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
  -My assessment of the Fukushima nuclear disaster Peace Patriot  Apr-14-11 05:41 PM   #0 
  - Thank you, Peace. K&R n/t  Mnemosyne   Apr-14-11 05:43 PM   #1 
  - Deleted sub-thread  Name removed   Apr-14-11 05:43 PM   #2 
  - I never understood why engineer types don't design things for the absolute  HysteryDiagnosis   Apr-14-11 05:45 PM   #3 
  - Two reasons  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 06:59 PM   #7 
  - Hey, I have this highly flammable stuff, I need 100 containers to hold it, lemme  HysteryDiagnosis   Apr-14-11 08:15 PM   #12 
     - Great. And then when every part of the fucking airport is exploding, someone will say...  JVS   Apr-15-11 12:13 PM   #32 
        - I see your point. n/t  HysteryDiagnosis   Apr-15-11 12:49 PM   #34 
  - Actually it is simple  nadinbrzezinski   Apr-14-11 10:44 PM   #25 
  - What is the absolute worst-case scenario?  PVnRT   Apr-15-11 11:29 AM   #30 
     - Well, you could certainly fuckin' start by not building nuke plants...  ret5hd   Apr-15-11 01:40 PM   #35 
        - So, you wouldn't allow anything to be built on coastlines?  PVnRT   Apr-15-11 01:50 PM   #36 
           - yeah, that's what i said, didn't i? oh i didn't.  ret5hd   Apr-15-11 01:54 PM   #37 
              - Such an intelligent response  PVnRT   Apr-15-11 01:58 PM   #38 
  - thank you and rec  sasha031   Apr-14-11 05:57 PM   #4 
  - Thx, Peace Patriot!  snot   Apr-14-11 06:31 PM   #5 
  - reading this makes me sad and sick.....another thought I had  Gin   Apr-14-11 06:59 PM   #6 
  - I think the reason we don't send the spent fuel into space is  buddysmellgood   Apr-14-11 07:17 PM   #8 
  - I was just joking, really. But the joke illustrates the insanity of nuke power.  Peace Patriot   Apr-14-11 07:36 PM   #10 
  - Or maybe somebody watched Space:1999?  csziggy   Apr-14-11 10:02 PM   #23 
     - I had forgotten all about that show.  buddysmellgood   Apr-15-11 09:43 AM   #27 
  - Some corrections  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 07:19 PM   #9 
  - more corrections - Bikini Atoll is inhabitable more than a half century after the H-bomb test  jpak   Apr-14-11 08:41 PM   #15 
     - Inhabitable is a bad thing?  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 08:50 PM   #16 
     - There is a reason why there is an Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty - can you guess why?  jpak   Apr-14-11 08:57 PM   #17 
        - Because it killed everyone on the planet?  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 09:15 PM   #19 
           - That's what they were designed for - Mega Death  jpak   Apr-14-11 09:43 PM   #21 
              - I remember as well.  FBaggins   Apr-14-11 09:46 PM   #22 
     - Bikini Atoll and Russia---did you mean UNinhabitable?  BlancheSplanchnik   Apr-15-11 10:58 AM   #28 
  - The very real possibility that dolphins and whales may be sentient beings  Urban Prairie   Apr-14-11 07:56 PM   #11 
  - There is very little doubt at this point  Cetacea   Apr-14-11 09:12 PM   #18 
  - Pissed off mutant whales will be the enemy of the future!  JVS   Apr-15-11 12:19 PM   #33 
  - I posted this a month ago...  jpak   Apr-14-11 08:25 PM   #13 
  - K&R!! nt  nc4bo   Apr-14-11 08:40 PM   #14 
  - The 'spent fuel rods' label is actually a misnomer...  hayu_lol   Apr-14-11 09:18 PM   #20 
     - no, spent rods really are spent.  Sirveri   Apr-14-11 10:38 PM   #24 
  - K & R. So many people on this board don't even list "the environment" among  Lorien   Apr-15-11 02:07 AM   #26 
  - Good point! I had been saying "50 years to the death of planet earth" but then  Peace Patriot   Apr-15-11 12:09 PM   #31 
  - World Wildlife Fund's assessment.....  BlancheSplanchnik   Apr-15-11 11:00 AM   #29 

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