Boost for campaigners over Forth Road Bridge lifespan

CAMPAIGNERS have welcomed news that the lifespan of the Forth Road Bridge may be longer than first thought.

Campaigners against an additional Forth crossing said news of the cable erosion happening slower than anticipated negated the need for a second road bridge.

The Forth Estuary Transport Authority said today the wearing away of crucial cables, which had expected to be the reason for the bridge to close in just over a decade, was not happening as fast.

This, campaigners said, would mean that any argument for a new bridge would have to be based on traffic levels alone rather than the need for a replacement, adding that this strengthened their hand as far as an environmental argument went.

The Scottish Government has already stated that work on the £4.2 billion bridge would begin in 2011 and take roughly five years to complete.

Feta's chief engineer and bridgemaster Barry Colford has met with the umbrella group ForthRight Alliance, who oppose the plans.

He said: "Although the cables are still losing strength, the worst case scenario of an HGV ban in 2014 now looks unlikely.

"However, although there is a good reason to be confident that dehumidification will greatly extend the lifespan of the cables, we still won't know for sure how effective this has been until it has been given time to work and the cables are reinspected in 2011/12.

"The bridge's long term structural integrity also depends on the outcome of precautionary checks on the bridge's anchorages and we won't know the results of this until 2011/12 either."

An additional crossing has long been seen as a dual answer to both the lifespan problems of the current bridge and the horrendous congestion problems during rush hour and when road works are taking place.

In 2004, an internal inspection revealed the cables had lost eight per cent of their strength and that if deterioration continued, limitations would have to be put in place on the weights of vehicles crossing the bridge.

However, opponents of the new bridge, which would be built to the west of the two current structures, said that the congestion argument was not a valid one.

They pointed out the more provision made for vehicles the more people would use them, and that it would merely discourage people from using public transport.

Laurence Marshall, acting chairman of ForthRight Alliance, said the new report gave their campaign a significant boost.

He said: "It think it is becoming clear the argument for a new bridge is going to have to be based on (increased) traffic levels (rather than corrosion)."

And a spokesman for Friends of the Earth Scotland added: "It is clear from the evidence that the impact of a second Forth road bridge in terms of traffic, congestion and green house gas emissions would be contrary to government policy.

"The studies commissioned by Feta show that the strength in the existing bridge cable can be retained or added to without excessive traffic impacts."