Are ASCE Infrastructure Assessments political and self-serving?
What would you grade the condition of America's overall infrastructure today? If we are a D+ nation, as the most recent report card on America's infrastructure from the American Society of Civil Engineers suggests, can you cite nations or societies with better civic foundations that we should be emulating?
Since 1998, the U.S. public has been repeatedly warned of the aging, deteriorating, crumbling condition of America's infrastructure, most recently, by the 28 members of the ASCE Committee on America's Infrastructure. For decades, the overall grades on these ASCE Report Cards: D-(1998), D+(2001), D(2005), D(2009), D(2013), D+(2017) have painted a dispiriting image of the deteriorating condition of our nation's civil works.
To propagate these assessments to federal and state funding agencies, ASCE has commissioned lobbyists to generate legislation aimed at obtaining major (dedicated) increases in infrastructure funding; relaxation of burdensome federal environmental regulations; and fast-tracking of construction permit processes. Decades of neglect and 'underinvestment', ASCE contends, now requires a near-term remedial expenditure of $4.59 trillion.
In addition, ASCE urges all members to take political actions to help 'put us on a path for increased economic prosperity.' Further, we are warned that 'The longer Congress delays, the more Americans pay.'
But are we, as America's rank-and-file civil engineers, planning and designing for an energy and resource-limited future? Or are these ASCE lobbying efforts a not-too-subtle indication that, in pursuit of 'economic prosperity', we will continue to design, build and operate civil works facilities based on a massive foundation of fossil fuels?
I have been a proud ASCE member for 62 years. I have observed the progress of our nation's growth over many decades and have developed a very different view of the current state of America's constructed facilities.
Our buildings are supplied with more reliable electricity than we could possibly need. We can travel everywhere with our roads and airports. Most Americans have safe, modern water supplies (while over 2 billion people worldwide don't). Over just the last half-century, we have protected our nation's waters with well-designed and well-managed wastewater treatment systems.
So why does ASCE offer such dismal appraisals of American infrastructure? Admittedly, it lobbies to advance the interests and profits of its members. Since fear is a great motivator, we are constantly warned of potential collapse and danger.
But, in a changing world of finite resources, last-century infrastructure - designed, built and still operating on a massive foundation of fossil fuels - cannot be allowed to continue.
As engineers, we must be the first to dispel any illusion of infinite resource availability and redirect our efforts to creating new foundations for a truly sustainable future, wherein our shared infrastructure will be energy-efficient, democratized, distributed, renewably powered, modest, environmentally safe and adequate for meeting basic public needs.
Perhaps America's infrastructure does deserve a near-failing grade, but not for the reasons ASCE ascribes.
I hope to continue to advocate for sustainable investments in our nation's infrastructure so as to protect the American public's health, safety, and future welfare. In that spirit, I would like to offer some suggestions that I feel are essential for ASCE to include in future infrastructure assessments.
Sustainability
Sustainability should be specifically cited as a goal/direction in evaluating progress toward renewing infrastructure. Resilience is not a substitute. Owing to its centrality to our nation's future, progress towards sustainability, by itself, requires a independent grade.
Transition from fossil-fueled-based infrastructure
Many engineering firms are already benefitting from nationwide efforts to design and construct facilities leading to a transition to renewable energy resources. These efforts should be a clearly stated, industry-wide imperative.
Ethics
From what is known, it should be obvious that the construction of new infrastructure for fossil fuel extraction, processing, and distribution is ethically questionable. Ethical design should be taken into consideration in grading all new infrastructure investments.
Transportation alternatives
ASCE should take a lead in promoting alternatives to current transportation design protocols with specific attention to minimizing the use and storage of private vehicles in burgeoning urban centers.
Overall, I would like to see ASCE take a position of bold leadership into a sustainable future. Presently, engineers are highly respected in our society, but our standing will suffer if many practitioners double down on last-century solutions.
Alternately, I hope that ASCE demonstrates courage and vision, using its influence and member insights to educate elected officials, leaders, and the public on the myriad benefits of truly sustainable infrastructure design.
John T. O'Connor, F. ASCE
------------------------------
John O'Connor D.Eng., P.E., F.ASCE
CEO
H2O'C Engineering
Columbia MO
(573) 234-1012
John@...------------------------------