Ecrl Northern Alignment More Than Meets The Eye

---

 

From Sheila Danker
There has been plenty of hullabaloo recently on social media and in the mainstream 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 corner, is the Selangor state government which is insistent on the southern alignment which passes through the southern parts of the state.
At the crux of the matter is the issue of which alignment can deliver the best economic and social impact while minimising environmental degradation.
At the risk of falling prey to impassioned political stances which usually dictate the ebb and flow of policymaking in this country, I am writing this as objectively as possible – prioritising facts over petty partisan politics.
Economic gain
If the northern alignment is followed, the ECRL will 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 nine million tonnes of cargo that will be shipped 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 than the southern alignment.
As such, the project cost when viewed on a per station basis favours the northern alignment at RM2.08 billion per station against RM2.37 billion per station 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 a smooth, safe and cost-effective rail freight link to Port Klang with flexible travel slots and short movement times. It will also enhance the safety of commuters in KL Sentral since 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 cost of construction as additional environmental reporting and other due diligence processes can be done simultaneously, with less financial hassle.
Social impact
Secondly, 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 under the southern alignment.
It also impacts fewer Orang Asli villages – two for the northern alignment against seven for the southern alignment. As for Malay reserve land, only two will be affected under the northern alignment compared with three for the southern alignment.
Environmental impact
The EIA is transparent with its findings where it concluded that the northern alignment has minimal environmental degradation. The proposed Gombak land bridge 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 traverses through 1.85km of forest reserves compared with the southern alignment’s 4.33km. In terms of water catchment areas – which is a crucial aspect for all Selangor residents who despise water cuts – the northern alignment passes through 65% of the state’s water catchment areas. Comparatively, the southern alignment is expected to pass through up to 95% of Selangor’s water catchment areas, 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 of the two, economically, and with a less negative environmental and social impact.
My only hope now is that policymakers can set aside their political loyalties and be guided by facts when deciding on the ECRL alignment. - FMT
Sheila Danker is an FMT reader.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.

---