Posted on 03/30/2024 2:31:48 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
the company will try to reduce liability by using the 1851 maritime liability law still on the books.
> Back in the 80s DT was the toast of the town <
He most certainly was. But then Trump did something terrible, something unforgivable. He had the nerve to defeat Hillary Clinton and keep her out of the White House.
Anyway, to back up your point here’s a clip of Donald Trump singing “Green Acres” at the 2006 Emmy awards. The liberal audience loved him. And so did the liberal host, Ellen DeGeneres.
https://youtu.be/8_4a9Z44EKE?si=e8Jt0ehFBshSDfTJ
Lift up the bits and Duct Tape
Don’t worry, it will take 10 years and 10 billion cost overrun to fix it.
It can be named after Dylan Mulvaney or Pete Buttegieg, as the powers that be choose. Of course, the news reports about backups at the Buttegieg Ferry would have to be worded politely and with a straight face.
301 is worth considering as a way to avoid Baltimore.
It’s slower than the interstate but a nice ride.
Unfortunately for me, it would be 50-75 miles out of my way. I live 30 miles NE of the city.
Then it will get replaced quickly.
Legos
Just another Swamp induced feather in the cap of BOOTYJUICE!
“Put Trump’s crew on it.”
Trump has had six bankruptcies. Almost seven but the banks forgave $700 million in loans.
Point taken.
Given the much improved tunneling capabilities in today’s engineering world, would a tunnel be better?
I am referring, of course, to the “Chunnel” between England and FRance.
It’s wide enough to build a suspension bridge, not a bad idea in light of what the port has become.
Put another truss bridge there with the same supports and this will happen again.
A tunnel would be a lot more expensive. A tunnel was considered as an option before the original Key Bridge was built. It was deemed too expensive. A cable stayed bridge may not be the cheapest option, but I think it will be the most cost effective option and give a direct hazmat bypass of Baltimore.
The Gordie Howe Bridge (Detroit-Windsor) was delayed for two years on the Canada side by lawsuits over the habitat of the garter snake (I sh*t you not).
They eventually moved the access road at the cost of hundreds of millions.
I wouldn't go THAT far. If true, we'd be losing these fairly often in rougher seas. How many ≥ 100kt displacement ships have been lost thusly in the last 10 years? Any?
In G-Captain's article on major container ships lost since 2000, there are only two that catastrophically failed in (and presumably due to) heavy seas, and only one close to 100kt: The MOL Comfort, in 2013.
https://gcaptain.com/the-worst-containership-disasters-in-recent-history-in-photos/
Following MOL Comfort's breakup and sinking, tougher construction guidelines were adopted :
https://gcaptain.com/new-rules-to-enhance-safety-of-large-containerships/
Now, it IS true these ships avoid going around South Africa in storm season, but that's hardly unique to large cargo vessels.
It is also true that cheap shipping allows more trade. Trade volume has almost always pushed to the limits of practicality. It seems to literally be a function of being humans.
Not if the supports are well protected.
However, I agree about building in PLENTY of height and width with an eye to the future. And protect those supports.
I’m sure the local unions won’t be happy about a cost-effective budget for the repairs/replacement.
Hahahahahaha. Is that a real gif of Bootygag? What a contrived phony bit of propaganda.
It should not cost a penny more than what it cost to build.(adjusted for inflation.) The anchors are there. The design and engineering are done and on file. Install provisions to prevent it again and finish quick.
Hahahaha. I know. Ain’t gonna happen. Too much grift.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.