4 ms·
> Initially expected to cost £4.2bn, the tunnel has ending up costing about £5bn By modern standards that seems extremely well-costed! What's £800m / 16% these
by switch007 3y ago
> Initially expected to cost £4.2bn, the tunnel has ending up costing about £5bn
By modern standards that seems extremely well-costed! What's £800m / 16% these days?
Rivers/sewage is a hot-topic in England at the moment as the water companies are trying to manufacture consent; trying to get bailouts and/or permission to massively raise prices to fix issues they neglected over many years in order to make shareholders happy (yes, water is fully privatised in England, naturally...though I'm not sure if Scotland (where it's publicly owned) is faring any better when it comes to sewage dumping?)
- JetSetWilly 3y agoScotland is not faring any better at all. It's just that "sewage in waterways" is not measured in Scotland very much. In England they made the mistake of adding lots of sensors to lots of waterways.
- mike_hearn 3y agoNote that Ofwat have reduced prices in real terms over time, whilst the population has gone up a lot. So the water companies are doing more with less, which is part of why Thames Water is in so much debt.