Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (12811)	4/28/2004 10:28:43 PM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

Re: I don't think you will find Google to be a reliable source of reporting for industrial accidents. What other suggestions would you have? It's your credibility that is at stake here. 64 killed in an industrial accident is clearly news-worthy. The fact that there is no record of this incident is very curious, indeed. For instance, plugging incorrect but approximate information on "Pennsylvania Coal Mine four rescue" yielded impressive results: google.com Contrary to that ease of access, plugging "LNG pipeline 64 dead disaster" yielded nothing useful about LNG at all. google.com BTW, from my investigation of the LNG system, there are no pipelines invovled, except for very short runs from the compessor station to the ships, and from the ships to the de-compression stations. There are no overland LNG pipelines, except in fertile imaginations. Even the LNG terminal proposed for the Bahamas would de-compress the gas there on the island, and then re-transmit it in gas form in a 90 mile pipeline to the Florida coast where it would be intertied with the existing gas pipeline infrastructure.

To: Elroy Jetson who wrote (12811)	4/29/2004 2:26:26 PM
From: benwood	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

I don't think you will find Goggle to be a reliable source of reporting for industrial accidents. Consider your self corrected. I did a two searches to locate this page: ntsb.gov Which accident is the one with PG&E & 64-deaths? I couldn't find it -- the only PG&E one I found was SF in '84 and no deaths resulted (didn't ignite). The worst accident I found was in Puerto Rico and 30-some died from NG. Interesting theme from reading through the reports -- most leaks were compounded by human denial, coming up with rationalizations for the causes of the automatic shutdown or alarm and just turning off the alarms and opening up the valves again. Seemed almost universal until somebody reported the leak, explosion or fire.