Pendejo 0 #26 September 8, 2005 and so it begins.... From here they will start pointing fingers at who made the decision to start pumping the water out before they had the test results back. http://www.comcast.net/news/index.jsp?cat=GENERAL&fn=/2005/09/08/216976.html Pendejo He who swoops the ditch and does not get out buys the BEER!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jumper03 0 #27 September 8, 2005 All I know now is that I will NOT be purchasing any more Gulf seafood.... even if enough survives to be caught.Scars remind us that the past is real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #28 September 8, 2005 NYTimes just reported that preliminary tests show 10 times acceptable levels for e-coli and lead. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/08/national/nationalspecial/08cnd-storm.html?pagewanted=2&ei=5094&en=efe0a58b7fc8e12c&hp&ex=1126238400&partner=homepageWe are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,071 #29 September 9, 2005 >If the city is ALREADY destroyed, why not at least do the right things >moving forward. Because then someone would attack the local politicians and claim they were destroying the city. And every business in NOLA would sue them for damages. "My priceless Degas could have survived two weeks underwater, but they left the water there for FOUR WEEKS!" Edited to add - if there is any question as to how bad it is down there, it's pretty much summed up by this quote from one of the referenced articles: "Engineers said the mammoth undertaking could take months, and could be complicated by corpses getting clogged in the pumps." Imagine being the guy whose job it is to unclog the pumps. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slug 1 #30 September 9, 2005 Quote>If the city is ALREADY destroyed, why not at least do the right things >moving forward. Because then someone would attack the local politicians and claim they were destroying the city. And every business in NOLA would sue them for damages. "My priceless Degas could have survived two weeks underwater, but they left the water there for FOUR WEEKS!" Bill The local politicans are already in deep water The lawyers and locals will sue but that's why there's a trial. it might even be less expensive to buy them off (times beach & the love canal.) then trying to clean up the polluted large area that's downstram of the pumps in NO. If the local fishing industry goes south as a result of the pollution from the pumps the fishing industry will sue. Cheaper to treat the hazardous waste where's its at. The folks with the Degas took rhem them or were insured. I know confusing the issue with the facts Pump on, help has arrived R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pendejo 0 #31 September 12, 2005 QuoteThe lawyers and locals will sue but that's why there's a trial. it might even be less expensive to buy them off (times beach & the love canal.) Nice comparison. Building there is about the same as what they are doing in NO. Both were said to be "acceptable" and both proved otherwise. Pendejo He who swoops the ditch and does not get out buys the BEER!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyinchicken 0 #32 September 12, 2005 QuoteJust thinking.... We cry when a tanker leaks into our oceans etc.... I wonder, in comparison to a tanker, how much pollution we are pumping into our lakes and rivers right now, and not even thinking twice about it... Anyone care to comment on how our own sport contributes to pollution? Everything in moderation. "Let he who has not sinned caste the first stone". Careful guys, our sport, the cars we drive, the houshold cleaners we use as well as some beauty products ALL contribute to serious environmental issues. You think Katrina would have been as large as she was if the ocean currents weren't warmer than they have been in years? They have to pump out the city and then they will have to try to clean up the mess. Just like our whole race has had to pollute the planet for 300 years and has to deal with the ramifications now. "Diligent observation leads to pure abstraction". Lari Pittman Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nate_1979 9 #33 September 12, 2005 QuoteAnyone care to comment on how our own sport contributes to pollution? heh, looked into what it takes to get a jumper to altitude in the twin otter once... forget the exact numbers, but I do remember it being quite shocking the amount of fuel, per jumper, per jump... Ohhhh well I like the quote at the bottom of the Pea Pit website "Skydiving: Wasting Fossil Fuels, Just For Fun" FGF #??? I miss the sky... There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,071 #34 September 12, 2005 >but I do remember it being quite shocking the amount of fuel, per > jumper, per jump... For a full otter it is approx 1 gal per jumper per jump from 12,500. (From Bryan Burke's estimates) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nate_1979 9 #35 September 12, 2005 hmm, thought it was higher, must have been a different plane that I saw the over 2 gal. per jumper 1 gal aint shit FGF #??? I miss the sky... There are 10 types of people in the world... those who understand binary and those who don't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HydroGuy 0 #36 September 12, 2005 Quote>but I do remember it being quite shocking the amount of fuel, per > jumper, per jump... For a full otter it is approx 1 gal per jumper per jump from 12,500. (From Bryan Burke's estimates) I worked that one out in my head one day and came up with the same conclusion. They usually fuel up the Otters @ Perris every 4 loads...and they add somewhere around 100 gallons at a time.Get in - Get off - Get away....repeat as neccessary Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
