Introduction

Automobile culture is a fundamental part of American culture as a whole. As discussed in previous blogs, while the majority of the world relies on public transit,  Americans almost exclusively rely on personal automobiles. Ever since Henry Ford released his Model T in 1908, the American market fell in love with private transportation and never looked back, as this graph from NPR shows:

One of the biggest reasons for the automobile’s dominance in America is because of the infrastructure built around the industry. In this blog, I will discuss one of the greatest feats in modern American history; the Interstate Highway System.

Conception

While many people point to President Dwight Eisenhower’s signing of the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956 as the birth of the interstate system, the idea for such a network was actually conceived about twelve years prior, with the passing of the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1944, according to the United States Department of Transportation. However, President Eisenhower’s bill was the first piece of national legislation that appropriated the necessary funds to start the project, as well as create a coordinated, national effort to start building highways. For this reason, Eisenhower is often called the “Father of the Interstate System”.

Development

The 1956 bill authorized the following:

• The construction of a 41,000 mile network of roads (later increased to accommodate the roughly 46,000 mile network now)
• $26 billion in funding (90% of which would come from the national government)
• An increase in the gasoline tax to pay for funds

The main goals of the interstate system were to connect major cities, make travelling across the country easier/safer, and allow a way for citizens to evacuate in case of a nuclear attack. Some defining characteristics of the new highways were the fact that they had at least four lanes, and had no at-grade crossings (using overpasses and underpasses instead of intersections to change routes).

The image on the top shows a regular intersection, while the image on the bottom shows a system of overpasses and underpasses. The reason why intersections were removed was to allow high speed, uninterrupted travel.

The Interstate System Today

The interstate system is one of the most used public utilities today.  According to statistics, an average of 13,000 vehicles pass through any given interstate everyday; some corridors (such as i-95), see 72,000 cars a day on average, with max numbers reaching 300,000. While there are undoubtedly flaws with the system, it remains one of the most important things in American daily life to this day.

Introduction

In a previous post about the Fukushima nuclear disaster, I talked about nuclear fission, and in particular, its potentially catastrophic consequences. In this post, I will also be talking about nuclear energy; but instead of discussing its past, I will focus on its future: nuclear fusion.

What is Nuclear Fusion?

As discussed in the previous post, nuclear fission involves sending high speed particles (typically neutrons) at semi-unstable isotopes of large atoms (typically uranium). This reaction creates smaller isotopes, a few neutrons, and a large amount of energy. This energy is then used to heat water, which can then by used to generate electricity. This process is shown in the diagram below by Duke:

Nuclear fusion, on the other hand, takes in two smaller particles at extremely high pressure and temperature, and releases a larger particle, a neutron, and (once again) energy. We experience the effects of nuclear fusion every single day- this is the reaction that generates the suns’ heat. The process is shown below:

There are a couple of key differences between these two processes. First, nuclear fusion is significantly more difficult to accomplish. Even inside the sun, which exerts extreme gravitational pressure, it takes 10 million degrees Celsius for fusion to occur. On Earth, the same reaction would require at least 100 million degrees Celsius- a temperature that nothing can come into direct contact with. Another big difference between fusion and fission is that the products of fusion (mainly the noble gas helium) are significantly safer than fission- in fact, they are almost harmless. As I have established earlier in my blog, dealing with nuclear waste is a massive undertaking.

ITER

Based on the information above, it is clear that there would be many advantages of developing nuclear fusion; clean energy with no downsides forever. Currently, there is a massive fusion reactor laboratory being built in the south of France called the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER).  Supported by over 35 nations across the world (including the US, Japan, India, and South Korea), this laboratory aims to make nuclear fission both efficient and implementable on a large scale. Recently, a massive breakthrough was achieved supporting the science behind the reactor.

The JET laboratory in the UK broke its record for the most amount of energy produced from fusing two hydrogen atoms, doubling the previous record. Although it requires two 500 megawatt generators to run, it only produces 11 megawatts of power.  While this technology is still in its infancy, it holds great promise.

Introduction

The Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco, California is one of the most iconic pieces of infrastructure in America today.  Designed by engineer Joseph Strauss, the 4200 feet long bridge was the longest suspension bridge in the world when construction finished on January 5, 1937, and it remains in the top twenty longest suspension bridges to this day. In this blog, I want to go over some of the details behind this marvel of engineering, and describe what makes it so special.

History

The Golden Gate looks great now that is finished, but why was it built in the first place? After all, going about designing, funding, and constructing such a massive project (especially a century ago) was an extremely difficult task. In fact, convincing locals that the bridge was even worth their tax money took six years- the city first started looking for designers in 1919, in 1921 Strauss revealed his design, and it wasn’t until 1925 that the surrounding areas of Morin, Del Norte, Sonoma, and others agreed. The single biggest driving factor for the decision came down to geography; as shown in the map above, San Francisco is a peninsula that separates the Pacific Ocean from San Francisco Bay. Additionally, the Port of San Francisco transported more cargo than every other Western port combined by the end of 19th century, making it a source of economic growth for the area; if San Francisco could be connected to the area up north, almost everyone would benefit. An integral part of the plan was to get permission from the War department to create a special district in order to better organize the transportation of materials and allocation of funds. Since this permit would basically mean complete government approval of the project, special interest groups (such as the ferry industry) that made money off of the Bay being disconnected lobbied hard against it. In the end, the engineers won, and the permit was approved.

The Bridge

Construction began in 1933, 8 years after all the necessary permits were acquired, because the Great Depression froze all projects for a while. It was only because of a six million dollar stimulus from Bank of America president Amadeo Giannini that developers broke ground. As shown in the picture above, construction was long and treacherous. With towers that extend 746 feet into the sky, workers had to stand 53 stories above sea level to get everything done.

Because part of the structure is rooted in the water, divers had to descend up to 110 feet in the cold, murky water to set up dynamite and clear out the area. However, despite the dangerous conditions, less than a dozen people died, setting a record for working condition safety at the time. As the image below shows, lead engineer Joseph Strauss spent $130,000 on a safety net to protect anyone who fell during construction. It ended up saving 19 people in total, before a 5-ton platform fell and tragically took the lived of ten people.

In the end, construction took four years, cost $35 million dollars, and used over ten different contracting companies.

Over the past decade, New York City’s iconic skyline has undergone a massive transformation, with new developments popping up all across Manhattan. Although there are new real estate projects throughout the entire city, one street in particular has seen exceptional amounts investment in the past couple of years; 57th Street, Manhattan, on the southern edge of Central Park (also known as “Billionaire’s Row”) is now home to some of the thinnest, tallest, and most expensive properties in the world. Although some embrace the new buildings as symbols of prosperity in the twenty-first century, others characterize them as signs of excess in an increasingly stratified city.

The Good

As shown in the graphic above, Billionaire’s Row is comprised of eight luxury towers built in the past ten years (7 of which were built in the past five). Together, these eight buildings hold a plethora of records between them. For example, standing at 1550 feet, Central Park (Nordstrom) Tower is the tallest residential building in the world. Meanwhile, Steinway Tower (111 57th) holds the title of the skinniest building in the world, with a height-to-width ratio of 24:1 (in comparison, the Empire State has a height-to-width ratio of 1:2.95). And collectively, the buildings made Central Park South the most expensive street in NYC in 2019, with a median price of $9.7 million, and an average sale price of $22.452 million (a figure that has only gone up since).

Whether the buildings are really worth this much or have any practical value is debatable. But they are undeniably cool. As mentioned above, these skyscrapers are incredibly thin. Thanks to advancements in construction techniques and clever tricks , these buildings are not only feasible to build, but inhabitable. One of these tricks is shown above, in the image of 432 Park Avenue. If you look closely at the center of the frame, you will notice that two floors have no apartments or windows inside of them; they are completely empty. Instead, these floors contain structural equipment inside of them, while the lack of windows allows wind to pass through, reducing the swaying the building (and its residents) experiences. In fact, 25% of the floors on 432 Park Avenue are so-called “structural floors”, meant to house equipment that maintains the integrity of the building.

The Bad

Although impressive, it is clear from the numbers above that these buildings were never meant for the average consumer. So then why were they build? According to former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2013, it was to attract investment from super-wealthy elites both domestically and abroad “because that’s where the revenue comes to take care of everybody else.” At the time, it seemed, like a reasonable idea; after all, more property sales mean more property taxes, and in a city where property taxes are the main source of government income, it means more benefits for everyone. There’s only one problem, though: nearly a decade after the first development on Billionaire’s Row opened its doors to residents, almost half the apartments remain not only empty, but unsold to this day. In a city where twenty-thousand people have to rely on shelters, there are 250,000 housing units that remain empty to this day.

The main problem with Bloomberg’s reasoning is that the people purchasing these homes are not looking for permanent residences, but rather pied-à-terres (seasonal homes) or investment properties. Therefore, many homeowners  on Billionaire’s Row do not pay federal, state, or local taxes. In addition, legal loopholes such as the New York City 421a tax abatement gives housing developers tax credit if they build affordable housing in other parts of the city. Although this sounds good in theory, the reality is that billionaires use this rule to their advantage to pay on average, 1/100th the property tax rate as other citizens in the city, in exchange for building questionable quality housing in areas where the demand for housing is not as high.

Introduction

On the afternoon of March 11, 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake devastated the northeastern region of Japan . Known as the Great Tohoku Earthquake, the cataclysmic event was centered below the floor of the Pacific Ocean, about 80 miles east of the Japanese city of Sendai.  Since the tectonic plates involved were underwater and located close to the Japanese coast, ocean water was displaced, creating massive tsunami waves that increased the amount of damage caused. According to reports, waves as high as 33 feet crashed onto the shore, and penetrated as far as six miles deep.

When all was said and done, Japan was left with hundreds of billions of dollars in damages, as well as a death toll of over 18,000 civilians. Another one of the impacts of the earthquake was meltdown of the Fukashima nuclear reactor, one of the largest in the world at the time. As we will see, the aftermath of the meltdown had significant impacts on Japanese infrastructure both at the time and for years to come.

Immediate Response

Many of us have heard of a “nuclear meltdown”-but what exactly is it? Although not officially defined by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a nuclear meltdown usually means the melting of the core components of a nuclear reactor. This is considered a severe failure because it can lead to dangerous, cancer-causing radiation to leak from the plant site and into surrounding areas and water sources. Usually, generators are constantly pumping coolant around the cores. However, if something causes these generators to shut down (like an earthquake), then disastrous consequences can result.

In the case of Fukashima, the emergency response system detected the earthquake, shut down the reactors on time, and turned on the backup generators to keep cooling the cores. However, the tsunami destroyed even the backup generators, leading to a partial meltdown of the core. As workers worked around the clock to stabilize the situation, an 18 mile no fly zone was established and everyone within a 12.5 mile radius was evacuated, displacing over 300,000 people, according to the Red Cross. 

Long-Term Impacts

At the time of the nuclear meltdown, Japan was looking for a way to reduce its dependency on fossil fuels. One of the ways it hoped to accomplish this was by investing in alternate methods, with nuclear energy being on the forefront. According to studies, nuclear power accounted for a third of the countries energy production in 2010 and was on track to increase by an additional fifty percent. However, since the accident, due to fears of additional meltdown by both policy makers and the general public, enthusiasm for nuclear as plummeted. Now, less than five percent of Japan’s energy comes from the reactors.

To make up for this loss in power, Japan has had to increase its dependency on fossil fuels in the short term. For the future, however, the Japanese hope the answer lies in renewable sources. Hoping to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, the Japanese government has increased funding for research and provided incentives for companies and individuals to go clean.