Ethanol Tanker Explodes off Virginia. Three dead, 19 missing.

[NNadir]

http://start.earthlink.net/newsarticle?cat=0&aid=228092612_breakingnews_story

The story will probably die before the dead are even counted, since ethanol is "renewable energy." Energy is dangerous, none the less, in all its forms.

[VTMechEngr]

1. Thats a lot of Drunk Fish...

Renewable yes, but much more explosive than crude oil.

[jmcgowanjm]

2. This is not a terrorist incident why

We're in an age where the difference between
sabotage and accident becomes vanishingly small.

Everything has to work perfectly.

How much energy was used to make the ethanol.
How much will be needed to maintain end-use status
quo.
How much to make more.
Plus, another tanker to ship the ethanol.

[Bdog]

3. As compared to Hiroshima & Nagasaki

www.pomperaug.com/socstud/stumuseum/web/msrbomb2.htm"The horrors caused by the destructive atomic bomb were immediate and still remain today: reminders of the deadly and unnecessary mistake. Immediately after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, 70,000 Japanese were instantly killed, the same numbers instantly injured. More slaughter was committed when the A-bomb was dropped on Nagasaki three days later. Death tolls were massive, yet less than Hiroshima. 40,000 Japanese were instantly killed and 60,000 injured.
The destruction of the A-bomb reached far beyond the 2 fateful days in August. Several thousand more deaths were caused by the radiation from the ill stricken mushroom cloud. Radiation related diseases plagued families for generations. Even children who didn't exist during the bombing were effected with cancerous diereses such as leukaemia. Proof of the damage from radiation can be found in the death tolls for 1950: 340,000 in Hiroshima and Nagasaki."


Ever heard of nuclear proliferation?

Your posts are meaningless and silly.

[snowFLAKE]

4. Wow - now there's a HUGE leap into bizzaro world!

Pray tell what the connection between Hiroshima and Nagasaki - and the relative risks of various forms of energy is?

:think: :silly: :crazy: :freak: :eyes: :think: :silly: :crazy: :freak: :eyes: :think: :silly: :crazy: :freak: :eyes: :think: :silly: :crazy: :freak: :eyes: :think: :silly: :crazy: :freak: :eyes: :think: :silly: :crazy: :freak: :eyes: :think: :silly: :crazy: :freak: :eyes: :think: :silly: :crazy: :freak: :eyes:


If you wish to dredge up WWII atrocities - perhaps in all fairness you should also recount the fire-bombings of Tokyo and Dresden, each with approximately the same number of casualties as either Hiroshima and Nagasaki - and put a big black mark up on the wall for hydrocarbon-based sources of energy and/or explosives.

[snowFLAKE]

9. Oh Oh, I seem to have stumbled into somebody else's private feud

In any event event, charactizing Hiroshima and Nagasaki as a use of "nuclear energy" does seem to go well beyond the bounds of conventional use of the term "energy."

There does seem to be alot of hysteria about all thing nuclear - which is unfortunate because small doses of radiation - the type that most people experience - are probably beneficial to one's health (I posted a longer post on these "hormesis" effects a few weeks back in this forum)

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.