Until Done

(or: Reason #1 why I am not a libertarian)

Inspired by Infrastructure for the Future We Want, an article by Alex Steffen on WorldChanging.

When I get bored waiting for the metro, I count the elevator outages that scroll across the announcements ticker: Elevator Outage, White Flint, Shuttle from Twinbrook; Elevator Outage Virginia Square, Shuttle from Ballston….rarely fewer than a half dozen, and I have never seen a day when all the elevators were working.

The DC Metro System is 42 years old. Granted, it is a century younger than New York City transit. But track work, elevator repair, escalator mending, is eternal. The system doesn’t need more patches. It needs an overhaul. Skimping on repairs or restorations and making due with patches can have fatal consequences.

While some elements of U.S. infrastructure are sheer marvels of engineering, the system at large -all the roads with cracks and potholes, structurally deficient bridges, the aging public transit systems- needs huge renovations. Indeed, the U.S. is falling behind in a global comparison as well: the first American high speed rail system will be not in the U.S. but in Argentina.

Rebuilding our infrastructure would be inordinately expensive. Indeed, how is it even thinkable at the beginning of a recession? On one hand (the unrealistic one), if taxes were progressive instead of regressive, and if we got ourselves out of this money sinkhole of an idiotic “war,” it might be easier to take care of the important domestic issues. On the other hand, updating the infrastructure would provide a large quantity of domestic jobs, the cost would be spread over multiple levels of government, and citizens could easily see how they themselves benefit – either by employment or safe and easier transit.

Updating our infrastructure is a prime opportunity to take into consideration the grave facts about our ecological state, and need to conserve energy and reduce emissions. Indeed, these are necessary goals, if we want our children to have at least the quality of life we are accustomed to.

There are the obvious methods of greening our infrastructure: bike lanes, focusing on mass transit rather than freeways (Worldchanging has a wonderful article: “My Other Car is a Bright Green City” about cars and emissions). Effective mass transit that encourages urban, rather than suburban, growth, is better for the environment. While cities might seem dirtier, they have a much smaller ecological footprint per person, of which the population denseness and decreased need to drive is a major factor. To note (from the above-mentioned article), it is easier to effectively and prolifically green buildings than it is to green automobiles.

But there are other issues as well, such as sourcing energy for the system. Hot asphalt roads are natural solar panels. The Dutch are already beginning to use them to heat buildings and regulate roadtop temperatures so the roads require less maintenance. Or what about piezoelectrics – vibration energy? Two years ago the BBC did a story about the vibrations at the Victoria Cross underground station Granted, it’s not enough energy to power the trains, but between the 34,000 commuters and the hundreds of trains that pass through the station each day, it could certainly generate enough electricity to light itself. There is no reason to let that energy go to waste. The cost of maintaining the system is high enough as is.

And that brings me to my final point: using the overhaul as a way to boost the sorry financial state of the transit systems. While SEPTA and WMATA come particularly to mind, there is (to the best of my knowledge) no transit system in the world that breaks even, much less turns a profit. It is the maintenance that is so expensive – we are using century old technology at well over capacity. Updating the infrastructure is an enormous upfront investment, but, making it more durable, more energy efficient, paired with adjusting the routes and service (again, another large investment) to be more efficient, would greatly reduce long run costs. Not enough that they wouldn’t require subsidies, I don’t imagine, but hopefully enough that they won’t have an operation deficit.

*

There are so many other types of infrastructure, physical, communicative, or societal: energy, waste, water, the legal system, phone lines, financial markets, the school system, even the internet. Keeping them well functioning is necessary to keeping society well functioning – when they break down, so do we, and when they work well, people can put up with a lot – Sadaam Hussein was a harsh dictator, but the garbage got picked up on time. I think the provision of infrastructure is a primary reason why we need the government; parcelling the services out to firms without regulation can easily lead to monopoly pricing and favoritism.

I will have more to say on infrastructure in the future.

And more reasons why I am not a libertarian.