Blog 024 - Why we need Crossrail 2

As part of the revised “bail out” of TfL, the Dept for Transport has mandated that TfL must cease works on Crossrail 2 for the duration of the funding arrangement. Whilst this is only a temporary disbandment of the project, it is an unfortunate delay and a further hurdle to jump to get the project back on the agenda at a later date.

The project is industrially important and I for one am against its delay or possible “shelving”. The UK has been operating significant tunnelling projects of this nature since the inception of Crossrail, a project that has done little to promote the cost certainty that the Government might be looking for when deciding the future of Crossrail 2.

The omnipresence of tunnelling projects over the last ten years has enabled an entire industry to develop, the absence of a tunnelling project may risk the resources still being there later when the ministers decide to take this project off the shelf.

Over the last 10 years, we have been lucky enough in the South East to have had Crossrail, the Thames Tideway Super Sewer, High Speed 2 and the pending project for the Lower Thames Crossing. The North having the benefit of the Woodsmith Mine project and the potential 109km United Utilities project. To deliver these jobs, the industry has adapted and grown, to not progress the Crossrail 2 project could result in:

1. Loss of engineering talent – Throughout the development of the various London tunnelling projects, engineers of all levels have developed. At the outset of Crossrail, it was clear there had been loss of skillset in design, this could be seen for example in the designs for the diaphragm wall shafts, a technique which hadn’t been widely used since the Jubilee Line Extension. As the other schemes have progressed since Crossrail, the standard of initial design has increased, the focus on early contractor involvement and the new data available from the projects, these are all vital skillsets that need repetition to continue to develop and pass on to the next generation of engineers. As part of Crossrail, the Tunnelling Academy was opened, all the people that have passed through this institution over the duration of the project have formed part of the UK’s now highly skilled tunnelling workforce. There will be engineers, site hands, mechanics, geologists, operatives, operators and many more that are now leading experts in tunnelling and specifically in tunnelling beneath major historic cities, that risk either leaving the industry or moving to counties with active tunnelling projects.

2. Atrophy of the Investments and the Supply Chain – The contractors and suppliers that have been part of the projects will have made significant investments in plant, machinery, Intellectual Property, facilities and education. The loss of such a substantial project risks the sale of or redundancy of these investments. Consider this simple example, the excavation of access shafts and tunnels requires the procurement and operation of the following plant and services (excluding the obvious tunnel boring machines); long reach excavators, clamshell buckets, digging support fluid, muck away lorries, tunnel segment factories, concrete batching facilities, concrete wagons and landfill sites. All of these items just couldn’t be kept in service by the private “basement building” and earthworks sector. We risk a mass mothballing of facilities.

3. The possible near miss of Tunnelling as an export – As we approach Brexit (looming ever closer), we must consider our nations exports. Britain’s main export have for a long time been service based. With manufacturing never likely to be cheap enough to compete for mass exports, tunnelling as a service could be a very real exportable service, Britain has along CV and heritage as international engineers. However, tunnelling as an export is not quite ready and only through the experience gained from another major infrastructure project could the framework for exporting the geotechnical engineering become a reality.

During times such as these, it is easy to understand why cut backs are made and projects that have little sunk cost and no construction underway are the easiest and lowest costs projects to shelve, however, I urge the Government to consider the “sunk cost” model fr

om a different perspective, consider the ten years of investment in the tunnelling and shaft building sector that have brought us to this point and the potential costs of remobilising and retraining a tunnelling industry in the event of a hiatus in major infrastructure tunnelling. Let’s think more about how we can develop an internationally exportable tunnelling industry and focus on selling it a service to the visionaries of the world such as “The Boring Company” and the developing worlds as they make moves to link their countries with high speed rail and taking vehicles off the roads. As National Tunnelling Day (4th December…. Who knew?) lets all take the time to think about what we can do to safeguard this very specialist industry that has a rich history in Britain and importantly beneath London.

If you’re a specialist contractor and want to discuss any of the above or ways to manage the changing demands of your business going forward, drop me an email.