I started following the Kerch bridge construction project more than two years ago. This was explained not only by the philistine interest of a person looking through the news, but also professional goals. I have been doing applied hydrogeology in Israel for several years. Basically, for various construction projects, among which there are both very large-scale and very complex ones, requiring non-standard and complex solutions.
Further, the story will go about my third-party observations of the construction of the Kerch Bridge (KM). I do not participate in this project in any way and the reflections will be purely academic in nature, based on official information. I will immediately warn you that the article will be long, but, in my opinion, interesting. True, at first it may be boring, but with the gradual disclosure of the topic, it will no longer be boring.
I became particularly interested in the construction of KM after watching a well-known video on Youtube with a recording of an interview given by Yuri Medovar, a well-known Russian scientist, senior Researcher Institute water problems RAN. In this interview, Yuri Anatolyevich outlined an extremely unfavorable picture and forecast for the construction of this bridge. He mentioned the fact that the project had already once, in Soviet years(EMNIP, somewhere in the 70s) was turned off by an expert commission, despite the desire of the top party leadership of the USSR to implement this project. The reason for the "wrapping" of the project was mainly due to unfavorable geology.
Among the problems of the project, Yuriy Medovar also listed multi-meter loose silty bottom sediments and the so-called. “quicksand” [note: Quicksand is a drifting liquefied ground composed of colloidal particles of sand and clay that bind larger particles. A mass is formed, supersaturated with water, capable of spreading and moving under the influence of interlayer pressure. ] and mud volcanism [This is when the "mud masses" imprisoned somewhere at a depth between some layers of soil, as a result of some shifts in the layers, are released under enormous pressure and begin to hit like a "volcano". The phenomenon is quite typical for this water area, about which there are many documents and even video evidence on Youtube] .
Among the geological difficulties, Yuri in that interview named the so-called. “karst voids”, but this phenomenon in the bridge construction zone was not further confirmed. Those. karst voids are nearby, but they are located, as I understand it, not at the bottom of the sea, but rather on land. In general, this particular thesis voiced turned out to be incorrect, which was subsequently widely used for numerous criticism, attempts to discredit and outright trolling, not to say real harassment against Yuri Medovar by opponents of all stripes. But more on that later.
Strictly speaking, the notorious karst attracted my main attention. This happened because I was engaged (and am engaged) in one Israeli construction project, where the topic of karst voids in the coastal sea zone repeatedly surfaced and promised major difficulties. I contacted Yuri Medovar and talked to him in more detail and in detail. Then I realized that, despite the absence of karst voids (information on them was not confirmed upon closer examination), the construction project Crimean bridge still looks very problematic. But truly the degree and depth of problematic and dangerous this project became clear to me much later, as I went deeper into the details.
I will try to state everything in the most ordered and correct form.
The review of this project is complicated by the fact that part of important materials absent in open access. Therefore, I will only refer to known facts, materials and publications. To Soviet, and then Russian GOSTs and SNIPs [SNIP - Building Norms and Rules], to publications from official sites related to the construction of the Kerch / Crimean bridge and to Wikipedia materials (especially in the part when it comes to completely simple things). I will try my best to keep things as simple and straightforward as possible. plain language and avoid complex professional terms or explain them.
So, let's start with geology. Because it is she, first of all, who is the Achilles' heel of this project and the reason why the then Soviet expertise wrapped it up. It should be noted here that in the USSR such projects (to connect the peninsula to the mainland with a bridge or to dig some giant strategic canal) were adopted at the level of the Politburo and in order to go against the demands of the top leadership of the Communist Party Soviet Union, the experts had to have serious arguments and have a lot of courage. Yes and just science community must have strong authority and the ability to say “no” without fear for their future and career. But it's in brackets.
In the mid-70s, geosurveys were carried out and then published, in which geoengineers drilled several research wells in the area of the planned construction and conducted a laboratory analysis of soil samples to establish their physical properties. Max Depth drilling reached about 70 meters.
The results of the study were published and, until recently, were available at the link also in the article on the construction of the KM on Wikipedia. After some time, the link from the article disappeared, but I kept both the link itself and the article so as not to delve into the history of edits and changes later.
This file is posted on the official source in PDF format, available for download and enlargement. I will post some enlarged fragments here for ease of reading.
What to watch out for: Usually, serious engineering structures, such as railway bridges, where serious loads are expected, it is customary to rely on solid soil foundations. To do this, they drill or hammer special piles, which are based on these very hard soils. If we lean a massive structure on an insufficiently solid foundation, its individual parts or the entire structure can sag unevenly, deform and, in end result, collapse.
Hard rock is best suited as a foundation for piles. But they are not always available. Under certain conditions, it is quite possible to use sand instead of rocky soil. This is less preferred. Sandy loam and loam are also not very suitable, but if you drill very deep piles in them, then, in principle, they can carry a certain load. Undesirable base for structures with high loads, as a rule, are clay. It is connected with a number of unique properties clay, including long-playing and uneven in time subsidence of piles in clay. I will not go deep into the jungle now engineering geology, especially since this is not my profile, I will only note that in my work I also had to deal with unpleasant “surprises” of clay several times. These surprises were connected not so much with the subsidence of supports (in Israel, in the projects in which I participated, geoengineers in especially massive structures almost always pierced clay and tried to get to the rocky soil, since geology most often allows this), but the ability of clay to transmit deformation over long distances. Yes, overpressure ground water, because of certain works, on one area of clay at a depth of 15 meters, gave a deformation and a crack in the same layer of clay at a distance of more than two hundred meters away from the impact site. When we got into the literature to understand at what distance clay can “transmit deformation”, it turned out that there were cases when deformations were transmitted almost 2 km to the side. In general, our geoengineers do not like clay in this sense. Although, for not large structures it's not relevant. Yes, and for large structures, with great desire, you can lean on clay. True, the piles will have to be drilled to great depths. Example: Lakhta Center in St. Petersburg. Piles to a depth of 65 meters and a huge diameter - 2 meters. True, the clay there, according to the assurances of geologists, is special, very hard, Vendian, Precambrian with an age of formation of about 630 million years and with its unique physical properties almost as good as hard rock.
For visual comparison, imagine a dental implant (this topic, at least superficially, is familiar to many readers). Any decent dentist, before fixing the implant, takes a picture to make sure of the bearing capacity and strength of the “soil”. If the bone is not strong enough or dense, the implant cannot be fixed. In some cases, compaction of the "soil" is carried out. But it is impossible to fix a tooth on a loose weak bone. More precisely, purely technically, if the doctor is unscrupulous, he can do it, but it will end sadly.
In the case of a railway bridge, unacceptable subsidence or deformation can lead to disaster after some time. And, even if, by a lucky chance, people do not die, we will talk about huge economic losses.
Be that as it may, the Soviet, and then Russian guests, forbade such structures to rest on anything other than a solid rock foundation. I will specifically emphasize this point. Not even on the sand. And not on clay. But, as we can see from the above geosurveys, no rocky foundation was found at the depth at which, according to the construction plans of the KM, piles should be supported (up to 58 meters deep) (see the bottom line of the table, highlighted in red). Moreover, even sand was not found there. But this is not enough - even clay was not found there.
Upper layers - silt - loose and porous, then sands and sandy loams varying degrees density, several clay inclusions, and the lower layer, on which, in fact, the piles of the bridge rest, are semi-hard clays.
What are semi-hard clays and how do they differ from hard ones? AT in general terms Even the name itself says so. It is clear that the degree of their semi-solidity or semi-liquid is different. It is determined by a number of coefficients, the most obvious for a simple layman will be the density (in grams per cm. Cubic) and porosity - highlighted by me in the table above in red. For comparison, I highlighted the top layer - silt - characteristic low density, about 1.6 g/smk and high porosity, also about 1.6
(porosity coefficient is determined by the formula
er = (p s - ? d) / p d,
where:
p s - density of soil particles, g/cm3
p d - density of dry soil, g/cm3)
What is loose silt everyone knows who swam in a heavily silted reservoir and tried to put their feet on the bottom. An unpleasant and eerie feeling, when the legs gradually and smoothly fall down, as if into a swamp, for example, I remember from childhood. So, if you compare the density and porosity of this very silt (geological index mQIVnch) in the table with the density and porosity of the lower semi-hard clay (geological index N1Sb), you will notice that they are almost comparable. To make it even clearer, I’ll clarify that the density of water is 1 g / cmk, and the density of water-saturated sand (and our soil is under water, the sea above it) is 3 - 3.2 g / cmk. As you can see, the density of the underlying semi-hard clays is 1.6 g/cm. - it's not even halfway between water and sand.
Now you can understand why the Soviet expertise rested its horn, not wanting to put their signatures on this project? After all, the one who approves the project and signs the expert opinion, in which case he will be in the dock. And there were precedents.
Now imagine that we are not just talking about an almost twenty-kilometer railway bridge, with huge loads and huge windage (storms, waves, crosswinds, trains), but we are also talking about seismically danger zone, where tremors different strength happen regularly. The designers of the new bridge claim that it is enough to drive the piles 58 meters and everything will be in order, but is this semi-hard clay suitable as a base for the supports?
In the Wikipedia article (which is constantly edited and rewritten) there was such a description of the construction of a pile foundation, I quote:
"Tubular piles are sinking vibrator by using the effectthixotropy , that is, fluidityloam from vibration, so the pipe very quickly (about 40 minutes) is immersed in loam for tens of meters, almost like in viscous liquid just under its own weight. After the tubular pile reaches semi-dense light clays at a depth of about 50 meters, blows hydraulic hammer it is immersed to the full depth"
"Thrash!" - you say? But it's not thrash yet. The thrash is ahead.
I checked, in the current version of the Wikipedia article, this colorful description is no longer there. Removed from sin away. But you can find it in the edit history.
Here again, in brackets, I want to note that I have been discussing this topic on the Internet for a long time and I have repeatedly expressed the theses voiced here and further in different places in different places. Sometimes it seemed to me that it was worth voicing some problematic moment with a link to a Wikipedia article, as, after a while, the problematic piece of text from Wikipedia disappeared or changed. Might be a coincidence. But some direct multi-episode coincidence. Be that as it may, I saved the materials that were important to me on my computer. And, I foresee that after the publication of this article, Wikipedia will again begin to rule at the most furious pace. But let's continue in order.
And so, the piles are supported in these same semi-solid / semi-liquid clays, not even in sand, and SNIP requires only a rocky base:
SNIP SP 14.13330.2011 Construction in seismic areas. Updated version of SNiP II-7-81*
Section 7
Subsection 7.4
7.4 Bridges
"7.4.3 Arched bridges are allowed to be used only if there is a rocky foundation. The heels of vaults and arches should be supported on massive supports and placed at the lowest possible level. The superstructure should be designed through."
Anyone can google this SNIP on its code number. It would seem that this is the end of the argument! What happens - by order of V.V. Putin, they are building a gigantic state project with flagrant violation state building codes and rules? But it was not there. Remember the joke?
Machine gun, fire!
- No cartridges, comrade commissar!
- But you're a communist!
And the gun fired again.
As it turned out, the 2017 SNIP arises almost retroactively. Date of entry into force, attention! - from June 17 (!) 2017 http://docs.cntd.ru/document/456044283
We look at point 8, which concerns the construction of bridges.
There is no prohibition to support bridge supports (in general, anywhere). There was a ban with a very unambiguous phrase “only if there is a rocky foundation” and suddenly it was gone. It hasn't been replaced with something less solid or something less rocky, it's just been removed. Understand as you wish. What you want - on that and rely on the railway arch bridge? Instead, they introduced some vague definition:
8.1.7 Bridge supports should not be located in places where underwater flows of loose marine sediments move and near mud volcanoes. If it is impossible to avoid the construction of bridge supports on an underwater slope covered with loose silts and sands, it is necessary to calculate the supports for the hydrodynamic pressure of the water-sand flow.
Like this. There is no ban. He made calculations and supported, even in loose silt, even in quicksand, even in semi-liquid clay.
It turns out that in favor of the decision of V.V. Putin, rewrote SNIP. Moreover, at the time of entry into force (from June 17, 2017), construction was already underway full swing and piles for the most part already scored. Those. If I understand correctly, the construction was legalized by some kind of hindsight? In general, you will agree, it all looks very bad. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think that's the way to do it. This is not only unfair, it is also downright dangerous. After all, we are talking about construction. largest facility. At stake human lives, eventually.
Remember, at the beginning of the article, I specifically highlighted the story with Soviet expertise. After all, then they did not begin to rewrite GOSTs, for the sake of the authorities. And now, it turns out, they have.
But this SNIP concerns not only the situation with KM (although it was clearly written for it). This SNIP now applies to all bridges Russian Federation. Will it have any consequences? It is hard to say. It seems to me quite probable that backfire will.
By the way, as you understand, being in Israel, I do not follow the Russian SNIPs. And I found out about this foul-smelling story by chance, in a curious way. In one endless and, I must admit, stupid dispute with another furious Russian patriot, they began to reproach me for not knowing Russian SNIPs. Which, of course, is absolutely fair. But knowing the SNIPs of a particular country is not at all necessary in order to understand the absurdity of supporting a huge railway bridge on semi-hard, water-saturated clays of low density and high porosity (again, see the table with coefficients above). Enough basic knowledge and common sense. To show that there can be no such nonsense in SNIPs, I got into Google. The opponent also climbed. And then it turned out that we were quoting rules that were essentially opposite to each other. Thus, I learned about the entry into force on June 17, 2017 of a new, “Putin's” version of the SNIP. "Putin's" in the sense that it retroactively adjusts to his decision to build this bridge.
I also discussed this circumstance with Yuri Anatolyevich Medovar. He commented on this with rather harsh words addressed to the authors of innovations in SNIPs and even tried to involve public attention. But public attention, as I understand it, is not particularly willing to delve into such nuances.
Moreover, every word spoken by Yuri Medovar is attacked by crowds of patriotically sharpened, trained Internet trolls, endless complaints and denunciations about work are written against him, and even on Facebook he practically does not get out of the bans, where he is sent regularly organized mass complaints.
So, let's summarize: as a foundation for the supports of the Kerch / Crimean bridge, there is a very problematic soil, namely, semi-hard water-saturated clays of high porosity and low density. Soviet and Russian GOSTs and SNIPs categorically did not allow the support of railway bridges in such a foundation. Then there is a sudden disappearance of such a ban in SNIPs from June 17, 2017.
Well, in the USSR, geology was a serious science and we have no reason not to believe the geo-surveys of the 70s. But still, before starting the construction of such a serious project, additional geo-surveys had to be carried out. Moreover, the results of Soviet geo-surveys are so disappointing. Logic and common sense suggest that if the project management is willing to take such a risk, they should have drilled many additional exploration wells, drilled them deeper than in Soviet times and explore in more detail. Where are these new results? Where is this new additional data? Where are the fixed rates? If the Soviet results raise such serious concerns, wouldn't it be right to dispel them just as publicly?
But for some reason, no one has posted anything new. With this unfortunate bewilderment, I also turned to Yuri Medovar - did he come across these new updated tables?
Here I must admit that Yuri Anatolyevich's answer made me distrust his words. He expressed the assumption that the new bridge builders did not do any serious geo-surveys, they say, they received Putin's order and began to sculpt outright hack-work.
Knowing some propensity of Yuri Medovar for straightforwardness and some harshness in expressions, I, of course, did not believe in this. Well, simply because this could not be! It is impossible to treat such a huge state project with such negligence, as it turned out from his words. But the reality turned out to be worse than any, even the most daring assumptions.
Since I have no direct access to the project materials, information about additional geo-surveys became known to me from the media with some delay. By the way, the appearance of this information was accompanied by some scandal, but for some reason it seems to me that few people understood and appreciated the scale of the emerging scandal.
And so, in December 2017, an article appeared in Kommersant
“It is not possible to approach the Crimean bridge. The railway approach project will have to be adjusted due to soils”
https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3506412
The article raises a number unpleasant topics, but let's turn Special attention for a few moments. Further quotes:
“As sources told Kommersant, during the implementation of the project for the construction of railway approaches to the Kerch bridge from the Crimea, problems arose with the soil used for the construction of the subgrade. The project was developed by St. Petersburg "Lenpromtransproekt" commissioned by the Federal State Unitary Enterprise "Krymskaya Railway"(KZhD), which was directly subordinate to the region, but, one of the interlocutors of Kommersant emphasizes, the document turned out to be "poorly prepared." As a result, Roszheldor turned to the general contractor Stroygazmontazh (SGM) with a proposal to make an adjustment. The maximum cost of work to solve this problem reaches 2.9 billion rubles, the real amount and sources of funding "will be known later."
The Ministry of Transport confirmed to Kommersant that the need for repeated engineering surveys was caused by poor-quality performance of the work of Lenpromtransproekt JSC, in connection with which Roszheldor sent an appeal to the prosecutor's office. Repeated surveys, the Ministry of Transport added, will be carried out by Stroygazmontazh.”
And so, KZD ordered engineering surveys from Lenpromtransproekt (the same ones that Soviet geoengineers had already done in the 70s and which should be supplemented and clarified). Lenpromtransproekt did the work very badly, of poor quality. And so much so that the case was transferred to the prosecutor's office.
And what can Lenpromtransproekt say in its defense? Further quote:
Lenpromtransproekt clarifies that the fault lies with the subcontractor. Rostislav Shkurko, CEO of the company, reminded Kommersant that the company received a positive conclusion from Glavgosexpertiza in June 2016, “all work was done with high quality, as evidenced by positive conclusions both on the technical and price audit, and on the technical and cost estimate of the project.” Geological engineering surveys were subcontracted by Krymsetenergoproekt LLC, both on the railway approach and on the road, says the top manager. Based on the obtained drilling materials and laboratory tests have been developed design solutions, the construction time in accordance with the construction organization project is 29.7 months, however, the contract with Stroygazmontazh was signed only in April 2017, Mr. Shkurko notes. At the beginning of construction, he explains, according to the results of the control drilling, it was revealed that the actual properties of the soil differ from the survey materials carried out by Krymsetenergoproekt LLC and used for the design.
Omitting everything superfluous for a while, let's briefly summarize for ourselves the main essence of what happened:
Geosurvey was carried out in 2015. These geo-surveys were approved by the Main State Expertise, confirming that all the work was done with high quality and gave a positive conclusion.
In 2017, when they started the practical part, the builders discovered a discrepancy: “the actual properties of the soil differ from the survey materials carried out by Krymsetenergoproekt LLC and used for the design. “
In other words, instead of geo-surveys, they did some kind of mess. And this mess was approved at the highest state level. And when it turned out that it was impossible to work with crap, the customer of crap (KZhD) began to blame the contractor (Lenpromtransproekt), and the contractor blamed the subcontractor (Krymsetenergoproekt) and snapped, sarcastically mentioning Glavgosexpertiza.
And so, we are talking about the very new geo-surveys (or part of these geo-surveys) that I have been trying to find for so long and on the trail of which I have finally attacked. The final link in the above chain was Krymsetenergoproekt. The fact that this organization did not try to throw responsibility on anyone gave me optimism and foreboding that I had finally found those who were doing such important geo-surveys. And I went to Google.
The results, I must admit, shocked me a little.
Judging by the name - "Krymsetenergoproekt" - I expected to find some reputable company, but it turned out that "Krymsetenergoproekt" is a fake office in best traditions Ostap Bender. LLC "Horns & Hooves". This office was registered to some two aunts - Antonina Valerievna Leontiev and Maria Azaryevna Polyakova. The authorized capital of this mega corporation is 10,000 rubles (in words: ten thousand rubles is just over $150 at that time). Both owners share the authorized capital equally - 5,000 rubles each. on the vice-chairman.
A floating crane collided with a support, traffic along one of the lanes was closed. Bad weather in Crimea led to several incidents at once
Updated 16:00
Storm on the Black Sea. The Kerch crossing is closed. A floating crane crashed into the Crimean bridge, which damaged the barrier fence and the lighting mast. As a result, traffic was temporarily closed on one of the lanes, and speed was limited on the other.
The SOS signal was sent by the Shkval sea tug two kilometers from Kerch. His crew drifted on a raft for some time in three-meter waves, seven sailors were picked up by a dry cargo ship located nearby. Details Business FM told Chief Editor news agency "Kryminform" Alexey Konovalov:
“At 6:55 a.m., the Ministry of Emergency Situations received a message that near the village of Geroevka, not far from Kerch, two kilometers from the shore, the ship was pouring rain. Crew in in full force had to leave the sinking ship, for some time seven people drifted into the sea on a raft. According to the latest information, they were picked up by a cargo ship that was nearby. The sailors are all right. The incident happened in the early morning in the area of the Krymsky bridge: a floating crane detached from the anchor collided with the road part of the bridge and damaged the barrier fence and lighting masts of the transport crossing. After the anchor broke, the crew tried to control the ship, but they failed. At about 6:20 a.m., he was nailed to the support of the road section. This is the section between the island of Tuzla and the fairway. It will take approximately six to eight hours to eliminate the consequences of the work. Another incident is in the Sudak region. Here, a pleasure double-deck motor ship was forced to anchor. There are currently 152 people on board. At night, he could not moor to the pier due to three-meter waves, so now people are waiting for the weather to improve further from the coast. There is no threat to the life and health of passengers yet. People are planning to be delivered to the shore when the waves at sea decrease.”
Heavy showers with thunderstorms, hail and squally winds are expected in Novorossiysk. On Saturday night there was a month's rainfall. The alert system worked. Mudflow descended in the area of Shirokaya Beam. By morning, the water had subsided in the city, and public utilities cleared the streets. Authorities are asking residents not to leave their homes and limit the movement of private vehicles. Juno Polishchuk, a journalist from Novorossiysk, tells about the situation in the city:
“There are reports from residents that hypermarkets, shops and those houses that are on the side under the mountain were sinking, on the first floors the water is almost ankle-deep. Yesterday they blocked the streets, and the authorities warned that none of the residents went out into the street and somehow sheltered from the rain. Although many people are indignant at how it is possible to hide from such rain when the same storm drains cannot cope. This is the most in the city a big problem. Now the rain has stopped. I stand on a tower and see that the clouds are gathering again, in the evening it will be the same. The authorities also announced a storm, they say not to approach water bodies and generally do not leave the house. Today was supposed to be a city holiday, but it was postponed to the next weekend due to the weather.
Now the wind speed in the Black Sea reaches 17 meters per second with gusts up to 20 meters. According to forecasts of meteorologists, such weather will continue at least until the end of Saturday, September 8.
Simferopol: A floating crane crashed into one of the pillars of a bridge in the Kerch Strait. The cause of the incident was a storm. Due to strong winds, the boat broke anchor.
It is reported by Radio Liberty
“The crane boom damaged one of the bridge's lighting masts and bent several meters of the barrier fence. Traffic on one of the sections of the bridge is limited,” the report states.
According to local experts, it may take no more than eight hours to replace the mast and fence. However, repair work can begin only after the cancellation of the storm warning.
It turns out that in the annexed Crimea industrial accident on the "Titan", near Armyansk, supplements and emergencies natural character, and the difficulty of passing through the bridge is increased by the temporary inability to use the ferry service.
So colleagues of journalists from Radio Liberty from the editorial office of the Crimea Realii resource, with reference to the website of Marine Directorate LLC, report that due to bad weather (increased wind speed up to 20 m / s), the work of Kerch ferry crossing suspended indefinitely.
On Saturday, September 8, due to bad weather, several incidents occurred in the Black Sea. In the morning, near Kerch, the captain of the Shkval small tug asked for help to remove seven crew members from the board. According to him, the ship was flooded with rain.
Later, rescuers located the members of the tugboat crew drifting on a raft in the waters of the Kerch Strait.
In addition, a motor ship anchored near Sudak with 152 people on board.
The early management of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of the occupying authorities in Crimea warned the inhabitants of the peninsula that due to heavy rains on the peninsula, mudflows and a rise in the water level in the rivers were possible.
Rescuers are asking Crimeans to follow safety rules in case of bad weather: refrain from traveling around the city, stay indoors if possible. In case of heavy rain, do not go down into the underground passages.
Regarding the future of the “construction of the century” - the Kerch bridge, the caution of skeptics about the fragility of the construction of such a complex engineering crossing is compensated by the fact that the occupiers took into account unsuccessful experience their predecessors, the Germans, moreover, without particularly advertising the world community, which applies sanctions against them, Russian bridge builders used the achievements of modern engineering thought of the West and China, as well as imported materials.
Nevertheless, a very thick layer of silt made it impossible to install the supports completely reliably and in the future they, without replacing them, may sag.
As a native of Crimea said in an exclusive comment for FNI: “Now storms of varying intensity will continue right up to late spring. Evidence that not everything is so good with the bridge may be the fact that trucks are not yet allowed on the bridge, allowing traffic only cars. Can you imagine what will happen when the railway is also put into operation here! I think it will make it worse general state bridge, so no one undertakes to guarantee the durability of the structure, ”summed up our interlocutor.
It should be noted that even at the beginning of the construction of the Kerch bridge, the Prosecutor's Office of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, based on the expertise of environmentalists, that the violation of the natural habitat of dolphins could lead to their mass death.
At the end of July, the European Union imposed sanctions against Russian companies involved in the construction of the Crimean bridge.
Regarding the future of its design, the opinions of our fellow countrymen differ.
Recall that, speaking on May 18 in Kyiv at a rally-requiem dedicated to memory victims of the genocide of the Crimean Tatar people, President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko noted: “I am sure that the aggressor will be held responsible for the illegal construction of the Kerch bridge and for other crimes. The Russians will need this bridge as an escape route. And Ukraine, after restoring its sovereignty in Crimea, uses it for ties with the Kuban, where, by the way, a large number of Ukrainians also live, and with another Russia, not the aggressor, ”he said then.
It should be noted that the construction of the bridge not only became a natural barrier (in terms of height) for sailing to the Sea of Azov, and hence to the Ukrainian ports - Berdyansk and Mariupol, many foreign ships of large displacement, but also allowed Russian border guards to illegally prevent ships from entering these ports smaller, which generally led to the so-called Azov crisis, which will be the subject of a closed discussion at the next meeting of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine.
FrontNewsInternational
