Been watching the teevee nooz coverage of the San Bruno [San Francisco peninsula] gas main explosion and conflagration. Wow.
I used to live about a mile away from that spot, across Skyline Blvd.; used to shop at the Lunardi's just across the road.
The news reported lots of people saying they'd been smelling gas in the neighborhood for the last week or so. One can only hope that PG&E (Pure Greed & Extortion) gets raked over the coals, literally, for this one.
Only one dead. That's fortunate, considering the locale.
These incidents are not rare in SFBA. Lotta gas, lotta poeple. There was another one a few years back, just off hwy 680 North near San Ramon/Danville area. Only took out the backhoe operator who ruptured the gas line.
I moved from SFBA 3 yrs ago. Don't miss it one bit.
nb
A few comments on this:
- People said they had smelled gas for a week, did any of those people bother to report it?
- People laugh at me when I say Nat. Gas is *not* safe and should not be allowed in residential areas, yet nearly every day there is a house explosion due to a nat. gas leak, and every year or two a big incident like this one. I recall an apartment building in the northeast (NJ?) being leveled by one of these nat. gas transmission lines exploding under it.
- Gas detectors are pretty inexpensive, they're included in every RV. Various technologies exist to allow the gas monopolies to install gas monitors in the areas where they pipe their dangerous product. It would not be especially expensive to install remote gas detectors in the area that would not rely on some person actually calling the monopoly to report a possible gas leak. The gas detectors also are more sensitive than human noses so they could detect a small leak blowing past.
explosion due to a nat. gas leak, and every year or two a big incident like this one. I recall an apartment building in the northeast (NJ?) being leveled by one of these nat. gas transmission lines exploding under it.
That laughter you speak of may be due to your humor.
There are annually over 33,000 traffic fatalities in the U.S., and that the lowest in about 60 years. Do you also believe we should eliminate automobiles?
I frequently get that nonsensical argument. The fact is that we do not have a reasonable alternative to automobiles, while we have a number of reasonable and much safer alternatives to nat. gas.
You still haven't given any verified data indicating the danger you are so sure is happening. Until then I would remind you that anecdote is not the singular of data. And Google and CNN random news accounts certainly don't fit that bill. What are the more safer alternatives?
I'm not aware of any central nat. gas explosion clearing house, so you'll just have to rely on the thousands of news reports of such explosions for your proof, unless of course you think CNN and all the various other TV stations and newspapers are faking those reports.
In no particular order: Oil, wood, solar, coal, electric (resistive or heat pump) none of which have ever caused a house explosion and killed people. Yes, some of those heating sources have been known to cause house fires, but those are slow and escapable unlike nat. gas explosions. Requiring gas detectors ($50 or so) in homes with nat. gas would go a long way towards improving safety, and indeed the generally required CO detectors are available in dual CO / gas detectors for about $60.
I don;'t have to rely on anything. You are the one making all of the great pronouncements that you can't back up with facts. I also don't find "thousands" of individual reports on CNN, etc. I see a few explosions reported many times over.
Here are some statistics for you:
No comment on all the readily available safer alternatives to nat. gas? Unlike the often cited auto deaths, we do have plenty of viable alternatives to dangerous nat. gas.
On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 20:31:21 -0500, Pete C. wrote: [snip]
They're also more polluting.
[snip]
Solar is most certainly not more polluting, nor is electric depending on the generation source. In any case, pollution isn't much of a concern vs. getting blown up.
Well, let me first say that I found the statistics you referenced to be informative and eye-opening. But I have to disagree with the above statement. Pollution kills people, too. For example, burning wood releases particulates, and particulates interfere with lung function and can lead to premature death. I don't have the statistics involved, but it may well be the case that burning wood causes as many deaths due to pollution (per unit energy delivered) as natural gas does through explosions.
Cheers, Wayne
"Pete C." wrote in news:4c8a3a32$0$24889$ snipped-for-privacy@unlimited.usenetmonster.com:
With properly maintained facilities, natural gas is safe. Considering the number of households and commercial establishments of all kinds that use NG, the number of accidents and fatalities is small. Gasoline etc probably have at least as many (BP well blowing up).
Now as far as proper maintenance, I don't understand the use of a 54" inch main gas line only 3 feet under a residential area. In an earthquake prone region. I bet that it will turn out that the residents have warned many times (probably crying wolf too many times, as far as PG&E was concerned), and that the line was NOT inspected often enough and recently enough. Wouldn't want to have shares in that company ...
But, mismanagement by 1 company shouldn't condemn the whole concept.
Of course, it is OT, and YMMV!!
Was the 54" main there when the allotment was created or installed after?
"A. Baum" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@50kilotons.net.not:
The community dates from the 60s. I don't know who was first. I don't think it matters at this moment.
Consider the manufacture and disposal of solar cells.
That (less polluting source) is likely to be unavailable to you. Most electricity is made from coal.
I said nothing about relative concerns before, but it is. Maybe less immediate but no less serious.
Sure it matters. Maybe not to the explosion victims so much but rather that you seemed to place PG&E at fault for placing the 54" 3 feet under the community. Can't quote you exactly since you snipped that part out.
Pretty sure they don't put subdivisons, or at least the house footprints, DIRECTLY on top of major gas transmission lines like that. I've seen them cut across the corners of subdivisions, but the easement always said there had to be a clear zone with no permanent structures directly above, and instant access when needed, for sniffer trucks and the big yellow things. The pipeline companies try real hard to lay them out based on 30+ years of undisturbed usage. Almost always they go through farm fields.
I've never seen a neighborhood distribution line bigger than 6-8 inches or so. About 15? years ago, this town had a small oopsie, where they connected a higher-pressure trunk line to the feeder for a neighborhood, with stepping down the pressure. About a dozen houses lit off, when the furnaces and water heaters suddenly had 10x the gas volume coming in. Police and FD had to break out their doomsday book, and call in all 3 shifts, and outside assistance. I think some court cases are still floating around from that one. Thankfully, nobody got killed. That is the only mass residential gas fubar I recall around this town- there were a couple of commercial buildings that tried to launch themselves, but they turned out to be insurance scams.
"A. Baum" wrote in news:pan.2010.09.11.22.07.07@
50kilotons.net.not:
The only thing I heard/read was a 54" main gas line that was 3' underground in a residential community.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.