I think they would form a fleet of various boats from all over the place in american east coast to take it on anything they can
Oh, say, can you see
By the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hail'd
At the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose bright containers shined
Through the perilous night
O'er the river's banks we watched
And the Dali was still there.
Quotehow would people salvage all this in 3 days right in the middle of the river with no bridgecanoes
This fuel at room temperature is a tar like substance and is heated to decrease its viscosity. It is then run through centrifugal separators to get rid of impurities prior to being fed to the engines
One theory that I've seen, that sounds plausible, is that contaminated fuel clogged the fuel filters for the generators, causing the generators to stop. Perhaps the ship didn't have centrifugal separators, or the separators didn't filter out enough impurities to prevent clogging the filters.
The bunker oil used as fuel on ships like this one is the dregs of the petroleum refining process and often contains gunk that may be problematic.
All of this should be easy enough to figure out as the ship is still intact and presumably there's data logging that will point to the cause of the problem.
Keep the ship for collateral - some 1851 law which was cited by the Titanic’s owner in a Supreme Court case 1912, could limit the payout. Titanic law could help ship owner limit liability in Baltimore bridge collapse
Estimates are $2B to repair/replace the bridge, $0.1B to free the ship and clean up the mess. Biden is talking like the Feds will give the money, but I have to ask why the US taxpayer is ultimately on the hook, as well as the many years of cranked up toll pricing we know will result. OUCH.
coastal areas and ports are sulfur emission controlled areas, so there they run bunker A which is basically diesel
coastal areas and ports are sulfur emission controlled areas, so there they run bunker A which is basically diesel
Sometimes they run cleaner fuel when in port and switch to the dirty stuff when at sea.
Even the lowest grade bunker fuel is lower in sulfur than it used to be. In fact, that change has contributed to global warming because higher sulfur emissions tended to mitigate warming.
Even the lowest grade bunker fuel is lower in sulfur than it used to be. In fact, that change has contributed to global warming because higher sulfur emissions tended to mitigate warming.
The largest crane on the Eastern seabord has arrived at the bridge. That may well be, but it doesn't seem large next to the wreckage.
Is this an example of decaying infrastructure or misplaced pride?
That crane barge built in 1972, max. 1,000 short tons (within 63ft), Donjon's stuff is all very old but with upgrades apparently.
It looks not enough to deal with the mangled steel trusses, and having to cut it up into nice little pieces will take a long time.
Just phone up a professional salvage company that has real cranes and foot the bill. The port needs to be open ASAP.
"U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is deploying more than 1,100 personnel to Baltimore..."
It's going to be impressive, they don't mess around- but you still need good tools for the job.
Is this an example of decaying infrastructure or misplaced pride?
That crane barge built in 1972, max. 1,000 short tons (within 63ft), Donjon's stuff is all very old but with upgrades apparently.
It looks not enough to deal with the mangled steel trusses, and having to cut it up into nice little pieces will take a long time.
Just phone up a professional salvage company that has real cranes and foot the bill. The port needs to be open ASAP.
"U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is deploying more than 1,100 personnel to Baltimore..."
It's going to be impressive, they don't mess around- but you still need good tools for the job.
they need to make better boats because fuck the cost going on the tax payer. You can probobly make a better bridge but someone is just gonna make a bigger boat. Its way cheaper to make the boat and it effects way less people if they improve the boat rather then improving the bridge.
Why should we have to build crazy bridges, when there is a over seas non American manufacturer that probably caused this problem by putting copper clad wire in a generator to keep his costs down?
Like we are gonna end up eating off brand ramen to protect the right of Marsk to use alibaba inverters and crap like that. I don't think the infrastructure is failing.
whats decaying about the infrastructure? It was a fine bridge. Probably would have passed inspection for 50 years more. It is the ship that was having problems even by its service history. A boeingesque problem?
what a weird nonsensical rant..
I would like to see maritime law changed to make the insurers liable for these costs, though. It's not okay that the federal government has to pick up the tab for incompetent maintenance, or contaminated fuel.
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/28/business/who-ends-upholdingthebagfor-the-baltimore-bridge-collapse/index.html
Insurers footing the bill
The Dali ship is owned by Grace Ocean Private, a Singapore-based company, and insured by the Britannia Protection and Indemnity Club.
Britannia is one of the dozen marine insurance member clubs under the International Group of P&I Clubs, a consortium that provides marine liability coverage for 90% of ocean freight and pools liability claims among members. (The International Group of P&I Clubs did not respond to CNN’s request for comment.)
These insurance companies are backed by insurance companies of their own – a type of business known as a reinsurer.
Around 80 different reinsurers provide around $3 billion in coverage to the Dali’s insurers, according to Moody’s analyst Brendan Holmes. Since the losses will be spread across so many insurers, it’s unlikely to bankrupt any of the companies or cause a major bump in insurance prices, he said.
I would like to see maritime law changed to make the insurers liable for these costs, though. It's not okay that the federal government has to pick up the tab for incompetent maintenance, or contaminated fuel.Where do you get the idea that the insurers are not liable?
whats decaying about the infrastructure? It was a fine bridge. Probably would have passed inspection for 50 years more. It is the ship that was having problems even by its service history. A boeingesque problem?
I would like to see maritime law changed to make the insurers liable for these costs, though. It's not okay that the federal government has to pick up the tab for incompetent maintenance, or contaminated fuel.Where do you get the idea that the insurers are not liable?
The post above by @floobydust suggests they might be on the hook for a maximum of the ship's value + cost of cargo transport. So probably north of $100mn, but well short of the cost of one replacement bridge.