we4
Junior
Girls Can't Do What?
Posts: 245
|
Post by we4 on Jun 23, 2009 21:30:57 GMT -6
This one's for you, Arch. ============================================== www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/1636024,Downed-power-line-main-spark-10-foot_na062309.article Downed power line, gas main spark 10-foot-tall fireballGLEN ELLYN — In a bizarre confluence of public utilities, an overhead electrical power line fell to the ground and ignited an underground natural gas main, creating a 10-foot-tall fireball outside two apartment buildings. No injuries were reported in the incident outside the six-unit apartment buildings at 17 and 23 Sunset Ave., Glen Ellyn Volunteer Fire Company Chief Scott Raffensparger said early Tuesday evening. The apartments are northwest of the intersection of Roosevelt Road and North Main Street. Thirty firefighters responded to a 911 call received from the area at 4:28 p.m., Raffensparger said. "We had a primary power line down, and that made the gas main underneath it fail," he said. The electrical line "burned a hole in the ground and ignited the gas main," Raffensparger said. That, in turn, created "a 10-foot-tall ball of fire" that continued burning as of 7:30 p.m., he said. Residents of the apartment buildings were evacuated at the start of the emergency and were still out of their homes as of Tuesday evening. Raffensparger said the flames did not set fire to or otherwise damage any of the apartments. He added electrical service was also disrupted to homes and businesses along a portion of Roosevelt Road. Nicor and Com Ed repair crews remained at the scene as of Tuesday evening. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jun 23, 2009 21:37:00 GMT -6
This one's for you, Arch. ============================================== www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/1636024,Downed-power-line-main-spark-10-foot_na062309.article Downed power line, gas main spark 10-foot-tall fireballGLEN ELLYN — In a bizarre confluence of public utilities, an overhead electrical power line fell to the ground and ignited an underground natural gas main, creating a 10-foot-tall fireball outside two apartment buildings. No injuries were reported in the incident outside the six-unit apartment buildings at 17 and 23 Sunset Ave., Glen Ellyn Volunteer Fire Company Chief Scott Raffensparger said early Tuesday evening. The apartments are northwest of the intersection of Roosevelt Road and North Main Street. Thirty firefighters responded to a 911 call received from the area at 4:28 p.m., Raffensparger said. "We had a primary power line down, and that made the gas main underneath it fail," he said. The electrical line "burned a hole in the ground and ignited the gas main," Raffensparger said. That, in turn, created "a 10-foot-tall ball of fire" that continued burning as of 7:30 p.m., he said. Residents of the apartment buildings were evacuated at the start of the emergency and were still out of their homes as of Tuesday evening. Raffensparger said the flames did not set fire to or otherwise damage any of the apartments. He added electrical service was also disrupted to homes and businesses along a portion of Roosevelt Road. Nicor and Com Ed repair crews remained at the scene as of Tuesday evening. Thank God we don't have any of these items around our schools-- you mean an electric line can cause a gas main to fail- who knew ?  |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 23, 2009 21:47:46 GMT -6
The pressure on those residential main lines are not even triple digits and they are usually about 2 inches in diameter tops.
I'm ticking away the calendar hoping that Player returns and tells us how improbable these sorts of things are...
Obviously these are all fake news stories (including the earlier train derailment in Rockford) because things like that won't ever happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Jun 23, 2009 22:41:09 GMT -6
The pressure on those residential main lines are not even triple digits and they are usually about 2 inches in diameter tops. I'm ticking away the calendar hoping that Player returns and tells us how improbable these sorts of things are... Obviously these are all fake news stories (including the earlier train derailment in Rockford) because things like that won't ever happen. cheap shot arch...Player did not site news articles to the probability but scientific analysis.... |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jun 23, 2009 22:54:29 GMT -6
The pressure on those residential main lines are not even triple digits and they are usually about 2 inches in diameter tops. I'm ticking away the calendar hoping that Player returns and tells us how improbable these sorts of things are... Obviously these are all fake news stories (including the earlier train derailment in Rockford) because things like that won't ever happen. cheap shot arch...Player did not site news articles to the probability but scientific analysis.... All the analysis in the world - or the longest of odds don't matter if you're the 1 in 10,000 or whatever number it is. Planes fly in storms all the time - yet the people on the Air France plane never got to have someone tell them what the odds were something bad would happen - or the scientific analysis of how the planes were built to take it - etc. risk takers eventually come up snake eyes....it's a matter of when, not if. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 23, 2009 22:55:45 GMT -6
The pressure on those residential main lines are not even triple digits and they are usually about 2 inches in diameter tops. I'm ticking away the calendar hoping that Player returns and tells us how improbable these sorts of things are... Obviously these are all fake news stories (including the earlier train derailment in Rockford) because things like that won't ever happen. cheap shot arch...Player did not site news articles to the probability but scientific analysis.... No, it wasn't a cheap shot and comparing miles of pipelines to fatalities in a formula is not 'scientific analysis' of the specific pipes and their conditions underneath the MVHS property. If anything it was a marketing gimmick to distract attention from the ACTUALS at the school site. |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Jun 23, 2009 23:19:09 GMT -6
cheap shot arch...Player did not site news articles to the probability but scientific analysis.... All the analysis in the world - or the longest of odds don't matter if you're the 1 in 10,000 or whatever number it is. Planes fly in storms all the time - yet the people on the Air France plane never got to have someone tell them what the odds were something bad would happen - or the scientific analysis of how the planes were built to take it - etc. risk takers eventually come up snake eyes....it's a matter of when, not if. shame on those risk takers flying to see their loved ones or going to work to support their families or going on a vacation of a lifetime. they should know better. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 23, 2009 23:22:17 GMT -6
All the analysis in the world - or the longest of odds don't matter if you're the 1 in 10,000 or whatever number it is. Planes fly in storms all the time - yet the people on the Air France plane never got to have someone tell them what the odds were something bad would happen - or the scientific analysis of how the planes were built to take it - etc. risk takers eventually come up snake eyes....it's a matter of when, not if. shame on those risk takers flying to see their loved ones or going to work to support their families or going on a vacation of a lifetime. they should know better. You driving to work or taking your family on vacation does not mean that 1000+ have to do what you choose for yourself. You can choose to work closer. HS Students in teh MVHS boundary can't choose to go to a closer school or another one in D204 for safety reasons, can they? |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Jun 23, 2009 23:28:36 GMT -6
cheap shot arch...Player did not site news articles to the probability but scientific analysis.... No, it wasn't a cheap shot and comparing miles of pipelines to fatalities in a formula is not 'scientific analysis' of the specific pipes and their conditions underneath the MVHS property. If anything it was a marketing gimmick to distract attention from the ACTUALS at the school site. sorry if it was something you didn't want to hear but when was the last time player was even on this site? that is a cheap shot IMO. He/she feels safe at MV based on the scientific analysis presented. should we look at the mathematical probability or news articles when weighing the risk? |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Jun 23, 2009 23:31:03 GMT -6
shame on those risk takers flying to see their loved ones or going to work to support their families or going on a vacation of a lifetime. they should know better. You driving to work or taking your family on vacation does not mean that 1000+ have to do what you choose for yourself. You can choose to work closer. HS Students in teh MVHS boundary can't choose to go to a closer school or another one in D204 for safety reasons, can they?[/color] nope, but that is not their only choices now is it? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 23, 2009 23:39:53 GMT -6
No, it wasn't a cheap shot and comparing miles of pipelines to fatalities in a formula is not 'scientific analysis' of the specific pipes and their conditions underneath the MVHS property. If anything it was a marketing gimmick to distract attention from the ACTUALS at the school site. sorry if it was something you didn't want to hear but when was the last time player was even on this site? that is a cheap shot IMO. He/she feels safe at MV based on the scientific analysis presented. should we look at the mathematical probability or news articles when weighing the risk? He is free to post whenever he wants. His account has always been active. News articles show the ACTUAL dangers of the site hazards. They cite ACTUAL incidents, especially 2 notable ones in the past year, of pipelines that had recently been tested and deemed SAFE but still exploded. Other things I have posted showed that at the federal level they KNOW the formulas used to do the data analysis of the pipelines from these tests conclude they are safer than they actually are... they predict a failure time frame too far out into the future. It's a documented known problem, documented back in 10/2008 and prior by the PHMSA. These are the same tests and formula that are used by Kinder Morgan to deem the pipes at the MVHS site as 'safe'. These are not hypotheticals and have nothing to do with miles of pipeline all over the country, they have to do with actual data collected, analyzed and then 'projected' to reach a conclusion as to whether the line is 'safe' or not and for how long. It's a buggy formula... and we are hanging out hat on a known bad formula for our safety assurances. Now, had they done what was suggested and actually dug up, replaced the lines and installed ACV's off both edges of the property we would have BRAND NEW, KNOWN GOOD CONDITION pipe at the site and devices that would cut fuel flow in the event of an unforeseeable accident, allowing only the most minimum amount to escape and run the risk of ignition. A blowout on its own is a bad problem for those right near it, but it won't damage the building structure or anyone in it. I would feel bad for anyone practicing right on top of it though... IGNITION of the fuel is the major danger there at the site. The ACVs, if installed, would minimize the amount of fuel that could escape and ignite and could probably burn off relatively quickly and probably save the building. Without them, if you have an ignition, you can pretty much kiss the building and its occupants good bye just due to the time of thermal exposure at those temperatures. What is the district's worst case scenerio plan? Do they even have one? Judging by the silence on the topic from them over the past year I would guess it will fall into the off-campus conduct category and they might address it months later if it were to ever happen and be needed. God help the kids and faculty in that case. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 23, 2009 23:41:19 GMT -6
You driving to work or taking your family on vacation does not mean that 1000+ have to do what you choose for yourself. You can choose to work closer. HS Students in teh MVHS boundary can't choose to go to a closer school or another one in D204 for safety reasons, can they?[/color] nope, but that is not their only choices now is it?[/quote] Many have felt they had to choose to not only pay district taxes, but also pay to send their kids to a safe school. Yes, still a choice... but they won't forget who to thank properly when the time comes for having to make that choice. |
|
|
|
Post by steckdad on Jun 23, 2009 23:54:06 GMT -6
sorry if it was something you didn't want to hear but when was the last time player was even on this site? that is a cheap shot IMO. He/she feels safe at MV based on the scientific analysis presented. should we look at the mathematical probability or news articles when weighing the risk? He is free to post whenever he wants. His account has always been active. News articles show the ACTUAL dangers of the site hazards. They cite ACTUAL incidents, especially 2 notable ones in the past year, of pipelines that had recently been tested and deemed SAFE but still exploded. Other things I have posted showed that at the federal level they KNOW the formulas used to do the data analysis of the pipelines from these tests conclude they are safer than they actually are... they predict a failure time frame too far out into the future. It's a documented known problem, documented back in 10/2008 and prior by the PHMSA. These are the same tests and formula that are used by Kinder Morgan to deem the pipes at the MVHS site as 'safe'. These are not hypotheticals and have nothing to do with miles of pipeline all over the country, they have to do with actual data collected, analyzed and then 'projected' to reach a conclusion as to whether the line is 'safe' or not and for how long. It's a buggy formula... and we are hanging out hat on a known bad formula for our safety assurances. Now, had they done what was suggested and actually dug up, replaced the lines and installed ACV's off both edges of the property we would have BRAND NEW, KNOWN GOOD CONDITION pipe at the site and devices that would cut fuel flow in the event of an unforeseeable accident, allowing only the most minimum amount to escape and run the risk of ignition. A blowout on its own is a bad problem for those right near it, but it won't damage the building structure or anyone in it. I would feel bad for anyone practicing right on top of it though... IGNITION of the fuel is the major danger there at the site. The ACVs, if installed, would minimize the amount of fuel that could escape and ignite and could probably burn off relatively quickly and probably save the building. Without them, if you have an ignition, you can pretty much kiss the building and its occupants good bye just due to the time of thermal exposure at those temperatures. What is the district's worst case scenerio plan? Do they even have one? Judging by the silence on the topic from them over the past year I would guess it will fall into the off-campus conduct category and they might address it months later if it were to ever happen and be needed. God help the kids and faculty in that case. no one is debating that if there was an accident that would be a bad thing. to say it is just a matter of time and that all pipelines will eventually blow is incorrect though right? I agree with you that new pipes and the valves would rest the minds of some. the news article issue I brought up because every day something bad happens somewhere in the world. let's not base our fears on that because then we would never leave the house. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 24, 2009 0:01:11 GMT -6
no one is debating that if there was an accident that would be a bad thing. to say it is just a matter of time and that all pipelines will eventually blow is incorrect though right? I agree with you that new pipes and the valves would rest the minds of some. Here is how you answer that question: Does the metal in the pipes get weaker or stronger with time, or remain constant? If you are not sure, go ask someone who is a metallurgist. |
|
|
|
Post by rew on Jun 24, 2009 5:48:34 GMT -6
Steckdad, If the risk is so small, why is it illegal in some states to build schools on such property? Are those states "nincompoops"? Or %^&* liars?
|
|
