Quote:
Originally Posted by Table 5
Yeah that's pretty much why emerging economies, or places like China and UAE, can get big projects done...somebody lays down the law, and things get bulldozed through regardless of consequence. It's not pretty, and often unjust to many, but it gets things done. Or you have countries like Japan, that get things built in a more efficient way, but that requires some serious cohesion and discipline.
Meanwhile we are stuck with paralysis by analysis... with endless consultations and studies, ballooning costs, and several rounds of political flip-flopping. Imagine trying to build the transcontinental railway in Canada today? I'm not even sure it would be possible. It's also why I'm skeptical of all the aggressive energy-transition talk...it takes 10-15 years to permit a new mine in this country, yet somehow we're all going to be living off of batteries soon? Good luck with that.
|
What a lack of standards and protocols can get you:
Quote:
|
Many died from exhaustion, illness, or exposure, while others were killed in explosions or crushed when tunnels collapsed. Between 600-4,000 Chinese men died working on the Canadian Pacific Railway.
|
https://oaa.on.ca/whats-on/bloaag/bl...ific%20Railway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Table 5
Obviously we need to maintain a certain set of standards and protocols, but there has to be some swing back the other way at some point, or we're just continue to be mired in this type of development purgatory.
|
How big of a swing is acceptable? To determine that properly, this would require analyzing each standard and protocol, no? Was there insufficient analysis in the setting of standards and protocols in the first place or are there valid reasons for the current ones?