What is ONE good non-defeatist reason not to rebuild the WTC exactly like it was.?

Answer 1

The design of the building is energy inefficient. The most energy efficient building shape is a sphere or a half sphere. Cube or elongated cube shaped buildings lose (in winter) the most heat to the atmosphere and gain the most heat (in summer) from the atmosphere. Thats one good reason alone. But this is true of all buildings.

Answer 2

If it were built exactly as it was, it would include a lot of asbestos, which is a known carcinogen and is no longer used in building construction. The Port Authority of New York had wanted to tear down the WTC for years, but they couldn't use traditional methods of demolition, because of the asbestos problem. The only other method was to systematically dismantle the structures from the top down, which was prohibitively expensive. "Fortunately" for the owner of the WTC, an investment group that had bought the complex just weeks before 911, and was expected to have to spend 200 million dollars to bring the buildings up to code, the demolition problem was taken care of. And the investment group made 500 million dollars off the insurance payout, to boot. Sweet deal, eh?

Also, and I realize this makes two reasons, the WTC was never a money-maker, having been subsidized from its inception by the City of New York. Why build another white elephant when we could build something that might actually support itself?

Answer 3

Steel constuction at the time and possibly now would not be as effective as steel reinforced concrete construction. Steel tends to be cheaper and quicker which is why it is used.

Answer 4

New structural designs are more efficient.

Answer 5

they don't correspond to modern ideas of good urban planning.