Slashdot Mirror
World's Longest Sea Bridge Opens After 9 Years of Construction (go.com)
Chinese President Xi Jinping inaugurated China's latest mega-infrastructure project on Tuesday: The world's longest sea crossing. From a report: The 34.2-mile bridge and tunnel that have been almost a decade in the making for the first time connect the semi-autonomous cities of Hong Kong and Macau to the mainland Chinese city of Zhuhai by road. The Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge spans the mouth of the Pearl River and significantly cuts the commuting time between the three cities. The previously four-hour drive between Zhuhai and Hong Kong will now take 45 minutes. One section of the crossing dives underwater into a 4.2 mile tunnel that creates a channel above for large cargo ship containers to pass through. The project came in over budget -- with Hong Kong alone investing $15 billion in it -- and delayed, as it was originally slate to open in 2016.
Jeff Bezos is not broke. Bill Gates is not broke. The US has plenty of money, it's just concentrated in the hands of a few private individuals.
A 20 billion dollar bridge is a win?
Estimate 1% annual maintenance cost, 3% cost of capital.
800 million/year...US$15,220/lanehour...
If it actually saved 3 hours/trip that wouldn't be too bad, but it's enabling cars to go to cities with no place to park them. Replacing a few train trips with car trips.
We'll see how much traffic it gets. Bet it never covers it's costs.
You should move all your money into Shanghai trades stocks. Do it.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Careful what you admire. It's amazing how much cheaper something is when you take worker rights out of the equation.
America doesn't build great infrastructure like this anymore. We're broke and getting more in debt every day.
The reason nothing is built in America is dysfunctional politics: Gridlock at the national level, combined with NIMBYism at the local level.
If something on this scale was attempted in America, we would spend $15B just on legal fees.
They already have a train. They don't have parking in Hong Kong and Macau for enough car traffic to justify the cost of the bridge.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
If something on this scale was attempted in America
Something of this scale is being attempted in the US, and yes, the costs are absurd.
A $100 Billion Train: The Future of California or a Boondoggle?
That mess will cost a quarter trillion by the end. Ultimately the stations will be in a bunch of 21st century Detroits.
...and now it's in need of replacement.
A 20 billion dollar bridge is a win?
Quite possibly yes. It connects some locations that are financially very important both locally and globally. Sure it will take quite a while to pay off (presuming it does) but I could see it being a net economic benefit overall. The Big Dig in Boston cost $24 billion so we're not in uncharted territory cost wise.
800 million/year...US$15,220/lanehour...
They are expecting roughly 29,100 vehicle crossings per day which is 10,950,000 crossings per year so accepting your math that would be ballpark $8/crossing. If it saves the amount of time the article claims they'll make the $800M back in fuel savings alone (3+ hours driving saved) irrespective of the value of the cargo carried and economic development resulting from the bridge. The real value in this bridge will probably be in the cargo and tourists it carries.
So yeah, it's a lot of money but one can make an economic case for it.
We could do the same if worker safety weren't an issue either.
You need to have a balance. If you spend billions on safety measures that only save a handful of lives, then you can afford far less infrastructure, which means stunted economic growth, which leads to worse healthcare, nutrition, and poverty, all of which lower life expectancy. So you end up killing more people than you save.
The tradeoff between safety and cost is going to be different for a developing country like China that it is in a 1st world country like America.
If you really believe in absolute safety and any cost, then the only answer is to never build or do anything.
Hong Kong will revert back to full Chinese control in a few decades, and this bridge is them literally extending their reach to the island, and making their presence and influence felt as early as possible.
Vox Borders has a great video about the larger political tensions and strategies that this bridge is a part of:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It'll be fine as long as there are no magic space wizards.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
11 people died during construction of the Golden Gate bridge. And that is considered pretty good. So yeah.
We already build most of our giant infrastructure projects years ago.
Your statement implies there is no further need for large infrastructure projects in the US which is plainly not true. Furthermore we have done a rather shitty job of maintaining the infrastructure we have and our public transit options (especially trains) are terrible in most of the country. Our power infrastructure needs rather substantial updating and modernization. Ask Flint Michigan it it's a good idea to never upgrade your water pipes for a century.
Infrastructure isn't something you build once and never worry about again. For a society to grow it needs to keep investing in it in ways both big and small.
The bridge is not for private cars. Indeed, the average person is not allowed to drive on this bridge. It primarily for freight and that will actually reduce pollution and to an extent congestion as vehicles can enter Hong Kong from the mainland and leave on the same day.
It probably won't stay up long enough for that to be significant.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Claiming there is no such thing as a wrong decision IS just childish thinking. You have made wrong decisions in your life, we all have. If you aren't recognizing them, that's a problem.
It's not always obvious looking forward, but many times it is. The problem is kids take advice without the necessary cynicism...What's motivating that advice?
If someone is only good at language a lit degree might be the right choice, but taking 200k$ is student loans for a lit degree IS a wrong decision.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Even if we took all the WEALTH of all the billionaires in the US we might be able to run the government for half a year. If you took all the corporate profits we'd be able to run the government for another half a year! Congratulations we funded the government for a year...now the billionaires have no wealth to invest. Corporations have no profits to invest, no money to pay dividends, no money for bonuses to employees. What are you going to do now.
The big dig was insane. But it was much more than a single 1.5 mile tunnel.
Political patronage was also huge, Mass politicians kicked back federal money to their buddies, SOP.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
A $100 Billion Train: The Future of California or a Boondoggle?
That mess will cost a quarter trillion by the end.
I don't think so. California's HSR is on a collision course with fiscal reality. It will likely be cancelled when the next recession comes.
it's enabling cars to go to cities with no place to park them. Replacing a few train trips with car trips.
FYI, the bridge is not limited to cars. It is also capable of carrying buses and cargo trucks between the major tourist areas.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Maybe instead of using a threshold like "billionaire" you could use something a little less arbitrary. Maybe, say, the top 1% of wealth holders?
You're off with the corporate profits though. US corporations apparently take in about 8 trillion a year in profit. Even the US government, the largest in the world, could operate quite happily on a bit more than a third of that.
The bridge is not for private cars. Indeed, the average person is not allowed to drive on this bridge. It primarily for freight and that will actually reduce pollution and to an extent congestion as vehicles can enter Hong Kong from the mainland and leave on the same day.
Freight may get the most use of the bridge- but they're not the real reason either- politics is. This is a physical link- China to wantaway Hong Kong. Just like the interstate system was originally designed for defence purposes (but gets lots of benefits to trade and travel in peace time)- the bridge is a military and political animal that will get lots of use from freight otherwise.
There should be no doubt though- this bridge was partially to be a political show to Hong Kong and partially to be a great way to get tanks and troops to Hong Kong quickly should they ever be troublesome about one party rule.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Too bad an AC posted that.
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
No matter where you go, there you are.
"America doesn't build great infrastructure like this anymore."
This is not about infrastructure, this is a political dominance game.
Those 2 islands are islands no more.
If they overstretch the liberties they were accorded, these bridges will be used to send tanks and troops very rapidly.
"Calling "literature degrees" worthless is not the same thing as saying you need a STEM degree to make a decent living. You forget that there is a third option. Forgo college and instead go into carpentry, plumbing, electrical, or some other trade."
I thought Uber drivers all studied literature.
"Estimate 1% annual maintenance cost, 3% cost of capital. "
As the infrastructure of the US tells us, you can ignore that for decades.
China already has physical connections to Hong Kong.
Maybe you should look at a map some time.
Never change.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
A big chunk of Phase 1's cost is the tracks between Caltrain & BART @ San Jose and somewhere around Modesto, which will get dual-use... LA-SF, and also SF-Modesto commuter rail. It's needed regardless of LA-bound trains. LA-SF is just frosting on the cake... regional commuter rail is the big prize, because it'll open up the Central Valley as East Silicon Valley.
Likewise, Brightline intends to extend Las Vegas-Victorville to Palmdale to connect with CALHSR, so you'll also be able to take the train from SF to Las Vegas (probably BEFORE it's 100% HSR the last ~50 miles into L.A.).
Worst-case, 50 years from now, CALHSR repurposes the bridge structures for vacuum supersonic maglev. The important thing will be ROW-preservation. In 50 years, central valley land will be as expensive & urban as the bay area is today, and CALHSR will be viewed as a spectacularly fortunate real-estate investment, if nothing else.
Take a look at a map. There are much easier ways to get tanks a troops in to Hong Kong. Like over the land that connects it to China.
This bridge connects to Lantau Island, not Hong Kong Island.
Nazi architecture for the 21st century.
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
In Boston, it takes that long to paint the Tobin bridge.
Over salt water, no.
Taking the 'American Association of Civil Engineers' word on needed infrastructure investment is like asking your barber if you need a haircut. I know it's politically convenient right now, but get a clue.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Considering China's enthusiasm for HSR, it does seem bizarre that they didn't just design another ~25 feet into the whole thing to make room for a pair of HSR tracks while they were at it. The marginal cost would have been fairly low, and it would have turned HK & Macau into the equivalent of a casual crosstown trip for each other.
Don't you know that there are already plenty of roads connecting the mainland and Hong Kong, through the city of Shenzhen; there is no need for another narrow bridge to move tanks.
Of course, everything the Chinese have been/are doing would have a politically biased interpretation from Americans.
America doesn't build great infrastructure like this anymore. We're broke and getting more in debt every day.
The reason nothing is built in America is dysfunctional politics: Gridlock at the national level, combined with NIMBYism at the local level.
If something on this scale was attempted in America, we would spend $15B just on legal fees.
It's true that the American political system is not as efficient as the Chinese one. That's both good and bad. Capital-intensive projects take a long time and money in the US, which is bad. In China, grand projects like $17-billion bridges and $32-billion dams get fast-tracked, as do ghost cities and concentration camps.
If this bridge were so critical to the movement of tanks and troops, then it would be a horrible way to move them. Destroy a handful of sections longer than basic temporary bridge equipment and you have a 34 mile long bridge to nowhere. If you can operate behind the spearhead then you can bottle up troops and equipment on the bridge.
No thank you.
Political patronage was also huge, Mass politicians kicked back federal money to their buddies, SOP.
You say that like its a bad thing.
Ba-dum-bum!
But really I'm making a serious point.
Graft is bad, and wrong, and illegal (three different things) - no question, full stop. But most of the "patronage" is actually paying people for the cost of inconvenience you are subjecting them too.
People here love to decry the horrors of NIMBYism, but in fact people have rights and interests and property, and are right to defend those things when they feel so moved. Big infrastructure projects impact many people and if you don't want them to exercise their right as a free people to take your ass to court you need to pay them for their trouble. This idea offends lots of geeks and nerds, but if so, they definitely should never be in charge of civil engineering project of any kind.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
Do you want to know the REAL difference between "boondoggle" and "valuable transportation infrastructure"? About 50-100 years (at least, insofar as COMPLETED infrastructure projects go... projects that get started & abandoned prior to being completed to useful length don't count).
In theory, the NEC was a "boondoggle". The Pennsylvania Railroad never made a profit on it due to the astronomical cost of maintaining it as electrified railway. Yet it's the reason why today, you can casually make day trips between New York and Washington without burning most of the day. Infrastructure has a funny way of doing that... hemorrhaging money at launch, losing money for years... then gradually, over time, becoming so important that disruption for even a few weeks would be DEVASTATING and UNTHINKABLE (hence, most of Amtrak's current problems with the NEC, and the London Underground's problems... they desperately need to do basic maintenance work on century-old tunnels, but can't shut them down, so they have two choices... defer maintenance as long as they can, or build a third tunnel at staggering expense so they can always keep at least two in service at any time because total shutdown is unthinkable).
Fifty years ago, Central Florida newspapers absolutely EXCORIATED FDOT for approving Interstate 4 -- a freeway from "nowhere" (Plant City) to "nowhere" (Lakeland). Nevermind the fact that even back then, it was fully intended to eventually span from downtown Tampa to Daytona Beach, and the initial segment between Lakeland and Plant City provided a detour around two crowded small towns that would have merited the construction of at least a 4-lane divided highway as a bypass around them for Tampa-Orlando traffic ANYWAY. If you read old newspaper articles, you'd think I-4 was proposed to be just a useless freeway between two small towns in Central Florida.
Ditto, for the Florida Turnpike between Orlando and Fort Pierce (the original "Turnpike" plans were for a "Y"... Miami to Fort Pierce, then one branch to Orlando (which is now Turnpike) and one branch to Jacksonville (which ended up as I-95). Newspapers and politicians fought bitterly over it, and pretended that then-existing roads between Miami and Orlando (US-27 through Sebring & Winter Haven) were even REMOTELY adequate (they weren't).
Back when "Alligator Alley" (I-75 across the Everglades) was first proposed by FDOT, the AAA fought it BITTERLY and did everything it could to get the project canceled for some insane, unfathomable reason. If anything, FDOT's only mistake with Alligator Alley was initially building it to a relatively low-standard narrow 2-lane deathtrap, instead of going full-on total freeway from day one(*).
Even Miami's Metrorail ended up being useful, despite Miami-Dade Transit's absolutely BREATHTAKING incompetence and short-sighted decisions (like cutting back Metrorail service to once/hour on weekends... at a point when their ridership was at the highest levels in its history... then scratching their heads and wondering why literally HALF of their weekend riders said 'fuck it' and disappeared. Unbelievable.) It took almost 40 years, but today the biggest limiting constraint on daily Metrorail ridership in Miami is the system's appalling lack of parking capacity at the 3 southernmost stations (thousands of people drive to the station intending to take Metrorail to go downtown, discover that the garage was full long before 8am, and end up having to drive downtown anyway because there's nowhere else to park).
Sometimes, politicians gamble and lose, like Cincinnati's subway. But you could equally argue that if Cincinnati had actually COMPLETED it and opened it for service, it probably WOULD have ended up influencing development and becoming useful 40-50 years down the line, too, even if it ended up being mostly useless for the first 25 years of its existence. That's just how transportation infrastructure IS... you build it through hinterlands, people spend years flipping land around it, then eventually people start buil
Is still not that bad for a 34 mile bridge considering here in the states a single bridge that spans a river can cost close to a billion.
It has been dubbed the "bridge of death" by some local media. At least nine workers on the Hong Kong side have died and officials told BBC News Chinese that nine had died on the mainland side, too.
That is better though than the Hoover Dam of Death (>100), or our own Brooklyn Bridge of Death (24), or the worst construction project in U.S. history the the Hawksnest Tunnel (476-1000). But worker safety standards are higher now, even in China.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
There should be no doubt though- this bridge was partially to be a political show to Hong Kong and partially to be a great way to get tanks and troops to Hong Kong quickly should they ever be troublesome about one party rule.
I was wondering why they chose to build it from Macau to Hong Kong, rather than mainland China, but thanks you just cleared that up for me.</sarcasm>
Political patronage was also huge, Mass politicians kicked back federal money to their buddies, SOP.
This project clearly shows how much more efficient China is at funneling money back to politicians and their buddies.
The question is, will any of the HSR network -- commuter or long distance -- actually be available at a ticket price low enough to get people to ride it? Even the initial optimistic plans had the SF -> LA type routes costing way more than a plane flight. You know the commuter service is bound to be more expensive than Amtrak, which hardly competitive as it is about $60 for a Sacramento/San Francisco capital corridor train roundtrip. Not a lot of people are going to want to spend close to $100 on their daily commute.
This space intentionally left blank
Those would be baristas
Everything above is my opinion....YMMV
There might be a HSR track from Hong Kong into mainland China via Shenzhen (which currently has a branch line to Zhuhai & extension to Macau under construction), but even if the train were allowed to run nonstop through mainland China & skip the border formalities besides those of Hong Kong or Macau, it would STILL be a 1.5-2 hour trip because it's so far out of the way compared to the new bridge/tunnel.
Plus, a train that ran directly between Hong Kong & Macau could probably relax some of the border formalities that are seen as necessary for trains passing through mainland China. Neither Macau nor Hong Kong might want to be swarmed by mainland residents, but I doubt whether they have much to care about with regard to EACH OTHER since they're both roughly equal in terms of wealth & freedom.
In American terms, rotate the map 90 degrees clockwise, and pretend that Macau is St. Petersburg (Florida) and Hong Kong is Bradenton. Yeah, in theory, you could drive from downtown Bradenton to downtown St. Petersburg by heading east to I-75, continuing north to Brandon, then slogging your way west through downtown Tampa over to St. Petersburg & driving south... and if you were extraordinarily lucky, you might even be able to make the trip in 90-120 minutes. But if you took I-275 and the Skyway Bridge instead, it's a 20-30 minute trip. Without the Skyway Bridge, Bradenton and St. Petersburg would be practically inaccessible to each other. With it, they're next-door neighbors. All over America, there are city pairs that USED to be mutually-inaccessible (at least, in any sane amount of travel time) that turned into casual driving distance once a bridge over some wide-but-shallow body of water got built. Ditto, for Europe... consider Copenhagen vs Malmo. The ferry always existed... but back when the trip took hours, the idea of living in Malmo and commuting to Copenhagen would have simply been LUDICROUS. Now, it's something people seriously consider as a daily option. The same thing is likely to happen when/if Italy finally gets around to building a bridge to Sicily.
Right now, Brightline charges $20-40 each way for travel between Miami and West Palm Beach, and $15-30 for travel between Fort Lauderdale and either Miami or WPB. There aren't a lot of people traveling between WPB and Miami daily, but there are a LOT of people using Brightline to travel between Fort Lauderdale and the two cities. Pretty much every affluent professional who lives near downtown Fort Lauderdale & works in downtown Miami or WPB now takes Brightline, simply because it literally cuts the travel time in half (and allows you to spend it playing with your computer, instead of sitting frustrated in gridlock).
For a better idea of how successful it'll be, check back in another year or two... after it's been around long enough for people to start making "where do I want to live" decisions based upon Brightline's existence and travel times, as opposed to "where do I want to live, if living in Fort Lauderdale means I'm going to have to endure a grueling 60-90+ minute drive to work each way, and commuting daily between Miami and WPB would take ~1.5-2 hours on a GOOD day at 8am or 5pm.
Considering how INSANELY expensive rent is anywhere in the Bay Area, I think Caltrain could easily find tens of thousands of people willing to fork over $50-100/day if it meant they could pay $2,500/month for a 3 bedroom townhome with garage and back yard, instead of paying $4,000/month for a one-room efficiency. They might still pay the same total amount per month, but they'd get a lot more for their money.
Trains don't HAVE to be faster OR cheaper than cars or planes to be used... they just need to be perceived as nicer. Consider Eurostar... planes are almost always cheaper than Eurostar (especially walk-on Eurostar fares), but anybody who can afford it unhesitatingly takes Eurostar because it's almost as fast as flying (when you consider "terminal time"), and WAY nicer & less-stressful than flying. Ditto, for Acela between DC and New York. The proles fly from Dulles to Newark & spend 2-3 hours just getting to and from the plane itself. Acela passengers spend more time in motion, but half the total time getting to wherever they're ultimately going (and enjoy substantially more unstructured free time during their trip, vs air travel's "hurry up to actively wait".
I have a real difficulty with that proposition for the simple reason neither Miami nor Fort Lauderdale are pedestrian friendly especially not Fort Lauderdale. Unless you want to have to shower and change your clothes again(from trying to walk through the sauna we call climate) when you get to work your going to need a vehicle at both ends.
I was wondering why they chose to build it from Macau to Hong Kong, rather than mainland China, but thanks you just cleared that up for me.</sarcasm>
They didn't. There are three different countries at play here. The bridge starts in Hong Kong and then goes to a new artificial island built in the ocean where the Macau and mainland borders meet. At this 3-way customs facility the bridge splits in two, one part goes west to Macau, the other has this fancy flyover arrangement to flip the traffic to the other side of the road before continuing north and joining just south of of the port in Zhuhai.
They don't have parking in Hong Kong and Macau for enough car traffic to justify the cost of the bridge.
What makes you think people will go from China to Hong Kong / Macau rather than the other way? The poor tend not to flow towards rich areas in any great mass, and Zhuhai isn't exactly the bustling economy that is Macau or Hong Kong.
Fort Lauderdale doesn't HAVE to be pedestrian-friendly to appeal to Brightline riders who work in Miami. Many of them might end up paying a super-premium to live at Flagler Art Village within walking distance of the Brightline station, but for everything else they'll just drive. Brightline is their loophole that enables them to have a well-paying job in downtown Miami that demands long hours, without having to further endure actually LIVING there. Don't get me wrong... Miami is fun for a few years... but after a decade or two, the endless 24/7 gridlock and general dysfunction everywhere around you just really gets tiring and old. Especially when it sinks in that it's never going to get better during our lifetime, and will only keep getting worse. Even moreso when you realize that almost all of your friends have thrown in the towel and moved to Fort Lauderdale, and you're now driving up there all the time.
Downtown Miami is "pedestrian friendly" in the sense that it's relatively easy to use Metromover to get to 80-90% of the places where well-paid people are likely to work... and people who LIVE in downtown Miami don't EXPECT to be able to do things like shop there. It's just taken for granted that if you live downtown, going shopping means driving 10 miles to Dolphin Mall or International Mall, or taking Metrorail 8 miles to Dadeland Mall.
Put another way, you don't live in downtown Miami because you crave an urban lifestyle... you live in downtown Miami because you make lots of money, have no free time because you work 60-80 hours/week, and endure it because it means you can get to work in 10 minutes instead of 90-120 minutes each way.
Moving to downtown Miami IS known to be actively harmful to your social life. Why? Stupidly-expensive parking (downtown Miami has more parking per square foot than some outlet malls, but most of the spaces are owned by a cartel that uses artificial scarcity to drive up prices... it really, really sucks paying $20 to park on a Friday night in a half-empty garage surrounded by TOTALLY empty garages). If you move to downtown Miami, none of your friends will come over to see you anymore. Or they'll do it once, spend the evening complaining about how expensive it was to park, and never do it again.
Another perk in favor of Fort Lauderdale for the car-averse... if you want to take Uber to the beach, Fort Lauderdale beach is a relatively cheap 2-3 mile trip down Las Olas or Sunrise Blvd. Getting to the beach from downtown Miami without a car is significantly more expensive (Biscayne Bay is wide, the causeway meanders, and gridlock drives up the cost even higher).
In downtown Fort Lauderdale, the transit sucks... but most of the places you'd want to get to via Uber are within 2-3 miles. In Miami, the transit sucks... but everything you'd want to get to via Uber from downtown Miami is FAR AWAY and EXPENSIVE to get to.