Lower Thames Crossing Facts

Cost - £9 billion (at least)

The LTC would cost £9 billion according to the latest estimate submitted by National Highways to the DCO examination [1], making the scheme more expensive per mile than the cancelled HS2 project. However this figure is likely to be hugely underestimated as it dates from 2020 when the outline business case was produced. Similarly, an extremely low and unrealistic predicted inflation rate has been used [2], from 2.08% in 2026, levelling out at around 2.5% by 2034. The Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) in their Analysis of the National Infrastructure and Construction Pipeline 2023 [3] reported that construction materials costs had increased by 40% since 2020.

Sources

[1] Funding Statement, 2.1.1, National Highways, October 2022

[2] Economic Appraisal Report, Table 6.1, National Highways, October 2022

[3] Analysis of the National Infrastructure and Construction Pipeline 2023, Infrastructure and Projects Authority, February 2024

Costs likely to increase as scheme incomplete

The overall cost of the LTC is likely to increase as necessary supporting road upgrades have been removed or not included, such as the Tilbury Link Road [4] and the Blue Bell Hill scheme [5], to reduce the cost and artificially inflate the already low Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR).

Sources

[4] https://www.thamescrossingactiongroup.com/tilbury-link-road/

[5] https://www.thamescrossingactiongroup.com/blue-bell-hill-improvements-consultation-response/

Low value for money

The Benefit Cost Ratio (BCR) is just 0.48, meaning that for every £1 spent only 48p is returned to the economy. The adjusted BCR, inflated by including ‘wider economic benefits’, agglomeration etc (with little supporting evidence), is just 1.22 [6]. This puts the LTC in the DfT’s Low value for money category [7]. It is a myth that the LTC is vital for the UK economy. The project would be a drain on the economy and would swallow up limited funds for transport, meaning better value and more sustainable projects cannot go ahead.

Sources

[6] Combined Modelling and Appraisal Report,Table 7.17, National Highways, October 2022

[7] DfT’s Value for Money Framework, Box 5.1, Department for Transport, 2015

LTC would not relieve congestion long term

Using traffic modelling data provided by National Highways, Thurrock Council have reached the conclusion that the LTC would take as little as 4% of traffic away from the Dartford Crossing [8]. They also concluded that the Dartford Crossing would be back to today’s level of traffic within 5 years of the LTC opening, if it goes ahead [9]. Instead the LTC would massively increase traffic on the roads in Thurrock and Gravesham, with inadequate infrastructure to allow traffic to migrate between the crossings if any incidents occur [10].

Sources

[8] https://www.thamescrossingactiongroup.com/ltc-not-fit-for-purpose/

[9] https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/24069270.lower-thames-crossing-will-relieve-congestion-five-years/

[10] https://www.thamescrossingactiongroup.com/incidents-ltc-dartford-crossing/

Carbon emissions

The total carbon emissions caused by the LTC are 6.6 million tonnes over the project’s lifetime [11]. The construction emissions amount to 1.763 million tonnes [12], and the operational emissions from the extra traffic total 4,833,762 tonnes [13].

Sources

[11] Environmental Statement - Climate Chapter 15, 5.6.19, National Highways, October 2022

[12] Environmental Statement - Climate Chapter 15, 15.6.2, National Highways, October 2022

[13] Environmental Statement - Climate Chapter 15, Table 15.16, National Highways, October 2022

Lack of consideration of non-road alternatives

National Highways’ evidence to the examination reported that the last - and only - time non-road alternatives were considered was fifteen years ago, in 2009 [14]. A rail link was briefly considered then, but then immediately dismissed. Since then only various routes for road options have been considered despite the dramatically changed climate, and the need to reduce traffic and rapidly decarbonise.

To relieve the Dartford Crossing, a better option would be to invest in infrastructure to get more freight on rail. This would deliver better economic outcomes, be better value for money, and would deliver the modal shift and carbon reductions Labour are committed to. For passengers, a tram crossing, the proposed Thames Gateway Tramlink by KenEx has also been developed, at a fraction of the cost of the LTC, and with a better business case.

Sources

[14] Statement of Reasons, 5.13.4, National Highways, October 2022

**LTC would increase collisions**

The DCO planning application showed that National Highways calculate that the LTC would actually increase collisions, causing 26 more fatalities, 182 serious injuries, and 2,464 slight injuries - over the 60 year appraisal period [15]. It is the only major road scheme to make safety worse.

Sources

[15] Combined Modelling and Appraisal Report, Table 7.7, National Highways, October 2022

**LTC would worsen air quality**

National Highways' Appraisal Summary Table Report states there would be an increase in air pollution: 89,786 tonnes of NO2 over the 60 year appraisal period, and 64,450 tonnes of PM2.5 [16].

Sources

[16] Appraisal Summary Table Report, page 7, National Highways, October 2022

Biodiversity and landscape impacts

The LTC would directly harm some of our most important habitats and landscapes such as the Thames Estuary Marshes Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar site. It would also cross the Kent Downs National Landscape (formally Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, or AONB). It would also destroy 5.35ha of irreplaceable ancient woodland, including the newly designated The Wilderness ancient woodland, and the Woodland Trust owned Shorne and Ashenbank Woods SSSI.

LTC DCO planning application

Much has been made about the length of the DCO planning application for the LTC, with it being used as an excuse to push planning reforms that would cut environmental protections and democratic participation. Some have claimed the planning application totalled 2,383 documents and 359,000 pages. This myth originated from a roads lobby group called Britain Remade, but has been repeated - unchecked - by mainstream media, including in the Times, FT, and politicians.

The planning application (DCO application) was actually 554 documents (not 2,383 claimed) [17]. Britain Remade had misleadingly included all the evidence submitted to the 6-month long examination, including many duplications and rebuttals of evidence. They did not count the documents in the actual planning application itself.

TAN has fact checked the number of pages in the DCO planning application, and has discovered that Britain Remade exaggerated the page total sixfold. The DCO planning application is actually 63,330 pages long, not the 359,000 claimed. You can see our figures here, and more detail on our LTC Myths and Facts page.

However it is not surprising the planning application for this project is large. It is the longest, most ambitious and costly road scheme ever proposed. It is 23 kilometres long, costing more than £9 billion. It impacts on internationally important habits, national landscapes, and ancient woodland. It increases deaths and injuries, air pollution and carbon emissions. It would cost the country well over £9 billion, while having an extremely weak business case.

Sources

[17] The full DCO planning application documents can be viewed here on the Planning Inspectorate website

Throwing good money after bad

Claims have also been made that £800 million has been spent on the LTC planning application. Unfortunately this, once again, is false. In fact, freedom of information requests [18] have revealed that this £800m cost included other significant expenditure, not just the two planning applications. The biggest costs so far are for technical surveys and investigations - £307.4m (+VAT which brings the total to £368.88m). These costs are non-recoverable and known as "sunk costs", so will not be added to the final bill for the LTC, skewing its poor BCR. These huge costs are unsurprising for the UK’s longest road tunnel, going deep under the Thames plus 13km of new motorway standard road. The £800m spent to date also includes land and property purchase costs (£97.9 million + VAT) as many have been intimidated out of their homes despite the project’s uncertainty. The planning applications cost £245.3m (+ VAT), up to February 2023, and the many consultations are a tiny part of the costs so far (£27m, or just under 4% of the money spent).

Sources

[18] Freedom of Information response from National Highways, 27 March 2024

The LTC is a Smart Motorway by stealth

The LTC is being designed to Smart Motorway standards (3 lanes, no hard shoulder). National Highways deny it is a Smart Motorway, but it is in all but name having the same technology, the same refuges, 3 lanes wide, with no hard shoulder [19].

Source

[19] https://www.thamescrossingactiongroup.com/ltc-smart-motorway/