Keeping the R&R task manageable by controlling uncertainties

Our country is home to some €347 billion worth of infrastructure. Much of it was built in the decades after the Second World War and was designed to last sixty to eighty years. However, its use has increased, and it has often been subjected to greater loads than anticipated when it was built. As a result, many bridges, locks, quay walls and tunnels are (almost) reaching the end of their life. Over the next 75 years, no less than 260 billion euros will be needed to finance the Replacement & Renovation (R&R) task. These costs are expected to increase considerably in the coming years. But is this billion-dollar spending spree really necessary? Or can we reduce the costs and spread them over a more extended period?

Costs rising by billions

The cost estimates mentioned above are from the 2nd report of the National Forecast for the Replacement and Renovation of Civil Infrastructure, published by TNO at the end of 2023. At the request of the National Government, the Association of Provinces of the Netherlands and the Association of Netherlands Municipalities, TNO has once again mapped out the scope of the R&R task in the Netherlands, following an initial version of the forecast in 2021. Mapping the R&R task nationally is a major challenge, given the large number of civil structure managers and the fact that the required information is not always available. The forecast is, therefore, also inevitably fraught with uncertainty; more on this later.

According to the 2nd National Forecast report, the expected annual cost for provinces, municipalities, and other authorities will rise to almost €3 billion between now and 2040. This is much more than budgeted. From 2040, the annual cost of R&R will continue to rise, reaching around €3.7 billion by the end of the century. Civil structures account for the largest part of the R&R costs, which are predicted to rise from €1.5 billion annually to around €2.6 billion by 2080. And so there is unease among managers and owners of civil structures because what exactly needs to be done, how urgent is the problem, and how will we pay for it? These are all initially logical questions.

Explore further

To find answers to these questions, we need to explore beyond the intended (design) life of each structure. In its 2nd National Forecast report, TNO assumes, in all 54 55 cases, a one-for-one replacement after the structures have reached their expected (average) life. Growth or changes in the area’s functionality, such as more intensive use, a different layout, or any possibilities for (circular) life extension, are not considered. Logically, the TNO study does not take into account the actual quality of the area nor the possibility of monitoring the current condition to better determine and hopefully postpone the replacement dates. Forecasting the total R&R task is, of course, subject to a high degree of uncertainty.

We have noticed that the above simplifications and uncertainties are often overlooked in discussions regarding these forecasts. In light of the objective of the forecast report, these simplifications and uncertainties are understandable, but this is precisely where the key to making this task manageable lies: controlling the uncertainties. Iv, therefore, seizes the opportunities here to ease the pain of the R&R task, and we have already been doing this for many years. For example, we conduct structural assessments of (sections of) bridges and quay walls to determine the assets’ structural safety and remaining service life. We do this in a risk-based way, from broad to detailed: in general terms where possible (for example, with quick scans), and we get the absolute utmost out of the structure when necessary (through inspections, research and calculations). This is how we achieve maximum control with minimum effort. As a result, we have been able to ‘save’ many structures from ‘ruin’. The structural safety of an object can be much greater than that based on a ‘standard’ calculation. Many load tests developed and conducted by us have also demonstrated this.

A call to all managers: cherish your civil engineering works! Because, in many cases, the structural safety – and therefore the remaining service life – is better than expected. Things are not always as bad as they first seem: an object may last for decades, much longer than its design life, without or with relatively limited adjustments. In other cases, measures can be postponed responsibly when monitoring is applied. With a comprehensive range of asset management services, we ensure that managers of civil structures gain and maintain the required insight into the condition of their assets, allowing them to create an optimal multi-year plan for the maintenance or replacement of their infrastructure. ‘Replacement’ is not the first option we should consider when a structure is nearing the end of its life: so much more is possible. Therefore, we prefer the term Maintenance, Renovation and Replacement task: maintain when possible, replace when necessary. 

Making the task manageable

For the Directorate-General for Public Works and Water Management (Rijkswaterstaat), Iv is working with ARUP and Wagemaker to map the structural condition of dozens of fixed and movable bridges in the main road network. The challenge for us as an engineering companyp is to make the right decisions using the correct approach. If necessary and responsible, we strive to achieve the most out of a structure so that physical measures can be minimised and postponed responsibly while ensuring structural safety at all times. In this way, we help to reduce the high social costs for infrastructure and, consequently, the burden on our environment. So that the Maintenance, Renovation and Replacement task remains manageable for all of us. 

Curious about the possibilities for your project?

Wouter, managing director Infra and also COO of Iv, would be delighted to discuss this with you! Get in touch via +31 88 943 3200 or send a message.

Send Wouter a message
Wouter van der Wiel