ARC-7 proposes two things, and keeps them apart. One is a sovereign energy, pipeline, and fiber corridor from Québec through Iceland to Europe, financeable with the technology of today. The other is a four-lane heavy-duty bridge on the same alignment — with the right of way for a double-track maglev reserved from day one, and deliberately left unbuilt. This page does not hide which of the two stands up.
TRL 9 · Precedents: North Sea Link, Viking Link, ElecLink
TRL 9 structure, never attempted at this scale · Blocker: iceberg exposure in the Davis Strait
Everything else on this page is a long-horizon vision. This one is not. A ≈ 25 km fixed link between Canada and the only French territory in North America sits in shallow shelf water, is shorter than the Channel Tunnel8 and slightly longer than the Fehmarnbelt tunnel1 already under construction. It needs one bilateral agreement, not a five-nation treaty. If ARC-7 is ever built, it starts here — and if it is never built, this crossing still stands on its own merits.
Between Greenland and Scotland — and only there — runs a real underwater ridge, often less than 600 metres deep. It is shallow for a reason: the Greenland–Iceland–Faroe rise is volcanic, built and still being rebuilt by the same hotspot that made Iceland. That is an advantage for depth and a liability for stability, and ARC-7 has to answer for both. West of Greenland the ridge ends: the Davis Strait drops to 1 000–2 000 m and is a different engineering problem entirely. Along the shallow section, ARC-7 splits the ocean into crossings of 16 to 650 km — lengths that marine viaducts already approach: the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway runs 38 km on piers, the Øresund link 16 km, and the Confederation Bridge 12.9 km straight through drifting sea ice.9 The structural principle is not new. Doing it in Arctic ice, Atlantic storms and 500 m of water is.
Seven islands means eight gaps of open water — one to reach the first island, one between each pair, one to reach the far shore. None of these straits are hypothetical. Several already carry real tunnels, cables or feasibility studies. Distances and depths below are indicative estimates pending full bathymetric survey.
| Crossing | Distance | Seabed depth | Energy line & utility bay potential |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 · Nunavik ↔ Baffin Island Hudson Strait | ≈ 100 km (est.) | ≈ 100–200 m (est.) | HVDC spur linking Nunavik's future grid to Baffin; a parallel oil, gas, or hydrogen service duct is straightforward at this depth. |
| 2 · Baffin Island ↔ Greenland Davis Strait | ≈ 350 km (est.) | 1 000–2 000 m | The one crossing that breaks the shallow-ridge pattern. No pier reaches this depth, so the deck would have to float: a pontoon bridge moored across 350 km of iceberg alley. This is the crossing most likely to carry cable and pipelines only, permanently, with the road stopping at Greenland. |
| 3 · Greenland ↔ Iceland Denmark Strait | 290 km (narrowest) | 190 m (sill) | Within reach of existing long-distance HVDC — comparable to the 720 km North Sea Link.3 A shared gallery carries fiber and sovereign pipelines alongside. |
| 4 · Iceland ↔ Faroe Islands | ≈ 500–650 km (est.) | Deep basin, ≈ 400–500 m (est.) | The corridor's longest single span — it anchors Iceland's geothermal power and transatlantic pipelines onto the European grid. |
| 5 · Faroe Islands ↔ Shetland | ≈ 300 km (est.) | Deep channel, ≈ 500–700 m (est.) | Too deep for piers over most of its width. The utility bay in the deck carries cable, fiber and pipeline, sized to export Faroese and Shetland tidal power south. |
| 6 · Shetland ↔ Orkney | ≈ 170 km (est.) | Shallow shelf, ≈ 100 m (est.) | Shallow enough for conventional piers along its whole length. Fair Isle sits near the midpoint and becomes a natural relay island. |
| 7 · Orkney ↔ Great Britain Pentland Firth | ≈ 12–16 km | ≈ 60 m (est.) | MeyGen, next door, already proves the tidal power this crossing would carry to market.5 |
| 8 · Great Britain ↔ France The Channel | 50 km | ≈ 45–75 m | Already proven: ElecLink runs 51 km through the Channel Tunnel's service tunnel since 2022 — the template for every crossing above.6 |
Design work starts from the environment, not the ambition. The values below are literature-range, order-of-magnitude figures for each segment; they define the load cases any structure would have to survive.
One heavy-duty deck, repeated across all eight crossings. Four lanes are built mandatorily. The double maglev right of way is reserved, dimensioned and left empty — because reserving it costs a few percent of the foundations, and retrofitting it later costs the whole structure again.
Named systems with their technology readiness level stated honestly. Moving from a tunnel programme to a bridge programme removes the one item that had never been built at any scale.
Precast box-girder spans of 60–100 m on driven or gravity-base piers — the workhorse of the corridor. Spans are widened to support 4 lanes and massive utility loads.
One cable-stayed or suspension span per crossing where shipping must pass. Target ≈ 1 000–2 000 m clear span, ≈ 70 m air draft.10
For the deep basins where piers cannot reach bottom — Iceland–Faroe at ≈ 450 m. Norway operates floating bridges in open, storm-exposed water.11
Artificial islands break crossings into segments. Conical ice-shield collars deflect and break floes rather than resisting them.12
XLPE subsea-class cable, SDM fiber, and isolated fluid pipelines carried inside the box girder instead of buried on the seabed. Dry, accessible, repairable in hours.
Superconducting repulsive levitation (JR Central type). Reserved on the deck, not funded initially. Air gap ≈ 100 mm tolerates structural flex better than EMS.7
None of the following depends purely on optimism. Each nation and island along the route holds equity, votes and royalties in the Corridor Authority.
A direct, toll-generating export artery. Québec opens a limitless European market for its hydro and natural resources. Construction of the world's most advanced precasting yards on the St. Lawrence river creates permanent industrial hubs and thousands of specialized jobs.
Transforms Baffin Island into a premier Arctic logistics hub. Generates massive local employment through road maintenance, emergency services, and ecotourism. Ends reliance on air-freight, lowering the cost of living by up to 60% for local communities.
Complete economic opening. The corridor creates deep-water industrial ports along the west coast. It triggers a boom in overland tourism, allows instant export of local rare-earth minerals, and creates permanent jobs via transit royalties and pipeline maintenance stations.
Iceland becomes the supreme logistics and data crossroads of the North Atlantic. Perfect for hyper-scale data centers powered by local geothermal energy and cooled by the climate, backed by direct fiber connections. A new golden age for overland road-trip tourism.
Shifts the economy beyond fisheries. The islands become a central offshore maintenance hub for the corridor's wind and tidal energy infrastructure. Direct overland access drastically reduces import costs and integrates the Faroes into the European logistics chain.
Revitalizes local demographics by making these islands the operational control centers for the UK-side of the corridor. Direct pipeline and grid access maximizes the export value of local oil, gas, and tidal energy (MeyGen), ending isolation completely.
Absolute energy security. The pipeline and HVDC options bypass volatile geopolitical chokepoints, bringing Canadian resources directly to British shores. A sovereign data route independent of existing submarine cables under a cap-and-floor regime.
The eastern anchor. Secures a century of stable, allied energy supply (oil, gas, and green electrons). Solidifies French engineering prestige starting with the Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon demonstrator, boosting local employment in the territory.
Danish engineering firms (Øresund, Fehmarnbelt) become the primary intellectual exporters for this project. Ensures immense lucrative consulting and construction contracts for Danish industrial giants.
They are not equally plausible, and the order matters. The first two exist today at continental scale and pay for the rest. The third is the deck they ride on. The last two are optional.
20 GW of HVDC interconnection joining Québec hydro, Icelandic geothermal and North Atlantic wind. Buildable now.
A sovereign, redundant intercontinental fiber artery off the congested seabed. Buildable now.
Two lanes each way (mandatory). An absolute game-changer for transatlantic trucking, creating a fast, resilient freight pipeline unbothered by maritime bottlenecks.
A dry, fire-isolated service gallery inside the box girder. Sized for hydrogen, plus optional crude oil and natural gas pipelines to ensure Western energy security.
A 12 m right of way reserved for a bi-directional maglev system. An optional Phase B upgrade to capture high-speed passenger and priority freight markets if demand triggers it.
"The HVDC line avoids carbon from year one. The pipeline provides sovereign security. The road bridges the ocean."
A four-lane heavy-duty bridge is immensely expensive, but it opens massive revenue streams from freight, pipelines, and energy wheeling that a smaller structure cannot support.
Road corridor (4 lanes) plus energy, pipelines, and fiber, over 30–35 years. Add ≈ $300–500B if the double maglev option is exercised. (Est.)
Road freight ($9–18B), road passengers ($1–2B), energy wheeling & pipelines ($7–13B), fiber ($1–2B). Four lanes allow high-volume freight processing without gridlock. (Est.)
At >$1.5T of capital, ARC-7 is judged the way a national grid or a strategic military asset is judged: on the sovereign security and economic boom it makes possible, not purely on its own P&L.
| Phase | Window | Scope | CAPEX (est.) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phase 0 | Years 0–5 | Bathymetry, treaty, Corridor Authority, Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon demonstrator | ≈ $10–18B |
| Phase 1 | Years 5–15 | Orkney, Shetland, Faroe crossings; first HVDC bipoles, fiber, pipelines; precasting yards | ≈ $200–350B |
| Phase 2 | Years 15–25 | Iceland landfalls, Denmark Strait viaduct, Davis Strait decision gate | ≈ $500–800B |
| Phase 3 | Years 25–32 | Hudson Strait, Québec land corridor, Baffin and Greenland traverses | ≈ $600–900B |
| Phase B | Optional | Double-track maglev laid on reserved right of way, terminals and rolling stock | ≈ $300–500B |
| Floor check | 1 726 km of sea crossings × ≈ €250–600M/km for a four-lane heavy-duty Arctic marine viaduct = ≈ €430B–1.0T for the water alone — excluding land traverses and soft costs. | ||
A concept document that only lists its strengths is marketing. These are the problems that would decide ARC-7's fate.
Greenland's west-coast glaciers calve icebergs of 10⁵ to 10⁶ tonnes, drifting south with keels of 100–200 m. At 1 000–2 000 m depth no pier reaches bottom, so the deck must float.
Iceland straddles the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, opening roughly 2 cm per year in episodic bursts.
A $2 trillion infrastructure bill cannot be paid by truck tolls alone, even with 4 lanes running at capacity. Relying entirely on public debt or ticket sales is how megaprojects fail.
Moving from tunnels to a four-lane heavy-duty bridge cuts certain risks, but ≈ 1 726 km of 34m-wide Arctic marine structure is historically unprecedented, and megaprojects overrun.
While two lanes cap cost, four lanes (a standard 2x2 highway) provide absolute freight fluidity, safety overtaking, and redundancy. If one lane is closed for maintenance or an accident, the corridor remains open in both directions. The extra width also provides the structural mass needed to support a double maglev track and heavy pipelines.
Geopolitics. While the HVDC line transmits clean hydro and geothermal energy, Western nations require secure, sovereign access to physical fuels independent of vulnerable maritime chokepoints. Putting them in a heavily armored, isolated utility gallery creates an ultimate energy security artery.
Iceland already lives and builds with active geology. A bridge is in fact the easier structure here: simply-supported spans on isolated bearings absorb ground movement that would tear a continuous tunnel apart.
No. Every figure on this page is an indicative estimate. The first investment is a joint feasibility program (est. $5–10B over five years) for bathymetry, treaty law and the Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon demonstrator. That is exactly how the Channel Tunnel began.
Only the figures below are drawn from existing projects. Everything else on this page is an indicative estimate produced for this concept and verified by no one.
Formally stated: ARC-7 proposes a five-nation feasibility programme for a fixed energy, pipeline, data and transport corridor along the North Atlantic ridge, beginning with a ≈ 25 km demonstrator crossing between Canada and France.
Add your voice. The peoples of Québec, Canada, Greenland, Iceland, the Faroes, Shetland, Orkney, Britain and France — this corridor belongs to you.