Debate, Norwegian Road Administration | According to the logic of the Norwegian Road Administration, it is not feasible to be future-oriented

Welcome to the year 2023State Highway Authority. Here on this planet, we have some big challenges. These are the challenges that some of the most realistic, realistic and fact-based of us describe as crises. Yes, not the crises as in the headlines in Dagbladet, the PT crisis, or in BA and BT if Brann suffers consecutive losses.

No, I’m already talking about very real and serious things crises. Crises that the world’s most talented researchers believe could threaten our livelihoods. I owe it to our descendants to take crises seriously.

one of these crises It relates to the fact that we are increasingly weakening our natural diversity. For decades after decades, we have caused enormous damage to nature. For a long time, not knowing better can be blamed. I can’t do that anymore. This was a childhood lesson when I went to school in the ’90s.

It’s a crisis that has really rallied people, at least when it comes to wind turbines in Norwegian nature. A little less if we are talking about a new four-lane road.

In 2019, the United Nations Nature Commission seriously sounded the alarm. They determined that within a few years we could kill 500,000 of the 5.9 million species of animals and plants on the planet. We have already managed to take the lives of many of them. In the end, this is about us. If I will save us. If I will be able to cure the disease. If you want to avoid big differences between people.

The second crisis is known as the climate crisis. The planet is getting warmer because of our activity. We’ve known this for a long time, too, even if many choose not to take the researchers’ warning seriously.

In fact, it is not a matter of two crises. We are talking about two sides of the same issue. We almost supply ourselves with the resources on this planet.

I will face big problems If we fail to see these crises in context. If we destroy more nature to solve the climate crisis, we solve nothing.

The National Highway Administration’s calculations are basically based on the following formula for success: It’s about getting as much traffic as possible. In addition, travel time should be reduced as much as possible. If someone also builds the road in a place where there was no road before, you can smell the jackpot on the account.

Stupidest thing one would do on such accounts, Is to build a railway along the road to prevent the growth of cars. If you also build a road near an existing road, you lose.

Our real needs are very different from what a calculator wants. At least if I intend to be a responsible physician.

Should I buy a new calculator? To the Swedish Road Administration, the following criteria should be observed:

How can you build a road or path that makes life and everyday life easier for businesses and individuals as energy efficient as possible, with as little natural interference as possible, and as safely as possible?

Reducing travel time would be a good thing, in isolation, but not if the profit in spinning increases with an increase in energy consumption or an unacceptable loss of nature. In times when we have to clear a new path through a natural or cultural landscape, sometimes we have to, the effect has to be undeniable.

Someone raised their hand in the air to come up with a counterargument. When a larger and larger part of the car fleet is electrified, can we continue as before?

I actually can’t. This past year, with electricity prices much higher than we are used to, has shown us that energy is a scarce commodity. If we have any hope of not collapsing when the oil economy begins to go down, we must use more of the energy we have in new industry, and less in transportation.

If we want to develop more energy, which is something we need, the natural consequences need to be as small as possible. The energy industry should also be equipped with an updated calculator.

How will this end? I actually don’t know. The world is not always what we like to believe. However, we cannot continue with the logic by which the Swedish Road Administration and many others operate today. The road service and the state itself also know this.

Because at the same time that new road projects are being planned that will increase traffic and emissions, the same state, through so-called urban growth agreements, is blackmailing municipalities and county councils. The logic is this: If traffic increases, usually due to new government road projects, municipalities and county councils receive less money for measures that reduce the need for motor vehicle traffic.

He saw me recently New paradoxical effect of the old and outdated state road authority calculator.

For years, Hordfast has been presented as one of the best road projects in the West, measured with the Norwegian Road Administration’s calculator. When not the Swedish Road Administration, According to NRK, insert data into the calculation that must take into account the consequences of the times in which we live, and must make the project more future-oriented, the project instead becomes less beneficial from an economic point of view. The reason is that the increase in traffic will be less than previously expected, and that care is being taken to ensure that traffic towards Bergen does not increase.

We should not put our trust in this account. Much of the change is due to the introduction of higher petrol prices.

If a real price tag was placed on the consequences of nature’s destruction and energy use, the answer could be changed further.

The Swedish Road Administration must urgently place more emphasis on nature, energy and climate in its calculations.

We can no longer trust these calculators which is used. The conclusion should be that the Norwegian Road Administration calculator played its part.