You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #30: What is the absolute worst-case scenario? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
PVnRT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-15-11 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #3
30. What is the absolute worst-case scenario?

Sure, you could space out those tanks with a good couple of acres or so in between them, run pipes everywhere. What happens when a pipe bursts? What happens when a tank springs a leak?

OK, so now we build concrete containment and sumps around every single pipe and tank. We still have to send operators to go check on them daily, which means now they're lugging around all of their equipment across a couple of square miles or so. I'm sure they'll love doing that in August when it's 90 and humid.

Oh, and by the way, we've now multiplied the costs of the project by around 20 or 30. It's an airport, so guess how that's paid for? Enjoy higher ticket fees and taxes, since I'm sure government is footing at least part of the bill.

That's if it even gets built. Now the accountants look at the projected costs and say, "Well, fuck it. Costs too much. Not worth the investment."

Right now, at my project, we have around 6000 items in a tracking log for hazards, most of which have been addressed, others we are working on, as part of the design. We have multiple binders full of process hazard analyses where every little thing is dissected in a process, down to that 2" valve on a drain for equipment that should never be drained. Teams of people go over every thing that we can think of that might go wrong. We design everything to IBC, ASME, API, ASCE, IEEE and so on to ensure we are getting everything right.

Yet, according to you and everyone else who has no idea of how engineering works, we're a bunch of morons who can't find our asses with both hands, and care only about building cheap shit and cashing our checks.

So, let's see, the worst tsunami on record for the past 60 or so years was the 1958 Lituya Bay, Alaska tsunami that hit 1,720 feet. According to you and others, that means that, along every single installation of anything along any part of the Pacific Coast, we must build 1,721 ft. tall walls to hold the water back. Take a guess at how thick a wall would have to be in order to 1)not collapse, being built to be 1/3 of a mile tall, 2) be able to withstand the maximum wind load based on location, and 3) be able to hold back the impact of the 1,720 ft. tall wave hitting it.

After all, that's the "absolute worst case," right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC