conundrumed
-
Posts
16,269 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
372
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Videos
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by conundrumed
-
-
12 minutes ago, Pyromancer said:
Here is a technical report that may answer many questions that this discussion regarding the creosote contamination glosses over. Read it & weep.....
In my opinion, the province should have cleaned it up when they built the containment wall in the mid-90's.
Domtar's gotta be on the hook for it, and in the end, they don't want this going too public, I'd think.
They're a massive entity, can't see them wanting all of their communities with follow up questions.
-
Another thing, pull a bunch of soil plugs to see the containment extent and depths. It takes a day or two, there's your research...
Just now, Carty said:A tank with a circumference of 24' that was 8' tall would hold 10380 litres...
To leak 200 million litres that would be like draining a full tank 19268 times...
A larger 24' diameter 8' tall tank would hold 102500 litres...
To leak 200 million litres that would be like draining a full tank that size 1951 times...
It would have been cheaper to weld up the tank or buy a new one than to bleed out the creosote all over the ground... It makes you wonder what they were thinking...
Of course the environmental damage is the true concern, and will cost a lot more to clean up the damage than the value of the creosote...
Yay, I'm poor at head math lol
-
50 minutes ago, CheersMan said:
Install sheet piling or a secant wall around the perimeter of construction site and/or contaminated area. Excavate the center, construct building, backfill, Viola. You see it downtown all the time. The tricky part I think will be the air monitoring, air quality, containing and collecting the ground water/river seepage. Typical sites produce clean ground water that is easy to collect and discharge, here it must be collected then dealt with. The contaminated soil/gravels need to be hauled and treated somewhere as well. This might take 7-8 years for a monkey contractor, but maybe a year for a good contractor.
Secant Wall
Sheet Piling
That's extravagant. Will it take 5 years? I'm sure the river seepage is a much smaller area based on tank size and silty/sandy morainal stoney soil which drains rapidly.
For perspective, if a pipeline company did this, it would be cleaned up, like right now.
At all costs.
And you don't start at the middle, you contain it from the edges. Then you know what you're in for.
-
Here's the type of tank responsible. It leaked 200 million litres. Somehow, they just let it. Even in todays prices, that's a vac truck, cleaning, inspecting, repairing and back in SAFE service for maybe $40,000. Hell, I can buy a used working one at auction for $5,000 and spend another $10,000 moving, installing and certifying it.
Plus, you were prolly bringing a suck-truck in to drain it regularly...or at least I would hope. Creosote stinks, it's not like anyone can say, "I didn't know".
Imho, Domtar is definitely liable. Are their lawyers too powerful? That shouldn't matter.
edit
sorry, pic didn"t load, it's a measly 24x8' circumference tank, maybe holds a few hundred litres. Leaked 200 million litres....why have a holding tank? sad lol.
-
For anyone wondering exactly what creosote contamination means, it is from a wood-preserving facility, now long gone and bought by Domtar, a major, MAJOR pulp-and-paper Corporation.
A few decades back, I worked at Domtar shutdowns in Quebec.
Chances are better than average that Domtar bought the facility without doing their due diligence. Yet it is their field of expertise.
Now, they are saying they are not responsible for any clean up.
I don't know why this isn't in court, on Domtar's tab to clean up.
Now, creosote. On the banks of our river, due to human incompetence.
Do we just say, oh well? Or do we kick accountability in the nether regions? I'm a fan of the latter.
https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/sites/KerrMcGee/docs/Creosote Health Effects (Tronox).pdf
-
There's a decent write up on Detroit's new venue here:
https://www.si.com/nhl/2016/07/08/inside-detroit-red-wings-little-caesars-arena
can't wait for the tour!!
-
17 hours ago, cross16 said:
Are you thinking of Sait? Because the west village is much more than "across the river" from the U of all C.
The point of a field house is the development of amateur sport, track and field etc. The vast majroty of those athletes are housed at the u of c and have support facilities at the u of c. So it doesn't make sense to me that you are going to build something that far away from the group you are trying to support.
No, not at all. I just think when you have a city University it's not unusual to have specialized "campuses" dotted around the city. Then it's just a matter of transporting the athletes.
And sorry cross, in terms of a drive or C-train, that's a pretty quick jaunt down Crowchild, but it depends on scale. It's definitely a bit of a walk lol.
I don't disagree it should be at the main campus, but if you can build a state of the art sportsplex I don't think you're creating a tragedy for the university, but expanding it's part in the entire community. It may make it more accessible for the public to support. It's no different than the U having access to WinSport facilities.
-
56 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:
Let us not forget that it is not just council that makes this decision. They have a committee made up of members of the community including business professionals, that have made suggestions to council. I believe that they concluded the location was deficient because the cost of the cleanup was unclear, as was the responsibility for the cost. The Flames needed to either approach council and gain their interest in advance, or engage in the strong arm tactics that Peeps suggested.
The thing I hate most about cleanups these days is they'll blow through $50 mil on study and research before a spade even touches the ground. Then it will be the research group that assigns the company to do the cleanup, further pollititcking the whole and driving the cost skyward with ineptitude.
That's my rant, I've seen this enough times...
Cross, why do you think moving the Field house away from the U is so bad? Across the river is not far. McMahon needs upgrade too, so why not bulk it all into one?
I believe Detroit's budget is $730mil for the arena alone, but creating an interconnecting sportsplex at the location draws about another $500mil US.
So $1.2bil total.
All of their pro sports franchises will now be very close together with the Pistons also moving into Little Caesars next year. It is a plexiglass dome also, 1000km S of Calgary, so the greenhouse thing I believe is moot. Although don't get near the sunshine in Calgary due to vast lakes creating cloud cover.
Edmonton's arena was estimated at $480mil, came in around $600mil, but they haven't finalized the infrastructure stuff, so likely have a few 100mil to go.
Just throwing these numbers around for context, as it's likely a billion $ plan we should be looking at. More is really developing the infrastructure around it to finalize.
Less is Edmonton where it's a beautiful facility, but it's pretty much stand alone and still needs some infrastructure spending.
My own thoughts are with Detroit, finish EVERYTHING before opening the doors.
-
28 minutes ago, Carty said:
Don't get too excited... The arena may only get used by the Flames a few times, and then they might find out that it is not up to the standards they are looking for... Then the arena might end up getting traded to another city...
Maybe we can trade it for two arenas?? It's all about volume at this level, lol.
-
5 minutes ago, Carty said:
Feaster is back?...
We're getting the best arena not playing in the NHL.
-
1
-
-
With the opening of Little Caesar's Arena in Detroit next year, the 'dome will be the oldest arena in the league.
So if anyone's got an extra $1.5 to $2bil, kicking around, it's time to step up. lol
I liked the West end idea of downtown, it's pretty much a waste land and would attract a lot of investment.
But the Stampede grounds are great because the C-Train infrastructure is fine there.
Right downtown is always best for 20,000 people pumping dollars into a city, but there is nowhere decent in downtown Calgary. As much as there are blocks I'd gladly rip out lol.
-
33 minutes ago, TrippinVdUb said:
No offense, but I completely disagree with that assessment, this team needed time to bring it together and get on the same page, now that the coaches, players and goalies have some familiarity the team looks to be turning a corner.
Elliot left a good situation in St Louis that has been under the structure of a hall of fame coach for years and walked into a rebuilding team, playing a new style for a new coach.
If Elliot and Johnson get us into the playoffs, I think they deserve the oppertunity to come back next season and show what they can do, infront of a team that should be a little more polished than they were at the start of this year.
You cant just run goalies through a revolving door until one has a Veizna like season, these guys need time to learn how to win together, as a team.
Hallelujah.
-
27 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:
I dont think we want to lock up elliot long term, but thats just my opinion. Elliot is not the answer in net, and locking him up at that price for 3 years is probably not the best idea. Has he been solid recently, yes he has but hes not a long term answer. Id be ok with bringing him or johnson back for another year but thats about it.
We are approaching scary good, gotta go with vDub on that.
Not too worried about LA, no stigma.
"That 70's Line" runs up minuses pdq.
Like they're about to, lol.
Bishop? Excellent, bring him on.
No stigma.
-
If we will our game onto LA, and we will, this is all for naught.
I think we're in this thing, for keeps.
This is the time of yr when you need a lot go right, we are crushing it.
We are definitely relevant, to the surprise of many.
Well.......surprise!!
Thanks for the 60 game warm ups...lol.
We're a lot better than we've been...A LOT BETTER.
-
It was like watching any Kipper backup all over again. Every start, team doesn't show up.
They have no confidence in you and you have no confidence in them.
The team has rarely played consistently well all year.
Get hot at the right time, all is forgiven!
As an aside, when do you think we should play Wideman?
-
18 hours ago, cross16 said:
Elliott's played well last week or two but overal I don't think the flames goaltending has been Very good this year. That being said Elliott has been known in the past to get hot at the end of the season so now I advocate just letting him run with it. I'd rather stick with the devil we know than the devil we don't, sort to speak.
Bringing both back next year isn't a regression but it's not an improvement either imo. I do think the flames need to upgrade at net just at the right cost. I'm also not keen on giving Elliot a multi year deal at anything more than 3-3.5 million.
While I mainly agree, I have to go back to camp and preseason. Elliott was great at staying square and rebound control.
Once we hit the reg season, too many of our players became an albatross. Suddenly, it was constant 2-1's, breakaways, guys alone in his kitchen.
We got a lot worse, the chances were coming from everywhere. To compound the problem, we were laying way too much blame on Elliott and not our overall very poor play.
We were generally losing games we had no right to win and it became almost an expectation that our goalies win all of those games.
For me, it always begged the question, "when will our team bail our goalies out"?
And the answer seemed like, "never".
2 seemingly minor D deals, and suddenly we are playing like world beaters.
The FLA teams were 2 of the hottest in the league...
I think that speaks volumes to the struggles we were having at D, but the goalies got the hairy eyeball the whole time.
-
5 minutes ago, 420since1974 said:
In my limited viewings, pinning forwards to the boards appears to be one of Stone's strong points.
It's something I remember Burke commenting on re: the D acquisitions.
I'm glad that their eyes caught that in our defending. Hard to keep the play to the outside when you don't tie guys up.
One thing I've really liked about Stone, is he gets right beside Brodie to support him if he has to, swap sides, whatev.
Wideman was always stuck in, "should I, umm, umm".
JBo used to do precisely the same with Gio.
Stone has impressed me, he's being what we needed, we didn't need spectacular.
BT on NHL Radio said when he talked to Stone he told him, "you aren't coming here to be our saviour, so relax about that".
These 2 additions on D are turning out to be very shrewd by our GM.
-
30 minutes ago, rickross said:
Are the Flames still desperate for a #1 goalie? If we resign Elliot and CJ is that a regressive move? I know there's still chatter around Bishop and Fleury but are they such big upgrades that can truly solidify the position. I still think we can sign Elliot and CJ for the price of one of Bishop or Fleury. Elliot has shown more consistency lately and like Cheersman said we do owe a good portion of our success to CJ's early play.
I haven't been against our goalies too much all year. It almost seems like the fix is in with the 2D additions and not having Wideman playing with his skate guards on 20 min/gm.
Goalies have bad games, even the best ones. But I think a lot of it has been the team more than the Gs.
Our G isn't a problem when the team shows up, imho.
-
On 2/24/2017 at 4:08 PM, lou44291 said:
Don't think I was being dramatic at all. In fact, I raved about Brodie's ability in my first paragraph. I didn't say the sky was falling with Brodie's game, I was simply providing a counter-argument to what JTech said about left/right side isn't a big issue. As a long time defenceman yourself, I'm sure you feel more comfortable on one side versus the other. That's all I was saying in my post - no drama - but "side does matter"
Brodie has been terrible.
Seeing Stone supporting was a relief in the FLA game.
And Bart isn't optimal, but am I actually seeing more of our dmen (the new adds), pinning the puck carrier??
That's new!
-
1
-
-
9 hours ago, JTech780 said:
So I heard on the radio the other day that Dean Lombardi was on the last year of his contract as well.
I wonder if Calgary is waiting to give Treliving a contract to see what other options appear such as Lombardi.
Personally, I think we should pack it in on Treliving's contract status.
He isn't going anywhere, beyond the fans contriving.
There's also an equal chance we'll trade Gio and Monahan at the deadline.
If BT isn't re-signed, I would hope it's his choice, not ours.
We have no control over that.
-
1 hour ago, DirtyDeeds said:
The discussions I have heard are saying the pad changes will benefit the athletic goalies more. Those goalies who have relied on being blockers due to equipment will struggle more. Time will tell but so far only the pants have changed.
Makes sense.
I was listening to Kay Whitmore talking about adjustments, and they learned from the pants gaffe. Midway through the season applies to everyone differently. This teams played 47, that one only 40,. Let's just say it was a bad idea that they've learned from...where do I apply? Wow you guys...I don't have foresight into becoming a millionaire, but jesus, I have a basic foresight, which this really is. Wow.
-
On 2/6/2017 at 0:31 AM, jjgallow said:
yup. I think there's a good list of them this year (unlike last year's dismal showing). Should be very interesting.
Unfortunately, college players that go undrafted to be signed/invited is still like trying to find a diamond in a mountain of coal.
Almost like real estate, but opposite, buy the best player on the worst team!
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:
After an article I read about the Flyers goal tending an idea occurred.
Flyers & Flames are both in a dog fight for a wild card spot. Neither has received great goaltending & both are running a tandem where none of the 4 are under contract come July 1.
We talk of re-signing Johnson & the flyers will likely re-up Mason. Often a change of scenery benifits a player @ least in the short term. So how about a trade of Elliott for Neuvirth. Elliot is paid a bit more but not enough to matter.
There could be an additional 2 players involved or done in a stand alone. I'm thinking Read for Stajan. Both are versatile up front & have 1 year left after this season. &s are also close enough to make little difference. If both deals are done the cap hit is almost equal.
You're working it and I don't hate the idea outside of 2 things:
1. Elliott might get better as the pressure mounts.
2. I would hope to trade Stajan for prospect/pick rather than keeping that salary on the books.
Read might be another guy getting too much for a 4th liner, so the deal carries a lot of risk that all we're doing is standing still, not getting better or getting cap space.
For me, I think our first priority is to get in line in a cap world, so I wouldn't really want much salary back for Stajan because I need to be sure his savings go towards a top 6 RW, top 4 D or goaltending, be it re-signings or finding something new.
I actually think our goaltending would look a lot better if it weren't for constantly trying to overcome our #4 dman.
As for the Flyers, they have a position of strength to deal from at D. If Voracek gets in tune, I don't think the Flyers would be in a dog fight for a playoff spot. It would be a given. I think when your side gets back to scoring, they have the firepower to blow the doors off. You might just be suffering the calm before the storm!
-
41 minutes ago, AlbertaBoy12 said:
They did bring that up.
The guy was commenting how after talbot they dont really have any known NHL talent in the back up sensem, brossoit hasent looked great when he has played minus the one game against us where he was average at best. Im curious to see what happens come playoffs if talbot plays 70 ish games in the regular season and then into the playoffs fatigue might become a factor.
It is something that I'd be worried about if I'm McLellan...
The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread
in Flames Talk
Posted
Just for clarification, Domtar is alive and kicking...