4 ms·

The replacements locks, Olmsted Locks and Dam, began construction in December 1995. They're due to come online in 2018. http://www.lrl.usace.army.mil/Missions/

The replacements locks, Olmsted Locks and Dam, began construction in December 1995. They're due to come online in 2018. http://www.lrl.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Navigation/Locks-and-Dams/Olmsted-Locks-and-Dam/ http://www.lrl.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/Navigatio... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olmsted_Locks_and_Dam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olmsted_Locks_and_Dam At $3B and 20 years in the making, maybe they're just a little more complex than a shovel.

duskwuff 10y ago
And it seems a little difficult to blame Obama for the slow progress of a project that began about the same time he was filing papers for his candidacy as an Illinois senator.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- mtanski 10y ago
  Hasn't stopped people in the past so I guess why stop now.
honkhonkpants 10y ago
Any idea why it would take 20+ years to build? The largest lock in the world was built in 5 years.
- cbr 10y ago
  "The corps, an agency within the federal government, decided to build Olmsted with an experimental “in the wet” construction method: Hollow sections of the dam are built on the bank, skidded down to the river, towed into position and lowered into the water, where they are filled with concrete. Traditionally, a project like this would have used a coffer dam — a small temporary dam that keeps water out of the site while construction goes on in the dry. The “in the wet” method was supposed to save time and money and minimize delays, but it did the opposite. By the time the corps realized its folly, it was too late to alter course. The novel construction process and inadequate congressional funding, among other things, have dragged the project past the quarter-century mark."
  - honkhonkpants 10y ago
    Wacky and yet, so typically American. I wish we had a lot less "innovation" in this country's infrastructure.
    - NegativeLatency 10y ago
      You can't fight the Corps, or the Bureau of Reclamation. The pork is too appealing to congressional representatives.
tomohawk 10y ago
Yes, the project was already under way. There was $768B allocated for shovel ready projects and this was 'only' $3B. If was merely a matter of money, it seems like this lock should be done now. Or, given the $768B, replaced with a different design and the failed one cast aside.

duskwuff 10y ago

And it seems a little difficult to blame Obama for the slow progress of a project that began about the same time he was filing papers for his candidacy as an Illinois senator.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
mtanski 10y ago
Hasn't stopped people in the past so I guess why stop now.

honkhonkpants 10y ago

Any idea why it would take 20+ years to build? The largest lock in the world was built in 5 years.

cbr 10y ago
"The corps, an agency within the federal government, decided to build Olmsted with an experimental “in the wet” construction method: Hollow sections of the dam are built on the bank, skidded down to the river, towed into position and lowered into the water, where they are filled with concrete. Traditionally, a project like this would have used a coffer dam — a small temporary dam that keeps water out of the site while construction goes on in the dry. The “in the wet” method was supposed to save time and money and minimize delays, but it did the opposite. By the time the corps realized its folly, it was too late to alter course. The novel construction process and inadequate congressional funding, among other things, have dragged the project past the quarter-century mark."
- honkhonkpants 10y ago
  Wacky and yet, so typically American. I wish we had a lot less "innovation" in this country's infrastructure.
  - NegativeLatency 10y ago
    You can't fight the Corps, or the Bureau of Reclamation. The pork is too appealing to congressional representatives.

tomohawk 10y ago

Yes, the project was already under way. There was $768B allocated for shovel ready projects and this was 'only' $3B. If was merely a matter of money, it seems like this lock should be done now. Or, given the $768B, replaced with a different design and the failed one cast aside.