English Channel Tunnel - Negative Op-Ed

[Gilbert B Norman]

Saturday's New York Times carried a negative op-ed piece regarding the English Channel Tunnel. This is surprising insomuch as the Times has taken positions that can be described as "pro mass transit".

The most interesting opinion offered by the columnist is that he believes the Tunnel's economic failure can be attributed in part to that is was not designed for vehicular traffic.

However, anyone having crossed the Channel must wonder at the thought of several "exhaust towers" interfeering with navigation that often resembles your favorite freeway at rush hour. Wouldn't that be "sport" if a vessel laden with petroleum or other environmentally unfriendly substances were to collide with one of these towere?

Anycase, here is a link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/10/opinion/10WOLM.html

[draintree]

In something of a reversal, the main advantage the chunnel train has over all other forms of travel between London and Paris is speed. The trip only takes two hours and 35 minutes.

In terms of experience, as the columnist noted, tourists travelling from London to Paris, prefer the ferry to make sure they see the white cliffs of Dover and feel the sea. After all, why go through the expense of travelling thousands of miles to get there just to see another tunnel?

The plane is a pain but flying from London to Paris can be jaw-droppingly cheap — like $12.28 cheap. Sometimes even cheaper. Check out this website for Britain's answer to Southwest and Jet Blue: http://www.easyjet.com/en/book/index.asp

If you want to check out the fares from London to Paris, take my advice and select Paris as your destination city first and then go looking for London in the departure category.

The rock-bottom fare for the chunnel train is $40.00 each way but it's only good from travel between 11:00 AM and 3:00 PM Monday through Thursday with an overnight stay before coming back. Usually, the trip will run you about a hundred or so.