Except the bridge and tunnel itself the project is interesting because it both finished ahead of schedule, and within budget [0]. We've studied it in a project management course as an example of excellent project leadership.

Another interesting tidbit is that Peberholm [1], the artificial island have acted as an interesting experiment ground for biologists.

[0]: https://group.skanska.com/projects/57321/Oresund-Bridge [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peberholm

Sadly, the pebberholm biology experiment is a bit broken, as the island is often visited (for reasons I do not know) by police and construction workers.

(I drove across the bridge twice a day, every day for two years, and saw people and cars on Pebberholm quite frequently.)

Fun tidbit (from the Wikipedia article) that Peberholm is named "Pepper Islet" as intentional joke that it's neighboring natural island is Saltholm ("Salt Islet").

"Holm" is a valid, though obsuce, English word. We can quite reasonably translate the two holms as "Pepper Holm" and "Salt Holm".

My grandma's sister was in on developing that bridge. As well as many things underground within denmark. It's kinda like sin city 2k as FAIK .

I have crossed this bridge a fair number of times, by car as well as by train. An engineering marvel, I'm sure, and presumably an efficiency upgrade from the ferries, though I actually used to enjoy those. But aesthetically it will never catch my fancy. There's something unbalanced, something visually completely off, by this giant construction solidly anchored to land at one end, and then ignominiously disappearing into a seeming whole in the water at the other. There were good reasons for this solution, yes, I'm aware. But it still looks wrong.

It's an enormous efficiency upgrade. It's also an enormous convenience upgrade.

That's odd. I actually like the tunnel part, although it can be troubling to think about how what keeps you from drowning are a few rubber gaskets that deal with expansion/contraction of the tunnel.

I find the bridge itself to be very rough and industrial in its design. I was never fond of raw concrete structures.

Is this image [1] the same bridge? It looks quite different from the other shots.

[1] https://charismaticplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/253...

Not the same bridge no.

A lot of stuff seems weird about the article. It looks like the information is scraped from different sources and then stitched together into a badly written article.

It really doesn't look like the Öresund bridge to me. A reverse image search suggests this is concept art for the planned Fehmarn belt bridge (between Denmark and Germany).

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fehmarn_Belt_Fixed_Link

I guess it's an early render, it is not a picture of the real bridge.

The real bridge has two pairs of towers, not four hollow tower as shown in the picture here. I don't know why it was included.

Was this written by a bot? It's terrible.

We changed the URL from https://charismaticplanet.com/oresund-bridge/, which looks like a spam site, to one that showed up when Googling text from the article.

Looking through the content of the site, it's quite random what subjects it covers. Everything - including the about/contact pages - is poorly written. My gut says clickbait site for ad impressions.

Could be copied verbatim from Google Translate. My wife taught in an art college and occasionally got an essay from a Chinese student which they wrote in Chinese, pasted into Google Translate, then copied that into the final essay. They were unintelligible. At least this one is understandable!

Probably. This is becoming a trend in clickbait sites recently and it's really annoying. As bad as Youtube videos narrated by voice synthesizers.

Very nice pictures though. It looks better than I remember it in real life. Maybe because it's not the same bridge?!