In the news

The boats not as stuck as it was.

#expert

This story is insane

That article doesn't really go into enough depth over some of the important points. For instance, one of the reasons that Donziger doesn't want to hand over his phone and computer is that it will reveal the identities of the specific people he is representing - and there is a strong chance that those people will then find themselves facing retribution, nominally from local militia groups, but really those guys will be working for Chevron.

Chevron >>>

As far as oil & gas companies go, Chevron is one of the absolute worst. And thats quite an achievement because there's a lot of competition on that front.

Dangers?
To me the article mostly lists impracticalities; "... a trend that leaves the overall supply chain more exposed to a range of threats including piracy and cyberattack ... ". Sucks for those having to wait a bit longer for their container to arrive. But calling these factors a danger is hyperbole.

The article does point out that the megaships represent a more efficient use of fossil fuel. Which means they contribute comparatively less to global warming – which is the real danger.

And pointing out the recent blockage incident as a case against megaships isn't a great argument either. Imagine the incident had never occurred, but that someone started campaigning for constructing a wider and deeper Suez canal in order to save X tonnes of fossil fuel a year by allowing more fuel efficient ships to pass safely, wouldn't we all be in favour of it?

Using less fossil fuel per whatever (tonnes shipped) isn't always the same as using less fossil fuels, especially if you end up shipping more tonnes or whatever is applicable to a situation where more efficient use of a fossil fuel is being discussed.

Have a go at navigating the Suez Canal: https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2021/03/cnnix-steership/

Nice, love a bit of crabbin

got through on my third attempt... piece of piss.

4th for me. Just slapped it on 100% power and kamikazed my way through. Not sure what all the fuss is about.

A life a sea is not for me

Did it first go.

Was looking forward to the Great Bitter Lake bit, but much disappoint to only have to do 4% of it.

Weirdly pass the first time but only cause once you add in the power to compensate for wind.

Off topic and a couple of days old and the Mirror... made me chuckle.

(https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/brit-expats-living-unregistered-spain-23811663)

^ Just spotted similar in brexit thread where it belongs. Soz. Back to boats y'll

Was this a Whoosh! or did you decide to ignore the joke? :)

And pointing out the recent blockage incident as a case against megaships isn't a great argument either. Imagine the incident had never occurred, but that someone started campaigning for constructing a wider and deeper Suez canal in order to save X tonnes of fossil fuel a year by allowing more fuel efficient ships to pass safely, wouldn't we all be in favour of it?

What snotter said:

Using less fossil fuel per whatever (tonnes shipped) isn't always the same as using less fossil fuels, especially if you end up shipping more tonnes or whatever is applicable to a situation where more efficient use of a fossil fuel is being discussed.

Simply put, larger and larger ships are a symptom of a larger and larger shipping industry--because there are numerous perverse incentives to over-concentration of the economy--making things where not nearly as many of them are needed and then shipping them all over the world. It's mainly subsidised by artificially-suppressed transport costs. Getting rid of megaships, in turn, would be a symptom of a shipping industry growing smaller, and overall fuel use would go down. It's not a question of comparing individual ships and their individual fuel use. They're all tied into their wider context of how the underlying economics work.

(And, for the record, ships like the Ever Given, while ridiculously large, are by no means the only ridiculously large ships--even much smaller ships are still way too large, whether you're talking about cruise ships, oil tankers, or container ships.)

This is awful. Thoughts with her family. Why the dogs haven't been destroyed already is beyond me. What does it matter what breed they are?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-56624119

I'm reminded of the time I was chased by two very angry stray Akitas whilst on my bike with daughter on child seat too. I hate to think what could've been the outcome if they'd bitten and brought us down, they were close enough too. I'm still very nervous around most dogs as a result.

I guess that is called being triggered.

That sounds ridiculous. We had a small terrier type dog crawl under our garden fence where our dog (German Shepherd) attacked it and we were told that if we didn't put it down and it attacked someone afterwards (not sure if this was just people or included dogs too), we'd be likely to be prosecuted. Despite the fact that the dog would regularly play fine with adults and kids alike.

Seems ridiculous that a pair of dogs can escape, kill someone and not have any repercussions for them or the owner (yet).

The dogs will be destroyed, the tests will be to see if they are on the dangerous dogs list which I assume will mean an additional charge for the owner.

The owner is in custody, that is the start of the process.

we were told

Unless it was by the CPS, whoever was telling you was probably talking out of their arse.

Our neighbour's Bull Arab bit a delivery guy, he saw him in the yard but decided he'd open the gate and take his chances... Small bite to the hand and decided to press charges, upshot was the dog would have to live indoors or in a crate and a dangerous dog sign would need to be displayed outside the property... They put him down, ridiculous situation and I felt terrible for the family...