Hopefully, I am paranoia (Suspicion of others that is not based on fact), for the last two weeks there seem to be some concerted efforts in preparing Penangites for the cancellation of the second bridge. Read some of the articles below.I remember calling my branch chairman and division youth leader that I will resign from Gerakan if the Second Bridge was not built. We would have failed the rakyat. This happened not too long ago when King Samy announced the expansion of the first bridge and the cancellation of the second bridge. Later, King Samy announced that the second bridge will not be canceled.
The second bridge will definitely divert traffic from the first bridge and help reduce accident. We will then see two bridges with generally smoother traffic.
Another important reason for the second bridge is that if something unthinkable happened to the first bridge, Penang will not be crippled. There are many other reasons to have the second bridge, I will not discuss it now, it will make this posting too long.
Lim Guan Eng, please don't do anything that can jeopardizes the Second Bridge. If there are delays to a certain extant, most Penangites can accept it. Please ensure NO CANCELLATION. You will feel the WRATH of many Penangites if you cancel it.
Malaysiakini, Apr 28, 08 3:21pm
Second bridge cancellation a blessing Om Prakash
I refer to the letter Penang doesn't need a second bridge at all.
Indeed it is true for with another bridge its only going to bring more chaos and damage to the environment and quality of life in Penang Island.
In fact, the industrial zone in the island should by right be re-located to the mainland for easy access to the port and to avoid heavy traffic on the bridge.
Please let us just stop at the widening of the current bridge and apply stringent traffic-control on the bridge and for the whole of the island supported by a high standard of ferry-service management....
...Let’s officially announce the cancellation of the Second Penang Bridge soon. If the current government of Penang is serious about improving and preserving Penang Island, it must support the cancellation of the Second Bridge project.
Letter to Malaysiakini and newspaper
Penang doesn't need a second bridge at all
SM Mohamed Idris, Apr 23, 08 3:53pm
We refer to the letter Improve ferry service to augment Penang Bridge.
It has been reported that the planned second Penang bridge will cost RM4.3 billion. This is a staggering sum of money by any standards, even more so when one considers that a second bridge is not what Penang needs.
Another bridge will only bring more traffic congestion to the already car-choked streets of Penang island. It has been suggested that the ongoing widening of the existing Penang Bridge will not suffice as the bridge will become congested again in a few years.
If so, then the same logic equally applies to a second bridge which will also become clogged up eventually under current trends. What would the authorities' solution be then - build yet another bridge while Penangites struggle with bumper-to-bumper traffic?
There has to be a better option than constructing a second bridge. And there is. For one, the existing ferry service should be upgraded. More ferries can be obtained for this purpose, and more ferry terminals built at strategic points on the island and the mainland. There should also be adequate bus services to and from the terminals.
If indeed a third link between Penang island and Seberang Perai is deemed necessary, then it should be a light rail link, one that transports people rather than congestion-causing private cars. Like with the ferry service, buses and possibly an extended light rail system should service both ends of the cross-channel link.
In short, the focus must be on improving the public transport system in Penang. This is a much more efficient, cost-effective and environmentally sustainable way of ferrying people from point A to point B, especially in this time of skyrocketing oil prices and global warming.
In this regard, RM4.3 billion, or even a portion thereof, would be able to fund a quality public transport network that will efficiently serve Penangites. It may not be as glamorous as an ‘iconic’ second bridge, but it would be more people-friendly, and that is surely what matters most.
The writer is president, Consumers Association of Penang.
Anil Netto's blog, Tuesday, 15 April 2008
Ten reasons why the second Penang bridge is not a great idea
1. It will add to traffic congestion on the island. Even with an additional third lane, the existing Penang Bridge is expected to become congested again in a few years. That’s the rationale given for building a new bridge. But then, what will happen to the roads on Penang Island with all that traffic coming in? Green Lane and Scotland Road are already congested with no room for further widening. Has an independent EIA and traffic study - analysing the impact on surrounding areas and roads on the mainland and the island - been carried out for this project?
2. We should be moving away from private vehicle transport and turning to public transport, not spending more money on infrastructure for private cars.
3. Higher global oil prices costs will burden bridge users, what more if the bridge is more than 22-24km (17km over water) long. Oil prices will rise even further in coming years while Malaysia will become a net importer of oil in a few years.
4. Toll charges on the second bridge are likely to be much higher than the RM7 on the existing bridge (a rate of RM9.40 has been mentioned), bearing in mind that the proposed bridge is over twice as long as the Penang Bridge. How many regular bridge users will be able to afford the higher toll and petrol charges?
5. Higher toll rates on the new bridge will lead to hikes in the existing Penang Bridge toll (from RM7.00 to RM9.40 and no more 20 per cent discount for Touch ‘n’ Go users?) and ferry fares. (If the Penang Bridge toll and ferry fare is lower, few people will want to use the new bridge.)
6. That would mean the tolls for the existing Penang Bridge will continue indefinitely even though the cost of the bridge has been recovered many, many times over.
7. In July 2007, the estimated cost of the second bridge was RM2.7 billion. By October/November 2007, it had crept up to RM3 billion. By January 2008, it was between RM3 billion and RM4 billion. And now, it is at about RM4.3 billion! How much will the final cost come to upon completion of the bridge? (An expert familiar with bridge building told me that the cost of materials for a new bridge, based on the estimated built area, would quite likely be less than RM1 billion. So how do we get RM4.3 billion? Can we have a breakdown of this figure?) How were the contracts awarded to a joint-venture comprising China Harbour Engineering Corp, a unit of the state-owned China Communications Construction Group (CCCG), and United Engineers Malaysia Bhd, also a state-controlled company? The lack of open tenders could lead to inflated contract estimates. Penangites could end up saddled with the cost of the bridge and higher tolls for years to come while the toll revenues go to UEM/Putrajaya. The people of Penang could well have to stump out many times the cost of the new bridge in tolls, just as they have for the existing bridge. And what is the additional cost of making the bridge resistant to major earthquakes?
8. The new bridge is likely to hurt the fishing industry in the southeast of the island, where fisher folks are already complaining about drastically reduced catches as a result of land reclamation. A Bernama report on 17 January said that the start of the second Penang bridge project had been delayed as the state government wanted to resolve several matters involving fishermen as well as fish and cockle breeders who would be affected by the project. Former chief minister Koh Tsu Koon said the project could affect the livelihood of 1,500 fishermen and the breeders, who were worried the project could threaten the area’s ecosystem. Will this deplete fish stocks and lead to higher seafood prices in Penang, making it affordable only to the elite? Has a study been done on the impact of the bridge on fisheries in the state?
9. The money spent on the bridge would be better spent on quality public transport, social housing (instead of creating more high-rise slums), public health care and schools.
10.The projected carbon footprint, the increased traffic, and the impact on global warming of this project is likely to be enormous. How many tons of raw material including metal, concrete, cable, electricity and fuel will be consumed in the construction of the bridge?
Building new roads and bridges to cope with congestion is not a viable long-term solution. Such infrastructure will rapidly get congested again, and then we are back to square one. There is a limit to the road surface area that Penang Island can take. And how much will all this cost in the long run and how will it affect the quality of life when more and wider roads are built, eating up precious green spaces?So what is the alternative?
If at all a third link (the ferry service and the Penang Bridge are the first two) is necessary, how about a light rail link parallel to the existing Penang Bridge? This would encourage people to use public transport to commute between the island and the mainland.
This rail link could be connected by buses/trams/light rail to industrial areas and urban centres on the island and on the mainland.
The ferry services should be expanded. Bangkok makes full use of river transport, but Penang has not tapped the full potential of sea-based public transport. More ferry terminals should be set up at different points of the island and on the mainland so that ferries can criss-cross the channel instead of being confined to the Butterworth-George Town route. Buses and trams at the ferry terminals could shuttle people to their ultimate destinations.
What do you think?
Read also: Second Penang Bridge
