Karl Erik Kesker: Tallinn light metro requires credible cost-benefit analysis

Karl Erik Kesker, a Reform Youth member and graduating student at Mustamäe State Gymnasium, argues that Tallinn needs an ambitious new public transport development plan following the cancellation of the Liivalaia tram line project. A credible solution could be a light metro, estimated to cost €1-1.5 billion. The author emphasizes that such investment requires an independent cost-benefit analysis and a transparent funding plan.

Following the cancellation of the Liivalaia tram line project, Tallinn has been left without a clear vision for how the capital's public transport network should develop over the coming decades. Karl Erik Kesker, a Reform Youth member and graduating student at Mustamäe State Gymnasium, suggests that the answer may lie in a light metro, and that now is the time to begin serious analysis.

Rennes shows it is possible

Light metro is not a new idea in Tallinn. In 2024, the Metro Group already presented a vision for building two light metro lines in the capital. Kesker draws a comparison with the French city of Rennes, whose metropolitan area has a population of approximately 480,000-nearly the same as Tallinn, where the population reached close to 460,000 in 2025. Rennes' public transport system made 102.8 million journeys in 2024, of which 53.8 million were by metro. Tallinn Public Transport served a total of 126 million journeys in 2025. Kesker concludes that in a city Tallinn's size, a rapid transit system is entirely viable.

Tallinn's traffic congestion is significant. According to TomTom's 2025 traffic index, Tallinn's average congestion level was 45.7%, while in Rennes it was 34.3%. The author draws attention to the phenomenon of induced demand: every new road fills up soon with new cars, meaning that continuously expanding roads is not a lasting solution. It is more effective to offer an alternative that is faster and more convenient than a private car.

Time savings and security measure

According to the Metro Group, building a light metro would reduce travel time between Õismäe and Priisle from approximately 50 minutes to 25 minutes, and between Kalamaja and Rae municipality from roughly 40 minutes to 15 minutes. Such time savings would make public transport attractive to many people compared to their private cars.

Light metro is also a security measure: underground stations and tunnels would provide additional shelter in crisis situations and increase Tallinn's resilience. Furthermore, electric light metro would support Estonia's energy security, reducing dependence on fossil fuels and enabling the use of domestically produced renewable energy.

A billion-euro investment demands responsibility

Metro Group expert Kristjan Kaunissaare has estimated the project's cost at €1-1.5 billion. Kesker acknowledges that this is not a decision to be made lightly. He concedes that Finance Minister Jürgen Ligi is right to warn against persistent budget deficits and irresponsible borrowing. However, the author emphasizes the need to distinguish between debt that covers everyday expenses and long-term investment that grows the city's productivity and reduces future costs.

Funding could come from a combination of borrowed funds, ticket revenues, EU support, and budget reallocations. Kesker stresses that light metro can only be discussed seriously if it is based on an independent cost-benefit analysis, a phased construction plan, and a transparent assessment of the project's impact on debt levels.

Tallinn needs a long-term plan

The author emphasizes that major infrastructure projects take decades to complete, and planning must begin early. Tallinn's public transport connectivity is not poor now, but the shortcoming is in speed and convenience compared to a private car. If the capital wants to be a well-functioning European capital with mobility solutions by 2040 or 2050, the necessary decisions must be discussed and made today.