Say the World Trade Center (or any other building)had survived another 100 or 200 years and eventually had to be torn down. How would this be done? I think a wrecking ball or explosives would create as much damage as what really happened, and those buildings couldn't have fallen down any straighter. Do they think about these things when they design skyscrapers?
Joe

• ID# 226.2 (reply to #226.1) - 19 June 2002
  In case of such close-in superscrapers, the way to go would be piece by piece demolition, as exemplified by the One Meridian Plaza, PDelphia and Bank One, Ft. Worth.
  The "picking apart" also allows better control against the release of asbestos, toxics or "just" dust into the air. Some of the detached materials can also be re-used, as opposed to the heap of rubbish that an implosion causes. Piece by piece demolition is, of course, slower and more expensive than an implosion project, but in these cases there aren't (m)any alternatives. ED