Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

A cross to bear

Letters

The article on the tanker fire on the M25 (NCE 15 June) highlighted the fact that many vehicles were stuck for several hours because there were no crossover facilities to allow them to leave the scene of the accident.

It seems obvious that a temporary crossover could have been cut through the barrier.

Given the overall cost of the accident, clearance and associated disruption, the 'additional cost' of destroying the integrity of the barrier may have been preferential to the cost of disruption from the impact on business of having its people and goods quarantined on the M25.

Presumably there were other commercial and engineering reasons for not breaching the barrier - if so what were they?

David Hadden, (AM), 11A Main Road, Castlehead, Paisley

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.