68 U.S. Bridges Lack Risk Assessment
When the Dali containership struck the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, the deadly collapse triggered an NTSB investigation into U.S. infrastructure. The safety agency wanted to see if other bridges could be susceptible to similar strikes.
About two weeks ago, the NTSB identified 68 bridges across 19 states that should conduct a vulnerability assessment.
Most Read on IEN:
World's Largest Tire Manufacturer Turns to Recycled Materials
Canadian Manufacturer Closes Plant, Moves Production to North Carolina
New EV Company Trolls Elon Musk with Ultra-Light 'Roadster'
PODCAST: Jack Daniel's Trade War Fallout; Ford's Door Lawsuit; Honda Moves to Indiana
After the Key Bridge collapsed, an NTSB investigation found that it was nearly 30 times above the acceptable risk threshold for critical or essential bridges, a metric set by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
The 68 bridges NTSB flagged were designed before AASHTO guidance was established and don't have a current vulnerability assessment.
The NTSB isn't saying that these bridges will collapse; it merely wants the 30 bridge owners to evaluate whether they are above acceptable risk levels. If the risk level is high, the NTSB asks the owners to develop and implement a comprehensive risk reduction plan.
AASHTO created the vulnerability assessment calculation for new bridges in 1991 in response to the Sunshine Skyway Bridge collapse in Florida.
Since 1994, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has required new bridges to minimize the risk of a catastrophic bridge collapse from a vessel collision.
The NTSB found that if the Maryland Transportation Authority had conducted a vulnerability assessment on the Key Bridge, it could have been proactive in reducing the bridge's risk of collapse.
Neither the FHWA nor AASHTO can require a bridge owner to complete a vulnerability assessment for a bridge designed before the release of the 1991 guidelines.
The list (included below) has some pretty notable structures, including the Golden Gate Bridge in California, built in 1937; the Sunshine Skyway Bridge in Florida, built in 1986; the Talmadge Bridge in Georgia, built in 1991; Leo Frigo Bridge in Green Bay, Wisconsin built 1979 and Chicago's Skyway bridge built in 1958.
New York topped the list with 13 bridges, including the Brooklyn Bridge, which was built in 1883, as well as the Manhattan and Williamsburg bridges. Louisiana had the second most bridges with eight and seven bridges were flagged in California.
The NTSB has recommended that an interdisciplinary team of experts be established to provide guidance and help bridge owners evaluate and reduce risk, which could mean infrastructure improvements or operational changes.
A list of U.S. bridges with unknown levels of collapse risk from a vessel collision:
California
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge
Carquinez Bridge
Benicia-Martinez Bridge
Antioch Bridge Bay
San Mateo-Hayward Bridge
Coronado Bridge
Golden Gate Bridge Golden Gate Bridge
Delaware
Summit Bridge
Saint Georges Bridge
Reedy Point Bridge
Florida
Sunshine Skyway Bridge
Napoleon Bonaparte Broward Bridge (Dames Point Bridge)
Georgia
Talmadge Bridge
Illinois
Chicago Skyway Calumet River Bridge
Louisiana
Huey P. Long Bridge
Greater New Orleans Bridge
Israel LaFleur Bridge
Crescent City Connection Bridge
Hale Boggs (Luling) Bridge
Horace Wilkinson Bridge
Gramercy (Veterans Memorial) Bridge
Sunshine Bridge
Maryland
William Preston Lane Jr. (Bay) Bridge (eastbound)
William Preston Lane Jr. (Bay) Bridge (westbound)
Chesapeake City Bridge
Massachusetts
Tobin Bridge (southbound upper)
Tobin Bridge (northbound lower)
Bourne Bridge
Sagamore Bridge
Michigan
Mackinac Bridge
New Hampshire
Memorial Bridge
New Jersey
Commodore Barry Bridge
Vincent R. Casciano (Newark Bay) Bridge
New York
Verrazano Narrows Bridge (eastbound)
Verrazano Narrows Bridge (westbound)
Brooklyn Bridge
Manhattan Bridge
Williamsburg Bridge
Newburgh-Beacon Bridge (eastbound)
Newburgh-Beacon Bridge (westbound)
Rip Van Winkle Bridge
Ogdensburg-Prescott International Bridge
George Washington Bridge
Outerbridge Crossing Bridge
Seaway International Bridge
Thousand Islands Bridge
Ohio
CUY-00490-0010 (I-490) Bridge
CUY-00002-1441 (Main Avenue) Bridge
CUY-00006-1456 (Detroit Avenue) Bridge
CUY-00010-1613 (Carnegie Avenue) Bridge
LUC-01W02-0002 (Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial) Bridge
LUC-00002-1862 (Anthony Wayne) Bridge
Oregon
Astoria-Megler Bridge
St. Johns Bridge
Pennsylvania
Walt Whitman Bridge
Benjamin Franklin Bridge
Betsy Ross Bridge
Delaware River Turnpike Bridge
Rhode Island
Claiborne Pell Newport Bridge
Texas
Buffalo Bayou Toll Bridge
Sidney Sherman Bridge
Rainbow Bridge
Veterans Memorial Bridge
Hartman Bridge (eastbound)
Hartman Bridge (westbound)
GulfGate Bridge
Washington
Lewis and Clark Bridge
Wisconsin
Leo Frigo Bridge
Click here to subscribe to our daily newsletter featuring breaking manufacturing industry news.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
Elon Musk's DOGE Wouldn't Have Worked Even If It Had Worked
WASHINGTON, DC - NOVEMBER 13: Elon Musk listens as U.S. President-elect Donald Trump addresses a ... More House Republicans Conference meeting at the Hyatt Regency on Capitol Hill on November 13, 2024 in Washington, DC. As is tradition with incoming presidents, Trump is traveling to Washington, DC to meet with U.S. President Joe Biden at the White House as well as meet with Republican congressmen on Capitol Hill. (Photo by) It's easy to forget that individual saving in no way shrinks consumption. Short of placing money saved into a coffee can, to save is to shift consumptive ability to someone else. What's true about individual saving is true about government savings. No act of parsimony shrinks the size of government either. That's why Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) wouldn't have worked even if it had worked. Short of the savings being placed in a much bigger coffee can, government spending cuts born of efficiency, headcount reduction, mandate reduction, or all three would have just freed up money for Congress to spend in new ways. In government as with individual, what's not spent is shifted to other existing priorities, or much worse, all new ones. It's the new spending initiatives that are the most perilous. Most start out small, and this includes Medicare. It's so easy to forget that it began as a $3 billion program in the 1960s, but is expected to pass $1 trillion in the coming years. Which speaks to the danger of spending cuts. Talk about "regime uncertainty." Unfortunate and economy-sapping as much government spending is today, the good news is that it's a known. In other words, the myriad ways that Congress politicizes the allocation of precious resources is already priced or factored into our day-to-day existence. That's not so with new initiatives. Who knows what Congress will dream up, and who knows how what Congress will dream up will end up? To see the peril of this, ask yourself if Congress would have had the votes to pass Medicare if it was known that sixty years later it would yet again be a nearly $1 trillion annual program today. That's why without excusing most federal outlays for even a second, when it comes to government the devil you know is better than the unknown. Which is why it's better to let Congress fight over what's known and priced, as opposed to freeing it to design all new programs and initiatives from the proverbial studs. They could end up much bigger than they presently are. Logically so. To which some will reply that what's been written doesn't, or wouldn't have applied to DOGE since any savings wouldn't free up money as much as the savings would reduce government borrowing. More realistically, it would just free up Treasury to borrow $2 trillion more in the future. With our federal government, no act of not borrowing subtracts from borrowing. It's all worth keeping in mind as conservatives in particular lament the failure of the latest gallant, but surely quixotic attempt to shrink the size and cost of government. These initiatives never work simply because in government as with individuals, money saved is never money that's not spent.
Time Business News
2 hours ago
- Time Business News
Exploring the Rise of Local Courier Marketplaces and Courier Service Platforms in Canada
In a world where speed, convenience, and real-time updates define consumer expectations, the logistics and delivery industry is undergoing a massive transformation. From online shoppers awaiting same-day delivery to small businesses needing rapid parcel dispatch, the demand for efficient courier solutions has never been higher. In response, a powerful new trend is emerging in the local courier Canada, this model is quickly gaining traction, offering both individuals and businesses a flexible, transparent, and efficient way to manage deliveries. At the heart of this transformation is the growth of the Courier service platform in Canada, a digital solution that connects senders with local couriers in real this article, we'll dive deep into what makes local courier marketplaces so powerful, why Canada is a prime location for this disruption, and how these platforms are reshaping the courier industry across the country. A Local courier marketplace is an on-demand digital platform that connects senders — whether they're individuals or businesses — with available couriers in their area. Think of it like Uber, but for deliveries. Instead of calling a traditional courier company and dealing with long wait times, users can simply log in to a platform, post their delivery request, and select a nearby courier based on price, ETA, vehicle type, and user model thrives on flexibility. Couriers are typically independent contractors who choose when and where they want to work. Users benefit from transparent pricing, real-time tracking, and rapid delivery times. Canada is uniquely positioned to embrace the digital courier revolution. With a growing e-commerce market, a dispersed population, and urban centers that demand fast, reliable service, the rise of the courier service platform in Canada is a natural evolution. Here are a few reasons why this model is growing rapidly in Canada: Canadian consumers are shopping online more than ever. From small Etsy sellers to large online retailers, the demand for reliable and flexible delivery solutions is increasing. A local courier marketplace provides e-commerce sellers with an affordable, scalable way to fulfill orders locally without relying on national carriers with slow delivery windows. Cities like Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal face high traffic congestion and logistical challenges. Local couriers who know the area well can navigate these challenges more efficiently than national couriers. The courier service platform in Canada offers real-time route optimization and allows for quick deliveries that traditional models can't match. Small businesses often can't afford to partner with large courier companies or pay premium shipping rates. Platforms that operate as local courier marketplaces give them access to cost-effective, on-demand delivery options, helping them stay competitive and retain local customers. Canada has high smartphone penetration and tech-savvy consumers. This makes it easier to adopt mobile-first delivery solutions. Couriers and senders alike can manage pickups, track packages, and handle payments seamlessly from their phones. To understand the impact of this model, let's break down how a local courier marketplace functions: Input Details : Enter pickup and delivery addresses, item size, preferred vehicle type, and any special instructions. : Enter pickup and delivery addresses, item size, preferred vehicle type, and any special instructions. Get Offers : The platform displays available couriers, estimated time of arrival, and pricing. : The platform displays available couriers, estimated time of arrival, and pricing. Track Live : Once a courier is selected, senders can track the delivery in real time and communicate directly with the courier. : Once a courier is selected, senders can track the delivery in real time and communicate directly with the courier. Pay and Rate: Payment is processed automatically via the platform, and users can leave reviews. Register on the Platform : Couriers sign up with details about their vehicle and service area. : Couriers sign up with details about their vehicle and service area. Accept Jobs : Choose deliveries that fit their schedule and location. : Choose deliveries that fit their schedule and location. Navigate with Tools : Use route optimization, live chat, and integrated GPS for efficient service. : Use route optimization, live chat, and integrated GPS for efficient service. Get Paid: Payment is direct and immediate upon completion. There are several advantages for both senders and couriers using this model: Users can choose the exact delivery window, compare prices, and select couriers based on past performance. Couriers can pick jobs based on their availability and location, making the system dynamic and efficient. Traditional courier services often come with hidden fees or vague pricing structures. Local marketplaces offer upfront pricing, allowing users to make informed choices. Live GPS tracking and integrated chat features build trust between sender and courier, and offer full visibility throughout the delivery journey. With route optimization and localized delivery, these platforms reduce unnecessary travel, making them more environmentally friendly compared to traditional delivery systems. The popularity of this delivery model has led to the rise of several platforms operating within Canada. One such platform is Sendiate, a courier marketplace that recently expanded its operations into Canadian cities like Winnipeg. The platform offers a seamless experience for both senders and couriers, with features like pricing comparison, direct chat, and diverse vehicle options — from bicycles to refrigerated trucks. By enabling real-time matching between senders and couriers, platforms like Sendiate are setting a new standard for the courier service platform in Canada. As demand for fast, local delivery continues to rise, we can expect local courier marketplaces to become an essential part of Canada's logistics landscape. Here are a few trends to watch: Many courier service platforms are working to expand their coverage to remote and rural areas. This will open up access to better delivery options for Canadians living outside of major cities. Expect tighter integration with platforms like Shopify, Amazon, and WooCommerce. Sellers will be able to offer real-time delivery options to local customers, boosting satisfaction and reducing cart abandonment. Electric vehicles, bicycles, and carbon-offsetting options will become key selling points for courier platforms, appealing to environmentally conscious users. Machine learning will play a role in predicting demand, optimizing routes, and ensuring timely delivery. Automation tools for dispatch, communication, and customer support will further improve platform efficiency. The delivery industry is shifting from large, rigid networks to agile, localized solutions. The local courier marketplace model reflects the needs of today's economy — speed, transparency, flexibility, and you're a small business needing same-day shipping or a courier looking for a flexible way to earn, platforms that offer a modern courier service platform in Canada are bridging the gap between technology and logistics. With real-time matching, transparent pricing, and urban-focused solutions, these platforms represent the future of delivery in more users embrace this model, expect to see rapid innovation, wider adoption, and a fundamentally transformed last-mile delivery experience across the country. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
What if Elon Musk Is Right About U.S. National Debt? 3 Stocks to Buy if He Is.
As Elon Musk argues, rising national debt and debt servicing costs are curtailing the growth prospects of the U.S. economy. More debt could lead to higher interest rates over the long term. These stocks are beneficiaries of rising interest rates. 10 stocks we like better than Prudential Financial › The highly public spat between Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump over the One, Big, Beautiful Bill highlights an ongoing, decades-long debate over national debt. The focus of this article is to explore a potential scenario and suggest a way to invest in protection against it. That path is via life and retirement insurance companies like Prudential Financial (NYSE: PRU), MetLife (NYSE: MET), and Corebridge Financial (NYSE: CRBG). Here's why. This chart gets to the heart of the matter. As shown below, the U.S. national debt has increased substantially, and so has the level of debt in relation to the country's gross domestic product (GDP). The shaded areas show recessionary periods, including the financial crisis of 2008-2009 and the pandemic, whereby GDP contracted and spending soared, so naturally, the debt-to-GDP ratio did, too. Still, the response in both cases was the same: more spending and more debt. Musk's view is that the national debt issue needs to be addressed as it's out of control and has the potential to saddle Americans with an unsustainable debt burden, which the bill will exacerbate. To be fair, the Trump administration's aim is not to increase the deficit as officials believe it will lower the deficit, through implementation of mandatory savings and promoting GDP growth. Again, this is not the place to debate that matter. However, what if Musk is right and the U.S. continues down the path of rising debt? Rising debt levels and debt servicing payments imply more debt issuance. Simple economics argues that, unless demand improves, the rising supply of debt will lead to a rise in the price of debt. In other words, long-term interest rates will rise, and could be higher than the market is expecting. The chart below indicates that the market is comfortable with the matter and isn't attaching a significant premium (beyond the usual premium to reflect the increased risk of holding longer-dated debt) to long-term interest rates over medium-term rates. But the market could be wrong. And while Musk's primary concern appears to be the difficulty of cutting rates caused by rising debt, it's only a short step away to argue that rising debt could lead to higher long-term interest rates. The situation might not be catastrophic, but interest rates could be higher than anticipated. It's not an ideal scenario for stocks overall, as it makes them relatively expensive compared to bonds. However, there is one sector that could do well, namely life and retirement insurers such as Prudential Financial, MetLife, and Corebridge. These insurance companies pick up premiums from policyholders. The policies create long-term liabilities for insurers that they need to balance against their assets. As such, they tend to invest in relatively low-risk assets, such as government debt. While rising interest rates will reduce the value of the existing debt holdings, they will also increase the discount rate used to calculate the net present value of their liabilities. Consequently, as rates rise, insurers will be able to buy corporate bonds, mortgage loans, and government debt at higher rates. Here's a breakdown of all three insurers and the assets they hold in their general accounts, which are used to match their liabilities. General Account Assets Highest Share Second Third Notes Prudential Financial 54.9% in publicly available for sale fixed maturities 18.3% in privately available for sale fixed maturities 14.4% commercial mortgage and other loans Mainly corporate and government fixed maturities MetLife 31.6% investment grade corporate debt 18.4% Net mortgage loans 16.1% structured products Only $11.6 billion of its $430.9 billion in general account assets is in non-investment grade corporate and foreign government bonds Corebridge 35% public corporate debt 10% private corporate debt 7% residential mortgage-backed securities 97% in fixed income or short-term investments Data sources: Company presentations. As indicated above, the assets in their general accounts are fixed income and relatively safe investments, giving all three companies good exposure to the theme of higher long-term rates. It's important not to be too alarmist here. The debt problem is undoubtedly an issue, but it's very hard to predict where interest rates, or total interest payable, will be. That said, if you are a young person worried about the public debt burden and the possibility of higher rates over your lifetime, then it makes sense to buy stocks in this sector as a form of (I'm avoiding the obvious word) matching your assets to your potential future liabilities from rising public debt servicing costs. Before you buy stock in Prudential Financial, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Prudential Financial wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $664,089!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $881,731!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 994% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025 Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. What if Elon Musk Is Right About U.S. National Debt? 3 Stocks to Buy if He Is. was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
