Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Images of Puerto Rico Reveal How Maria Wiped Out Power On the Island (jalopnik.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the night-and-day dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Jalopnik: Hurricane Maria was the most devastating hurricane to make land in Puerto Rico in nearly 100 years and the country is still reeling in its wake. Much of the island still doesn't have running water, reliable communication or electricity. Recently, NASA published a set of date-processed photos that show the island's nighttime lights both before and after the storm. Here, you can see images of the country's capital, San Juan, on a typical night before Maria. It's based on cloud-free and low moonlight conditions. Conversely, the following composite image is of data taken on the nights of Sept. 27 and 28 -- nearly a week after the storm hit -- by the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite, a scanning radiometer that collects visible and infrared imagery of land, atmosphere, cryosphere and oceans, according to NASA's website.

113 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... it might be a sensible idea to bury electric cables rather than running them around on fragile masts and poles everywhere?

    1. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Viol8 · · Score: 2

      Why not? Its done in a lot of places in europe.

    2. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Obviously, however the reason why they put them on poles in the first place is because it's considerably cheaper than run them underground and if you've paid any attention to what's been going on there for the last few years you'll know they don't exactly have the money for this just lying around.

      To put the cost into perspective, here in Finland, where we don't have the same debt and budgetary problems, they only relatively recently started mandating companies put a significant effort into moving the above-ground powerline infrastructure under ground and the current plan is to have 65% of the low voltage and 47% of the medium voltage infrastructure moved to underground cables by 2029.

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    3. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by eastlight_jim · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I know the UK is hardly subject to hurricanes but most of our low voltage cables are buried. It's only the high voltage (tens of kV) that are often above ground and even then, a lot of these are buried.

    4. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      Its not like their grid was put up last week. They've probably had 100 years of electric power in which to think , "Y'know, maybe we should put these cables that keep falling down in hurricanes underground?"

    5. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      because we don't over-react to factual, uncontroversial posts on internet forums due to an innate chip on our shoulders, perhaps.

    6. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      One word: flooding.

      Sorry, thanks for playing, but there is no easy answer.

    7. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      My rural Cooperative charges $3 per foot for overhead lines to a private dwelling. They charge $15 per foot for underground. Overhead lines make much more sense especially when such great devastation is not expected each month. Privately owned generators can be used to power pumps for water, refrigeration, or lighting and are used here for our power outages that can be expected every year or 2.

    8. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 1

      If they weren't able to muster the effort required to get the necessary investment lined up at any point in the last 100 years, what makes you think they'll be able to get it done when their financial situation is what it is today?

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    9. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by rmdingler · · Score: 2

      Heat dissipation, for one. Current carrying cables in the air dissipate the heat of electrical power much more efficiently than those inside underground conduit.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    10. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by rmdingler · · Score: 3, Informative
      Flooding is actually less of problem for underground cable than you might think. There is always water present in underground conduit, and the wiring is jacketed to account for it.

      The location of junctions and transformers is the most important consideration, and if you get those above the flood level, you are likely in good shape.

      Underground municipal infrastructure is usually saturated with water and sewer lines, so even if money isn't a factor in the design, space constraints often are.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    11. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      The worse the economy, the easier it is for the government to start a ditch-digging program.

    12. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by ffkom · · Score: 1

      Air conducts heat pretty badly (also in comparison to "ground"). And no, I never heard of any power line in the ground to overheat.

    13. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by ffkom · · Score: 1

      How can you dare to propose such? Where should this end? Buiding houses from stone and concrete instead of wooden slats?!? That is so un-american!! You will be ridiculed as "Captain Hindsight" if you continue to make such statements!

      The only true patriotic way to handle this kind of catastrophy is to briefly mourn about the dead, have some inspiring pep-talk, then re-build everything the same cheap, brittle way it was build before, and then pray harder than before catastrophy won't strike again.

    14. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by rmdingler · · Score: 5, Informative
      Underground Electric Transmission Lines.

      The design and construction of underground transmission lines differ from overhead lines because of two significant technical challenges that need to be overcome. These are: 1) providing sufficient insulation so that cables can be within inches of grounded material; and 2) dissipating the heat produced during the operation of the electrical cables. Overhead lines are separated from each other and surrounded by air. Open air circulating between and around the conductors cools the wires and dissipates heat very effectively. Air also provides insulation that can recover if there is a flashover.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    15. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      To further support your point, National Electric Code requires a much thicker wire gauge for buried/raceway applications. Or rather, for any given wire gauge the allowable amperage is much lower if buried, so I suppose it doesn't matter if you're already going to massive overspec your run.

      Take 4/0 copper and 75C rated wire. In free air it's legally rated to 360 amps. Buried, it's legal up to 230 amps.

    16. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Air may conduct heat badly, but it does a significantly better job than soil at convecting it away from the source.

    17. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      No. You're not an ignorant bigot now are you?

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    18. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 3, Informative

      Why not? Its done in a lot of places in europe.

      How deep is the water table?
      What might they be drilling through? Dirt, or rock?

      Just saying...the easy assumption to bury might not be as easy as "Just do it".

      During/after Hurricane Isabel a few years ago, my neighborhood was the only one in the area with power. But is not always 'the answer'.

    19. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Sure, are you going to pay for it?

      Power isn't run above ground because it makes the skyline look pretty.

    20. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Failure rates for underground cables are higher in normal operation, and are more sudden and difficult to repair compared to overhead. You might get it for a residential subdivision, but not for the distribution network.

      The real problem is that the poles are too far apart resulting in dramatically higher wind loading in a direction they have little capability to resist. Coupling that with the complete lack of maintenance, poor quality repairs, extremely high centralization of substation infrastructure, and transmission towers that are likely as under-designed as the island's cell towers, it is pretty easy to see why we are here.

      We were trying to get a redundant feeder to a site there, and it was essentially impossible. Their grid was bare bones to say the least.

    21. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      Tropical climates are hell on medium voltage insulation underground. You have water, insects, and heat to contend with. Salt and dust on insulators above ground are much easier to deal with.

    22. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by jittles · · Score: 1

      Why not? Its done in a lot of places in europe. How deep is the water table? What might they be drilling through? Dirt, or rock? Just saying...the easy assumption to bury might not be as easy as "Just do it". During/after Hurricane Isabel a few years ago, my neighborhood was the only one in the area with power. But is not always 'the answer'.

      Most coastal areas in Florida have also switched to buried power lines. Even in areas where the water table is, according to the map I am looking at, zero to five feet, or five feet to ten feet. But the soil in Florida is very soft and sandy. My dog once dug a 4 or a 5 foot deep hole in a matter of hours.

    23. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by houghi · · Score: 1

      How deep is the water table?

      In The Netherlands? Pretty deep on average.

      To be fair, you still see a lot of cables in the air, but not in cities or villages where there is already a lot of groundwork happening, just to get waste-water out.

      So if the city is build on rock, to will the rest be on rock.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    24. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Hurricanes Hugo and Georges (1989 and 1998 respectively) both wiped out more than 90% of the power infrastructure of Puerto Rico. But each time it was rebuilt as before...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    25. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Except take a trip over the pond to the UK and most local electricity lines are under ground along with the gas, water, sewer and telecoms. Everything since WII is all underground apart from telephone, where everything in the last 40 years is underground. The idea that space constraints prevent putting it all under the ground is uninformed nonsense.

    26. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      No no no!
      That would be to smart!

      And it would safe to much money.
      And think about the unemployed ... how would they get a seasonal job after the rain/hurricane season?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    27. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Strider- · · Score: 1

      Right, but overhead cables aren't insulated; the conductor is directly exposed to the air.

      Underground cables, on the other hand, must be electrically insulated, and most electrical insulator materials are also pretty decent thermal insulators. Thus, in order to prevent the cable from heating up and destroy the insulation and/or blow up.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    28. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      I don't think he was asking if it's always sensible. It looked more like he was asking if it might be a sensible idea on an island subject to hurricanes. More specifically, I bet he was asking about Puerto Rico.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    29. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you don't know anything about high voltage and power distribution you probably shouldn't be commenting like this.

      Underground wires fail all the time, I have had six power outages this summer in Arizona due to exactly that. As cables heat up their insulator breaks down and becomes brittle and then dust. When the wire is exposed it is now very close to the ground where it will bleed current. Worse yet, if both + and - lines lose their insulation they could short, typically they are run in separate conduit though so it is more of an issue where the wire surfaces.

      If you have ever loaded an extension cord with too much current you'll see what I mean. I used to work in tents with temporary power all the time. Extension cords for lighting were always so hot you couldn't touch them. You solve that problem by using a thicker gauge which also allows you to go further. I had a hell of a time getting 208 power 500 feet from the generator. It takes real thick wire if you're going to actually power a server rack or two. 20 amp 208 for 500' ends up being 10 gauge preferably but you can probably get away with 12. Either way that is some THICK wire and is very hard to work with. Now imagine doing that with transmission lines while are way higher voltage and pulling waaay more current.

    30. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      The problem being that generational power outages can be significantly longer. Blizzards, earthquakes, tornadoes, and hurricanes can all knock out power for weeks.

      I think Puerto Rico would be well served by having a solid, disaster proof island wide background to which less expensive wiring as you propose is attached.

      Volunteer digging efforts could be organized and that would lower the cost of laying electric wiring (tho I imagine waterproof cable will still be more expensive than water resistant wiring but maybe not.).

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    31. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It is a silly comment both of you just made.

      The water table isn't bad for cables, and by countering with the Netherlands you've actually pointed to one of the key points the GP was making: the high water table and soft sub-ocean level dirt / sand mixture that much of the country is made of is actually really really easy to trench and dig, which is why you won't typically find overhead powerlines here.

      Trenching is hell expensive. But it is always a risk vs cost thing, and both of those are highly dependent on the local geography. It isn't foregone conclusion that many on /. make it out to be.

    32. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It is technically impossible to fail.

      Well, found the non-electrical engineer.

      There are many technical, geological, electrical, and external reasons that cables fail. Unfortunately underground it is often a case of not being able to identify problems early through PD monitoring or similar maintenance systems.

    33. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Overhead cables are often uninsulated because insulation is heavy. This is definitely the case for very high voltage lines. Insulation is provided by the distance to the powerline.

      Birds don't get fried because both their legs rest on the same cable. There is no difference of potential between them, hence no current.

    34. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The parent was talking about HEAT.
      Birds don't get fried because overland lines are not hot!
      That the difference in voltage on 1million volts line is not enough over 3cm or 5 cm to cause pain to the birds is a no brainer.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    35. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

      Buried cables, done correctly, will cost society much less in the long run. Future generations will benefit, thank us, and honor us for investing in a long-term solution and a better society.

      Buried cables are far more expensive to build and maintain. Things go wrong slightly less often, but you need heavy equipment to fix it.

      In addition, you have to dig trenches everywhere, with the environment impact of that activity.

      And on top of that, there is unfriendly terrain. In some places, the bedrock is very near to the surface. In other places the soil is either too dense or too loose. Sometimes the water table is near the surface. Sometimes the area is geologically unstable---and slack in aerial lines can provide a cushion that is impossible to achieve underground.

      You are assuming that buried lines are more efficient in the long run, but there are a number of factors that make them unappealing or just plain unworkable. Without detailed knowledge of Puerto Rico's geography, it's extremely unwise to write a blanket policy.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    36. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by MercTech · · Score: 1

      ... it might be a sensible idea to bury electric cables rather than running them around on fragile masts and poles everywhere?

      That makes sense until you get into areas where you have extremely permeable soil and a high water table such as on Caribbean islands and the lower two thirds of Florida.

      Think of shorts to ground due to slow seepage water intrusion and buried cables where you have to do excavation to look for the problem.

      --
      NRRPT/RCT
    37. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by MercTech · · Score: 1

      Underground you need more electrical insulation that also insulates the heat from dissipating. One reason you have to use a larger gauge wire for underground.

      BTW, if the wire actually were in contact with the soil, it would be conduction and not convection. Convection is what you get with a natural fluid flow to carry off heat such as in air.

      --
      NRRPT/RCT
    38. Re:Perhaps on an island subject to hurricanes... by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      Cost. That's all it is over, cost to do it. Where I live now they're all buried. Where I grew up even to this day they are above ground. 13K on top, 220 below. It's aging infrastructure and I hope they switch to burried. So what do they do when your cables hit max life? Dig them up and replace them? Here in the US, we have some cables buried 12' underground, and they STILL managed to get hit by construction equipment.

  2. Re:It's all Trump's fault by Chrisq · · Score: 2

    Re:It's all Trump's fault

    Well all that hot air has to go somewhere

  3. But that takes money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Puerto Rico's government drove the island to bankruptcy.:

    With its creditors at its heels and its coffers depleted, Puerto Rico sought what is essentially bankruptcy relief in federal court on Wednesday, the first time in history that an American state or territory had taken the extraordinary measure.

    The action sent Puerto Rico, whose approximately $123 billion in debt and pension obligations far exceeds the $18 billion bankruptcy filed by Detroit in 2013, to uncharted ground.

    ...

    Of course the pols in charge in Puerto Rico are now casting about blame to deflect attention from their own contributory negligence.

    1. Re:But that takes money by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      Puerto Rico's government drove the island to bankruptcy.:

      With its creditors at its heels and its coffers depleted, Puerto Rico sought what is essentially bankruptcy relief in federal court on Wednesday, the first time in history that an American state or territory had taken the extraordinary measure.

      The action sent Puerto Rico, whose approximately $123 billion in debt and pension obligations far exceeds the $18 billion bankruptcy filed by Detroit in 2013, to uncharted ground.

      ...

      Of course the pols in charge in Puerto Rico are now casting about blame to deflect attention from their own contributory negligence.

      Oh sure, quote a right-wing rag like the NYT ;)

    2. Re:But that takes money by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately that articles leaves out the changes to US tax policy that lead to the current conditions. It also leaves out the influence of the protectionist Jones Act, which considerably increases the cost of living on the island.

  4. Re:It's all Trump's fault by msauve · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Well all that hot air has to go somewhere"

    That's the problem - it doesn't go anywhere, so it just inflates his ego.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  5. Not how. Just how much. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These photographs don't shed any light on how the grid was wiped out. It just shows how much. Which we already know. Just a little bit more graphic. That is all.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Not how. Just how much. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Exactly what I wanted to say. When the power goes out after a windy storm in New England we all know HOW we lost power because we grab our chainsaws and cut up the trees that have fallen on the power lines. "Wutya reckon knocked the power out?" "I got no idea but at least we got some wood for the fireplace now."

      I guess BeauHD was in a hurry to post content and accidentally omitted the word "much".

    2. Re:Not how. Just how much. by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, it was a really disappointing article. We know the power is out. 'NASA' wasn't needed to show us that. The whole article appears to be a puff piece. A gee-whiz article not suitable for Slashdot readers.

  6. Less is More by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

    I love how, in the comparison images, someone actually felt the need to label darker areas as "less lights" and brighter areas as "more lights."

    Also, how pedantic would it be of me to point out that it should be "fewer" lights, not "less"?

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    1. Re:Less is More by Mal-2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nope, they got it right in a somewhat awkward way. They aren't counting those lights, but rather mapping the overall intensity at given locations. If it's not a countable quantity but rather one of magnitude, then "less" is correct. The use of "lights" rather than "light" may be throwing you off.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    2. Re:Less is More by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      Well, I'd say they just got it wrong in a different way then. Pedantically speaking, of course.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    3. Re:Less is More by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      If you don't put a colour scale on your graph some pedant will point it out. So you put one on even if it should be perfectly obvious.

      The answer to your second question is, not pedantic enough. The label should read "less light" not "less lights" or "fewer lights" because the satellite is incapable of counting individual light sources.

    4. Re:Less is More by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Also, how pedantic would it be of me to point out that it should be "fewer" lights, not "less"?

      If you want to be super pedantic then point out that counting working lights from space on a small heatmap isn't really representative. The issue isn't with less or fewer lights, it's that they used the word "lights" instead of the word "light". :-)

    5. Re:Less is More by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      It's for the blind when the translate it into braille.

  7. No representatives to bring home the pork! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While other states have representatives to bring home pork spending, Puerto Rico does not. In addition, the median household income is $18K compared to Mississippi, where where the per capita income is $40K. How much can you really tax a household that only makes $18K? No companies will target Puerto Rico as a market. It's expensive to ship food there from the COTUS. In addition, if the island was already in debt, a substantial portion of the revenues are going to pay off the debug.

    So it's easy to say the government "drove the island to bankruptcy" implying that funds are being mismanaged. Even a new government would not be able to change the status quo because they are starting from such a deep hole. When the federal government needs to get out of a recession, they use deficit spending, and the closest thing a state can do to do that (which is not really ethical but there are no other options) is to issue bonds, and then default on them (bankruptcy).

    1. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by naughtynaughty · · Score: 3, Informative

      Mississippi's per capita income is approximately $20k, not $40k.

      You probably meant median income for both Mississippi and Puerto Rico.

    2. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      While other states have representatives to bring home pork spending, Puerto Rico does not. In addition, the median household income is $18K compared to Mississippi, where where the per capita income is $40K. How much can you really tax a household that only makes $18K? No companies will target Puerto Rico as a market. It's expensive to ship food there from the COTUS.

      So you propose ... what?

    3. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 2

      No, he said "household income", not "per capita income".

    4. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      If puerto rico became a state, they would immediately benefit from millions or even billions of dollars of federal defense spending funneled there by it's two senators.

      That money would then circulate thru the puerto rican economy multiple times.

      ---

      It wouldn't hurt to have key trunk lines built to hurricane standards (with cheap break off wiring locally.)

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    5. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Not only did he say household income he also italicised household to make it stand out.

    6. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      They have democracy. Now what?

    7. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      If puerto rico became a state, they would immediately benefit from millions or even billions of dollars of federal defense spending funneled there by it's two senators.

      That money would then circulate thru the puerto rican economy multiple times.

      Gee, maybe then we could put a Navy base there.

    8. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      A naval base? A few tens of millions of dollars annually? Really?

      How about just something similar to Maryland (#17th per capita defense spending) which received 20 Billion for 6 million people which would be about 11 Billion for 3.4 milllion puerto ricans.

      How about high quality, high paying defense jobs building parts of some unwanted airplane or some unneeded tanks?

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    9. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Puerto Rico's 2017 budget was 9 billion dollars total.

      What would 11 billion dollars of defense budget spending do for the state? Especially if it generated a typical 77 billion in economic activity? Their current debt would be trivial in such an economy.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    10. Re:No representatives to bring home the pork! by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      A naval base? A few tens of millions of dollars annually? Really?

      How about just something similar to Maryland (#17th per capita defense spending) which received 20 Billion for 6 million people which would be about 11 Billion for 3.4 milllion puerto ricans.

      How about high quality, high paying defense jobs building parts of some unwanted airplane or some unneeded tanks?

      I guess you missed my snark. We had a Navy base there. The same people screaming that we aren't doing "enough" did everything they could to make us leave.

  8. "the country"? by j-beda · · Score: 5, Informative

    A large part of the challenges that Peurto Rico faces is that it is not in fact a country, but rather it is an "unincorporated territory of the United States located in the northeast Caribbean Sea".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    https://www.thoughtco.com/puer...

    Peraps if Peurto Rico was a country (or a "state" within the United States), they might have been better able to respond to the types of problems that this storm has caused.

    WIth a population of a bit more than 3.4 million, the territory seems to have more people than twenty-two other US states:

    http://worldpopulationreview.c...

    1. Re:"the country"? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 3, Informative

      They pay taxes, that's all the reason anyone needs to be able to get a better response from the government

      They pay US federal taxes indeed. The federal government should help out here. Why is Trump dragging his feet? Well, Texas is a big republican state so Trump was all about helping them out. Florida is a toss up state so Trump helped a little. Puerto Rico can't vote for President and if they could there is no way they would vote for Trump.

      Trump isn't going to help another human being if they can't give him something in return.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      They could have chosen statehood or independence. There has been 3 different votes since 1998.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Why does PR keep choosing the status quo?

    3. Re:"the country"? by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1, Troll

      What the hell are you talking about? The federal government (headed by President Trump) is doing everything they can in Puerto Rico right now, and people there are mostly praising the efforts. But the fact is that the devastation is so widespread that it'll take years to clean it up. There's no indication that Trump is doing any less there than other places, and he's certainly not "dragging his feet".

      --
      Do you have ESP?
    4. Re:"the country"? by olau · · Score: 1

      Eh, did you read your link? It says that they choose to become a state in November 2012 and then asked the US to enable them to become one.

      I think a better question is, why have they been stalled since?

    5. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      Puerto Rican voters were asked two questions: (1) whether they agreed to continue with Puerto Rico's territorial status and (2) to indicate the political status they preferred from three possibilities: statehood, independence, or a sovereign nation in free association with the United States.[2] 970,910 (54.00%) voted "No" on the first question, expressing themselves against maintaining the current political status, and 828,077 (46.00%) voted "Yes", to maintain the current political status. Of those who answered on the second question 834,191 (61.11%) chose statehood, 454,768 (33.34%) chose free association, and 74,895 (5.55%) chose independence.[3][4]

      The governor-elect Alejandro García Padilla of the Popular Democratic Party (PPD) and several other leaders who favor the present status had recommended voting "Yes" to the first question, and leaving the second question blank as a protest to what they said was "an anti-democratic process" and "a trap"

      Because there were almost 500,000 blank ballots, creating confusion as to the voters' true desire, Congress decided to ignore the vote.

      History professor Luis Agrait explained the result in this manner to CNN: "If you assume those blank votes are anti-statehood votes, the true result for the statehood option would be less than 50%." Considered as a percentage of the total number of votes cast in the first ballot, 44% voted in favor of statehood on the second ballot.

      IOW, because it wasn't clear the results were ignored. Is a vote valid if the questions are poorly constructed? This has been the case for many of the referendums. Not saying it is right or wrong but if you make a decision with such permanency as statehood then the results should not be doubted to such an extent.

    6. Re:"the country"? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      A large part of the challenges that Peurto Rico faces is that it is not in fact a country, but rather it is an "unincorporated territory of the United States located in the northeast Caribbean Sea".

      And to top it off, most people can't find Puerto Rico to help out because so many people misspell the name!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    7. Re:"the country"? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      Taxation in PR. No Federal income tax, and they paid about $3.7 billion in taxation. PR gets back about $3 dollars for every one collected in taxation. And the response has been good according to the PR Governor.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    8. Re:"the country"? by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      IOW, because it wasn't clear the results were ignored

      97% voting for statehood isn't clear?

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    9. Re:"the country"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except he didn't waive the Jones Act like he did for TX and FL until browbeaten by the rest of the country.

    10. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      You must be talking about the 2017 referendum not the 2012 referendum.

      A referendum on the political status of Puerto Rico was held in Puerto Rico on June 11, 2017. The referendum had three options: becoming a state of the United States, independence/free association, or maintaining the current territorial status. Those who voted overwhelmingly chose statehood by 97%; turnout, however, was 23%, a historically low figure. This figure is attributed to a boycott led by the pro-status quo PPD party.

      Again, there wasn't a clear majority because of the boycott. Should the US just ignore that and try to force PR to be a state which is permanent? At what point is the future of PR the fault of PR?

    11. Re:"the country"? by RailRide · · Score: 1
      A John Oliver monologue (21 mins) on just how far in the hole PR is, and why it's having such a massively difficult time getting out of it.

      And this was all before the hurricane...

      ---PCJ

    12. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      , your purported indignation has no merit whatsoever.

      There was as boycott of the vote. That casts doubt on the legitimacy of the vote. What am I missing ?

      protests of permanence are irrelevant

      Unless they wanted independence.

      they have some actual influence or control

      What does the PR government need to do that they cannot do now? That is still rather moot because the government still put in place policies that bring PR to the brink of bankruptcy.

      not being at the whims of an outside group that is not paying attention to them, has no interest in paying attention to them, and treats them as disposable or worse

      If it is as bad as you say then the referendums would have reflected that.

      requires some means of effecting action

      What can the PR government not do that caused them to be fiscally irresponsible?

      fault belongs, in the US Capitol.

      There is some fault, for sure but it is mostly on PR. They need to have a clear vote without boycotts or confusion. They need to have a responsible government that doesn't piss away money to the point of bankruptcy. If anything, their own government and financial problems are inhibiting their statehood.

      PS

      Yes, someone else pointed it out and I acknowledged it. I am so terrible I mistaken the Jones-Shafroth Act to the Jones act.

    13. Re:"the country"? by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      Again, there wasn't a clear majority because of the boycott.

      You don't call 97% a clear majority? Oh, you mean a majority of eligible voters? I'm sorry, but democracy does not work that way. You either vote, or your opinion doesn't count.

      Using your argument, no recent US President had legitimacy, because less than 50% of the eligible voters voted for him.

      In the case of Trump, less than 27% of eligible voters voted for him. Should he be ignored because of this?

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    14. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      'Clear' is the keyword. Many elections are suspect if the opposition steps out particularly when the result is so one sided (95%+) when that only happens in dictatorships, for the most part. It doesn't mean it is illegitimate or does not represent a voting majority. The issue is that there needs to be a clear decision that isn't muddied by boycotts or poor wording. A strong vote with a strong turnout is needed. Why this hasn't been achieved in PR, I don't know.

      There are two things stopping PR statehood; PR bankruptcy/fiscal irresponsibility and a strong vote of yes with a strong turnout.

    15. Re:"the country"? by j-beda · · Score: 1

      A large part of the challenges that Peurto Rico faces is that it is not in fact a country, but rather it is an "unincorporated territory of the United States located in the northeast Caribbean Sea".

      And to top it off, most people can't find Puerto Rico to help out because so many people misspell the name!

      Yeah, those people are idiots!

    16. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      None of which has any legal impact on statehood or independence. It's all about Congressional action.

      Yes, but nothing says "Please vote to accept us as a state" like a referendum with clear support of the people.

      From your own link, they chose statehood 2 of the 3 recent times(61% in 2012, 97% in 2017), and in 1998, Statehood was in 46%, a solid second place behind None of the Above.

      In 2017 there was a boycott which casts doubt on the results and in 2012 there was confusion over the questions. Which again, casts doubt on the results. That doesn't scream PR people wanting to be part of the US if there is so much doubt over the results.

      Congress just made a choice, not to act on any of the votes

      Yes, because there was doubt to the results and the PR government is on the brink of bankruptcy. Those two issues are completely in control of PR and her people.

      can do anything when Congress fails

      Voting tends to work.

      where you totally fail to comprehend something

      How have I failed in comprehension? Perhaps, original post badly worded but so far with the doubt in the results of the referendums PR has chosen the status quo. Congress refusing to act on that doubt and because bankruptcy is a real situation there is not really the fault of Congress.

      My point is that the two major roadblocks of statehood for PR are entirely up to PR to fix. When those are resolved then congressional inaction can be addressed but they have good reason not to act.

    17. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      I am a little confused, at the 9 min mark he says: "unlike states Puerto Rico cannot authorize what's called chapter 9 bankruptcy."

      Everything that I have seen currently shows that states cannot file for bankruptcy. Cities and municipalities can (Detroit) but not states, like Illinois. Congress could change that but that is very different then what Oliver is claiming.

      From what I understand there was only one instance of a debt restructuring or default on state debt and that was Arkansas in 1933 authorized by the FDIC predecessor.

    18. Re:"the country"? by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      According /pol Trump plays 4d chess - why didn't he predict all these people moving to Florida and voting?

    19. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      I think your full of shit. PROMESA protects PR from lawsuits as it tries to fix the finances of the PR government and they are currently going through a de-facto default to restructure the debt. Their debt only happened because of decades of mismanagement of the PR government. Yes, there has been some Congressional failings but there were good decisions and bad decisions. PR being 100+ billion in debt is the fault of PR because it is their failed policies.

    20. Re:"the country"? by dave420 · · Score: 1

      It's true - he dedicated a golf trophy to them! What more do they want?!?

    21. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      Yes, there has been some Congressional failings but there were good decisions and bad decisions. PR being 100+ billion in debt is the fault of PR because it is their failed policies.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      the Department of Treasury of Puerto Rico is incapable of collecting 44% of the Puerto Rico Sales and Use Tax (or about $900 million), did not match what taxpayers reported to the department with the income reported by the taxpayer's employer through Form W-2s, and did not collect payments owed to the department by taxpayers that submitted tax returns without their corresponding payments.
      public teacher's base salary starts at $24,000 while a legislative advisor starts at $74,000. The government has also been unable to set up a system based on meritocracy, with many employees, particularly executives and administrators, simply lacking the competencies required to perform their jobs.
      There are 78 municipalities of Puerto Rico, which budget $2.2 billion a year, with mayors' salaries alone costing $4.8 million. Thirty-six of these have a budget deficit, putting 46% of the municipalities in financial stress.
      Just like the central government, the municipalities would issue debt through the Puerto Rico Municipal Financing Agency to stabilize its finances rather than make adjustments.
      The state monopoly provides free electricity to local governments, which prompted the Mayor of Aguadilla, Puerto Rico, to build an ice-skating rink.
      with FTI Consulting estimating that the utility had improperly given away $420 million of electricity and that the island's governments were $300 million delinquent in payments.

    22. Re:"the country"? by penandpaper · · Score: 1

      if you can't understand why quoting the mismanagement of the government highlights examples of why the mess has been created by pr then your obviously just a troll. the link has things that congress has done as well.

  9. Re: Spending income is irresponsible by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Because our $20 trillion in debt is caused by $400,000 grants. Give me a break, our debt is caused by our defense spending (your "heroes"). They are protecting our Homeland after all.

  10. Re: Spending income is irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Democrats gave us 20T debt? Republicans were equal partners.

  11. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by GLMDesigns · · Score: 3, Interesting

    PR should become a state or become an independent country. There shouldn't be any middle ground. However I know many, many PRicans who do want the middle way. They want it to remain as it is. "This is what was agreed to 100 years ago - and we ought to stick with it."

    --
    If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
    Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
  12. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by penandpaper · · Score: 1

    I don't know if you know this but Puerto Ricans are US citizens. Their debt is their doing as is their current statehood. They have to choose to be a state as much as they have to choose sovereignty just as they chose to be fiscally irresponsible.

    Why can't the debt be resolved by the Puerto Rican government? Why should other citizens and states pick up the tab for them when that has never happened before?

  13. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by whoever57 · · Score: 1

    1. They already voted for statehood.
    2. Much of their fiscal problems can be attributed to the Jones act, which increases prices on the island.

    The US has treated Puerto Rico shabbily.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  14. Re: Spending income is irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Please. Federal social program spending is greater than defense.

  15. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by penandpaper · · Score: 1

    1) they have voted 3 times for statehood with another one to come.
    2) the fiscal problems all stem from the PR government. not the act that gave PRs citizenship while trying to create strong economic and cultural ties to the mainland.

    US has treated PR shabbily? HOW? How is it different than any other territory vying for statehood? If it was truly that bad then why hasn't PR voted for independence?

  16. Re:deficit goes up when Republicans take over by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    When was the last time the US Federal debt dropped, year over year? HINT: the first satellite ever was launched and Elvis starred in Jailhouse Rock.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  17. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by whoever57 · · Score: 1

    You can't simply pretend that the Jones act doesn't exist and doesn't drastically raise prices on PR, which then has a knock-on effect on the whole island economy.

    Why hasn't the US government responded to the request for statehood?

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  18. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by SeriousTube · · Score: 1

    Guam and the Marianna Islands only have 200,000 people so they aren't going to become a state.

  19. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by penandpaper · · Score: 1

    I didn't ignore it that is why I said "the act that gave PRs citizenship while trying to create strong economic and cultural ties to the mainland".

    As I have explained in a different post, the referendums have been contested for poor wording and boycotts. Basically because none of the results had clear majority and/or legitimacy they were ignored. What is the US supposed to do without a clear mandated decision from the PR people?

  20. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    I didn't ignore it that is why I said "the act that gave PRs citizenship while trying to create strong economic and cultural ties to the mainland".

    I think you're talking about two different laws. I'm pretty sure the Jones Act that has to do with shipping is different from the Jones-Shafroth Act that gave Puerto Ricans citizenship.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  21. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by penandpaper · · Score: 1

    oops. my bad. thanks. some reason I thought it the same law. Dang Jones and his laws!

  22. Troll? Even snopes agrees with him. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Snopes has a fact check of what's been sent to Puerto Rico. Trump may be an insufferable idiot but to say the Federal government is dragging it's feet is just bullshit. Must more be done? Absolutely, but the narrative that the government is doing less than they did for Texas and Florida is just wrong. Aid did get there faster but until they pave over the Caribbean that's going to continue to be a problem. The only questionable call was not suspending the Jones act so non-American flagged ships can help with supplies, but right now the infrastructure is so screwed that the military is the best one to be distributing aid. Their ships have the ability to offload without shore support, most commercial ships don't and would just be getting in the way at this point. Once they get power, diesel, etc back to the docks then yes, they could use more ships.

  23. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    oops. my bad. thanks. some reason I thought it the same law. Dang Jones and his laws!

    It's OK, I heard talking heads on TV make the same mistake last week. The two laws were passed within a few years of each other, so it's an easy mistake to make, and they both impact Puerto Rico.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  24. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by whoever57 · · Score: 1

    So now you know which act I was referring to, how about commenting on its effect on the economy of PR?

    The USA has created a situation where the cost of living on PR has been artificially increased, to benefit a few wealthy people, and ensuring that the brightest people can easily leave.

    Do you really think that that's been good for the economy of the island?

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  25. Distributed renewable microgrids would fix this by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

    If you look at the pics, you'll notice the areas with buildings that had distributed microgrids of power, as in houses with some solar or wind that could be protected or taken indoors, were the first to regain power, followed by diesel backup generators that either pre-existed or were provided by the military or commercial/private interests.

    While it is true that undergrounding is a good choice, it would not have prevented blown transformers, flooded power generation sites, storm damage to all utility power generation, so bringing the grid back up becomes very difficult. You have to isolate the cells and bring them back up one by one. Problem is the load is too high. Modern equipment mostly goes to off mode (e.g. furnaces shut down during power interruption, fridges go to quiet/standby mode), but there's a lot of old equipment on islands.

    Current Energy Policy articles recommend that most islands go to sustainable/resilient renewable microgrids with both battery (e.g. Tesla PowerWall and equivalent (cheaper to make yourself)) and CNG/LNG power backups.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  26. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by penandpaper · · Score: 1

    Hawaii falls under the Jones act, how are they negatively impacted by it?

  27. Problem with Puerto Rico by k_user · · Score: 1

    The problem is that Puerto Rico is an island, surrounded by water, big water, ocean water, and that water is salty and fishy. Also, Puerto Rico is sitting in the middle of an ocean. And it’s a big ocean; it’s a very big ocean. A very very big ocean.

  28. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    All US ports fall under the act. It's just another diversion. Pure bullshit.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  29. "Clever" Trick! by gerald.edward.butler · · Score: 1

    Compare "Median Income" to "Per Capita Income". Lies. Damn Lies. Statistics. You are a fucking liar!

  30. brighter spots? by ChristTrekker · · Score: 1

    There are several places that a brighter in the "dark" photo than before. For example, near the northern coast, from about center running a ways west. (Roughly Manati to Arecibo.) Makes me wonder what's going on there.

    --

    Constitutionally Correct

  31. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by whoever57 · · Score: 1
    Hawaii in this discussion is a diversion.

    Separately, the high cost of shipping is a substantial burden on the Island's productivity. Puerto Rico is in a distinctive situation with respect to the Jones Act because of its status as an island economy. One option could be to seek a temporary exemption from the Jones Act, for instance for five years, in order both to evaluate whether or not these restrictions really are a substantial cause of elevated shipping costs and to allow for assessment of the costs and benefits of a permanent exemption.

    That's what a study by the Federal Reserve of NY thinks.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  32. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by penandpaper · · Score: 1

    I am not sure I understand. Two Island economies yet one needs special treatment. Why?

    I see that you quoted a Wikipedia source but if you read the next paragraph that uses your source:"Although, in March 2013, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a study of the effect of the Jones Act on Puerto Rico that noted "[f]reight rates are set based on a host of supply and demand factors in the market, some of which are affected directly or indirectly by Jones Act requirements." The report further concludes, however, that "because so many other factors besides the Jones Act affect rates, it is difficult to isolate the exact extent to which freight rates between the United States and Puerto Rico are affected by the Jones Act"

    So far, the more I read about Puerto Rico I see a couple of themes. 1) Puerto Rico is given special treatment sometimes good sometimes bad. 2) the government of Puerto Rico is garbage which compounds all its problems. I don't think the Jones Act is to blame as much as the crap government of Puerto Rico.

    For example, the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA) was a state monopoly providing free electricity to local governments which prompted the Mayor of Aguadilla to build an ice-skating rink. I wonder why PREPA has a $9 billion debt.

  33. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by AaronW · · Score: 1

    Just ask anyone who lives there. There is a lot of poverty in Hawaii due to the high cost of shipping. Just go into any grocery store and you can see why.

    http://www.hawaiibusiness.com/...

    The Jones act punishes Hawaii, Alaska and Puerto Rico.

    Because of the Jones Act, you can't have a foreign ship stop off in Hawaii before hitting a port in California, nor a ship traveling from the west coast stop off in Hawaii on their way to Asia. Any ship that goes between US ports must be U.S. flagged, U.S. crewed, U.S. owned and U.S. built. This makes it very expensive since most ships are foreign built, foreign-owned, foreign flagged and foreign crewed. The Jones act makes shipping cost several times what it normally would cost. For example, it's cheaper to send a product from Alaska to Seattle by first sending it to Japan than to send it directly.

    --
    This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  34. Re:PR is too heavily entwined, it needs to be a st by penandpaper · · Score: 1

    With a recalculation of poverty rate, yes it seems that Hawaii is pretty high (Hawaii's poverty rate of 17.4 percent is nearly 2 percentage points higher than the national average of 15.8 )http://hano-hawaii.org/newhano/index.php/news/237-hawaii-poverty-rate-recalculated-to-be-7th-highest-in-us

    That is very different than Puerto Rico's 44.9%. What causes the cost of living in Hawaii to be so high, the huge tourism industry or the Jones Act?