SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (12779)4/28/2004 9:27:58 PM
From: Raymond Duray  Read Replies (2) of 110194
 
Elroy,

I like you passion and I admire your willingness to do the math.

The only thing I've been trying to point out over this series of posts is that you seem to coming up with a doomsday scenario that is highly improbable.

You calculate that a natural gas plume is going to travel concentrically from a ruptured LNG tank. That is highly unlikely due to wind conditions.

You calculate that somehow there is going to be a catastrophic failure of the container that won't involve any static electricity or explosion. That is equally far-fetched.

You assume that in congested urban setting that the nearest source of combustion to a disabled tanker could be 2 1/2 miles. I'll assure you, I've lived in urban areas and that doomsday version is simply preposterous.

You are basing your doomsday scenario on a series of ridiculous assumptions that simply defy reality.

***
Re: This does not concern you as you are conceited enough to know that an accident will never happen,

Self-righteousness and deliberate mis-interpretation ought to be something you leave to the pros like Bush and Company. It is unbecoming for the righteous warrior for ecological sanity to make so many vitriolic and fantasy-based arguments.

As of my first post in response to your contention about LNG risks, I thought highly of your level of concern. After our back and forth here, I'm now much more inclined to be concerned about how close a grip on reality you have. :)

LNG is something that we ought to be dealing with and regulating in an adult fashion. The U.S. is running out of conventional natural gas. This isn't in dispute. How we make up for the shortfall is a matter that we need to soberly address. Hysteria from the tinfoil hat crowd in the enviro-maniac community just makes the movement look weak, silly and unreliable.

JMHO, Ray :)

PS: Have you studied the specific gravity of the alkane series? Does it cross your mind that LNG is primarily CH4 and that this fraction is lighter than air once it approaches ambient temperatures? While propane or butane tend to cause wonderful explosions because they are heavier than air, natural gas is far more likely to float above sources of ignition located at ground level. Think about that one.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News