Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rival to Panama Canal Planned
Los Angeles Times ^ | September 30, 2006 | Héctor Tobar and Chris Kraul

Posted on 10/01/2006 3:28:29 AM PDT by tlb

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 next last
To: knarf
shared revenues from the user ships

Before you get too generous in giving away those revenues to Mexico, I would ask how much of it they are going to finance.

21 posted on 10/01/2006 4:55:20 AM PDT by scannell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: F-117A

I remember that article about the peaceful use of atomic explosions to dig a deep, wide, sea-level canal with no locks. Wasn't it in Life Magazine?

My question then was: what about the fallout and contaminated soil the explosions would throw up? Maybe they could do the explosions underground to just loosen the soil. My question today, looking at the map, is would the canal go through Lake Nicaragua? Is that lake freshwater now? Would connecting it with the sea make it salty?


22 posted on 10/01/2006 5:02:43 AM PDT by Stirner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
The environmental impact statement is gonna be a bitch...

If there is one, I bet it isn't truthful nor realistic.

23 posted on 10/01/2006 5:05:44 AM PDT by Loud Mime (An undefeated enemy is still an enemy.......war has a purpose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Stirner
The lake is fresh and has a species of sharks that are vicious.

Thought to be a bull shark relative,IIRC.
24 posted on 10/01/2006 5:18:26 AM PDT by Vinnie (You're Nobody 'Til Somebody Jihads You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tlb

I think we should build it. We could dig out the Rio Grande.

Fence? We don't need no Steenking fence.


25 posted on 10/01/2006 5:23:52 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (Vote a Straight Republican Ballot. Rid the country of dems. NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jhensy

The Panama Canal was built pre DDT and pre viable treatment for malaria, although malaria is still nothing to play around with.


26 posted on 10/01/2006 5:25:07 AM PDT by wita (truthspeaks@freerepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: tlb

I thought we were wainting on global warming to open the NW Passage?


27 posted on 10/01/2006 5:41:41 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wastoute

You're correct. Estimates for an enlarged Panama Canal are that the new lake needed to supply the locks would have to be 4-5x time size of the present body of water. Who gets to write the environmental impact statement?

The bigger problem in Panama is the unstable soil...landslides occur constantly, dredging is continuous..and the new, proposed canal, besides being wider, would have to be much deeper..which makes the landslide problem much greater.


28 posted on 10/01/2006 5:48:30 AM PDT by ken5050
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wastoute

In addition high susceptibility to hurricanes is listed under negatives, but hey, what's a day or two closure now and then, compared to driving an aircraft carrier through from one ocean to another, of perhaps large oil tankers etc.


29 posted on 10/01/2006 5:50:07 AM PDT by wita (truthspeaks@freerepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

The Chinese don't "have" the Panama Canal.

Never did, never will. The Panama Government can't give it to them. It must remain neutral as per the neutrality agreement.


30 posted on 10/01/2006 5:50:33 AM PDT by allen08gop ("Woman is the most powerful magnet in the universe... and all men are cheap metal!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tlb

Finally Jimmy Carter's folly will be reversed.


31 posted on 10/01/2006 5:51:30 AM PDT by WashingtonSource
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tlb
The Chinese probably would invest. The,, they'll go for the port management contract just like Panama.

It is the operational side that would concern me. Logistics, safety, training and procedures are well established in Panama. I should think that many of the post-Panamax ships will wait to see how well any new waterway will handle the ships.
32 posted on 10/01/2006 5:55:57 AM PDT by allen08gop ("Woman is the most powerful magnet in the universe... and all men are cheap metal!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tlb
Sorry Nicaragua, but I hear this stamp was pretty convincing.
33 posted on 10/01/2006 5:57:03 AM PDT by VanDeKoik (Fitzmas Has Been Canceled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tlb

What's up with all of that think China is the be-all and end-all when it comes to investment? Why would China invest in this project over, say, JPMorgan Chase?


34 posted on 10/01/2006 6:01:13 AM PDT by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tlb
the project would be a joint public-private venture financed by unnamed investors

Cintra?


35 posted on 10/01/2006 6:02:58 AM PDT by TXnMA ("Allah": Satan's current alias...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VanDeKoik
The presence of active volcanoes near Lake Nicaragua was the reason why Panama was chosen for the canal instead. Can you imagine the major havoc that will ensure if one of those volcanoes erupts after the canal is built?

Besides, the Kansas City Southern railroad--which bought the TFM railroad in Mexico and turned it into the KCS de México subsidiary--has a more workable solution, namely using a port on Mexico's Pacific coast to transport international shipping containers through Mexico back into the USA with double-stack intermodal trains.

36 posted on 10/01/2006 6:35:27 AM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

The environmental impact statement is gonna be a bitch...

We don't need no stinkin' environmental impact statement!


37 posted on 10/01/2006 6:39:20 AM PDT by dgallo51 (DEMAND IMMEDIATE, OPEN INVESTIGATIONS OF U.S. COMPLICITY IN RWANDAN GENOCIDE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

Huh? Where are you getting your information from?

There is no new lake.

Gatun Lake's level will rise by 1.5 feet. Additionally, the widening and deepening of Gatun Lake's and Gaillard Cut's navigational channels will add 385 million gallons of water capacity per day.

Suggest reading the ACP's plan.





38 posted on 10/01/2006 6:45:07 AM PDT by allen08gop ("Woman is the most powerful magnet in the universe... and all men are cheap metal!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Stirner

The article i saw was in either an American Legion or VFW magazine. I'll have to see if I can find it.


39 posted on 10/01/2006 7:45:07 AM PDT by F-117A (They say there is no such thing as an ex-Marine,.Murtha disproves that!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMan55

I wouldn't be surprised if the chinese are the "unnamed investor" in all of this. I think they are very active in central/south amer.


40 posted on 10/01/2006 12:21:35 PM PDT by virgil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson