Surprise!

Transportation officials say 520 bridge in jeopardy.

"This bridge is in jeopardy. This bridge is aging. This bridge needs to be replaced," said Dave Dye, urban corridors administrator with the Washington state Department of Transportation, in a tour with politicians, media and community members.

More than 6,000 feet of cracks in the walls of the bridge were the most obvious signs that the structure, now in its fifth decade, is reaching the end of its useful life. (italics added)

They sure don't build things the way they used to in the great days of American craftsmanship in the 1950s and '60s.

Comments

[Gomez]

Will the state have enough money to replace both the viaduct and the 520 bridge simultaneously? I'd think not. They, however, need to green light replacement now, as in the next month or two now, or either highway's life will end badly. I'm glad, only for safety's sake, that I don't ride a bus that uses either road.

[ian]

This bridge was built I think in 1848 and now carries traffic many times heavier than its original designer ever anticipated. I find it remarkable that a structure only 50 years old should be reaching the end of its useful life.

[David Sucher]

Yes, Ian, I agree entirely, of course. And what is most discouraging is that no one here locally in Seattle makes any comment. Such a short life-span for a major public work of engineering — you see it in the discussion of the Alaskan Way Viaduct, too — is accepted as normal and expected.

[kieth Nissen]

David, you've made the point at least once that the Viaduct is deemed unsafe. Yet we continue using it. It is essential to our convenience and the stated threat of collapse and death are absorbed in a different part of the brain than that which governs our day to day lives (and our political leadership).

This same society that accepts Al Gore's warnings (and just about all the published literature on the subject
either accepts Gore or maybe implies he doesn't go far enough). There was a PBS shocker on Channel 9 (I think) last week that dealt with the "Solar Dimming, Global Warming" issue and, you know, back six or seven years ago there would be some dubunking going on, at least in the WSJ. Now there seems to be little counter-argument to the "things are going to hell" scenario. In fact, the same newspaper that features lauditory reviews of Mr. Gore and "An Inconvenient Truth" also prints vigorous editorials demanding fast action on renewing 520.

So, Mr. Gore selected a good title for his movie (I haven't seen it yet) but he may not have realized that we human have a place to put inconvenient truths. And it's not up there with making a living or getting laid.