LETTERS: Recently, there has been plenty of hullabaloo in the media on a crucial section of the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL).
In one corner is the federal government, which has reverted to the original northern alignment that passes through Serendah from Port Klang and onwards to the East Coast.
In the other is the Selangor government, which is insistent on the southern alignment that passes through the southern parts of the state.
The crux of the matter is which alignment can deliver the best economic and social impact while minimising environmental degradation.
First, let's look at the economic gain. If the northern alignment is followed, the ECRL would ferry an estimated 5.03 million passengers compared with 4.07 million for the southern alignment.
With regard to freight volume, the northern alignment will see 26.12 million tonnes of cargo being shipped, which is close to three times more than the 9 million tonnes of cargo via the southern alignment.
However, there is the issue of cost. The northern alignment costs slightly more at RM50 billion compared with the southern alignment at RM47.4 billion.
Nevertheless, the northern alignment is longer and passes through more townships and cities, resulting in four more stations.
As such, the project cost on a per station basis favours the northern alignment at RM2.08 billion compared with RM2.37 billion for the southern alignment.
An additional bonus of the northern alignment is that it comes with the Serendah bypass since it passes through the burgeoning town. The Serendah Bypass provides smooth, safe and cost-effective rail freight transportation to Port Klang with flexible travel slots and short movement times.
It will also enhance the safety of commuters in KL Sentral as cargo trains carrying dangerous commodities will no longer go through downtown Kuala Lumpur.
The southern alignment does not include the Serendah bypass. In fact, the Selangor state government has announced that the bypass will be done as a separate project altogether.
As such, the northern alignment is essentially a two-in-one deal with the ECRL and Serendah bypass. It will also greatly reduce the operations costs of construction as additional environmental reporting and other due diligence processes can be done simultaneously with less financial hassle.
Second, let's look at social impact. According to the publicly available environmental impact assessment (EIA) report, the northern alignment only needs to reclaim 11 residential areas compared with 23 for the southern alignment.
It also impacts fewer Orang Asli villages — two for the northern alignment compared with seven for the southern alignment — and Malay reserves — two for the northern alignment compared with three for the southern alignment.
Thirdly, the environmental impact of the project. The EIA is transparent with its findings, where it concluded that the northern alignment has minimal environmental degradation.
The proposed Gombak landbridge is set to reduce encroachment into natural preserves and the alignment will not traverse through the Batu Dam or Klang Gates Quartz Ridge.
The northern alignment also passes through 1.85km of forest reserves compared with the southern alignment's 4.33km.
In terms of water catchment areas — a crucial aspect for Selangorians who despise water cuts — the northern alignment passes through 65 per cent of water catchment areas in the state.
Comparatively, the southern alignment is expected to pass up to 95 per cent of water catchment areas in Selangor, especially since the Serendah bypass is to be implemented as a separate project.
Given these reasons, the northern alignment proves to be the better choice economically and has a less negative environmental and social impact.
SHEILA DANKER
Petaling Jaya, Selangor
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the New Straits Times
