this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2023
84 points (98.8% liked)

United Kingdom

4108 readers
239 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GreatAlbatross 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The difference between a Victorian bridge and a modern one, is that the Victorian one was built to definitely stay up, while the modern one is built to just stand up.

Because just is all you need, when you can calculate so much of the design, and know the service life.

What's happened here, is a lot of the buildings were built with a service life that was within the bounds of aerated concrete. The buildings were supposed to be replaced by now, but budget constraints have meant that they've been pushed beyond their service life.

Or in analogous terms: You have to stay in a house for a week, you buy some disposable plates and cutlery.
2 months later, you're still there, and all the plastic forks have broken.

[–] tal@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

and know the service life.

According to other articles that I linked to in this thread, the problem was only discovered in the 1990s, that the stuff had a relatively short lifetime.

[–] wewbull 3 points 1 year ago

Couple that with the bidding process for infrastructure contracts, and anything built in the last 40-50 years by government contract is likely to be falling apart before too long.

[–] jabjoe 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've found nothing is more permanent than "temporary".

It's economically and environmentally bad to make things to be temporary and disposable. Stupid short term thinking.

[–] roboticide@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

This is true, but it's also more expensive, which means the owners now don't want to spend the extra 25% to make sure their building lasts 500 years instead of 50.