Yah, hard to know the particulars---and the wind and current probably would have worked against this idea---but---I did have a sailing instructor who stress tested me in a narrow channel by proposing that I'd just lost the engine---now what would I do?

The correct answers? Well, it's a sailboat, dummy---you could sail. And if all else fails---drop anchor (as long as you had the swing room; and even if you didn't, the resulting collision would be less impressive.)

But---we don't really know how the captain and pilot got into this situation.

I look forward to learning more.

Only if it spreads evenly to the entire Florida aquifer instantly.
Local users will see a far less diluted effect than those, say, 300 miles away.
Because there's absolutely no method available to test the water until it's pumped to the surface for use, prudence demands you assume maximum contamination level until proven otherwise.
There's also absolutely no measure of the aquifer itself, how it moves, mixes, flows, etc. The system is mostly unmapped. That means it could (not will) stay in the local area and not be diluted much at all, or could go directly into the main body and be diluted 1000 times per day. There's no way to know until they test the aquifer itself, something they have no way to do at this point, they can only test what they draw off at individual wells, with no knowledge of how they're connected underground.

Also, let's be clear, the 250000000 number comes from the polluter, not some independent measurement. If history is a guide, we can expect that number to rise to > 10 times that amount when independent investigators look into it. (Think BP).

Even in the best case scenario, it's exposing the already short supply of fresh water to more toxins. Just because it might be below the level that would condem your home if found there doesn't make it 'safe' by any means. Radiation exposure is cumulative, low levels over a long time can be as dangerous as high levels over a short time.
IMO, your contention is comparative to me saying 'no problem that I'm putting arsenic in your water, I put in only 1/10 the lethal dose...and arsenic is found in nature, so no harm no foul'. You would still get sick, might die, and would likely have problems and stress the rest of your life. I could still be convicted of attempted murder, and rightly so. I get that this wasn't intentional, but it was foreseeable, so more like manslaughter I suppose....of >an entire county.

EDIT: And you didn't address the orange problem. An orange uses 53 liters of water, and it takes 13-15 oranges to make a liter of juice, for a cumulative dose of 742 times the contaminants if you drink a liter of OJ (based on the assumption that an orange will trap the contaminants, a reasonable assumption). Now, at 742 times the diluted dose, are you going to continue to drink Florida OJ? I'm not....and that sucks, I like OJ. Now I'm going to have to try to grow oranges here on the N coast of Cali if I want them....an impossibility. (although I did grow a pineapple here, another impossibility, so we'll see).

\

Published on Apr 14, 2016

The aerobatics skills of Russian pilots over the US destroyer Donald Cook in the Baltic Sea left the Pentagon and other US official running for cover in Washington over “aggressive close interactions” with Russian fighters jets.
Trends
Russia-NATO relations
Releasing the footage of Russian jet flybys in the vicinity of the destroyer, the US Navy said that its vessel has encountered multiple “aggressive flight maneuvers ...within close proximity of the ship,” some as close as 30 feet (10 meters) on Monday and Tuesday.

The set of incidents took place as the US ship, which had sailed from the Polish port of Gdynia, was conducting exercises with its NATO ally Poland in the Baltic Sea. The Navy announced that the SU-24 first flew over Donald Cook on Monday as US sailors were rehearsing “deck landing drills with an allied [Polish] military helicopter”. The numerous close-range, low altitude encounters were witnessed at 3:00pm local time, forcing the commander of the ship to suspend helicopter refueling on the deck until the Russian jets departed the area.

The next day, the Navy said, Russia caused concern among US sailors when a Russian KA-27 Helix helicopter flew seven times over the ship at low altitude in international waters at around 5:00pm. Some 40 minutes later, two Russian SU-24 jets allegedly made a further 11 “close-range and low altitude passes”.

“The Russian aircraft flew in a simulated attack profile and failed to respond to repeated safety advisories in both English and Russian. USS Donald Cook’s commanding officer deemed several of these maneuvers as unsafe and unprofessional,” the Navy said.

Judging by the videos released by the US Navy, the sailors were nonplussed by the Russian aerobatic skills. They gathered on the top deck of the destroyer to watch the Russian pilots.

“He is on the deck below the bridge lane...It looks like he’ll be coming in across the flight deck, coming in low, bridge wing level...Over the bow, right turn, over the bow...” the voiceover on the footage states in what looks more like an instructor’s advice on how to maneuver in open waters, rather than the panic that the central command presented it to be. At least on the video no one can be seen running for cover.

According to a US defense official who spoke with Defense News, sailors aboard the Donald Cook claimed that the Russian jets’ low altitude stirred waters and created wake underneath the ship. US personnel on the American vessels, also claimed that Su-24 was “wings clean,” meaning no armaments were present on the Russian jets that could have posed a threat to US operations in the Baltic.

Yet at the same time, the official noted, that this week's incidents are “more aggressive than anything we’ve seen in some time,” as the SU-24 appeared to be flying in a “simulated attack profile.”

The Russian overflights have caused panic over in Washington, with White House spokesman Josh Earnest calling the actions of the Russian pilots “provocative” and “inconsistent with professional norms of militaries.”

“I hear the Russians are up to their old tricks again in the EUCOM [US European Command] AOR [area of responsibility],” Operation Inherent Resolve spokesman Col. Steve Warren said during a briefing on Wednesday, adding that the US is “concerned with this behavior.”

“We have deep concerns about the unsafe and unprofessional Russian flight maneuvers. These actions have the potential to unnecessarily escalate tensions between countries, and could result in a miscalculation or accident that could cause serious injury or death,” the US European Command said in a statement.

In the meantime Adm. John Richardson, the chief of naval operations, thanked the US crew for keeping their cool during the stressful situation.

“Bravo Zulu to the crew of USS Donald Cook for their initiative and toughness in how they handled themselves during this incident,” the admiral said on Facebook.

Russia has yet to comment on the incidents but most likely the Russian air craft flew from the Kaliningrad region, bordering Poland. Kaliningrad is the headquarters of the Russian Baltic Fleet, which also includes the Chernyakhovsk, Donskoye, and Kaliningrad Chkalovsk air bases.

Description Credits: Russia Today

Video Credits: Defense Media Activity - Navy

A little, but I also understand it. It would have been a great moment of stress when he realized what was about to happen, and if his brain is anything like mine, would have been replaying it over and over again and you have to do something with that pent up energy.

I tend to blabber on about what happened. I think he is similar.

Bob thinks pneumonia = hemorrhagic fever...

Dude, it's an inflammation of the lungs caused by something else, like the flu or a cold. She just didn't take care of herself and suffers from no small amount of stress.

It's serious, for her, but you can't "catch" pneumonia.

I have an hour long commute by car to get to work, and again to get back home. But I chose the commute to, as said in the video, own my own home and be able to get a bigger home than I would have had I bought closer to work.

Here's why I don't consider it stressful...

I work 12 hours four days a week, so that's one less day I need to commute. I also have the luxury of being able to work from home two of those days.

On the days I do have to go in, half of the drive is back country roads which I often get to myself. I find a nice country road quite soothing to drive on. And the half of the commute spent on city motorways I reduced the stress on by upgrading to a car that does a lot of the driving for me. I set the top speed I want to go and the car takes care of the accelerating and braking and keeping in the lanes.

I load up the car stereo with audio books and have a nice relaxing drive to and from the office. Now the most stressful part of the journey is having to get up at 5am. Which really does suck.

I really enjoy my commute, it's my un-stressed book reading or game playing or quiet contemplation and staring out the window time. Unless it's raining, it usually includes some walking. I suspect Hank's point mostly applies to commuting by car.

...followed by a commercial for legal advice when you're the target of frivolous lawsuits, followed by a spot for a prescription drug to combat the stress of being counter-sued, followed by an ad for a class action lawsuit against fraudulent medical advertising, followed by Trump being president for ever and ever and ever and ever.

If, as you wrongly assume, I had only driven by them, you could get away with that statement. Unfortunately for you, I actually went TO the farms, stayed at them (slept there) and watched the workers at their jobs. (EDIT: I also have an angora goat rancher in my family...close enough to the same thing for this discussion.)
I stand by my previous statement 100 percent, with first hand knowledge about the topic.
This video is bullshit. You dragged it out of me. 99.95% of farms would never allow anything they showed to happen, and would report the abuse to the authorities after booting the offender off the farm.

Edit: and yes, fast sheerers can do even more than 30 an hour, but they know exactly how to handle the sheep with tiny pokes that put them into a seated, leaning position that makes it simple to control them painlessly and without any trauma in the least using their legs while sheering. In the two times I watched, over 150 sheep altogether, I saw 2 get slight cuts that were taken care of properly and with care. As was mentioned above, stressed animals make subpar wool, so it's in the rancher/farmers interest to keep them happy, so they do.

Males had their horns on the farms I went to and the one's I drove past....so you're wrong about that too.

The National Farmers Federation says that “mulesing remains the most effective practical way to eliminate the risk of ‘flystrike’ in sheep” and that “without mulesing up to 3,000,000 sheep a year could die a slow and agonising death from flystrike”.

A fiber farmer is heavily invested in the health and well being of their animals for the simple reason that an animal that isn’t happy and healthy can’t produce a sell-able product. An animal going through a period of stress of any kind produces a fiber that breaks.

Wool fiber has properties that make it unequaled by many other natural fibers/ Lanolin is also a critical oil that cannot be replaced with other oils. Lanolin and its many derivatives are used extensively in both the personal care (e.g., high value cosmetics, facial cosmetics, lip products) and health care sectors. Lanolin is also found in “lubricants, rust-preventative coatings, shoe polish, and other commercial products”

In some cases, the products derived from sheep make up a very large portion of a country's GDP. Banning sheep farming could cripple a country like New Zealand economically.

That said, obviously there are some horrible scenes in the video. Obviously there needs to be more oversight to control abuse to the animals. However, I would like to point out that the video did cherry pick a couple of companies that had egregious policies. Also, if the mulesing that was shown was part of the PETA video, it was staged with a fake lamb. PETA even admitted they staged that video for 'educational' purposes. I don't know if it was the same clip, but just putting that out there.

Never mind his strength, what about the strength of his sport shorts? My stuff rips at the slightest stress.

"Medication to reduce the stress of shipping" uhm, yeah, so they drug the little suckers then?

It's a guess, but I think because the blades are so short and wide, they produce more torque at much lower speeds, so yes, likely gearing is needed, but most turbines have some sort of transmission these days. Because the blades are so short and wide, they also don't go as fast under strong winds, there's more air resistance and far less tip speed. That means far less vibration and stress on the hub/trans.

Why is this more auto governing for high wind conditions and yet effective at low wind speeds (and therefore avoidant of overspeeding or stressing the axle/mounting)? Because it's so much more compact? Lower forces over all?

And does the low wind/high wind envelope mean that someone has to be clever somewhere else? Like in forcing a transmission to gear up the speed at low wind speeds?

Sorry, not an engineer.

*engineering

That was quite a lot of stress the strut held up to