Was The Bridge Collapse An Attack? Speculation

Well, it was near DC, it was a strategic route, it caused disruption, and this…just sayin’

Second busiest strategic roadway in the nation for hazardous material now down for 4-5 years – which is how long they say it will take to recover. Bridge was built specifically to move hazardous material – fuel, diesel, propane gas, nitrogen, highly flammable materials, chemicals and oversized cargo that cannot fit in the tunnels – that supply chain now crippled. Make no mistake: this was an extraordinary attack in terms of planning, timing & execution.

The two critical components on that bridge are the two load-bearing pylons on each end, closest to the shore. They are bigger, thicker and deeper than anything else. These are the anchor points and they knew that hitting either one one of them would be a fatal wound to the integrity of the bridge. Half a mile of bridge went in the river – likely you will have to build a new one. Also caused so much damage to the structural integrity of the bottom concrete part that you cannot see & won’t know until they take the wreckage apart. Structural destruction likely absolute. Attack perfectly targeted. “They have figured out how to bring us down.

As long as you stay away from the teeth of the US military, you can pick the US apart. We are arrogant and ignorant – lethal combination. Obama said they would fundamentally change America and they did. We are in a free-fall ride on a roller coaster right now – no brakes – just picking up speed.” The footage shows the cargo ship never got in the approach lane in the channel. You have to be in the channel before you get into that turn. Location was precise/deliberate: chose a bend in the river where you have to slow down and commit yourself – once you are committed in that area there is not enough room to maneuver. Should have had a harbor pilot to pilot the boat.

You are not supposed to traverse any obstacles without the harbor pilot. They chose a full moon so they would have maximum tidal shift – rise and fall. Brisk flow in that river on a normal day & have had a lot of rain recently so water was already moving along at a good pace. Hit it with enough kinetic energy to knock the load-bearing pylon out from under the highway – which fatally weakens the span and then 50 percent of the bridge fell into the water.

All these factors when you look at it – this is how you teach people how to do this type of attack and there are so few people left in the system who know this. We have a Junior varsity team on the field. Tremendous navigational obstruction. Huge logistical nightmare to clean this up. Number of dead is tragic but not the whole measure of the attack. That kind-of bridge constantly under repair – always at night because there is so much traffic and they cannot obstruct that during the day. So concern is for repair guys who were on foot (out of their vehicles) working who may now be in the water – 48 degrees at most at this time of year. When you choke off Baltimore you have cut the main north-south hazardous corridor (I95) in half.

Now has to go around the city – or go somewhere else. To move some of that cargo through the tunnel you may be able to get a permit but those are slow to get and require an escort system that is expensive and has to be done at night. For every $100 dollars that goes into the city, $12 comes from shipping. Believe this will cripple the city of Baltimore at a time when they do not have the resources to recover.

Electric Transmission Buildout Could Cost Americans Trillions Of Dollars

Though windmills and solar panels get the headlines, the big energy topic in Washington is electric transmission. Whether it is Congress’s newfound interest in permitting reform, the U.S. Department of Energy’s new Grid Deployment Office, or the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) upcoming final rule on transmission planning and cost allocation, how to build and pay for long-range transmission to connect generators to customers is considered the final piece in the quest to meet net-zero goals.   

Like so many issues in Washington, the need for more transmission lines is accepted without question and the costs are not considered. But for American consumers, especially low-income and elderly, as well as small businesses and energy intense manufacturers, building new transmission lines could result in much higher monthly bills and leave them on the hook for stranded assets.

Traditionally, high-voltage transmission lines, consisting of 150-foot lattice towers crossing the landscape for hundreds of miles, were planned for by local utilities to meet their customers’ energy needs and subject to approval by state public utility commissions. But public policy goals to promote renewables are changing how the grid is being developed.

Over the past few years, States established renewable energy mandates; Congress enacted over $1 trillion in taxpayer subsidies for renewable energy; and President Biden issued an executive order setting net-zero goals for electricity generation by 2035. To fulfill these policies, the grid needs new high-voltage transmission lines—lots of them—and they will be expensive.

According to the “Net-Zero America” analysis published by Princeton researchers, achieving net zero goals with 100% wind and solar by 2050 will require an additional $3.5 trillion in capital spending for new transmission lines. If net-zero goals are pursued with a mix of renewables, nuclear, and natural gas generation (which may include carbon capture), then a significant portion of this transmission investment would be unnecessary. Furthermore, a balanced resource mix of dispatchable and renewable resources would enhance grid reliability without overbuilding renewables or transmission.

More