Courtesy of Idaho Transportation Department
In January 2009, as the stimulus package was being debated on a national level, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) released a timely preview of a study it was working on. The study was a report card that graded many areas of our nation’s infrastructure. It was not pretty. Overall, the ASCE gave our infrastructure a D with no specific area receiving anything higher than a C. They also estimated that the nation would need to invest 2.2 trillion dollars over the next five years to have any chance of raising our grades.
The report was released at a very opportune time and attracted much attention just as the nation was debating how much stimulus money should be allocated to our nation’s infrastructure. In this regard it definitely served its purpose and may very well have aided in the passing of the stimulus package. However, the timing of this report has led some people to question the validity of its findings as well as the neutrality of the ASCE.
I, for one, stick by the ASCE wholeheartedly. I am a member and have worked with them before on many projects. I have always found them to be highly competent and upstanding people. I certainly admit that they may have an interest in seeing more government investment going towards our nation’s infrastructure. However, I also think this is unavoidable. Any organization, even a government organization, is going to be biased in some way. When we are talking about billions (even trillions) of dollars, there are always going to be many parties with vested interests. It’s just unavoidable.
I think if anyone really doubts the validity of the findings from the ASCE report card, all they need to do is scan the headlines about our crumbling bridges, failing levees, and persistent traffic problems.
Also of note is another important, but less publicized study that was released in November 2008. The “State of Industry Report” was issued by the American Water Works Association (AWWA) and mirrored some of the concerns from the ASCE report card, such as, most water professionals described U.S. infrastructure as “aging” with some going as far as “crumbling” and “failing.” Also of note, many respondents lamented that tight budgets have caused utilities to delay or cancel maintenance, leading to larger expenses down the road.
In summary, I see mounting evidence, which shows that as a country we need to create a long-term plan to upgrade and maintain our infrastructure. I believe that the examples we see in our daily commutes and hear about in the news are only the most visible tip of the iceberg. The industry reports being released show that the problems run deeper, and most of the corrective measures that are needed are currently being postponed. The stimulus funds are a step in the right direction, but they are really just a drop in the bucket with respect to what is needed. We should not have to wait for an economic crisis to come along so that we have an excuse to throw a lump sum of money at the problem.
Instead, we need to create a long-term plan that outlines where we want to be in 5-10 years. This plan should lay out specific objectives and action steps for achieving these goals. The plan should also incorporate effective maintenance, budgeting, life-cycle costing, and most importantly, a long-term and sustainable mindset.
