The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!
A Literal Wall Expert Explains Why Trump's Wall Won't Even Work
President Donald Trump's unrelenting bid to build a wall on the southern border has not only held up much of the federal government for 24 days and counting, its construction could be devastating to the environment and local wildlife.
Now, in a epic Facebook post shared more than 100,000 times, an actual structural and civil engineer explained why the project is also a "monumental waste of money" and will be ineffective if it ever goes up.
"Structurally and civil engineering-wise, the border wall is not a feasible project," wrote Amy Patrick, a structural and civil engineer from Houston, Texas.
"Trump did not hire engineers to design the thing. He solicited bids from contractors, not engineers. This means it's not been designed by professionals. It's a disaster of numerous types waiting to happen," she added.
Patrick teaches structural analysis and design at the University of Houston and says she has been deposed as an expert witness in matters regarding proper wall construction, making her a literal "court-accepted expert on walls."
She shared three major concerns about the wall, including how it could impede the movement of water during flash floods and increase the risk of flooding; that it could disrupt the surrounding ecology; and that the wall prototypes so far are "nearly impossible to build or don't actually do the job," citing an article from Engineering.com.
Trump has demanded Congress hand over more than $5 billion to fund the unpopular wall, and even sought $25 billion for it at one point.
But when all is said and done, Patrick estimates the wall could be as "higher than $50 billion" and won't even be finished in the president's lifetime due to "rework, complexities beyond the prototype design, factors to prevent flood and environmental hazard creation, engineering redesign" and other complications.
The structural forensicist is certain that the project "WILL go wrong" and noted that others in her field might not even want to work on the controversial project, as "a large quotient of us are immigrants, and besides, we can't afford to bid on jobs that are this political."
"We're small firms, and we're already busy, and we don't gamble our reputations on political footballs. So you'd end up with a revolving door of contractors making a giant, uncoordinated muddle of things, and it'd generally be a mess. Good money after bad. The GAO agrees with me," she said.
Further, she argues that the wall "won't be effective" and could, right now, easily scale it with a 32-foot extension ladder and a cheap custom saddle.
"Another thing: we are not far from the day where inexpensive drones will be able to pick up and carry someone," Patrick wrote. "This will happen in the next ten years, and it's folly to think that the coyotes who ferry people over the border won't purchase or create them. They're low enough, quiet enough, and small enough to quickly zip people over any wall we could build undetected with our current monitoring setup."
Patrick is not alone in her derision of Trump's pet project. Most voters remain are strongly opposed to a wall on the Mexican border, according to a Quinnipiac poll released Monday, with 55 percent saying that they reject every argument for the wall.
Opponents also worry that the wall will dissect a border tribe, degrade the natural landscape and threaten 93 endangered and threatened species, including jaguars, ocelots, Mexican gray wolves and cactus ferruginous pygmy owls, according a study from the Center for Biological Diversity.
"Let's have border security, by all means, but let's be smart about it. This is not smart. It's not effective. It's NOT cheap," Patrick concluded. "The returns will be diminishing as technology advances, too. This is a ridiculous idea that will never be successfully executed and, as such, would be a monumental waste of money."
- Here's why Trump's border wall won't work - San Antonio Express ... ›
- Trump Learns Why a Wall Won't Work From a Border Patrol Agent ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
David Gilmour, guitarist, singer and songwriter in the rock band Pink Floyd, set a record last week when he auctioned off 126 guitars and raised $21.5 million for ClientEarth, a non-profit environmental law group dedicated to fighting the global climate crisis, according to CNN.
The Trump administration ratcheted up its open hostility to climate science in a move that may hide essential information from the nation's farmers.
Police have cleared 250 climate activists who stayed overnight at the Garzweiler brown coal mine in western Germany, officials said Sunday.
By Megan Jones and Jennifer Solomon
The #MeToo movement has caused profound shake-ups at organizations across the U.S. in the last two years. So far, however, it has left many unresolved questions about how workplaces can be more inclusive and equitable for women and other diverse groups.
By Tara Lohan
By now it's no secret that plastic waste in our oceans is a global epidemic. When some of it washes ashore — plastic bottles, plastic bags, food wrappers — we get a stark reminder. And lately one part of this problem has been most glaring to volunteers who comb beaches picking up trash: cigarette butts.
Andrea Rodgers, second from the right, takes notes during a hearing in the Juliana v. U.S. case before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Portland, Oregon on June 4. Colleague Elizabeth Brown sits to her left, while colleague Julia Olson sits on her right, with co-council Philip Gregory on Julia's right. Robin Loznak / Our Children's Trust
By Fran Korten
On June 4, Andrea Rodgers was in the front row of attorneys sitting before a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court. The court session, held in Portland, Oregon, was to determine whether the climate change lawsuit (Juliana v. United States) brought by 21 young plaintiffs should be dismissed, as requested by the U.S. government, or go on to trial.