2 ms·
The Engineering of Wildlife Crossings
- rqtwteye 2y agoI think this is a great effort but I wonder if they could have done something cheaper that can be put in many places. I am not sure how useful one super shiny crossing will be.
- Night_Thastus 2y agoSometimes one giant crossing is better than several-equivalently priced smaller ones, for animal behavior or geography reasons.
- contingencies 2y agoHalf the ~$100M probably disappears in administrative BS. Now that they've captured the federal government (re. Trump/Elon bromance), maybe The Boring Company can obtain some national environmental restoration funding and dig a bunch of holes to put the ugly freeways in. If digging a short tunnel is a repeatable operation free of BS and possible at ~2-3x this cost (~$250M) then it could perhaps be widely replicated to good effect on relatively natural lands adjacent to but outside of core urban areas.
- NortySpock 2y ago> If digging a short tunnel is a repeatable operation It is not. Geology and drainage conditions are different at every site, and thus cookie-cutter solutions do not go nearly as far as you would hope.
- 9dev 2y agoHah. As if. They are just going to funnel taxpayer money into private ventures and corruption. Just you wait.
- relwin 2y agoHere's a case when a $660k tunnel didn't work out because it spooked the animals, then the Marines blocked it: https://jesseshunting.com/threads/660-000-wildlife-tunnel-under-calif-highway.18481/ https://jesseshunting.com/threads/660-000-wildlife-tunnel-un...