Hacker News Reader

Not explained is how environmentally (the reason for building a tunnel instead of a bridge) is better.

Sure it was. It preserves the current environment which is preferable from both aesthetic and ecosystems point of view.

On the surface, what about the long term effects of boring giant holes and tunnels through underground?

Probably most of it is rock, and the tunnel is probably sounded by concrete.

Regardless, I have no doubt the Swedes did an analysis and weighted the pros and cons.

There was a previous Swedish tunnel project that had a number of incidents, among others groundwater pollution caused by a new sealing compound that contained acrylamid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallands%C3%A5s_Tunnel

What about the aesthetics and ecosystem of the bedrock? Are we suddenly caring more about living things than inanimate objects?

Yes, in general we do.

The joke is that rock that deep underground has no ecosystem.

It may however be involved in the water table, which is always critical.

Out of sight, out of mind. That's pretty much the reason.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com