The future of Lyon-Turin can now be summed up in one word: the scenario of large dimensions. Because while the work on the main work has already begun, there is still the question of the accesses of this ancient sea snake which remained unsolved for several months.
“This project was declared of public utility in 2013 and since then almost nothing has happened in 10 years on the French side”, remembers Stéphane Guggino, general delegate of the Transalpine, an association that brings together actors and communities in favor of the project. Because if the main tunnel has been decided in addition to the Italian accesses, it is still not the same for the French infrastructures, which will have to connect the new project to the regional railway lines, already largely saturated.
“The government had instructed the regional prefect in 2020 to set up a steering committee that would bring together local authorities, parliamentarians and all the actors involved in the dossier”, recalls Stéphane Guggino.
Three scenarios presented, only one to be preferred
It is in this context that various access scenarios have been presented, following studies conducted by SNCF Réseau. Among these, two that stood out in particular: a so-called mixed traffic scenario, transiting through Chambéry and allowing mixed traffic between passengers and goods (17 million tons of goods per year) as well as a so-called “wide gauge” .
More expensive (6.7 billion euros), it would eventually bypass the metropolis of Chambéry through three tunnels, focuses mainly on freight to offer greater transport capacity (28 million tons per year).
And it is precisely this option that seems to have been validated, during the discussions held behind closed doors last week, by Minister Clément Beaune and by the local authorities present (and in particular by the cities of Lyon, Grenoble and Chambéry, as well as by the departments of Isère, Haute-Savoie, Savoie and Ain, as well as the Auvergne Rhône-Alpes region).
A choice that would not be unanimous, however, since the metropolis of Chambéry, as well as the department of Haute-Savoie, which has thus nurtured the ambition to improve their passenger service thanks to these new infrastructures, remain hungry.
The LR Mayor of Chambéry, Thierry Repentin, had already stated that he would contribute to the financing of the Lyon-Turin access only under these conditions, and told the press that the mixed scenario “it would have made it possible to have TER which are finally competitors of the motorway between Lyon and the Northern Alps“arguing elsewhere that the large-scale scenario was” not solution that had been registered on the occasion of the declaration of public utility, which provided for a mixed gallery “.
For his part, the president of LR of the department of Savoy and former Minister of Economy and Finance, Hervé Gaymard, is fully in favor of this new scenario: “We believe that in this dossier priority should be given to freight transport, which thus passes quickly through the center of Chambéry. Furthermore, Savoie is already 2h50 from Paris with the existing line, and the works included in the 600 million euro Saint-André le Gaz – Chambéry section – which fall within this scenario – will already allow for an improvement in daily transport.“, Considers Hervé Gaymard in La Tribune.
The question of the round table and the accumulated delay
From now on, the whole question will therefore be summarized in two phases: knowing how the round table will really complete a scenario that could reach 10 billion euros (if we count the accesses to the east ring road of Lyon, which could be integrated in this project in a convex way, with other issues such as some works between Saint-André le Gaz and Chambéry, as well as between Dijon and Modane).
But even when these new railway infrastructures will be able to come into operation and play the role for which they are expected, while the delivery of the main Lyon-Turin facility is now scheduled between 2030 and 2032.
“The Italians have already made the decisions about their accesses and have ensured that they are delivered at the same time as the tunnel. For France the question is no longer really whether the accesses will be delivered on time, but rather to know how to deliver as soon as possible. .... “, warns Stéphane Guggino, who also reminds us that the challenge will be to decide by the end of 2022, in order not to miss the train of European subsidies.
Because concretely it will take a dozen years before the accesses, which in particular involve the construction of three tunnels in Belledonne, Chartreuse and in the Glandon massif, are completed.
“All that Bercy awaits is the signing of an implementing act, which would correspond to the start of the works in two years for about 20 million euros.“, Adds Hervé Gaymard.
200 million a year for “the project of the century”
On the side of the budget, “The European Union had already indicated in 2019 during the general assembly of the Transalpina that the works of the French section were eligible for 50% of European aid”remembers Stéphane Guggino.
Also in this case, the scenario that emerges could be that of a financing of 50% from Europe and 50% from the State, with an internal distribution to be considered with the local authorities concerned. “It will hardly go to 50-50 between state and community, the whole question will be to see between a distribution of 70-30 or 80-20”, summarizes an observer of the dossier.
However, the department of Savoy adds: “We must decide as soon as possible now, because it cannot be said that a great country like France cannot put 200 million a year for 10 years to finance the great project of the century ”. While ensuring that local authorities are also committed to this issue, “commensurate with one’s abilities“, in particular on the passenger routes concerned, but not on freight transport, which remains the responsibility of the State.
“We must not forget that at the time the Italians had accepted a higher distribution key for them, because they felt they did not have access to the Prealps, which are more complicated, to finance. But they could also decide to reconsider this choice if France it does not do its part“, Someone next to the file adds.
The environmental issue lurking?
Finally, there is an outstanding question: that of the environmental issue, which has been the subject, since the beginning of the project, of numerous demonstrations and reports by groups of citizens and elected representatives (ecologists, LFI in particular) opposed to the project.
With, as the latest, the draft resolution presented by the LFI deputy for the 6th district of the Rhône Gabriel Amard, which collected the signatures of almost 80 Nupes deputies to ask for a commission of inquiry on the impacts of the project under the law on water in particular.
Could the question, which has yet to pass before the ranks of the Assembly, put a new thorn in the side of the project? “When we build infrastructure, we inevitably have an impact on the environment, so let’s not fool ourselves. But you have to look at the gains made and anything that can be improved should be improved, and this project has set a particularly high level in this regard. “believes the delegate general of the Transalpina, who disputes the claims of drainage made on the site.
From there to disturb the construction of the three tunnels necessary for the project? He does not believe it:The construction of the three tunnels can be delayed over time in the form of phasing, but what the declaration already stated in 2013 was that this project was of public utility and urgent. The Lyon-Turin was built, from the beginning, as a global project that envisaged a tour consistent with the question of access, but these interventions could well pollute the debate“.
In front of the Municipality of Lyon, whose ecological mayor Grégory Doucet mentioned, in addition to the environmental impact of the project, the need to strengthen the regulations in favor of modal shift as a “sine qua non” condition for the success of the future LGV during his exchange with Clément Beaune last weekStéphane Guggino abounds:
“Our position has always been to say that without infrastructure nothing is done, but also that infrastructure does not do everything. We also need accompanying measures, currently under discussion at European level, such as the ecological taxation issue, and “polluter pays” principle, with a carbon cost to be determined. But this cannot be done without infrastructure “.
A bit the same for Hervé Gaymard, since the president of the Department of Savoy recalls that with the announced closure of the Mont Blanc tunnel (for works, ed), it is in the interest of the hauliers, even without legal obligation, to be able to make the longest possible route by freight (and which could, in this large gauge scenario, allow them to load trucks from East Lyon to Turin):
“This work is all the more important in view of the sooner or later closure of the Chamonix valley, which could be classified as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It is to be feared that if trucks are banned in the Mont Blanc tunnel, the traffic is postponed and could completely encumber Savoy if there is no response to freight transport “.
–
