Saturday, January 12, 2019

Engineering the wall

An engineer friend linked to this report about the border wall.

Still, the question remains: how could a process that solicited the best designs the world had to offer have turned out such flawed prototypes?

One possible answer is the chaos surrounding the bid submission process. CBP opened its call for proposals in March 2017, and gave potential bidders just 12 days to submit their proposals (in comparison, the industry standard is 30 days).  During those 12 days, CBP added seven amendments to its original requests for proposals, and extended the deadline just hours before the original deadline.
Imaginary problems beget imaginary solutions.

However, even a hogwire fence on slopes of over 30% is an expensive proposition.  Haleakala National Park built some of these near my former home on Maui, and it meant lots of helicopters just to get the workers in. (Hogwire fences work pretty well against hogs, who do not have opposable thumbs.)

Evidently, part of the southern border would require building on 45% slopes.

UPDATE

Then there is this.

A union that represents Border Patrol agents recently deleted a webpage that said building walls and fences along the border to stop illegal immigration would be “wasting taxpayer money.”

4 comments:

  1. 10 pounds of meth? Woo-woo. Dos the sheriff know how much is intercepted at sea? Do you?

    It is a failure of the simplest logic to simultaneously argue that policy attracts people and causes them to die of thirst -- although it is true that the deaths would be fewer if our jackbooted milice had not emptied the water caches set out in the desert.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 10 pounds of meth just in his jurisdiction.

    It is a failure of the simplest logic to simultaneously argue that policy attracts people and causes them to die of thirst ...

    So what is the answer? Greyhound buses for all who want in?

    The US is a sovereign country, entitled to secure its own borders. If you don't think so, then make that argument.

    It's a loser, but go ahead and try, anyway.

    The sheriff the NYT interviewed was articulate, well informed, and made a persuasive case. Which, as is your wont, you avoid taking on like a vampire avoid sunlight.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Not persuasive enough to have persuaded the people who live down there.

    If you are going to argue that $5.7 billion is trivial, then you'll have to admit that 10 pounds of meth is trivial

    ReplyDelete