I agree with this idea, expressed by Matt Casale, expressed in a piece at The Hill:
We should not rebuild the same old infrastructure, the same old way. When spending on infrastructure, we need to make sure that the projects we fund are more than “shovel ready;†they must also be “shovel worthy.†The projects that we choose to invest in should be ones that are going to make American lives better. We should not invest in outdated infrastructure that is going to exacerbate the problems from air and water pollution to global warming that we are actively trying to solve.
If only there were some metric for determining what people need, want, and are willing to pay for!
Unfortunately, Mr. Casale’s list largely consists of the usual suspects:
We should invest in clean energy infrastructure by expanding tax credits for wind, solar and energy storage projects and by providing grants to help communities reduce energy use and deploy clean energy projects. We should not subsidize new fossil fuel infrastructure.
We should expand and electrify public transportation, beginning by immediately providing at least $32 billion in emergency operating support for transit in the wake of COVID-19-related budget shortfalls. We should repair our nation’s crumbling roads and bridges. We should not, however, build new highway lanes that end up leading to more traffic and cars on the road.
I largely agree with this priority:
We should invest in clean water infrastructure that limits the flow of polluted runoff into our bodies of waters. We should replace lead service lines to protect Americans — particularly children — from the damaging lifelong health impacts caused by lead exposure.
My preferences would be that, rather than building or even improving roads and bridges, the following should be priorities:
- Improving the electrical grid to make it more efficient, capable of carrying greater loads, and more resilient. This is something that will never be done by the private sector.
- As noted I tend to agree with all of his “clean water infrastructure” proposals.
- I would add a more general improvement of the sanitary sewer systems. The complication of this is that it would be the responsibility of state and local governments. Do New York, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, etc. really need to expand anything?
- We genuinely need an organized structure for decommissioning cities and it’s something no city will ever do on its own.
- We should stop subsidizing all forms of energy production. Let them rise or fall on their own.
My ideas have so many problems it’s hard to know where to start. They won’t maximize the number of jobs or the payoffs to political contributors. They’re exciting to practically nobody—there aren’t any catchy slogans promoting any of them. I’m pretty confident none of them will make it into anybody’s infrastructure plan.
How about a two tube freight hyper loop from, say Long Beach to a terminal in, say, Indiana.
Following, (above or below) existing interstate highway right of ways.
https://www.discovery.com/technology/Hyperloop-Elon-Musk-Tube-Travel
Perhaps there’s a lesson to be learned with the success of the covid development project. Channel money to the private sector (and maybe the academic sector) to support R&D and then get out of the way. Rather than supporting rent seekers by subsidizing climate change efforts which utilize old limited technologies, let imaginations run wild on new solutions. Those new solutions can include making wind and solar more productive but also need to address nuclear (fusion and fission), carbon sequestration and anything else that might pop into the minds of dreamers. Just provide the dollars and let science find the way.
When the government put money into vaccine research there was a clear objective.
If the objective weren’t set, the objective would’ve been profit.
Believe me, the objective was still profit. Not necessarily company profit but profit nonetheless. That’s my explanation for the timing of announcements—they were intended to boost stock prices.
I’m wondering if the interstate highway system was a one off and America’s days of big infrastructure projects are done.
Maybe the best we can do is keep filling the potholes and adding lanes.
Crumbling roads and bridges, crumbling infrastructure, crumbling American vision, crumbling, crumbling, crumbling.
Improving the grid is at the top of may people’s lists so that should be doable if our government worked. I have not sen an economic analysis of the investment in vaccines. A lot of money was spent and we dont know what we got in return, but it was an emergency so economic efficiency was not really a primary goal. I doubt we should spend like that on infrastructure.
Steve
Another government green investment failure:
https://www.dailywire.com/news/another-green-energy-company-that-received-millions-from-taxpayers-under-obama-has-gone-bankrupt
Anyone surprised?
“If only there were some metric for determining what people need, want, and are willing to pay for!”
Surely typed in jest. In the absence of price and threat of loss of capital – a defining attribute of government investment boondoggles – its just people slopping at the trough. If you want to make a case that there are certain projects that only the resources of government can entertain, then at least require a level of co-investment by the sponsors such that they suffer significant financial loss in the event of failure. Contra popular propaganda floating around. That’s how private equity works.
But as was observed: My ideas have so many (political) problems its hard to know where to start.
As I said in reacting to that report elsewhere, $500 million here and $500 million there and pretty soon you’re starting to talk about real money.
“Subsidies for climate change efforts “
We will soon be under the control of the Climate Czar, the eminent John Kerry.
This is what critical Federal efforts look like in the Biden administration.
But what’s the truth and why do people distort it?
While images from Google Earth show the arctic ice free, reports from researchers say that the ice pack is at a ten year high, although of course, warning that cannot last, as we approach the end times unless taxes are raised
significantly. And we return to the golden age of windmills.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/04/200420104852.htm
One problem with electrical infrastructure is that most of our system still operates under a system of regulated monopolies often under the purview of local governments. Regulations have eased in the last couple of decades a bit to allow these monopolies to buy power from independent producers (often solar and wind), but for the most part upgrades to the grid still need to happen with these local monopolies making holistic and grid-level improvements more difficult.
And the biggest problem is still us – people want better infrastructure but don’t want to pay for it. I often sing the praises of my state, but the people here also want a free lunch – bad and insufficient roads are one of the greatest complaints, especially with a fast-growing population, but almost every tax measure to raise revenue targeted specifically to infrastructure gets shot down. So the state is adding toll lanes instead which people aren’t happy about either.
BANANA.
Warp Speed had the advantage it reused existing facilities and equipment, so no BANANA, hence why it was fast.
and the companies like it that way. When you rob Peter to pay Paul you can always depend on the support of Paul.