Fact-Checking Elon Musk’s Response to Our Investigation on Boring’s Houston Flood Tunnel Plan — ProPublica

Billionaire Elon Musk takes the question A recent investigation In the Houston Chronicle and the Texas Editorial Board, which raised questions on the Flood project, he acts as to the chronic trouble of Houston. But the experts stated that his response, which he did not explain in the editorial board, is not supported by facts and data.

Last month, the editorial staff reported that the Moscow Tunnel Company, Boring Co., has been lobbying selected officials for months to allow it to build tunnels under Houston to mitigate the consequences of the flood. The sadly offered to dig two tunnels for 12 feet under Buffalo Bay-Bai Water Water, which passes through the central Houston-kab to remove storm water from the neighborhoods and towards Mexican Gulfs during large storms. Experts say, however, that large tunnels, near 30 to 40 feet in diameter, can have much more water and be more effective.

Musk and representatives did not answer the interview requests and did not answer the questions that send the stories of the last month about whether the small Boring tunnels could handle the Flodwater Houston in the future.

Instead, Musk waited up to a few hours after the story was published Answer xCompany Social Media It belongs to 2022.

“The company’s sad tunnels will work and cost <10% of the alternatives," the report said on August 28. "If you need more flow, you can build additional tunnels, and, in addition, they can be water from many parts of the city, not just one."

The recording was written in response to a message to the X from US representative Wesley Hunt, a Houston Republican, who helped organize private meetings with government officials in Harris and across the state to sell them according to the Toring Flood plan. Hunt also did not answer questions from the editorial staff to the publication of the original history, but he weighed on X after the story was published.

“The lifetime congressman in Houston and Texas talked to the most intelligent person on the planet Earth about the issue of the issue of flooding of generations in our city that no one else will fix,” – Hunt wrote.

Musk’s message did not offer any data and engineering explanations to support its statements. Thus, the editorial staff studied his statements, comparing them with the research of floods and interviewed engineering experts, some of which noted key technical and material -technical problems with the sad plan.

One of the Musk’s claims is probably false and others are still impossible to check with confidence, according to the examinations.

Again, when the editorial staff pressed Musk and sad representatives to explain the requirements of the missile technology, they did not answer. Also Hunt.

Would boring tunnels cost less than 10% of the alternatives?

Musk’s proposal carries a smaller price tag than the estimated cost of a greater system, which the area of ​​floods spent years and millions of dollars, studying. But this is partly because they are amazingly different suggestions.

Hunt’s team said the Buffalo Bawalo Bawalo project would cost $ 760 million, according to internal communication obtained in the editorial office through state record requests.

On the other hand, the county county, offered in 2022. Tunnels with a diameter of 30 to 40 feet for this segment of the system at a price of about $ 4.6 billion.

Because the project is still in the study phase, the number of counties is previous. But, based on the available figures, Boring’s proposal will cost closer to one of the county estimates, not less than 10%, as noted by the post of Musk. Thus, Musk seems to exaggerate how cheaper his system will be.

Flood experts also claimed that the reduced price was somewhat proportional to the boring tunnery. Two 12-foot tunnels would provide less than a fifth of the volume, which offers one 40-foot tunnel.

This means that they distract less water from vulnerable areas than one big tunnel.

Jim Blackburn, Houston’s Environmental Lawyer and Flood Political Expert, said Musk’s Company deserves a fair hearing, cheaper does not mean automatically better.

“If this is a smaller tunnel, then I would like to expect it to cost less,” Blackburn said. “You have to see how much flood mitigation you get for the dollars you spend.”

Emily Woodel, a Press Socialist Fighting Harris, said the agency needs additional information before he could weigh any Musk’s requirements.

“We would have to conduct a lot of research before you can potentially move forward, so I wouldn’t want to think,” she said. “Until we conducted a project or other study, we would have sent people to our web -site for the reports and the data we have collected to date.”

Is it possible to build additional tunnels for more water flow?

Musk said that if you need to move more floods, you can add more tunnels. The engineers said it wasn’t easy.

Larry Danbar, a veteran of water resources, who advised the government agency Houston on drainage, said only 11 tunnels of Toring to transfer the same amount of water as one large tunnel. Lasting nearby, with enough space between them to keep the ground stable, the full system can cover hundreds of feet. This will require the provision of rights to more land and the construction of additional access points for maintenance, he said.

And every new stage of construction can bring another round of review and mobilization costs, said Dunbar, reducing the speed and availability, which is sadly advertised as the key advantages of its proposal.

“The problems are just becoming more complex,” Donbar said. “Not what you can’t do it, but just throw it there -” Oh, if we need more, we just do more ” – well, that’s it much more.”

County Commissioner Harris Tom Ramzi, who has engineering experience, agreed. More tunnels will also mean more service equipment, which can increase long -term costs, Rams said.

He added that the county will need to be determined with the full plan at the beginning, so all system elements such as pumps, drains and emissions can be developed properly.

“It would just be just adding extra tunnels later,” Rams said.

John Blant, a former County engineer Harris, who retired after more than three decades in the county, similarly rejected Musk’s proposal that it can be sad to build more tunnels if the original plan is.

Working on other infrastructure projects, Blant said, he came across a number of contractors capable of creating tunnels, large enough to handle work properly.

“You don’t start with the kid and understand later,” he said. “All this concept of introducing 20% ​​of what you need to find out whether it has zero meaning.”

Can tunnels move water from other parts of the city, and will the tunnels get?

Musk claimed that Bering tunnels could be used in different parts of the city, not just along Buffalo.

Some local officials have agreed that Musk’s tunnels can actually work better for smaller watersters that do not take as much water as Buffalo.

Ramsey said he supports the study of smaller tunnels for areas such as Bayous hunting and halls passing through other parts of the city and also need resources to strengthen the flood protection. The district commissioner called publicly to consider the narrow tunnels more closely during the commissioner’s court hearing in April, after Hunt placed it on the proposal of Bouring in February.

“This is another tool in our toolbar to help soften the Deadly Floods in Central Texas“And what continues to happen in the Harris district, we need as many tools as we can get.”

In August, Woodla with a flood area said that the agency originally focused on large diameter tunnels, as engineering research identified them as the most effective option for the system throughout the county.

However, she said that smaller tunnels could be a viable solution in certain areas. Since this idea was not the focus of research, it added, it would be necessary to study more before any such project could move forward.

Colin Gilbert, Executive Director of the Greens Bayou Coalition, is a non -profit organization that works to protect the neighborhood near Grins Bai, in the northeast of Houston, said the community in its watershed is also desperate. According to her, they welcome a massive storm tunnel, offering Harris county, but even smaller tunnels would be better than nothing.

“We would be delighted to see all the opportunities,” Gilbert said. “When Congressman Hunt and Sad Cou the Couns, we are glad to hear it.”

Experts and officials who were interviewed in the editorial staff have still accepted the question with the broad statement of Musk that “the company’s sad tunnels will work” because it does not take into account the complexity of the project or that success depends heavily on which system ultimately the district wants.

In A The memo on two pages is sad Sent to Hunt’s team in February, and it was distributed among local officials in the district, the company made a step as an “innovative, cost -effective solution” of the chronic flood of Houston.

“We are confident in our ability to successfully perform this project,” wrote Jim Fitzgerald, Head of the Boring Business Global Development.

But Donbar said that the only way to evaluate Musk’s claim is to focus on the purpose of the storm tunnels.

If the goal is to create the highest project at the lowest price, Dunbar said, Boring’s proposal can comply with the bill. But if the goal is to protect life and property from another flood of Harvey Flood at the Harvey level, he believes that a smaller project simply does not evaluate.

“You have to have a major reason why you are building this tunnel that you are trying to achieve,” Donbar said. “And I didn’t hear that Elon gave this answer.”

Rock Owns, retired Harris County Prosecutor on Environmental Issues, including flooding county, said he saw local officials repeatedly covered massive projects that were not well thought out and led to expensive legal battles.

For example, he pointed to the problems control over the flood White oak fight In the northwest of Houston. In a long legal battle, which began in 1999, about 400 housing owners in the area accused the district of approving the development of the flow without proper control over the flood, which, according to them, caused a repeated flood of their homes.

Texas Supreme Court ultimately ruled in favor of the county in 2016. But Owns said even unsuccessful lawsuits, and the challenge that could expose the county a significant loss reward.

Musk The ethos of the rapid move And experiencing the consequences later, said Owns, only increased the risk.

“It works great in the private sector, but not in the public sector,” he said. “We do not look at Mr. Moscow’s personal happiness; we look at the livelihood and throughout the life of the people who live here.”