share interactive transcript request transcript/captions live captions
download
|
MyPlaylist
ANDREW CUOMO: The El train tunnel-- as you know, it's about a mile and a half long. It's over 100 years old. It goes from First Avenue in Manhattan to the Bedford station in Brooklyn.
I asked Columbia and Cornell to assist the state of New York. As good citizens of the state of New York, they agreed. The dean of the engineering school of both Columbia and Cornell put together teams, went through the whole process, went through the tunnels. And I said to them, any new idea-- outside of the box, creative-- any way to reduce the 15 months, we are open.
They have proposed a new design. It uses many new innovations that are new to frankly the rail industry in this country. With this design, it would not be necessary to close the El train tunnel at all, which would be a phenomenal benefit to the people of New York City.
SPEAKER: We're going to place the bench wall into three categories. So there's bench wall that's going to, in some sense, be stable, and will remain. There's bench wall that's been compromised to some degree, but not significantly, that we think we can reinforce using something called fiber reinforced polymer-- so it's essentially a mixture of epoxy and fiber-- to wrap around.
And if you look at the figure to the right, you'll see essentially wrapping it around the bench wall and strengthening the bench wall. And then there's a third category, which is bench wall that really is just not structurally sound that has to ultimately be demolished and removed. Then the question becomes how do we know what's what. And so we're going to use a state-of-the-art ultrasound technology to evaluate the entire length of the bench wall and figure out which parts of the bench wall are in which categories and then and act accordingly to either leave it as it is or to reinforce it as needed, or remove it as needed.
In addition, we are going to install smart fiber optics sensors. These are sensors-- it's a fiber optic cable that will run along the vertical side of the bench wall along the length of the tunnel. And these sensors will be able to pick up small changes and deformations in the bench wall in advance of failure. So if there were something that eventually is going to fail, we'll know that in advance and be able to send in a team to go in and do what's whatever's necessary, reinforce that section as needed in advance of the actual failure.
So this is really state-of-the-art technology. It's been applied in new tunnels. This is an unusual application in that we're applying it in an existing-- as part of a rehabilitation of an existing tunnel. But it's proven technology. And so I think that the fact that it's proven technology means that it will work beautifully here.
But we're not going to just stop there. So the other thing we're recommending is that we introduce a lidar system. What lidar does is it essentially maps out the shape of the tunnel at a given instant in time. This is not going to be continuous monitoring, like the fiber optic cable. In this case, this is going to be something that we would mount, for example, on a train. And as the train is passing through the tunnel, it would do a reading of the tunnel. So it would be periodic.
But it would add a second and a complementary evaluation of any sort of deterioration that might be going on within the tunnel. So with these two pieces of technology, we think we will be able to know in advance if any section of the tunnel is showing signs of deterioration and be able to head off any more significant things that might happen, for example, if there were structural loss into the actual train area.
We're going to have to install a walkway where the bench wall no longer exists. We imagine that this could be just fiberglass, steel. It would be a relatively simple installation, certainly a lot less expensive than reconstructing the concrete bench wall. So we see a savings as far as that's concerned. But we would still have a pathway from the standpoint of access and from the standpoint of egress and from the standpoint of safety.
We also looked very carefully at the resilience. This is not going to be the last-- as bad as Sandy was, it's not the last storm that New York is going to experience. And so we wanted to make sure that the tunnel is more resilient than it was before. We're making four recommendations to improve the resiliency of the tunnel. The first is that we want to increase the pump capacity for the tunnel.
So as it currently stands, there's a single drainage pipe. We will have, in fact, now drainage pipes that will run to the Manhattan side and to the Brooklyn side so that we can double the amount of water going through those pipes. In addition, we've increased the pumping capacity of the standard pumps and of the emergency pumps to dramatically increase the amount of water that can be pumped out of the tunnel during-- under an emergency situation.
The second thing is we look at how those pumps are powered. Obviously, they only run if they're going to be powered. And so they're utility lines that are going to run from Manhattan into the pumping station and from Brooklyn into the pumping station, providing one level of redundancy. So if one of the grids goes down but the other grid is up, then the pumps are continuing to run.
In the event that both of the utilities go down, though, then you need to think about an external generator to provide that power. So we are recommending that a permanent generator be installed. Moreover, we would like to explore the option of possibly powering that generator using natural gas rather than a diesel fuel. The advantage of having it powered by natural gas is that the emergency generator would be able to run Indefinitely, so it would not stop running when the diesel fuel-- as it would with diesel fuel when that ran out, when the tank ran out. And of course, under conditions that we're talking about-- major storm is hitting-- there's a lot of things going on at the same time. And so the notion that this external power would be there indefinitely would add, certainly, to the resilience of the tunnel.
Third is that we-- and there's a demonstration of this shown here with the Queens Midtown tunnel. Consideration should be given to potentially putting a watertight gate on the two ends of the tunnel to protect the tunnel from any sort of major flooding. So I'm showing an example here in front of the Queen's Midtown tunnel. The Brooklyn Battery tunnel has something very similar, and so there should be some consideration given to that. So that's our third recommendation.
And fourth, there's a lot of vent shafts and so forth that run along the entire length of the tunnel. That's where the water is going to get in. And so we're recommending that all of those openings-- that some ceiling facility be built into all of those between the First Avenue station and the Bedford Avenue station, especially all of those that are under some critical elevation. And so that should be something that's examined and implemented as needed.
And finally, I just wanted to point to the fact that public safety was always in our mind. It was in every conversation that we had. And there were really two aspects of it that we discussed at some length. One had to do with the actual construction project, and one had to do with the operation of the tunnel after the construction.
So during the construction, the demolition of the duct banks and the removal of the duct banks is going to generate a good deal of dust, and importantly, airborne silica, which is a hazard for humans. And so part of what the construction company will have to do is monitor that and ensure, through filtration and remediation, that the air has been cleaned before that tunnel could then be reopened.
So we made an additional recommendation, beyond just having the company itself monitoring, that there should be an external, independent evaluation and monitoring of air quality to ensure-- this is public assurance that, in fact, the air quality is as is needed. And then in terms of the ongoing operations of the tunnel, as already mentioned, we're recommending the smart technology be introduced. This will monitor the structure of the tunnel. This is, in some sense, raising the quality of safety within the tunnel even beyond what it is today by introducing this technology. And so we conclude that in some sense, we're leaving the tunnel safer than it was originally.
So let me just quickly run through those-- all of the recommendations that are being made. So we start with a new power and control system, as was stated, and in fact, implementing a racking system for hanging the cables outside of the bench wall. This decouples the cables from the bench wall and allows us to then treat the bench wall in a somewhat simpler way, and not comprehensively remove all of it, but in fact, only remove that portion that is needed.
We want to jacket the cables with a fireproof material that is also low smoke so that in the event of a fire, people are safe. We'll abandon the cables that currently exist within the bench wall. There is no environmental concern there. We will leave the structurally sound bench wall in place, reinforce the less structurally sound bench wall, and remove the unstable bench wall.
Number seven, we'll install a smart sensor system that is state-of-the-art to monitor the structures initially, and ultimately, I believe, the operations within the tunnel. Eight, install a walkway so there continues to be a pathway for access and for egress under emergency conditions. Nine, install and improve the resiliency of the tunnel in terms of any future storms that may be coming along. And 10, as I mentioned, we always had public safety in mind as we went through this exercise.
ANDREW CUOMO: Necessity is the mother of invention. What these people have designed is the first of its kind in the United States of America. No rail system has used this approach before. So it really is, from their point of view, exciting.
I don't know if you can tell, but these are engineers excited. I'm sorry. This is really a unique design, a unique system. We're going to-- we'll deploy it here. But as you heard, this could be a national model, because it is a totally different way to reconstruct a tunnel. It's faster. It's cheaper. It's better than the way we have been doing it now.
And New York should be the first. And we are trying to be the first. This state is the most aggressive state in building infrastructure in the United States of America. The corollary to that is let us be the state that is leading in innovation and new designs and new technology. This fiberglass wrapping of the bench wall-- this has never been done before. So this technology not only works for this situation, but has capacities well beyond.
SPEAKER: It is obviously a major shift in approach. We'll continue to work closely with local communities, the city of New York, and all of our stakeholders, and solicit their input throughout. But without a doubt, this is a less invasive, more efficient approach to rebuilding the El train tunnel for the future. And it represents a huge win for our transit system and our customers. And for that, we can all celebrate and be thankful. So thank you all. Thank you, Governor.
SPEAKER: Well said. Thank you.
New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo convened a panel of experts -- including Lance Collins, the Joseph Silbert Dean of Engineering -- to look at New York City's Canarsie Tunnel, a vital underwater subway path connecting Manhattan to Brooklyn. Flooding from Superstorm Sandy had badly damaged the century-old tunnel, which was set to close for 15 months of repairs beginning in April 2019. The inconvenient shutdown of the tunnel's L-train service was so dreaded by New Yorkers, some had dubbed it "L-pocalypse." Cornell and Columbia engineers have worked collaboratively to develop a proposal to renovate the Canarsie Tunnel while keeping it operational, safe, on time and on budget. Night and weekend closures would be required, but only one of the tunnel's two tracks would close at a time, allowing for continuous, round-the-clock service.
