We’ve argued that a compelling reason to raise the gas tax (which is still absurdly low) is that it’s actually costing drivers money to keep it so low — more specifically, the damage being done to roads from inadequate maintenance (a result of state and federal governments not having any tax-generated money to fix the roads) is costing drivers more than actually paying a slightly higher tax for gas.
Well, as it turns out, those crummy roads aren’t just forcing more cash out of our pocket books for repairs — they’re also compounding the costs of fixing them. As the above graph, known as the “pavement curve,” indicates, the cost to fix pavement increases dramatically when initial repairs and maintenance are delayed beyond a reasonable time frame. A recent study by the New Hampshire DOT found that if you apply a treatment to preserve pavement within the first 15 years, the treatment will generally restore the pavement’s condition. But if this maintenance is delayed for another 3 years, the cost of rehabilitating the roads will be 4 to 5 times more than the cost of the original treatment.
So basically, our low gas taxes are costing everyone money on all sides: The federal and state governments suffer from lack of tax collected and exponentially increasing expenses of fixing roads, while the taxpayers suffer from cruddy roads that damage their cars as well as increasingly-strained government coffers that have to spend more just to keep roads functional, and therefore have even less to spend on things like budget deficits and other services. Not to mention all the negative externalities of keeping gas artificially cheap.
So D.C., still not convinced?
July 21st, 2010 at 1:48 pm
Add on to that a large segment of both the driving public and politicians that think building a new road is “more flashy” and “gets more done” than pavement and bridge preservation.
July 21st, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Yeah, but it doesn’t matter. There is a good-sized segment of the population that is opposed to any and all taxes. Doesn’t matter what it is for or how good the idea sounds. They are against it. They justify the opposition by waving their arms and talking about “waste” or whatnot (which they can never specifically identify, of course).
I guess I expect to see more rural roads revert to gravel
July 21st, 2010 at 2:06 pm
Maybe part of the plan is that some of the roads are eventually going to revert to gravel, as is already being done in Michigan…
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704913304575370950363737746.html
http://www.wwmt.com/articles/roads-1363526-mich-counties.html
July 22nd, 2010 at 2:10 am
Cash strapped mayors of SimCity have learned this the hard way. Delaying the replacement or maintenance of infrastructure causes real headaches down the road (no pun intended). Unfortunately, the real world has no “weaknesspays” cheat.
July 22nd, 2010 at 9:08 am
[...] New Hampshire DOT: Skimping on Road Upkeep Early Costs 6-14x More Later (Infrastructurist) [...]
July 22nd, 2010 at 10:00 am
@Froggie Unfortunately, you are correct. That’s the nature of our political system I guess. Our Congressmen are (or appear to be) very much disinterested in doling out already constrained resources to fix a bridge or road. On the other hand, they are extremely willing to build a shiny new train line if they get to take credit or have their name on it (or both). Essentially, it’s a problem of goals: our lawmakers main goal is to get re-elected and these mainly wasteful and inefficient projects create the facade that they are working for their constituents, while we concerned citizens want safe roads that are well-maintained and a transportation system that makes practical sense as a whole.
In my opinion, what’s more significant about this article is how it demonstrates our largely reactive nature of our government and the services it provides. Our representatives have little interest spending resources on projects that will not help them get re-elected. This means while investments in infrastructure make perfect practical (and economic) sense in the long run, in the short run, these investments are unattractive. This problem manifests itself with the Minnesota I-70 bridge collapse in August 2007. No one seems to care about or do anything for our crumbling infrastructure before a tragic event occurs. This is why we need a new vision for transportation policy.
We need national goals attached to a long-term vision piece of transportation legislation. We need to build projects that adhere to and pursue these national goals. We need a “bottom-up” approach with these projects with regions, metropolitan planning agencies, and local officials determining which projects are most urgent and deserving of funding and which projects are wasteful pet projects. We need new funding mechanisms eventually in the form of VMT and other user-based fees. And these transportation projects need to be performance-driven, achieving goals and empirical benchmarks over time.
July 22nd, 2010 at 10:13 am
[...] Delaying Road Repairs Costs a Lot in the Long Run (Infrastructurist) [...]
July 22nd, 2010 at 10:50 am
This graphic is wrong. The study linked to in this post has the exact same chart, except they they claim 4-5x times the cost, not 6-14x. Where did that number come from? Unfortunately even the NH report doesn’t give specifics on these numbers. Who decided to up it to 6-14 though? Was there data supporting that?
July 22nd, 2010 at 12:48 pm
Out here in the Chihuahua desert we have sand roads everywhere…
I can travel for weeks and never touch asphalt if I wanted. Only problem is everytime we get one of those monsoon rain storms the roads are carved out by water and impassable to smaller vehicles. I know plenty of ppl that are trapped in their homes when it rains hard enough out here.
When I lived back east the same happened with gravel…
But I don’t think every road needs pavement…just be careful to provide some paved arteries.
July 22nd, 2010 at 4:43 pm
Also, don’t government contracts always go to the lowest bidder? So, a cheaper short-term fix will always be chosen over a longer term solution. I burns me up to think there are roads in France - still in use - that were built by the Romans 2000 years ago…We need to think about the long term sustainability of our infrastructure, even if it might be more expensive, and might NOT result in more repair work for the politicians’ cronies next year….
July 23rd, 2010 at 1:58 am
Road repairs aren’t seen as much by politicians, they need to bring something new back to their constituencies. We need some serious transportation reform that should have happened 80 years ago and given rail and transit trust funds and start reducing the highway and aviation trust funds. See which modes get gobbled up first.