THURSDAY, JUNE 29, 2006
Thursday Edition: Asphalt Inflation
I spotted this story in the St. Petersburg Times. I bet it plays out in city after city during the summer road-construction months.
State transportation officials say the rising cost of oil has pushed
bids for a portion of Interstate 275 construction to $100 million more
than engineers' estimates.
"We've had problems with materials," said Marian Scorza,
spokeswoman for the Florida Department of Transportation. "The price of
materials, the cost of asphalt, that's the reason why the bids are
going up."
A couple of weeks ago, The Boston Globe reported:
The
soaring cost of petroleum -- a primary ingredient of asphalt -- has
forced many communities to shoulder a 50 percent increase in costs as
crews head out to repave roads this summer. Asphalt sticker shock is
creating heartburn for legions of highway chiefs, prompting many to
significantly curtail the number of roads they intend to repair this
season.
And
the going may get even tougher. Two major asphalt suppliers for the
region are warning of another 50 percent increase by Thanksgiving -- in
addition to potential shortages. The news comes as public works crews
in some areas hard hit by last month's record flooding are still
patching sinkholes and replacing washed-out roadway shoulders.
Communities are hoping federal emergency funds will cover most of those
repairs.
"When
we were building our budget a year ago, my paving program received a
significant reduction because of needs in other places," said Bob
Gravino, Ipswich's director of public works. "Now, not only is the cost
of materials going up, but the money I have is going down."
We covered asphalt prices on Al's Morning Meeting earlier this month. You can
find those resources here.
Viral Videos
Web sites like YouTube
and GoogleVideo are giving the power of mass media to anybody who has a
camera. The "mass" part of the story comes in the viral nature of these
sites. Not only do people watch the videos, they pass them along in
astonishing numbers. This video
of a Comcast technician who fell asleep on a customer's couch has
attracted more than 500,000 views. It also cost the worker his job.
Recently, more than a half million people watched
the Connie Chung "singing" video. In fact, The Associated Press reported that more people watched the viral
video than ever watched the TV program on which it aired.
MSNBC's Red Tape Chronicles wonders when some of the riskiest viral videos will lead to tragedy.
There are stupid tricks gone horribly wrong. In
one clip, a young man dons a banana suit and covers himself in lighter
fluid, then torches himself and badly burns his face. The video ends
with him in a shower, bathing the side of his face in cold water to
control blistering.
In another, men and teenagers build "dry ice bombs" in plastic bottles, then watch as one of them explodes in someone's hand and nearly blows off his fingers.
There's also apparently premeditated violence:
In one, a child announces he's about to attack after another kid who
"pisses him off," then is followed by a camera as he chases down and
repeatedly shoots the child with what appears to be a BB gun, causing
the youngster to fall to the ground writhing in pain.
And there's accidental horror caught on tape.
In another video, a child hanging dangerously out of a car door is
struck in the face by an oncoming car. In this video, as in several
others, the most gruesome passage is repeated and played in slow motion.
Then there's sleight-of-hand video editing, such as a clip that appears to show a teen-ager running into the road and lying down as a bus passes over him.
Sorenson said all these videos encourage copycats, and many have already led to serious injuries.
"This is going to
lead to someone getting really hurt. It has led to that already," he
said. "Clearly, people are getting hurt making these videos … there's
blood. It's true that kids do these stupid things (anyway), but could
you ask for a better template for doing stupid things?"
On YouTube, there are, in fact, a number of videos of kids shooting
each other with BB guns. Still others show young people shooting
themselves with BB guns. This one is not particularly graphic, but it will give you an idea of what I am talking about.
Yesterday, NPR's Morning Edition aired two nice pieces, one on the rise of YouTube and the other on viral videos.
Where Floods and Flood Claims Occur
Most flood insurance
claims are not paid out to people living along the oceanfront, as you
might think. River floods cause the most damage while coastal floods
cause the most deaths. As I told you back in September:
There is a story waiting for you in
a Congressional Research Service report [PDF]
that was filed in June. It looks at the issue of repetitive losses by people who
purchase federal flood insurance. Keep in mind, this report was
pre-Katrina, and the claims from that storm will change the numbers
considerably. Still, the flood insurance program clearly has problems.
You are about to learn that a tiny number of people who get washed out,
time after time, make up a third of the flood claims.
Before you read on, you need to learn a few terms that will help all of this make sense:
- NFIP is the National Flood Insurance Program, run by FEMA. Your homeowner's policy covers wind damage, not water damage. The NFIP covers the water damage from a flood.
- RLP is Repetitive Loss Properties, those properties that get damaged and repaired by NFIP over and over.
- FIRM is a Flood Insurance Rate Map. These maps were drawn up beginning in 1974.
The report (Page 19) says:
A major public policy issue before the 109th Congress
is the cost to the NFIP of paying for repetitively flooded properties.
According to FEMA, a relatively small number of RLPs [repetitive loss
properties] account for a disproportionate share of paid flood claims.
Insurance market analysts insist that by reducing the number of RLPs,
actual flood insurance claims will be reduced, and this will both
diminish the upward pressure to raise flood insurance rates and
stabilize, in the long run, the financial condition of the NFIP. ...
In
total, there were 4,498,324 flood insurance policies -- so RLPs are 1
percent of the total policies nationwide. Yet, according to FEMA,
this 1 percent accounts for an annual average of 30
percent of amounts paid in claims. Since 1978, RLPs have cost the NFIP about $2.7 billion. Appendix D [of the report] shows that although RLPs exist in all 50 states, five states -- Louisiana, Texas,
Florida, North Carolina and New Jersey -- accounted for 63
percent of all repetitive loss payments from 1978 through 2004.
The top 10 states accounted for 78 percent of all repetitive loss
claims; and the top 25 states account for 96 percent of all
repetitive loss claims.
So what do you suppose these properties are? Condos? Vacation homes? The big new developments sitting oceanside?
The report explains:
The
majority of existing flood-prone structures are residences (not
vacation or income-producing homes) "grandfathered" into the NFIP when
the program was created. These properties have been repaired multiple
times with subsidized flood insurance claim dollars. FEMA estimates
that 90 percent of RLPs were built prior to December 31, 1974,
before the preparation of flood insurance rate maps (FIRM) and building
codes that adequately reflected the probability of flooding in special
flood hazard areas (SFHA).
What floods?
The report (keep in mind that after Katrina, these facts may be different) says:
Of
the two types of floods -- riverine or inland stream flooding and
coastal flooding -- riverine floods typically cause the highest
economic losses. On the other hand, coastal floods often cause greater
loss of life.
What's the problem? Why do people keep rebuilding in flood zones?
The
report says some lenders and communities do not enforce the mandatory
flood insurance laws. People are allowed to build in flood zones and
remain uninsured. See Page 18 of the report [PDF].
Most
of the high-risk properties were built before we had national flood
maps. And, once the properties get flooded, the government allows the
owners to rebuild, often without elevating the property or fixing the
problem. Read these excerpts:
FEMA estimates that 90 percent of RLPs were built prior to December 31, 1974,
before the preparation of flood insurance rate maps (FIRM) and building
codes that adequately reflected the probability of flooding in special
flood hazard areas (SFHA). These older, generally less-safe pre-FIRM
buildings were built before flood hazard risks were fully known and not
constructed to resist flood waters.
Moreover, most of the owners of RLPs pay subsidized rates for flood insurance.
FEMA
has sought over the years to prioritize RLPs and pursue a variety of
insurance and mitigation strategies to stem the disproportionate costs
to the NFIP associated with these properties.
So what needs fixing?
The report is pretty clear about four steps that should be taken right away:
- First, remove damaged older properties built in flood plains
or elevate them to the 100-year flood level. Don't let them
rebuild in the same place and the same level, just to be flooded
again.
- Second,
even if a property is not destroyed, but sustains "substantial damage,"
the homeowner should have to do things to reduce the risk of future
claims. The report says a disproportionate share of NFIP claims are for
RLPs that suffer less the 50 percent damages and, therefore, are
not required to be rebuilt to appropriate floodplain management
standards designed to reduce future losses. The report says that the
flood insurance program costs are rising because of the number of
properties that are repeatedly damaged but not destroyed. If they are
not currently damaged beyond 50 percent of the property value,
then the building can be rebuilt without meeting new flood standards.
And, interestingly, some of these repeat offender properties might
never be destroyed because the flood waters are fairly shallow.
- Third, get better data on who is in the flood zone and who is/is not insured.
The report says many RLPs are classified as being outside the
designated 100-year floodplain, which raises concerns about the
accuracy of flood insurance maps. One issue is that FEMA really does
not have accurate information on what has been built in some flood
zones. The GAO has found recently that FEMA also does not have accurate
information on how many people are actually insured in each flood
zone.
- Fourth,
the accuracy of flood maps which capture actual risks facing properties
in flood zones is a contributing factor for repetitive losses. I have told you before in Al's Morning Meeting stories that many of your community flood maps are outdated -- sometimes by decades.
Flood Lessons in Photos
One of the longest-contributing Al's Morning Meeting readers, Jim Sweeney, dropped me a thoughtful note:
While looking at all the news photos of flood problems here (Washington, D.C.) and last week's floods in Houston,
it occurs to me that many of them illustrate all the things you're not
supposed to do in these situations. Aside from the obvious driving
through floodwaters, I've seen photos of kids playing on a mattress in
floodwaters in Houston,
numerous folks walking through water (not apparently evacuating, just
walking around). Seems like someone could do a photo essay on this is
what you're not supposed to do.
Here is an example.
We are always looking for your great ideas. Send Al a few sentences and hot links.
Editor's Note: Al's Morning Meeting is a compendium of ideas,
edited story excerpts and other materials from a variety of Web sites,
as well as original concepts and analysis. When the information comes
directly from another source, it will be attributed and a link will be
provided whenever possible. The column is fact-checked, but depends
upon the accuracy and integrity of the original sources cited. Errors
and inaccuracies found will be corrected.
Posted at 12:37:25 AM
E-mail this item |
Add Your Comments |
QuickLink this item: A103841
Al's Morning Meeting Archive
MAIN
|
Back to Top
