by basil_hayden » Thu 02 Aug 2007, 13:51:56
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('IanC', 'S')o, what will it be: spend money to maintain largely automobile-based infrastructure (roads, bridges, viaducts, etc) or reallocate that money to more appropriate technology for a Post Peak future?
I hear (figuratively) a lot of posters on this site bemoaning the fact that we are not preparing for the future by retrofiting our car-based infrastructure ie. not building better infrastructure for bikes, trains, walkable communities. I'm one of those posters. However, we clearly have a choice to make regarding the vast amount of dollars it will take to maintain our current infrastructure. Should we maintain or highways or not? What makes sense for the future?
Be careful how you answer as both paths are frought with challenges!
-Ian
Send all the DOT funds to the "Jet Pack Reasearch Department"!
Connecticut went through this several years ago with the
Mianus River Bridge Collapse. Now things are even worse and the next bridge is overdue for collapse, whether it be a highway bridge or an Amtrak bridge (still wooden) along the shoreline.
I think the major issue is how engineers do cost analyses for this type of infrastructure - I see costs to build, but I never see costs to inspect and maintain for its lifetime, nor a replacement estimate at the end of its lifetime.
Just lots of "happy thoughts".
My heart goes out to those negatively affected by this disaster, especially Ron's friend.
Also, this reminds me of that Oakland California deck collapse, where someone on the board calculated how much more oil would be used detouring and in traffic. Usage gets ratcheted up after each event like this.