My understanding is that this behemoth will be permanently moored there. Then, several times a year, there will be a second, twin vessel alongside it making deliveries. The risks due to marine traffic in the harbour are horrendous, as Ann Fenech, clearly described in a recent article.

The risk to life and limb is too high, let alone the economic repercussions which will set Malta back a hundred years. If an accident happens EVERYONE on the island loses.

The power rests with the people – and particularly the 20 or so super-rich Maltese businessmen who, let’s be blunt, pull most of the strings and also have much to lose. They can and must bring their influence to bear and stop this madness.

This is way beyond politics – this is all about the risk that the island faces if this project goes ahead. Politicians come and go. The people will always be there.

The approach being used reminds me of one particular billboard in Australia telling people to slow down on the highways. It which simply states, “Do not die for a deadline”.

A very apt inverse metaphor in this context. Stop it before it’s too late.

So I just read the headlines and go to The Malta Independent if I am interested in pursuing a particular story.

However if I right click on a timesofmalta link posted on your blog and open the story in a new tab – hey presto – I get to read the full story and all links to other stories from that page, without restrictions.

Is there a trick to this, or maybe links posted by subscribers have somehow by passed the timesofmalta main gateway?

Your comment misses the point on many levels. Not least of which is the fact that bang on in the red heartland, live many people who saw through the smokes and mirrors during the last election and refused once again to vote Labour. The same cannot be said for the many supposedly ‘Nationalist’ voters from the Exiles area who either stayed at home or elected to go red last time around.

If you saw Toscana in the Grand Harbour last year, you’ll realise that picture is understated.

You’d need very thick stainless steel plate with special properties to withstand that very low temperature.

I think the biggest danger would be if the floating storage unit starts to take in water and lists to one side or sinks.

Then we will first see Archimede’s Principle when the ship sinks and Boyles Law and Charles Law in practice because 140,000 tonnes of a gas in liquid state at minus 170 centigrade in a thermos flask can’t be kept for long in a sea temperature of say 20 degrees Centigrade.

The nearest I can get to explain the effect of LNG hitting the sea surface is like when someone throws water in a frying pan filled with boiling oil.

The company which got the contract should have opted for an FSRU like the one installed in Livorno.

http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:9.990688/centery:43.64584/zoom:8/mmsi:247323700

http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/9253284/vessel:FSRU_TOSCANA