• HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, and it makes sense to do it with certain technologies.

    My concern is that focusing only on high speed rail when there isn’t any decent connectivity could mean dumping money into a short section that requires a lot of viaducts and tunnels when it may be cheaper to just get some sort of connection built and cover back later after you’ve built up more of the system and the demand is there to justify the more expensive option.

    Still keep the signaling, electrification, and rail precision of high speed rail, but maybe accept that there will be a small section that isn’t high speed in order to save in bridge and tunnel costs.

    • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      On the other hand, the bridging and tunneling expertise developed by these projects would enable more extensive public works across other domains as well, so it’s not “wasted money”.

      Also, what people miss is that Africa today lacks education across the stack. It isn’t the case that African countries have a well-educated labour pool but simply no expertise in HSR (like the US, which will spend on the order of $100 billion trying to connect San Francisco and Los Angeles with HSR), but that many African countries simply lack the well-educated labour pool in the first place. Building out these large projects is simultaneously a means of economic stimulus and a means of targeted education in core engineering disciplines.

      This kind of work is essential to before there can be any hope of replacing more skilled workers with African ones. That’s also why you see a lot of foreign workers on these projects: the expertise and experience simply isn’t there domestically to ensure that the project can complete on-time and under-budget.

      • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        That assumes that these projects will use African labor, which may not be the case. Chinese infrastructure projects abroad are typically Chinese funded, Chinese designed, and Chinese built. Some local unskilled labor may be used, but Chinese construction companies are likely going to keep the key technical parts in-house.

        This also brings a question of economic stimulus. A project can only really be an economic stimulus to a region if the project uses local labor and materials. I really doubt Chinese construction firms are going to use local rebar for production; a big reason that China is motivated to build out Africa’s High Speed Rail is that the demand for these projects has dropped in China. The apparatus to make high speed rail in China is still there while there is no longer any demand for the internal market.

        • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Again, I think you’re misunderstanding. “Unskilled labour” by the Western definition is already considered decently skilled. This was a problem that China ran into as they industrialized and it’s a problem that African countries will also run into: there simply isn’t enough well-trained, experienced skilled labour. People are aware of this.

          You can’t train a nuclear physicist if you can’t train an electrical engineer, and you can’t train an electrical engineer if you can’t train a construction worker. This doesn’t solve the problem of nuclear physicist or electrical engineer, but it should at least solve the problem of construction worker.

          • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I know some people are aware of it, but not everyone.

            Also, China is in the habit of not even training the construction worker. Chinese SOE’s have a lot of projects being built outside of China that don’t use local labor except for the most basic tasks. This is different from a lot of Western companies that will generally tap more into the local labor pool.

            This isn’t a value judgement one way or another, but a statement of differences between the two.

            • zephyreks@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Oh for sure, Western projects do tap more of the local labour pool. They’re also more likely to be overbudget and behind schedule (California HSR and most transit/rail projects in the US, etc). To some degree, that’s just a difference in management technique and there’s definitely an advantage to training more workers at the cost of time and money.

              On the other hand, those “basic” tasks only seem basic because we have had a proper Western education… And that’s not something we should be taking for granted.