5 ms·

I think I can explain the subway costs - the construction itself is relatively cheap - tunneling and excavating is something mine companies do regularly on a bi

I think I can explain the subway costs - the construction itself is relatively cheap - tunneling and excavating is something mine companies do regularly on a bigger scale. It is the NIMBY, regulations and not breaking anything. Unlike China you cannot rule by decree - there be subway here - dig.

mahyarm 10y ago
But how about spain, france & the UK?
- venomsnake 10y ago
  Different culture. People like, use, and depend on subways so they like the extensions and expect their governments to get shit done. And in Europe the power of a single individual to block major project is limited.
  - matt4077 10y ago
    Well in France any hamster is basically empowered to stop a project... While we're guessing, this may just be due to the very special environment that is Manhattan. It's been a few years since I read about it, but I seem to remember that they had to fight some quite unusual challenges, including skyscrapers, the constant influx of water, and both granite and basically liquid sediments. Manhattan probably also has an insane amount od existing, badly documented underground infrastructure.
- tomarr 10y ago
  The UK also has problems with particularly expensive infrastructure projects. They tend to cost magnitudes more in common law countries (USA, Canada, UK, Australia, NZ. This is generally down to the land and legal costs, with the dispute framework becoming much more expensive. Land and property rights are much more extensively protected in common law countries.
  - xioxox 10y ago
    Germany has also had massive cost problems with some projects, such as the Hamburg concert hall. There's also the Berlin airport which is years late and has costs over twice of what was expected.
- Symmetry 10y ago
  They handle environmental impact by regulatory agency, not by giving everybody and their brother the right to sue to stop the project on environmental grounds. The way the US does it keeps regulatory bodies relatively small and cheap in budget terms by passing on the enforcement costs to private parties. But the overall costs and delays go way, way up.
onion2k 10y ago
It's also likely that the early construction projects were the low hanging fruit - things that had the greatest impact for the lowest cost. As you run out of those things and start to implement the more complex ideas costs are bound to increase. I'm not sure that would be enough to account for a 20* increase though.
- dionidium 10y ago
  One way to test this theory would be to estimate the cost of completing low-hanging-fruit projects from the early twentieth century that were cancelled (e.g. subways in Cincinnati and St. Louis). I doubt you'd find that it's just as cheap to build them now.

mahyarm 10y ago

But how about spain, france & the UK?

venomsnake 10y ago
Different culture. People like, use, and depend on subways so they like the extensions and expect their governments to get shit done. And in Europe the power of a single individual to block major project is limited.
- matt4077 10y ago
  Well in France any hamster is basically empowered to stop a project... While we're guessing, this may just be due to the very special environment that is Manhattan. It's been a few years since I read about it, but I seem to remember that they had to fight some quite unusual challenges, including skyscrapers, the constant influx of water, and both granite and basically liquid sediments. Manhattan probably also has an insane amount od existing, badly documented underground infrastructure.
tomarr 10y ago
The UK also has problems with particularly expensive infrastructure projects. They tend to cost magnitudes more in common law countries (USA, Canada, UK, Australia, NZ. This is generally down to the land and legal costs, with the dispute framework becoming much more expensive. Land and property rights are much more extensively protected in common law countries.
- xioxox 10y ago
  Germany has also had massive cost problems with some projects, such as the Hamburg concert hall. There's also the Berlin airport which is years late and has costs over twice of what was expected.
Symmetry 10y ago
They handle environmental impact by regulatory agency, not by giving everybody and their brother the right to sue to stop the project on environmental grounds. The way the US does it keeps regulatory bodies relatively small and cheap in budget terms by passing on the enforcement costs to private parties. But the overall costs and delays go way, way up.

onion2k 10y ago

It's also likely that the early construction projects were the low hanging fruit - things that had the greatest impact for the lowest cost. As you run out of those things and start to implement the more complex ideas costs are bound to increase. I'm not sure that would be enough to account for a 20* increase though.

dionidium 10y ago
One way to test this theory would be to estimate the cost of completing low-hanging-fruit projects from the early twentieth century that were cancelled (e.g. subways in Cincinnati and St. Louis). I doubt you'd find that it's just as cheap to build them now.