PDA

View Full Version : Transportation Infrastructure Failing the Nation, Says UPS CEO


Invisible Fan
04-06-2006, 12:42 AM
Transportation Infrastructure Failing the Nation, Says UPS CEO

HOUSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE) (http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20060330005561&newsLang=en)--March 30, 2006--Describing the nation's roads, ports, railroads and airports as the backbone of global trade, UPS's chief executive officer today warned that America was taking a chance with its future by neglecting its infrastructure.

"What's shocking, quite frankly, is the inability of our transportation infrastructure to keep up with the normal day-to-day stresses imposed upon it," said UPS CEO Mike Eskew. "Our highways, waterways, railroads and aviation networks are simply not keeping up with ordinary demands.

Eskew noted the problem is receiving some recognition outside the transportation industry, citing a report card issued last year by the American Society of Civil Engineers. (http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2005/index.cfm) "In 2005, here's what our infrastructure report card looked like: our aviation system got a D+; navigable waterways a D-; roads a D, and rails a C-."

"What does the overall report card on our national transportation infrastructure look like? Well, let's put it this way: if your kids brought home report cards like this, someone would be grounded."

Eskew, in addressing the Houston Forum here, said business leaders had to help Americans understand that their jobs and standard of living depend on a U.S. economy that today depends on global trade. People may not like to build new roads or add runways to airports, but the American economy risks stagnation without continued investment and infrastructure expansion, he said.

"Here's the deal: We can't wait on this," Eskew continued. "We need to move forward now."

Clearly, any solution will require "lots of money" and that's why it's also time "to target that money strategically using a holistic strategy," the chief executive urged.

"By holistic, I mean taking into account how all the air, ground and water-based systems work together and increasing the integration of all these different modes of transport. For example, all the port capacity in the world won't prevent bottlenecks if there isn't enough rail freight capacity on which to unload the ocean shipments."

UPS takes this type of holistic approach to its own network, operating an integrated system that combines the flows of air, ground, residential, commercial, domestic and international packages. The company also invests billions of dollars each year in technology to help customers coordinate the movement of goods and information.

Public and private entities must work together to solve the nation's infrastructure problem, Eskew said, adding one private business sector that particularly needs to step up is the rail sector. The nation's railroads are "under-investing" in advanced technologies available today that could improve the capacity and safety of their networks, he asserted.

The problem is not insurmountable, he added, but it's time "to sound the alarm."

"If we're going to take our rightful place as a nation in the world of trade, we must have the best infrastructure," Eskew concluded. "Are we willing to take the necessary steps today to ensure a vibrant economy tomorrow?

"Do we really have a choice?"

------------------------------------
A smaller deficit would look good right now. 1.6 trillion in 5 years to overhaul according to the ASCE's report card (http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2005/index.cfm).

pouhe
04-06-2006, 08:03 PM
A study lobbying for more road, railway, airport terminal and waterway construction. What an objective and selfless position for civil engineers to take. These people ought look at any major freeway or intersection, up here in Omaha, like, 5 minutes after 6:00 pm, no "strained infrastructure" here.

Even though I agree with this 100% in the context of under-developed countries (or continents), I assume, in the US, ever advancing communication technology development (which really is where I think we should be investing $320 billion/year, after skimming off a million or two for medical research and education) will partially offset the burden of strained transport venues, specifically in the context of paper mailings, document transfer, commuting to and from work, company-client visits, retail consumption blah blah blah. Any burden placed on transport companies, like UPS, will probably be priced into their fees.

Hair, Beard Length "Out of Control," Barber's Union Claims

Sara Lee: U.S. "Lagging Behind" Rest of Developed World in Cake, Cookie Consumption

Zboy
04-06-2006, 08:24 PM
My dad is a senior traffic engineer in Boston. My uncles are also in the same field. They keep saying how we need to "renew" the infrastructure for our traffic flow. I tease them saying they are just just looking for more $$. But the truth is, we seriously do.

1) Age of Structures
1) Population growth

boomer83
04-06-2006, 08:27 PM
My dad is a senior traffic engineer in Boston. My uncles are also in the same field. They keep saying how we need to "renew" the infrastructure for our traffic flow. I tease them saying they are just just looking for more $$. But the truth is, we seriously do.

1) Age of Structures
1) Population growth

you talking about your dad and your uncle

what the hell?
this aint family tree hour
we aint holding hands and singing

Zboy
04-06-2006, 08:28 PM
you talking about your dad and your uncle

what the hell?
this aint family tree hour
we aint holding hands and singing

Thats because your family left you for dead.

You are the reason they had to invent the stork fable.

boomer83
04-06-2006, 08:29 PM
Thats because your family left you for dead.

You are the reason they had to invent the stork fable.

Ohhh

that hurts so bad
please no more







:rolleyes:

Jared Novak
04-06-2006, 09:38 PM
Ohhh

that hurts so bad
please no more


:rolleyes:

Seriously guy, chill out, this is the third thread that I've read and you've done nothing but insult people with mindless banter. Read the rules for posting on this BBS again.

pouhe
04-06-2006, 11:40 PM
Thats because your family left you for dead.

You are the reason they had to invent the stork fable.

That's actually the most original joke I've heard in a long time. No vulgarity, direct response to the original insult, familar analogy (well, at least once I stopped trying to process "fork stable"), and, based on the posting times, all delivered in less than two minutes. Very efficient.

But now to your original comments:
1) Age of Structures: What exactly is the aging process for these tyes of structures, especially roads? What negative impacts are we hedging against: potholes, or actual structural collapse? When you say age do you mean decay, or obsolescence? And aren't both of those relative to the needs of individual communities?

Is there not already some periodic "stress testing" performed on some of these facilities, that would actually effectively identify critical (and financially feasible) enhancements (or am I giving local Public Works Departments a little too much credit)? For $320 billion/yr federal, much of which will probably be diverted to larger cities, shouldn't suburban, rural residents be given some cost/benefit certainty?

2) Population Growth: Doesn't the fundamentally gradual nature of populaton growth make it secondary/tertiary grounds for immediate facility expansion? Don't group dynamics (avoiding usage during high congestion times) and commercial development (more shops along the same roads equals shorter trips and less traffic, more airports in the same city equals less crowded terminals, more vacation spots in the same region equals shorter flights, or less flights and more road trips, etc) offset the negative effects of population growth?

StupidMoniker
04-07-2006, 12:17 AM
We should have deeper roads, which would require huge costs up front, but would be better in the long run.

Invisible Fan
04-07-2006, 02:14 AM
^^^ And tax trucks by the axel instead of using gas taxes to pay off the highways. Trucks, while essential to the transportation industry, are getting subsidized for tearing up our interstate highways.

Yeah, the source is suspect in its interests, but the # of civil engineers have been steadily declining so I don't think it's to line their pockets and rather a genuine interest in the matter. I've read some of their sourced documentation (intuitive site) and it's a little more than taking it with a grain of salt.

We need a lot of money to build the new internet infrastructure (communications, fiberoptics, wifi) but also to overhaul and revamp the old (docks, airports, border security, etc...).