> why? Largely because the project requirements said "we should warn people away from this dangerous site". Assuming the standard (very generous) EPA figure o

> why? Largely because the project requirements said "we should warn people away from this dangerous site". Assuming the standard (very generous) EPA figure of $4 million as the break-even point to save one statistical human life, and an unrealistically generous discount rate of 0%, there's essentially no way a project of the scope of the proposed earthworks would be worth it.