5 ms·

That's a really good point. I guess we'll see if Europe has its own infrastructure problems in 50 years or so when some of that "new" WWII infrastructure start

by craigyk 11y ago

That's a really good point. I guess we'll see if Europe has its own infrastructure problems in 50 years or so when some of that "new" WWII infrastructure starts to get old. I would say, though, that not all parts of Europe had to rebuild from scratch. You still find WAY more 100+ year old structures in Europe than the US.

mike_hearn 11y ago
Well, the UK wasn't by any means completely destroyed in WW2 and there's a lot of work being done there to upgrade centuries old infrastructure. Some examples: 1) The Thames Tideway sewer is being constructed to handle the fact that the old London sewers have run out of capacity and routinely flood sewage into the Thames when there are heavy rains. The problem is that unlike modern sewer systems, London's is used for both rainwater and household sewage. And the original system was designed to overflow into the Thames, on the assumption that would ~never happen. But population growth and lots more concreting means it now happens regularly. The Thames Tideway is a massive, very deep underground tunnel that roughly follows the path of the river. 2) The London Underground is the world's oldest underground railway. It is upgraded continuously. The Crossrail upgrade is the largest construction project in Europe (technically Crossrail is not LU, but it's all a part of an integrated somewhat underground network). 3) The UK road network costs less to maintain than is raised via fuel taxes. The roads are effectively a profit centre for the government, in a sense. They are maintained continuously. 4) The UK water pipe network has had leaks at an economically sustainable level for 15 years now (i.e. the cost to find and fix the remaining leaks is higher than the value of the water lost). It does not use lead piping: http://dwi.defra.gov.uk/consumers/advice-leaflets/lead.pdf http://dwi.defra.gov.uk/consumers/advice-leaflets/lead.pdf I don't think there's actually any difference in infrastructure age between Europe and America. WW2 is a red herring. A lot of modern infrastructure runs underground and was undamaged or only lightly damaged by bombing, which was in any case, focused on the cities. The biggest impact of WW2 on the London Underground, for example, is that these days they have to do systematic searches for unexploded underground bombs before doing any work.
- philjohn 11y ago
  For point 3 ... that's the case for motorways and other major roads. Local road maintenance comes from the local council, and that's why anything less than an A road is usually littered with potholes that are rarely repaired.
- eatonphil 11y ago
  Thanks for the response. I really don't know much about the UK so I appreciate all those examples! However, even if WW2 is a red herring, I don't think you can compare Europe and the US to each other because the US is a single country under one government and Europe is a group of very individualistic countries that don't always cooperate well. This is just my theory, but any single country in Europe has the ability to change their countries infrastructure much more easily than the US (or any city in it) because the entire country's resources can be more easily bent toward it. Furthermore, those areas of many century-old buildings in Europe are /probably/ not located in the most economically advanced city/countries and therefore falls out of my initial comparison of the US versus the major economies/countries today.
- tim333 11y ago
  It seems the UK pipe network does have some lead: "If you live in an older property, you could have a lead supply pipe – the underground pipe which connects your home to the public water mains..." But you can have your tap water tested and they'll replace the pipes free if it's >10ug/l
- cmdkeen 11y ago
  The UK also has a partially privatised water system. When it first happened it was highly controversial, especially regional price disparities. Now years later there's an interesting political storm in Scotland which has retained a public water utility. The public sector has to contract out for water supplies and a private bidder came in with a much lower bid. The Scottish Government, for various reasons not least that the private bidder was English, gave Scottish Water three opportunities to try and make a more competitive offer - they couldn't.
  - 11y ago

by craigyk 11y ago

mike_hearn 11y ago

Well, the UK wasn't by any means completely destroyed in WW2 and there's a lot of work being done there to upgrade centuries old infrastructure. Some examples: 1) The Thames Tideway sewer is being constructed to handle the fact that the old London sewers have run out of capacity and routinely flood sewage into the Thames when there are heavy rains. The problem is that unlike modern sewer systems, London's is used for both rainwater and household sewage. And the original system was designed to overflow into the Thames, on the assumption that would ~never happen. But population growth and lots more concreting means it now happens regularly. The Thames Tideway is a massive, very deep underground tunnel that roughly follows the path of the river. 2) The London Underground is the world's oldest underground railway. It is upgraded continuously. The Crossrail upgrade is the largest construction project in Europe (technically Crossrail is not LU, but it's all a part of an integrated somewhat underground network). 3) The UK road network costs less to maintain than is raised via fuel taxes. The roads are effectively a profit centre for the government, in a sense. They are maintained continuously. 4) The UK water pipe network has had leaks at an economically sustainable level for 15 years now (i.e. the cost to find and fix the remaining leaks is higher than the value of the water lost). It does not use lead piping: http://dwi.defra.gov.uk/consumers/advice-leaflets/lead.pdf http://dwi.defra.gov.uk/consumers/advice-leaflets/lead.pdf I don't think there's actually any difference in infrastructure age between Europe and America. WW2 is a red herring. A lot of modern infrastructure runs underground and was undamaged or only lightly damaged by bombing, which was in any case, focused on the cities. The biggest impact of WW2 on the London Underground, for example, is that these days they have to do systematic searches for unexploded underground bombs before doing any work.

philjohn 11y ago
For point 3 ... that's the case for motorways and other major roads. Local road maintenance comes from the local council, and that's why anything less than an A road is usually littered with potholes that are rarely repaired.
eatonphil 11y ago
Thanks for the response. I really don't know much about the UK so I appreciate all those examples! However, even if WW2 is a red herring, I don't think you can compare Europe and the US to each other because the US is a single country under one government and Europe is a group of very individualistic countries that don't always cooperate well. This is just my theory, but any single country in Europe has the ability to change their countries infrastructure much more easily than the US (or any city in it) because the entire country's resources can be more easily bent toward it. Furthermore, those areas of many century-old buildings in Europe are /probably/ not located in the most economically advanced city/countries and therefore falls out of my initial comparison of the US versus the major economies/countries today.
tim333 11y ago
It seems the UK pipe network does have some lead: "If you live in an older property, you could have a lead supply pipe – the underground pipe which connects your home to the public water mains..." But you can have your tap water tested and they'll replace the pipes free if it's >10ug/l
cmdkeen 11y ago
The UK also has a partially privatised water system. When it first happened it was highly controversial, especially regional price disparities. Now years later there's an interesting political storm in Scotland which has retained a public water utility. The public sector has to contract out for water supplies and a private bidder came in with a much lower bid. The Scottish Government, for various reasons not least that the private bidder was English, gave Scottish Water three opportunities to try and make a more competitive offer - they couldn't.
- 11y ago