• TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    The bridge is basically valueless compared to everything else about the ship and cargo plus the lawsuits from various contract breaches and other damages. Port shutdowns, environmental cleanup, insurance losses. $100m is a rounding error.

        • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          54
          ·
          6 months ago

          Not sure what you’re trying to say. The new bridge will cost far more than the old one, and the insurance settlement for the loss of the bridge will far exceed the original construction cost.

          • QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Wouldn’t they only have to pay the depreciated value? After all, a replacement bridge will be more valuable than the one that was destroyed.

            Legitimate question btw, I have no idea how… bridge finances work.

              • QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Right, is this not the same thing as cost minus depreciation?

                Again, I don’t know the first thing about this subject, so I’m trying to relate it to, like, home insurance. If your roof starts leaking all over, they don’t give you the full amount required to replace it, since shingles need to be replaced every couple decades. They give you the amount minus a linear multiplier of how long it’s been since they were last replaced.

                • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Present value is more like replacement cost minus depreciation but ask an insurance adjuster.

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          43
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          That isn’t how damages work either. They can’t reuse anything so it’s the price of what it costs to rebuild the same bridge in the same place with current prices and the estimated cost of cleanup and whatever business damages are claimed which almost certainly exceed the cost of the bridge.

          • yoshi@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            You’re causing me to question their tech nerd wizard credentials

          • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            6 months ago

            Which is what I said. The cost of the bridge is a rounding error. The cost of the damages resulting from its collapse both on land and in the waterway is the real damage.

            Reading comprehension in the states is very low.

            • Madison420@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Multi billion dollar material costs are hardly valueless. Less than you’d think given everything else but still absurdly costly quick is why Baltimore never replaced it.

          • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            6 months ago

            Explain how the cost of your driveway does not appreciate over time.

            The replacement cost goes up with what the current prices are. But a 8k driveway does not become a 200k driveway just because the house it’s going to is a mansion.

            That bridge is a shitty old rusty bridge. It may be economically valuable, the waterway may be valuable, it may have large opportunity cost for the city. But it’s still a hunk of old steel.

            The cost of the bridge, is the old steel.

            The cost of the insurance layout is the old steel PLUS all the other factors.

            You Americans are so stupid.

            • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Your point is as valid as saying a person is worth $27 because that’s the cost of the elements they’re made up of.

              Location, replacement cost, possible cash flows: all of these are possible additions to the value of something. Even just the value of the permit to have such a bridge would exceed the value of the metal.

        • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I suppose there’s a difference between the resale (or original) value of the material, and the abstract value of having an, any, bridge in that location.

          • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            There’s also the concept of forward replacement value, which is the cost of replacing something like for like.

        • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          If you lose control driving and knock over an old tree and out lands on my house, you’re not only responsible for the tree - you owe me a house.

          The economic damage of destroying a bridge that’ll take years to replace plus blocking a major port until debris can be cleared is going to be at least 10-figures - probably more.

          • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            6 months ago

            Nobody is disputing that.

            The value of the tree ironically does go up a lot over time. But it’s still the value of the tree. The value of everything else is still a cost and that is EXACTLY THE POINT I MADE. The cost of the tree is insignificant compared to the house and you’re hotel bills.

            Reading comprehension… It’s a glorious thing, and lost on Americans.

            • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              My fellow lemming. You made a terse comment that was prone to misinterpretation. People misinterpreted it.

              I see what you’re trying to say, and I see how people are understanding it differently than you may have intended.

              I’m not saying your underlying message was wrong, certainly a rusted old bridge is momentarily not worth the same money that it was when it was installed, but that’s not how you seem to have been interpreted.

              I won’t tell you what to do, but if I may make a suggestion: it may be prudent to be a little less terse.

              Have a good day.

            • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              The point you made?

              Someone said replacing the bridge would cost billions and you called them out saying that it’s rusty and decaying.

              And the value of trees is a complicated subject. A significant part of my life is dealing with trees and the laws surrounding them for a municipal government.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s cost is both material and in the business of links from one side to the other. It’s almost certainly worth multi billions at this point.

      • Kiosade@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        And not just the business from one side of the land to the other, but also from the port to… everywhere out in the ocean. With the old bridge remnants blocking ships, that’s a LOT of lost business…

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      98
      ·
      6 months ago

      Think it’s probably more appropriate to say recover instead of rescue by this point. Unfortunately the Atlantic is pretty cold this time of year.

      • pmmeyourtits@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        6 months ago

        Minor correction, that’s not the Atlantic, it’s the Patapsco river which flows into the Chesapeake Bay.

        Still cold as shit and very likely those people are dead now unfortunately.

          • pmmeyourtits@ani.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Oh yeah, like that one child that was found under the ice in a lake frozen over. His body had gone into some extreme hibernative state.

            Sadly coast guard has always ceased calling it a rescue, it’s now a recovery operation

  • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    6 months ago

    They were on the phone with bankruptcy lawyers before dawn. That is the ones that didn’t just disappear into hiding.

  • MsPenguinette@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Estimates I could find said $60-$120 million

    I assume wrongful debt suits are gonna eclipse that tho

    • CptEnder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think that’s when it was built. A superstructure like a major port bridge will be well into the billions in 2024 money.

      • Droechai@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        6 months ago

        Remember to also factor in losses due to transport disruptions in the calculations regarding the value of the accident

  • FriendBesto@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    It would not just be the bridge cost, some Corps. could try suing for business income lost. Do not think they will get very far.

    Like, most people still are not aware how this is going to fuck a bunch of market sectors that is theich bigger problem until the port is fully operational. Most (if not all) European car imports come into Baltimore. Cocoa comes there too. There are dozens of products. Ramifications are dire. On top of just to the local economy. Not to mention the pain of worst traffic.

    Expect price increases on some specific markets. Surely someone with more time and better knowledge will do a much better write up soon enough. Either here or on the news.

    • Willy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      97,000 tons moving at just 3mph would be sooo much force. I’m not sure what type of bomb it would be equivalent to but I don’t see much stopping that.

      • Willy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m coming up with 1000lbs of TNT. I have no idea what I’m doing though and the conversions are apparently controversial.

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          You can hit the standard bridge with 19, 19 hand high horses with a standard 15 meter trebuchet; assuming all shots are places back to back in under 7 minutes.

          If it is built to withstand such a horse thumping, it is given an A rating by the Bridge Association of America. (BAA)

          Some of this may be controversial though.

            • TransplantedSconie@lemm.eeOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              It shouldn’t. A trebuchet is a superior siege engine with great horse tossing ability. What might factor is whether it is riderless or not.

    • TransplantedSconie@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      Liz, can you go back to working the register at the Quik Trip and stop getting high behind the dumpster and making comments on Lemmy? K? Thanks.

    • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      Can you point out any bridges are built to withstand 100,000 ton ship directly colliding with them?

      For whatever reason I don’t think you’ve done the math.

      • Droechai@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        I think you have to look at natural bridges like Beringia for that kind of durability, which would be unfeasable to build as standard infrastructure

      • BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        The point of most bridge protection systems is to stop a ship before it can directly collide with it. They are usually separate structures.

    • force@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The bridge you linked likely wouldn’t have been able to withstand the collision of this ship at one of its pillars. Assuming that the numbers are for a fully loaded ship at 120,000 DWT at 7 knots, it could only take about 90% of the momentum maximum that the Dali had (116,000 DWT at 8 knots) at once.

      For my American friends that’s about 27.56 fully loaded F-35Cs going max speed (Mach 1.6) at the same spot at the same time. Or 312 M1A2 Abrams.

      • Liz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’d have to look at shipping logs and whatnot to say whether that specific protection system is sufficiently rated for the traffic going under that bridge.

        And I mean, come on, the fact that a completely random protection system I pulled up can “only” withstand 90% of the impact we’re interested in is not a fucking gotcha. It’s evidence that this kind of system is completely reasonable for this kind of impact. Engineering, physics, and numbers don’t work this way, but shit, scale it by 20%. Tada.

        • force@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Ok but that relies on them knowing that they’d be hit by this exact size ship in the future. Hindsight is 20/20. The Delaware Memorial Bridge is within 10 ft of clearance and is about 2,000 ft longer than the Baltimore bridge, and both would take vessels of this size, why would they just randomly decide to scale the same kind of system by the number required to stop the bridge from collapsing from being hit in this specific scenario (or more) for the Baltimore bridge?

          Also what’s with the “only”? If it doesn’t work, it doesn’t work. It’d hypothetically still collapse the bridge even if the system were effective for ships 90% of this ship’s weight.

          • Liz@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Failure in an engineered system is rarely a binary condition, though the FSC bridge is a type that fails catastrophically once you fully remove that pillar. But, recognize that you can damage the pillar without removing it.

            Anyway, the protection system necessary for the bridge isn’t just a factor of the design of the bridge. Like I referenced in the previous comment, it’s dependent on the traffic going under. The world’s biggest bridge would never need a collision protection system if the boats going under were small enough.

            This isn’t a hindsight problem. Bridges have known traffic under them and should be rated to withstand impacts. It’s extremely easy to predict what the largest possible impact is for a particular bridge and plan accordingly. Do you think this boat was lost? This particular boat probably passed under that bridge a hundred or more times before it malfunctioned and hit it.