames Crossing project have called for an immediate review of it amid fears about its environmental impact.
A coalition of conservation groups want Transport Secretary Mark Harper to rethink the Lower Thames Crossing plan.
They are concerned the proposed 14-mile tunnel linking Kent and Essex will destroy ancient woodland and other habitats while increasing pollution. The route has been in discussion for more than 10 years, is estimated to open in 2029 or 2030.
National Highways said the crossing would be the “greenest road” in the UK. Umm, how?
The coalition, which includes the Campaign for Rural England (CPRE) and the Woodland Trust, said a range of habitats and landscapes in Kent and Essex were under threat, and the project could become “England’s most damaging road scheme for a generation”.
In a letter to the Transport Secretary, they said “We are troubled both by the impacts of the scheme, the huge cost and low economic benefits, and by a consultative approach taken thus far that has been far from transparent.”
Emissions figures, obtained through a Freedom of Information request, found the new route was estimated to create five million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) over a 60-year period.
it is not reasonable to expect a project of this scale to go to examination without full detail of its impacts
However, project officials have proposed planting swathes of farmland to soak up the pollution. Critics say that this farmland will eventually be turned into housing or business districts once the road is built.
Jack Taylor, lead campaigner at the Woodland Trust, said “We’re fighting both a nature and climate crisis, and destruction of ancient woodland and veteran trees for a road scheme beggars belief.”
Mark Bottomley, deputy director for the Lower Thames Crossing project, said there was an “urgent need” for the crossing, which would create a “reliable new route between people, jobs and businesses”.
Mr Bottomley said an application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) had now been submitted and the plans would be examined by independent, government-appointed experts.
