The vessel

The vessel IVY is made up of two units, IVY 1 and IVY 2. For the longer elements (217 metres), “each end is securely attached to IVY 1 and 2, which provide buoyancy”, a note from the official website of the project explained.

For the shorter special components (39 metres), the two units are put together to form one vessel. IVY will also feature 23 kilometres of steel wire spread over 66 winches. This allows it to submerge elements 40 metres below the water with high precision. While the vessel was being tested, the bed of the sea was made ready to welcome the structures of the tunnel.

This month, IVY will be taken near the Danish entrance of the tunnel and the elements will be loaded with ballast to make sure they sink. “IVY 1 and 2 will then transport the element to the trench and immerse it in a controlled and precise operation”, the Femern note added.

The Fehmarnbelt tunnel

The project for a tunnel under the Fehmarn Strait was officially approved by the Danish government in 2011. Construction started in 2021 with initial estimates of 5,1 billion euros, but it has now increased to roughly 7,5 billion euros. Other than rising costs, the project also experienced delays. The commissioning of the tunnel was planned for 2029, but it is now postponed by two years.

“The outlook in 2025 is worse than in 2020, and falls far short of what was initially envisaged”, the Court of Auditors writes. The covid pandemic and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine have led to cost increases in recent years. Compared to original estimates, costs have grown by an average of 82% for the eight examined transport megaprojects. In 2020, the cost increase was 47%.

Rail Baltica and Turin-Lyon

Two projects stand out for spiralling costs: Rail Baltica and the Turin-Lyon railway. They have, respectively, become four times and two times more expensive than was estimated initially. The growing costs could prove to be a problem for the implementing countries, since EU co-funding is “not directly linked to the total cost”. A case in point here is Latvia, which is struggling to find the funds to complete its section of Rail Baltica.

Clearly, money is an obstacle for TEN-T implementation. It is contributing to severe delays and missed deadlines. The EU auditors noted an average delay of 11 years in 2020 for TEN-T projects, but that has now escalated to 17 years.

Completely out of reach

The Court of Auditors is clear in their conclusion. There is no way that the EU will meet the 2030 deadline to complete the core TEN-T network. “EU transport flagship infrastructures are supposed to reshape Europe, bringing people closer together and facilitating economic activity”, said Annemie Turtelboom, the ECA Member who led this update report.

“But three decades after most of them were designed, we are still a long way from cutting the ribbon on these projects, and a long way from achieving the intended improvements in passenger and freight flows across Europe”, Turtelboom added.

The Auditors note that, interestingly, the EU Commission has only once employed its main legal tool to receive explanations for delays. They also expect that the recent TEN-T regulation revision will give the Commission more oversight over the completion of the network, but that the impact on currently ongoing projects will be limited.

The Fehmarnbelt tunnel

The ambition for iPort Zealand is to become a key hub in the region, especially in lieu of the future Fehmarnbelt tunnel, one of the largest infrastructure projects in Europe. It is an 18-kilometre underwater tunnel connecting the Danish island of Lolland to the German coast. There will be two electrified railway lines and four lanes of road, for a total cost of 7,4 billion euros based on 2015 values (around 10 billion euros today).

The grand opening has been planned for 2029, but a few hiccups will likely delay it. The most recent issue concerns the vessel which will have to take the tunnel parts at sea and drop them to the bottom, but its preparation is running 1 and a half years late. “It remains uncertain how much of the lost time can be recovered in the coming years”, the company overseeing the project said in September.

Verdion’s iPorts

The iPort Zeeland will not be the first initiative of this kind for Verdion. The real estate developer already undertook a similar project in Doncaster, in the heart of England. The English industrial and logistics site spreads across 337 hectares and is a key hub for connections to various UK ports. A similar role is envisioned for iPort Zeeland as well. “iPort Zealand is set to become a major new cluster for Danish business in an unparalleled strategic location,” Michael Hughes, CEO of Verdion, said.

T&E’s report argues that the EU’s current rail funding model is imbalanced. Between 2021 and 2023, €6.6 billion in total was allocated to large-scale projects including Rail Baltica, the Brenner Base Tunnel, and the Fehmarnbelt tunnel — each with price tags over €1 billion and timelines stretching into the 2030s. In contrast, dozens of lower-cost but critical upgrades received far less support, ERTMS upgrades in particular, says T&E.

Big projects, big delays

According to the report, these megaprojects, though essential to completing the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T), are “capital-intensive” and slow to deliver benefits. Rail Baltica alone accounted for nearly one-fifth of all CEF rail funding in the period, yet its completion has now been pushed to 2035. The Brenner Base Tunnel has been delayed by close to 20 years and is now aiming to be completed in 2032.

In one recent funding round, demand for CEF transport funds was triple the available budget, underscoring the need for more strategic allocations. T&E argues that placing greater focus on short- and medium-term projects could accelerate connectivity and reduce emissions more quickly.

Carlos Rico, rail policy officer at T&E, said: “Megaprojects have helped give rail the boost it needs, but they’re draining resources from other vital parts of the network. The EU must address this imbalance and ensure that the Connecting Europe Facility supports all necessary upgrades.”

‘Key upgrades’, less money

Among non-megaproject initiatives, track electrification emerged as the top-funded upgrade, securing €3.1 billion (20% of CEF funds which went to rail), followed by line speed improvements with €2.8 billion (18%). However, most projects aiming to fill missing high-speed rail links are still at the study stage, with construction not yet underway.

The report identifies 84 projects as “key upgrades”, targeting goals such as boosting capacity, improving line speeds, and standardising track gauges. Yet the average funding per upgrade project was just €70 million, far below the nearly €1 billion average for each megaproject.

Signalling stuck in the slow lane

Perhaps most concerning to T&E is the lack of progress on rolling out the EU’s standardised signalling system, the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS). Between 2021 and 2023, just €0.7 billion—or 3% of the CEF Transport envelope—was directed toward ERTMS deployment.

2024’s preliminary figures show a boost for ERTMS, which the NGO calls a “positive development that puts it on a hopeful path”. However, they state “ERTMS funding is still trailing behind other essential upgrades, as it received only close to a third of the funds directed to rail electrification”.  That is despite its role as a legal requirement on core TEN-T corridors by 2030 and a pillar of cross-border rail interoperability.

The report notes that countries such as Germany, France, and Poland continue to lag behind on ERTMS implementation. T&E recommends integrating the system into military mobility funding to enhance cyber resilience and dual-use potential.

The next EU budget

With more than three quarters of CEF funds having been spent in its first three years, it is currently unable to properly fund the adaptations needed to adapt the infrastructure to the challenges of today, says the report.  “While frontloading investments makes sense to effectively kick-start infrastructure projects, it leaves the CEF vulnerable to unexpected developments.”

Looking ahead to the next EU Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) in July 2025, T&E is calling for a rebalanced approach. First of all, the next round of CEF should have a larger budget to reflect the higher ambition that resulted from the revision of the TEN-T regulation, argues T&E. The advocate group for clean transport and energy estimates that a 25% increase in the CEF rail budget could double funding for crucial upgrades, without cutting off support to necessary megaprojects.

The future of dedicated transport funding under CEF has been shaky recently, with the European Commission initially dubbing whether to instead go for national and regional investment plans and thus dissolve the fund into a broader pot. From recent leaked draft legislation outlining the next long-term budget strategy, reported by Euractiv and Politico, it appears that CEF Transport will still have its place, however.

In T&E’s view, CEF Transport is more important than ever, but the current model is oversubscribed, fragmented, and not delivering the rapid integration the EU needs.  Carlos Rico: “Boosting rail is vital for Europe’s economy and defence, but funding must match infrastructure goals. The EU budget, high-speed rail plan, and the Military Mobility strategy should prioritise key upgrades and dual-use projects.”