3 ms·

There is a good article in the Atlantic (I will try to dig it up) about how the relatively unexplainable reasons (or maybe, lazily not explained reasons) why co

There is a good article in the Atlantic (I will try to dig it up) about how the relatively unexplainable reasons (or maybe, lazily not explained reasons) why construction and public infrastructure projects in our country are costing so much (billions of $ more than you would expect), is really hindering our development and collective wealth as a country (wealth in terms of infrastructure, modernity of our facilities). The example was the rail development of the 2nd Ave subway line in Manhattan, but take almost any example of a large project. Think about how, if the cost of our projects is 2-3x what it "should be", we are doing without 2/3-1/2 of the improvements to our physical world that we could otherwise achieve. For some reason, it's a confluence of aging infrastructure, cost of displacing entrenched residents / businesses to make improvements, labor cost, insurance, etc. What it also produces is a country that does not have a lot of practice in doing big, important infrastructure projects. Maybe once every 10 years. Compared to growing younger countries where they have major projects, say, every other month. And as a result, fewer experts are around to bid for such work, and also as a result, the cost of such projects goes up. It's a big problem as a country ages and gets more expensive. Some articles: - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-construction-costs.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-... - https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/1/1/14112776/new-york-second-avenue-subway-phase-2 https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/1/1/14112776/ne... - https://pedestrianobservations.com/2018/05/07/why-is-second-avenue-subway-phase-2-so-expensive/ https://pedestrianobservations.com/2018/05/07/why-is-second-... And this article is not specifically on the problem of cost, but how replacing signals in the NYC subway has lessons like managing a massive software project: - https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/11/why-dont-we-know-where-all-the-trains-are/415152/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/11/why-d...

jimmaswell 6y ago
> confluence of aging infrastructure, cost of displacing entrenched residents / businesses to make improvements, labor cost, insurance, etc. What about corruption e.g. ghost employees, inflated billing rates, intentional delays, knowingly letting things be done wrong according to a mistaken spec to bill more hours later, all done by a company owned by the mayor's cousin? Construction is famous for those kinds of things.
- supernova87a 6y ago
  That definitely may come into play. But I think the bulk of the 2-3x (or more cost inflation) for the average project is larger factors that no particular entity is trying to "cheat". Just a gradual creeping up of expectations and willingness to tolerate higher and higher costs.
asdff 6y ago
Part of the reason is the insistence of not using international help to greatly advance projects, and favoring making the most minimum impact on car traffic possible. When newer nations are able to rapidly and cheaply build infrastructure, chances are they are using outside help and have no qualms about de-prioritizing car traffic. We lack experience building infrastructure since we largely gave up on mass transit projects for decades; NYC and Boston are reliant on vestigial rail infrastructure that hasn't had a serious expansion for decades, D.C. metro almost didn't happen, and LA managed to build 1.5 subway lines in the 90s before metro was banned from digging new lines until the 2010s, under the unfounded idea that the city might explode into a methane fueled fireball if the tunnel boring machine made its way under Beverly hills high school. That half line they started in the 90s won't be completed until 2030, and will be 3.5 miles shorter than originally planned. Our ignorance and unwillingness to take off the shelf solutions is what has driven up our costs. The patriotic label of 'american made' is regularly used to hide greed and waste. This LA times article (original la times link was dead, this is a mirror) talks about how an established french company offered to construct the project under budget, but officials dismissed them and opted to reinvent the wheel for massive costs along a political route, not an optimal one (1). The contractor consultant model that we rely on for public works is designed to loot the public purse first, and improvements to public welfare take the back seat to maintaining the status quo of a car dominated way of life. If we were serious, calhsr would have been spooled up into an actual agency with its own labor and engineering pools, and not be this big resovour of public money being sucked dry by parasitic consultants who smelled the billions of dollars of chum we put in the water and convinced us explicitly not to try this in house (2). Another example of compromised by design infrastructure is the expo line in LA. It takes 15 minutes for the train to travel two miles from USC to downtown LA, because the train runs at grade and is only this year being given signal priority at traffic lights, despite the line opening 8 years ago. Embarrassing to spend millions on a vehicle that can be beaten by someone in decent shape sprinting those two miles along the train tracks. 1. https://transdef.org/wp-content/uploads/High-speed-rail-officials-rebuffed-proposal-from-French-railway.pdf https://transdef.org/wp-content/uploads/High-speed-rail-offi... 2. https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-california-high-speed-rail-consultants-20190426-story.html https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-california-hi...
- 6y ago
jmalicki 6y ago
"Think about how, if the cost of our projects is 2-3x what it "should be", we are doing without 2/3-1/2 of the improvements to our physical world that we could otherwise achieve." This is far, far underestimating how many projects we lose. If things were 3x cheaper, one could justify many more than 3x the projects, as there would be more return on investment and more willingness to fund additional projects.

jimmaswell 6y ago

> confluence of aging infrastructure, cost of displacing entrenched residents / businesses to make improvements, labor cost, insurance, etc. What about corruption e.g. ghost employees, inflated billing rates, intentional delays, knowingly letting things be done wrong according to a mistaken spec to bill more hours later, all done by a company owned by the mayor's cousin? Construction is famous for those kinds of things.

supernova87a 6y ago
That definitely may come into play. But I think the bulk of the 2-3x (or more cost inflation) for the average project is larger factors that no particular entity is trying to "cheat". Just a gradual creeping up of expectations and willingness to tolerate higher and higher costs.

asdff 6y ago

Part of the reason is the insistence of not using international help to greatly advance projects, and favoring making the most minimum impact on car traffic possible. When newer nations are able to rapidly and cheaply build infrastructure, chances are they are using outside help and have no qualms about de-prioritizing car traffic. We lack experience building infrastructure since we largely gave up on mass transit projects for decades; NYC and Boston are reliant on vestigial rail infrastructure that hasn't had a serious expansion for decades, D.C. metro almost didn't happen, and LA managed to build 1.5 subway lines in the 90s before metro was banned from digging new lines until the 2010s, under the unfounded idea that the city might explode into a methane fueled fireball if the tunnel boring machine made its way under Beverly hills high school. That half line they started in the 90s won't be completed until 2030, and will be 3.5 miles shorter than originally planned. Our ignorance and unwillingness to take off the shelf solutions is what has driven up our costs. The patriotic label of 'american made' is regularly used to hide greed and waste. This LA times article (original la times link was dead, this is a mirror) talks about how an established french company offered to construct the project under budget, but officials dismissed them and opted to reinvent the wheel for massive costs along a political route, not an optimal one (1). The contractor consultant model that we rely on for public works is designed to loot the public purse first, and improvements to public welfare take the back seat to maintaining the status quo of a car dominated way of life. If we were serious, calhsr would have been spooled up into an actual agency with its own labor and engineering pools, and not be this big resovour of public money being sucked dry by parasitic consultants who smelled the billions of dollars of chum we put in the water and convinced us explicitly not to try this in house (2). Another example of compromised by design infrastructure is the expo line in LA. It takes 15 minutes for the train to travel two miles from USC to downtown LA, because the train runs at grade and is only this year being given signal priority at traffic lights, despite the line opening 8 years ago. Embarrassing to spend millions on a vehicle that can be beaten by someone in decent shape sprinting those two miles along the train tracks. 1. https://transdef.org/wp-content/uploads/High-speed-rail-officials-rebuffed-proposal-from-French-railway.pdf https://transdef.org/wp-content/uploads/High-speed-rail-offi... 2. https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-california-high-speed-rail-consultants-20190426-story.html https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-california-hi...

6y ago

jmalicki 6y ago

"Think about how, if the cost of our projects is 2-3x what it "should be", we are doing without 2/3-1/2 of the improvements to our physical world that we could otherwise achieve." This is far, far underestimating how many projects we lose. If things were 3x cheaper, one could justify many more than 3x the projects, as there would be more return on investment and more willingness to fund additional projects.