Building new bridges (often of little use) rather than keeping existing ones efficient: a not very brilliant and only Italian habit whose effects are then reminded us when tragedies such as that of the Morandi bridge in Genoa, of the drawbridge of Massa Carrara and of the one sold on the Milan-Meda.
In 2005 the company Padane Center commissioned a study on the third motorway bridge over the Po from the Milanese consultancy TRT Trasporti e Territory, which, after completing it, defined the investment as risky from an economic-financial point of view. The calculation of the IRR, that is the discount rate, in fact made its value null.
It is therefore surprising that now the old project is dusted off by the new dealership of theA21 Brescia-Cremona-Piacenza. With this new work we would have three bridges in 3 (three) km as the crow flies between Cremona and Piacenza, when there would be many others very damaged that would have to be put back in order to avoid what happened with the long closure of the Casalmaggiore bridge.
Furthermore, the construction of an additional bridge would lead to an excessive infrastructure capacity in relation to the current and future needs of light and heavy traffic. Firstly because it is ongoing an optimization of road transport that to reduce management costs and environmental damage is increasing the load factor for each truck and slowly reducing the number of transits. The traffic analysis of the Emilia Romagna region 10 years ago, they had already cut off the presumed usefulness of the third bridge, given that this area was crossed every day by 21,550 vehicles (of which 1,300 trucks), of which less than 20% would use the new route.
The traffic demand forecasts of the old project (43,700 vehicles per day by 2033) are largely overestimated precisely to justify the need for the work. As far as car traffic is concerned, it would be advisable to reopen it before facilitating it unnecessarily the Cremona-Piacenza line to rail traffic with one train per hour. Thus it would constitute a valid alternative to the automobile. The line is fast, electrified, with low running costs and almost without level crossings.
Its reopening is instead in fact opposed by the two neighboring regions, Lombardy and Emilia Romagna. They both have in fact their own railway company (Trenord and TPER) which does not intend to manage it: an attitude in contrast with the guidelines of the NRP which would instead want a greater use of sustainable rail transport. In any European country 29 km of railway network between two provincial capitals in a highly developed area would be super exploited for mobility.
A European tender for its reopening would be the best solution to relaunch the section, in line with the railway liberalization that has made great strides forward in local and rail transport throughout Europe, except in Italy (see the bankruptcy management of the Lombard railways
by Trenord). The national priority for Trenitalia, on the other hand, it seems to be only that of high speed.
As for the 10 km route of the third bridge project – from the cost of 360 million euros – they seem to have been dusted off only to draw on funds from the NRP. Among other things, the route crosses a very delicate territory such as the floodplain area of the Po, the EU protected areas, the ecological corridors and many fertile soils.
The municipality of Cremona recently stated that the Pums (Urban mobility plan) provides for “the promotion of connection structures between the Castelvetro (PC) motorway exit and the production and port area of Cremona”. With this declaration, the left-wing administration takes sides in favor of a work already rejected by history, useless, very expensive and with a significant environmental impact.
In this area there is already a river port and an unused stretch of waterway. Only the neighboring areas are used, designed for rail / river / road intermodality but instead become the site of a large steel mill that cannot even count on strong sea winds that dispose of harmful emissions more quickly.
Written with Maria Grazia Bonfante di Vescovato