China Goes Full Keynesian-tard: Demolishes Never-Used Just-Built Skyscraper

Tyler Durden's picture


"Growth" meet "mal-investment boom-bust" In a perfect example of the smoke-and-mirror-ness of China's credit-fueled expansion, a 27-storey high-rise building which was completed on November 15th 2015 was just demolished, "having been left unused for too long."

As China People's Daily reports,

Directional blasting demolition of a high-rise building was completed successfully at 7 a.m. on November 15, 2015 in Xi'an, in northwestern China's Shaanxi province.



The building was 118 meters high (27 floors) with a total construction area of over 37000 square meters.



Having been left unused for too long, the building could not be brought back into use so local government decided to demolish it.



It is reported to be the highest building that has ever been demolished in China.

*  *  *

The silver-lining - now workers can clean up the mess, dig a bigger hole... and fill that in - all in the name of Keynesian "growth."

Your rating: None

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 01/09/2016 - 17:48 | 7022956 Bill of Rights
Bill of Rights's picture

Shrivel ready jobs ...

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 17:51 | 7022967 El Oregonian
El Oregonian's picture

2 months is too long? ... Boy, talk about a real quicky...

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:02 | 7023015 0b1knob
0b1knob's picture

I can remember a public housing tower built in Indianapolis in the 1970's.   It was left unheated after construction and the water pipes all froze.   When it got warmer the whole place flooded.    After some debate they decided to destroy it.  No one was ever housed in it for even a day.

At one time this story had a point but I've forgotten what it was.    Something to do with windows....

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:11 | 7023048 knukles
knukles's picture

Kinda like Progressive stewardship of race relations in 'Mercia.
Were well built and improved over generations only to be torn asunder in 7 years.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:11 | 7023053 Scooby Dooby Doo
Scooby Dooby Doo's picture

All you have to do is thermite the top floors and the rest pancakes!

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:17 | 7023067 AdolfSchicklgruber
AdolfSchicklgruber's picture

No scooby, all you have to do is dump a few hundred gallons of jet fuel and burn some office furniture and paper and the beams will all melt at the same speed and fall straight down. Its physics! Just like Popular Mechanics taught us...and the 9/11 commission report. All those official sources never lie and always have our best interest in mind. 

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:20 | 7023079 Richard Chesler
Richard Chesler's picture

Klugman Lah! Lah! Lah!


Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:30 | 7023120 BuddyEffed
BuddyEffed's picture

You don't have to melt all the beams at the same time.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:33 | 7023131 Rick Blaine
Rick Blaine's picture

Wait guys...

When was this building completed?

Unless I'm missing something, the story from the Chinese site says it was demolished on November 15th...

However, I don't see anything about when the construction was completed...

Maybe it was an older building...

...but again, maybe I'm missing something.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:43 | 7023139 BuddyEffed
BuddyEffed's picture

You don't have to melt all the beams at the same time. With the weight of so many floors above, damage or softening to beams on one side that leaves the overhead weight unsupported can cause a little sag And that sag will start to torque the beams elsewhere. Once that torque gets to a certain point structural failure occurs and the rest of the beams quickly snap. At the snapping point the corner or side sag hasn't moved the upper floors but a few feet off center. Hence it falls pretty much straight down.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:50 | 7023190 BuddyEffed
BuddyEffed's picture

I wonder if anyone ever tried to analyze video looking for evidence of corner or side sag prior to the pancake-ing. You might be able to compensate for sway from wind and see evidence of a few feet of off center shift.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:52 | 7023210 mvsjcl
mvsjcl's picture

A pyroclastic cloud! Now, where have I seen that before....?

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:56 | 7023220 BuddyEffed
BuddyEffed's picture

Just trace lines from lower floors through the torn gap to the upper floors. Any change in the line up over time would be pretty convincing.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:58 | 7023237 mvsjcl
mvsjcl's picture

Yeah. I think David Chandler did something like that:

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 19:18 | 7023304 BuddyEffed
BuddyEffed's picture

That video mostly not on WTC and focused just on acceleration after drop started. More interested in data points looking for signs of sag or torque in the minutes leading up to the start of the fall of either or both WTC.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:51 | 7023640 eatthebanksters
eatthebanksters's picture

The PROC probably finds it cheaper over the long to knock down a number of buildings vs having a very high vacancy rate which would drive rents down and perhaps leave the entire office building market under water.  I get they made some real 'smart' loans to the developers of those buildings.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 00:03 | 7024205 The Blank Stare
The Blank Stare's picture

Wow! What a waste. They could have had some Uyghurs fly a plane into it for insurance purposes.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 00:20 | 7024243 boattrash
boattrash's picture

WWTS (What Would Trump Say) to this business model?

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 01:21 | 7024377 Xibalba
Xibalba's picture

"It didn't say TRUMP, so I don't really care". 

- Sincerly, Donny

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 02:03 | 7024421 Not Victor E. O...
Not Victor E. Overbanks's picture

Beware of the user "DontGive"

He has been hijacking accounts through ZH Chat and posting as other people.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 02:50 | 7024463 Durrmockracy
Durrmockracy's picture

China is supposedly on a different time slot, so that could explain the discrepancy with when it was built and when it was destroyed.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 07:55 | 7024664 Chris Dakota
Chris Dakota's picture

China just pulled it to prove to the world that the World Trade was controlled demolition.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 10:00 | 7024800 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

I suspect that omeone discovered structural flaws in the building. A building inspector was probably paid off to pass deficient construction and it was cheaper to demolish it than repair it.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 10:57 | 7024913 zhandax
zhandax's picture

That or the bribes on that building were so excessive that they wanted a plausible reason to shred the documentation.

Big bro Xi is looking for examples to make.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 22:17 | 7027641 Scarlett
Scarlett's picture

A search by image brings this up:  


Where they say it's been there since 1999... 



Sun, 01/10/2016 - 00:22 | 7024245 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

and leave their passports to be found in the smoking rubble so identification was certain.

possibly nixed because the chinese equity market couldn't currently take the exercise of the put options on the airline stocks.

the beams wouldn't have to melt at the same time.  


Sun, 01/10/2016 - 17:48 | 7026447 Lumberjack
Lumberjack's picture

UPC Group might....

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 18:55 | 7023222 mvsjcl
mvsjcl's picture

LOL!!! That's freaking hilarious! Please, keep it coming!

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 19:14 | 7023291 besnook
besnook's picture

the problem with your engineering is the core support structure of the twin towers were meant to support the cantelevered floors extending from the core. in other words the base structure was strong enough to support the entire building. the tenth floor core was built to support the entire building minus the bottom ten floors and so on all the way up the center of the building. under the .gov conspiracy theory the core of the towers should have remained virtually intact as the weight of the building fell away from it. as the building fell the core would have needed to support less and less weight.

instead the core fell away from the base of the core structure. that could never have happened in ny physical world. yet it did. go figure.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:09 | 7023476 balolalo
balolalo's picture

Two comments:

1.  It's a good thing there aren't any homeless people in China who could've used some shelter...

2.  This is how humans use our precious Mother Earth's resources.  


Sun, 01/10/2016 - 06:31 | 7024602 FreedomGuy
FreedomGuy's picture

That is not how the cantilevers work or will collapse. Vrtually all building collapse into their own footprints regardless of how they are constructed. Look at photos from WWII bombings.

Buildings are designed more for vertical forces, not horizontal. Torque and sway-vectors are designed as well.

The best analogy I can offer is to imagine a sandcastle. If you throw a pencil at it will not knock it over (as Rosie O'Donnell supposed). It will penetrate it. If you weaken the sand castle it will collapse vertically. You cannot apply a large enough force spread over a large enough area to knock it over. The mass is huge and the force is perpendicular to the base...vertical forces from gravity. This is particularly true the higher you hit the building. Short of a controlled demolition these buildings do not fall over.

My college engineering project was touring the WTC. We studied the structure, fasteners (welds, rivets, etc.) and fireproofing at the roof.


Sun, 01/10/2016 - 13:26 | 7025443 besnook
besnook's picture

i don't know if they are still available online but i was able to study the architectual blueprints of the structure of the towers. it was clear to me that if you had to determine how the building failed without considering more than a plane crash into the building the official explanation was plausible given the weakest point of the building was the outer shell which supported the ends of the cantelevered beams attached to the core center structure except that, because of the structure of the building a good portion of the core should have been sticking up from the pile. the force of the pancaking floors may have compromised the upper structure but the base should never have completely collapsed toward the center of the building. under the .gov theory the outer beams should have been popped out the frame as massive projectiles(some apparently did. imagine a several ton ibeam  flying through the air at considerable speed).

i am not toatally convinced of the other theories i just know it didn't happen the way the official claims that it happened. that means the real reason is not known.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 20:36 | 7027189 FreedomGuy
FreedomGuy's picture

At least you are being reasonable. The truth is we never will know exactly and precisely but we can know in general. Put broadly it is heat, weakening support members (probably denuded of fire retardant) and simple building design.

As I see it, as floors pancake the mass of stuff above continues to grow and accelerate. This would allow complete failure. There is also the issue of kinetic energy as floors collapse and beams snap. The forces will not be everywhere equal as they are designed.

Here is the other side to consider. The conspiracy theorists really get to have a lot of fun. They simply find one thing, anything that appears to be an anomaly and challenge you to disprove the negative of their theory.

The other side is to imagine the incredible coordination it would take for all these Arabs (mostly Saudi), planes, and timing with the building, undetected demolition crews, hitting the right floors and nothing to go wrong or at least nothing worse than UA 93 hitting the ground...and on and on to make this conspiracy work.  Thousands of people working for months or years would be necessary, all the way back to applying for half of flight school.

I suggest that conspiracy theories while fun and exciting are the very most improbable to the point of impossible...unless you want to believe. You have to want to believe it.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 20:08 | 7023435 bookofenoch
bookofenoch's picture

Yeah. Sure. Right.

At freefall speed all the way down, with pools of melted steel pouring out and burning for weeks.

That kinda stuff happens in the absence of thermite explosives in like uh NEVER. Well, OK. It happens when Marvin Bush guards your building.

And building 7 collapsed at freefall speed out of sympathy. The BBC preannounced it fell 20 min early because they're really smart British guys with deluxe accents.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 22:29 | 7023892 RAT005
RAT005's picture

BuddyEffed, I have an engineering degree, passed PE exam early and easily, plus more than 25 years experience.  Your nonsense is entirely ignorant! ! Explosives were used for both Twin Towers, and building 7.

For fun burn a half gallon of diesel on the biggest piece of structural steel you can find and tell everyone when you can change its shape.  Then try it with cement lined steel ;-)

How long did it take the burning Dubai skyscraper to collapse?  

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 23:12 | 7024017 BuddyEffed
BuddyEffed's picture

Angry Metal Worker Makes Video Debunking ‘Jet Fuel Can’t Melt Steel Beams’ 9/11 Meme

Your full of it RAT005 !

Dubai burned on outside is what I heard. Not inside.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 23:50 | 7024160 Mr Pink
Mr Pink's picture

Did you just say it burned on the outside? Idiot

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 01:06 | 7024258 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

yes.  yes he did.  

check out the address hotel in dubai from ten days ago; imagine if the wind had been from the opposite direction:

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 04:40 | 7024525 Element
Element's picture



Brand new buildings are in fact burning on the outside, because the Chinese manufactured external cladding, normally designed specifically not to burn, is a massive fire risk as the Chinese stuff burns like it was designed to burn.

Same thing happened to a high rise in Melbourne, caused by cheap and out of Aust codes imported Chinese external cladding, which looks like it's the correct stuff, but it isn't - it's highly flammable.

There was another earlier external high rise fire in UAE, just a few months back as well;

Massive fire erupts at residential building in UAE’s Sharjah - Published October 1st, 2015

Same sort of thing is happening in Australia with non Aust standards conforming Chinese AC PVC insulated electrical wiring.  It breaks down in a few years then shorts-out and starts building fires, in new houses, and apartments.


Don't buy stuff manufactured in China if you can possibly avoid it.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 05:37 | 7024575 Wile-E-Coyote
Wile-E-Coyote's picture

I'll second that, Chinese electrical gear is downright dangerous. I have had a few bad experiences and never buy anything now unless I'm sure of its provenance.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 05:52 | 7024582 Element
Element's picture

My girl bought a cheap Chinese air blown heater, they were recalled as a fire hazard after causing a stack of house fires, the thermostats were junk and heated up until the plastic fan and chassis burned. Then there was the Chinese oscillating fan present given to me, where the plastic blade literally disintegrated into plastic frag, all over the room, at full speed. And then the ...

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 23:50 | 7027963 FreedomGuy
FreedomGuy's picture

I have family in China and even they know that.They buy foreign when they can.

I have explained it in other posts but simply put: In Communism you learn to lie to stay alive. You answer everything in the affirmative. Codes, regulations, specs? Yes! We will do it, can do it, etc.? They do not even know them. This is quite normal.

My family member was telling me how if you order concrete for construction in China, unless you put real guards on it, it will get diluted at least twice on the way to you. They will sell of the good stuff and keep diluting it until it gets to you. This is why so many of their Commie era buidlings absolutely crumble in earthquakes.

Do not buy anything of real importance from China if you can avoid it. A lousy shirt or shoes have few consequences. Your medicine, pet food or construction materials have huge consequences.

If I am not mistaken the Golden Gate Bridge repairs will be done with Chinese steel and even labor? Anyone remember? This is insane. Personally, I'd go with U.S even if the mafia is taking a cut and hiring 30 extra workers (Ever see the Sopranos?). It will get done right.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 23:24 | 7024081 MASTER OF UNIVERSE

I'm a real Mechanical Engineering Technician and the P.Eng is right, BuddyEffed.

Sat, 01/09/2016 - 23:42 | 7024136 BuddyEffed
BuddyEffed's picture

Technician? Get your degree from Corinthian?

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 00:23 | 7024249 MASTER OF UNIVERSE

No, got my Diploma from an established College in CANADA. It was a two year full time course. Then, I worked in industry in a high production Tool & Die precision aerospace parts manufacturing company. After that I went into Particle Physics at Herzberg High Energy Physics for the ARGUS Microvertex Particle Detector build that is now part of the array of Particle Detectors in CERN's Large Hadron Collider in Geneva, BuckO.


Stick that in your Corinthian, and smoke it.



Sun, 01/10/2016 - 00:27 | 7024262 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture


Sun, 01/10/2016 - 10:13 | 7024827 BuddyEffed
BuddyEffed's picture

2 year degree from a college you can't name?  I got a 4 year degree from the 3rd highest ranking engineering college in the country, and we specifically studied steel and its strength and phase changes in our dedicated Materials and Metallurgy class.

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 14:03 | 7025579 MASTER OF UNIVERSE

Algonquin College of Applied Arts & Technology Ottawa Ontario CANADA. And I did much more than 'study' Metallurgy, BuckO.

In fact, I had to heat treat all the tools I made via Case Hardening in an oven. Frankly, all of my Mechanical Engineering tools were Case Hardened to RockWell 'C' hardness testing, but I forget the number on the Specifications that we had to harden to. I think it was around 97 Rockwell C.


Question: What do you place in the Case Hardening Box when you are heat treating & Case Hardening your tool steel, YuppyEffed? And what Degree Mill did you pay to give you your fake degree, YuppyEffed?

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 14:06 | 7025595 detached.amusement
detached.amusement's picture

but it sounds like you totally and completely failed stoichiometry

Sun, 01/10/2016 - 14:16 | 7025630 MASTER OF UNIVERSE

I have never even heard of Stoichiometry, detached.amusement. And I can assure you that I was never tested on 'Stoichiometry'.


Please explain it to me?

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!