There are countless examples of ancient infrastructure that are still with us to observe in amazement, such as the Egyptian Pyramids and the Roman Aqueducts. As we were developing the science of engineering, the adage which applied was “When in doubt, build it stout.”
As scientific knowledge advanced over the centuries, we adapted new ways, designs, processes, and materials to streamline material use while getting appropriate design lives. What followed were standards of practice which defined what we should deliver in our designs which met our fundamental tenet of the engineer: “to hold paramount the public health, safety and welfare.”
In today’s world of manufactured and environmental stressors on our built environment, building in lifecycle resilience is just as fundamental.First, I think some definitions are in order. When evaluating lifecycle cost in infrastructure development, we are contemplating not only the initial capital costs or (CAPEX) but the operations and maintenance costs (OPEX) – as well as the energy costs, replacement costs, financing costs and costs associated with decommissioning. Small increases in an asset’s CAPEX can yield large savings in all the other costs associated with the piece of infrastructure.
Resilient infrastructure enhances the durability and functionality of the system against disruptions, minimizing both human and economic losses. The sooner a community is at a state of functional recovery, the sooner humans get back to a steady state from a crisis mode, and the economy begins to recover. When you consider this definition, I believe built-in resilience is no longer an option, but a foundational element of any infrastructure asset or system. Resilience must be a core value.
The Industry Leaders Council (ILC) of the American Society of Civil Engineers developed a policy and toolkit in 2015 around what was called the ASCE Grand Challenge. It was defined as a chance to explore big, bold ideas that will lead to new project approached and business models. The basic premise is to leverage and encourage the cost savings and increased resilience and sustainability inherent in life cycle and performance based approached that foster innovation. Doing more with less – something we are all looking to do.
Any project or program has a series of so-called “lives.” First, there is the financial life of the project, which is defined by the term of lending or investment of that asset. Secondly, there is the design life, which is dictated by standards of practice for any specific asset class. And third, the functional life. When an asset is properly designed, that functional life can be many times that of the design life. Again, think about the Roman aqueducts that are still functioning as designed. No one can argue that they did not stand the test time.
When we consider the manmade and environmental stressors we see today, not investing in resilient infrastructure systemically is ignoring the current risk landscape. Because many projects are extending either the borrowing or equity term, the financial life of an asset is bumping up against the design life, which greatly increases risk.
Individuals experience this in their own lives. If there is a minimal increase in cost to go from a 10-year guarantee shingle to a 30-year shingle, most will opt for the minimum increase in upfront cost to decrease the lifecycle cost, without even thinking about that in those terms. Or if you need a car to last you for 200,000 miles, you don’t go to a used car lot and buy the cheapest car on the lot. In our own large ticket personal infrastructure, we apply this logic. So why is it so difficult to extend that thought process to large infrastructure projects?
Resilience is a critical thread in the fabric that is infrastructure deployment. It is just as important as other threads, including infrastructure planning, investment and insurance decisions.
As climate events that create cascading disruptions across interconnected systems become more frequent, we must come to the understanding that there is not enough money or human resources to build anything but resilient projects. It is a natural evolution in the infrastructure delivery process. We cannot ignore changing conditions any more than we can ignore innovation or digitization. Any automotive dealer who was around in the late ’80s to early ’90s remembers the ad campaign “Don’t You Buy No Ugly Truck.” My version of that today would be “Don’t You Build Me No Ugly Infrastructure.”
Maria Lehman, P.E., NAE, NAC, F.ASCE, ENV SP, is Executive Advisor for U.S. Infrastructure at GHD. She is the current interim executive director and past president of the ASCE and currently serves as a member of the National Infrastructure Advisory Council. She also is the Samuel P. Capen professor of engineer management at the State University of New York at Buffalo.
