 |
Re: BOB2 ! "16 miles of tunnels would stretch under the Tehachapi Mountains"- NOPE!!!
Author: Ed Workman
Date: 10-26-2015 - 17:03
As I said
One can do ANYTHING
One can not afford EVERYTHING
I received draft of a paper from the interwebb-
I saved it and printed it and started reading it and misplaced it.
It was to be in a recent symposium held by Oxford- or the like.
I thought I'd cite it and quote, but see above
So I googled 'cost overrun' to see if I could find it.
No, but plenty of other papers on the subject quickly were revealed.
Studies by engineering societies, university folks and the like, not the Koch brothers.
IIRC the mystery paper, written by a person in Scandanavia, was a study of LARGE public projects of the last 30 or so years.
This was a world-wide study and mentioned were the Bay Bridge fix, the Channel Tunnel
[in that one some private investors were suckered in- their rate of return is negative 15%]etc.
Hiway projects missed projections, but some were too high, some too low, indicating some learning at play, or a reasonable appearance of statistical consistency.
Rail projects were WAAAAAY over on cost/time and waaaaayyyyy under on ridership projections.
NO improvement in estimating 'skill' is evident over the last decades.
Which is to say where public bodies are involved, the books are cooked.
Before I drifted off I hadn't reached the part about '...and what can be done about it', but that is a concern in some quarters.
Even tho' the paper is based on post 1950-ish projects, the conclusions are not new. The Thames Tram Tunnel of 100+ years ago was administered by the London Council and failed miserably in schedule and costs. Then there was the British Dirigible project- was it the R101?- too heavy too costly too too.
An engineer can do for $5 what anybody could do for $10
Let the gummint hire the engineer and it costs $87.50
One can do ANYTHING
One can not afford EVERYTHING
I received draft of a paper from the interwebb-
I saved it and printed it and started reading it and misplaced it.
It was to be in a recent symposium held by Oxford- or the like.
I thought I'd cite it and quote, but see above
So I googled 'cost overrun' to see if I could find it.
No, but plenty of other papers on the subject quickly were revealed.
Studies by engineering societies, university folks and the like, not the Koch brothers.
IIRC the mystery paper, written by a person in Scandanavia, was a study of LARGE public projects of the last 30 or so years.
This was a world-wide study and mentioned were the Bay Bridge fix, the Channel Tunnel
[in that one some private investors were suckered in- their rate of return is negative 15%]etc.
Hiway projects missed projections, but some were too high, some too low, indicating some learning at play, or a reasonable appearance of statistical consistency.
Rail projects were WAAAAAY over on cost/time and waaaaayyyyy under on ridership projections.
NO improvement in estimating 'skill' is evident over the last decades.
Which is to say where public bodies are involved, the books are cooked.
Before I drifted off I hadn't reached the part about '...and what can be done about it', but that is a concern in some quarters.
Even tho' the paper is based on post 1950-ish projects, the conclusions are not new. The Thames Tram Tunnel of 100+ years ago was administered by the London Council and failed miserably in schedule and costs. Then there was the British Dirigible project- was it the R101?- too heavy too costly too too.
An engineer can do for $5 what anybody could do for $10
Let the gummint hire the engineer and it costs $87.50
