Bay 12 Games Forum

I would like to start a team, accepting 1 other player.

I plan on genning a world with no caverns, exposing the magma sea to the open air, and making a cast osidian tower.

the first person willing to join this insanity is welcome.

Is this allowed? The rest will have to pump the magma sea up past caverns to cast obsidian.

The limit is set in the world parameters. The default is 1050 years, and it generally reaches that. Walk away for a while if your computer takes too long for your patience. It shouldn't take more than a minute to generate a world with a functional modern computer, but not everyone is that lucky.

We don't really know what the technical details are, because they're not public. I would not hesitate to say that as the pipe is leaking in multiple places, we can assume that it is critically compromised. By that I mean that the structure and materials are damaged to where they can no longer perform their original functions, like withstanding high pressure.

I think the depth is what has halted repairs. It doesn't take a genius to figure out how to stop something like that, just a good engineer.

There's no point in a printing press. It is for mass production; if you want to record something then it is much faster to write it yourself or with a secretary than to set type.

I need to explain in order to avoid propagating misinformation: any single tile of magma of 4/7 or more is sufficient. The channel does need to be exposed, and the magma forge does need to be directly on top of it. However, it can be any tile of the forge or other magma-operated building. It is just best to place the darker squares over magma in order to prevent anything from crawling out. They are solid, and nothing will come up through them as it will through other exposed channels.

So this thing is a lot of fun, worthwhile?

Just out of idle curiousity, has the spill reached Exxon Valdez proportions yet?

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-18/bp-doubles-estimate-for-oil-captured-in-gulf-spill-update2-.html

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2010-05/scientists-push-bp-hand-over-gulf-spill-video

At least 94,000 gallons as of May 18th, based on rather conservative estimates. It was later estimated that much of the oil was not reaching the surface, and that the rate was many, many times the previously estimated amount. Even then, the likely answer to your question is "not even close." There's a lot of difference between 1.5 million (the approximate amount leaked at the highest media-published estimates) and 10 million.

The danger here, they say, is that unlike tanker spills (all too common, I'm afraid), this broken rig will be spewing long into the foreseeable future. It is its potential output that is massive.

I moved on to research oil rig leaks, in case I'd been misinformed. Upon careful research, I find it's only US Gulf of Mexico rigs that have never had an accident of this kind. Australia and some others have had leaks. And after writing all of that, I found this:
http://www.texastribune.org/stories/2010/may/18/next-deepwater/
Which points to another similar unsafe BP rig, and casually mentions that the Deepwater leak is 210,000 gallons a day. Really??
Over 3 times Congress' published estimated high, this would put the disaster far beyond the Valdez.

"While you were typing 3 new replies have been posted."
List of 3 accidents:
Mexican,
Mexican,
North Sea w/shutoff valve.

Same 'ole.

Upon careful research, I find it's only US Gulf of Mexico rigs that have never had an accident of this kind.

You just beat me to it by a few seconds

I mean that there has never been a spill. Didn't I say specifically that there has never been a spill? There has never been an accident of this type, and there are no known contributing factors to what we're seeing.

At least, that is according to people I know who are working with this actual instance, both the investigation and the cleanup.

It's been in the news that BP is the only major drilling company that does not utilize the basic emergency shutoff valve Aqizzar has referenced. I assume they weren't being libelous.