Gas Rage In Staten Island

[Jasper Janssen]

More hypotheticals. It is impossible to plan for all events. Not too
many people thought a chunk of foam hitting a space shuttle would cause
it to burn up as it re-entered the atmoshpere. Not too many people
thought a group of terrorist would use planes as cruise missles. There
are just to many ' what if ' s to think of them all.

Actually, both of those were things that *were* foreseen.

- Everybody knew bad enough damage to a Shuttle's heat shields would cause
it to burn up, and NASA knew that the heat shields were getting damaged on
lift off on a regular basis. They didn't have the funding to do anything
about it, though.

- I refer you to Tom Clancy, who in '97 or so used
terrorist-bores-747-into-the-Capitol as the plot point by which his Jack
Ryan becomes President just hours after the vote confirming his vice
presidency and minutes *before* his swearing in.


Jasper

 

[Jasper Janssen]

I mispoke, not being an expert in hazmat shipping. But while the risks, as
you mention, might be higher for hazmats than nuclear waste, because the
former aren't protected as well, they are nevertheless still not 0% for the
latter. And, given what just happened in NO, I have a bit of a problem with
the "conceivable" qualification above. Clearly, sometimes the inconceivable
(at least for public officials, who continually give us reason to question
their foresight, and thus their judgement) happens, with devastating
consequences. I'm not saying we should all live in caves and minimize all
risk, just that proper risk management is absolutely essential.

Note that I said 'conceivable collision with a stationary object or an
oncoming train' -- that's a fairly narrow set of specs. Incidentally, it's
also what's used for those chlorine tanks -- in the event of a crash,
they'll mainly just pile up on one another, without even a slow leak, let
alone bursting. Nuclear waste containers are the size of regular shipping
containers for at most a cubic meter worth of active material, and all the
rest is containment.

Incidentally, the NO thing was hardly unforeseen. There are news reports
going back to 2001, at least, of the "what could happen if" variety.

Nuke transports tend to be canceled in the event of major weather or
protestors, in fact, they're cancelled at the drop of a hat. That's the
first line of defence.


Jasper

 

[Jasper Janssen]

I heard that nuclear power plants were environmental disaster waiting
to happen. I also heard that anybody living within a 100 mile radius of
such a plant had a 90% chance of getting cancer and that their
offspring would be genetic mutants. That's what my local Petroleum
Refiners and Distributors of America rep told me. I believe him.

But at least the people living next to coal fired power plants don't get
inundated with radioactive flyash! Oh wait.. the only reason they don't
nowadays is the environmental activists.


Jasper

 

[Chuck]

Even so, Art would be a lot better off fuelwise and spacewise with a
minivan than with his SUV.

Minivans aren't *that* great on gas. Most people in minivans would be
better off in mini-stationwagons.

 

[Bob the Cow]

No problem mon we been doing that for years in Netherlands.
But were willing to spend money on Dikes .

Queens, too. And in Amsterdam, bongs.

 

[Florian Feuser /FFF/]

- Everybody knew bad enough damage to a Shuttle's heat shields would
cause it to burn up, and NASA knew that the heat shields were getting
damaged on lift off on a regular basis. They didn't have the funding
to do anything about it, though.

They did have the funding to keep putting shuttles into orbit but not
enough to fix the heat shield problem?

The problem was with risk analysis and management. If the same thinking
were to be used in the
building and maintenance of nuclear power we'd have a big problem. Well,
maybe we already do but have been kinda lucky so far.

florian /FF/

 

[Mark Hickey]

But that still does nothing to resolve the mid to long term problem of
refineries and demand. Like the news has reported there hasn't been a
new refinery built in about 30 years. And usage has increased, Thus you
still have a supply issue.

And I agree - but the point I was making was that there was a valid
reason for tapping the SPR (gap in crude supply due to tankers being
delayed).

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

 

[Mark Hickey]

FWIW, I think Bush was exactly right in using some of the reserves for
this event. This seems like precisely the thing the SPR was designed
for: temporary problems.
Absolutely.

Whenever we're past this event, though, we still have very serious long
term strategic problems. We have an economy that is addicted to
uninterrupted delivery of oil from foreign powers - powers that are
accepting bids from other eager customers. Seems to me that makes us
very vulnerable to all sorts of disasters, attacks and shenanigans.

Absolutely.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

 

[Ken M]

Well that is pretty much what the reserves were created for. Very short
term national type emergencies.

Ken

 

[Ken M]

Again the benefits are worth the risk.

Ken

 

[Ken M]

Yeah and a lot of them post to usenet.

Ken

 

[Bill Sornson]

Again the benefits are worth the risk.

Ken, for the love of...well, Usenet, please learn to QUOTE!

TYVM, BS

 

[Ken M]

I'm sorry uncle Bill.

Ken

 

[John_Kane]

How would that help? It would be a very small proportion of US
petrochemical production, from everything I've read.

The best answer is to reduce consumption, and that isn't that difficult.
Most production goes to gasoline, and a lot of gasoline is used for the
short drives easily replaced by pedal power.

Yes indeed. I was a bit surprised to see this from Statistics Canada
dated 07 Jun 05:
"The median commuting distance of Canadian women is 6.1 kilometres.
That means half live at least 6.1 kilometres from work and the other
half live closer. Men tend to go farther afield to their jobs: their
median one-way commute is 7.8 kilometres.

How far we live from work determines our mode of transportation. Among
those who drive, the average median distance for women is 7.0
kilometres, whereas for men it is 8.8 kilometres. Those who take public
transit, cycle or walk have shorter commutes."
http://142.206.72.67/02/02e/02e_supp/02e_supp_002_e.htm

John Kane
Kingston ON

 

[Ray L. Nutz]

yup we got the Queen, you guys have Curious George

 

[Jasper Janssen]

He didn't say no fuel, just less fuel. Thus the word "scarcity". Look it up
sometime. ;-)

Although I do disagree with Campy, that either scarcity OR higher prices are
likely to curtail driving.

The only way scarcity without price increases drops consumption is by
simply having no fuel for sale at any cost, which is what I said. But it's
not gonna happen, prices will rise until demand and supply match up again.

Jasper

 

[Jasper Janssen]

They did have the funding to keep putting shuttles into orbit but not
enough to fix the heat shield problem?

Exactly. It's not like NASA can just shuffle money around without
congressional approval, you know. And the problem *still* isn't solved
after a year and a half and however many billion they threw at it lately.

Jasper

 

[Jasper Janssen]

Until it actually happens, who really knows, even crash testing doesn't
guarantee success, maybe you have and older tank, and there is a
microscopic crack, and the guy looking for it, broke up with his
girlfriend before the shift started and isn't paying as much attention
as he should. Maybe you have another guy driving a cement truck while
drunk (his boyfriend left him, for a girl), hits a bridge support, and
the bridge needs maintenance, but budget cuts at the railroad have put
it off until next year, and the bridge collapses just as that train is
passing overhead. The cracked tank, hits whats left of the cement truck
at just the right angle, and explodes, which overwhelms the protective
ability of the other tanks, causing a chain reaction explosion, just
outside a major city, and 5,000,000 people are now feeling the effects
of a dirty bomb.

"Chain reaction explosion"? What do you think spent nuclear fuel is, a
bomb waiting to happen? Free clue: This isn't weapons-grade material. You
couldn't get it to blow up spectacularly if you tried. the stuff is
completely inert, except for the radioactivity. So your scenario ends in
"that tank cracks and leaks some radioactive material into the wild, the
other tanks pile up but maintain containment, and the cleanup team cleans
it up quickly and very little is affected aside from CNN."

Jasper

 

[Jasper Janssen]

Big deal so some kids in the future will have 12 fingers, or something
stupid like that. Cheap energy is needed and worth the risk.

It's not so much about cheap energy as it is about *clean* energy. All
those coal, gas, and oil fired electricity plants put out much more
pollution than you think.

Jasper

 

[Jasper Janssen]

Minivans aren't *that* great on gas. Most people in minivans would be
better off in mini-stationwagons.

No, but minivans are pretty cheap. And mini-stationwagons are particularly
unsuited for Art for the same reason SUVs are, namely ceiling height.

Jasper