Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

bit-player.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 127 posts

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#31

Post by mschuster91 »

jrjrjrjr wrote: post #8

Even my air compressors have blow off valves, did something get lost in the advancement of technology from the boiler days ???? it seems to be a pretty stupid design that doesn't have relief valves.

> it seems to be a pretty stupid design that doesn't have relief valves.

They have, the problem here was that the relief valves vented way too much gas - they're in the houses of people... and one spark with the right amount of oxygen and stuff goes kabooomm. Gas fires are no joke, gas explosions even less.

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#32

Post by Scoundreller »

taliesinb wrote: post #3

The Chemical Safety Board produces some pretty fascinating videos that reconstruct the chains of events that led to large industrial accidents in chemical plants. The videos normally conclude with recommendations for voluntary actions industry can take to prevent similar incidents in future. They basically summarize the results of detailed investigations by CSB agents. The videos are well produced and, apart from tho…

I like their videos. Unfortunately, this incident will be investigated by the Transportation Safety Board.

The report will be thorough, but we may not get a great video out of it :(

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#33

Post by hexane360 »

Scoundreller wrote: post #32
taliesinb wrote: post #3

The Chemical Safety Board produces some pretty fascinating videos that reconstruct the chains of events that led to large industrial accidents in chemical plants. The videos normally conclude with recommendations for voluntary actions industry can take to prevent similar incidents in future. They basically summarize the results of detailed investigations by CSB agents. The videos are well produced and, apart from tho…

I like their videos. Unfortunately, this incident will be investigated by the Transportation Safety Board. The report will be thorough, but we may not get a great video out of it :(

The TSB does do videos, but you're right that they're not as polished as the CSB's.

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#34

Post by geerlingguy »

monochromatic wrote: post #30
gwbas1c wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I built my house with solar, heat pumps, an EV charger... And natural gas service just for my stove and grill. It costs $500 for gas service, or $500 to put in the high amperage outlet for the stove, so it's a wash, cost-wise. You can take my gas stove over my dead body. I'll happily pay whatever it takes for carbon neutral methane to come through my pipes. (Natural gas is mostly methane.) The flame just makes everyt…

> so it's a wash, cost-wise For installation. For ongoing costs, gas wins by a mile.

And in most areas, way more than a mile, especially with 97+% efficient appliances.

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#35

Post by captain_perl »

wyattpeak wrote: post #17
jrjrjrjr wrote: post #8

Even my air compressors have blow off valves, did something get lost in the advancement of technology from the boiler days ???? it seems to be a pretty stupid design that doesn't have relief valves.

I don't know much about the specifics of gas distribution, but I came across a comment on an entirely different discussion recently which I think is apropos: > you should be very suspicious of any conclusion that requires you to assume that all the world’s experts have missed something extremely basic. It seems to me most likely that the answer is simply that releasing natural gas into the air is an even more dangero…

> you should be very suspicious of any conclusion that requires you to assume that all the world’s experts have missed something extremely basic.

This is hugely mistaken. If you're an expert in compliance in one field, often your insights are valid in another field.

For example, anybody who has certified a data center knows that Fukushima was both in the wrong location and had wonky power distribution.

Anybody in aviation knows the Tyndall F-22s were in the wrong location after Kermit Weeks' collection was destroyed in Florida in 1990.

Expertise and common sense are always in short supply. It's 2018 - we've collected enough hindsight for the next 100 years.

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#36

Post by URSpider94 »

nicoburns wrote: post #28
acidburnNSA wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh, I guess you're right: I'd prefer both nuclear and natural gas to get sober reports. I think natural gas has a better name (it's natural! As if uranium is not), no ties to superweapons, and no The Simpsons. Regular fire is just easier to understand to most folks than radioisotopes.

With natural gas incidents, the entire surrounding area doesn't become unusable for hundreds of years...

No, but over the past 50 years, we’ve had two severe nuclear incidents resulting in any kind of long-term environmental damage (Fukuhima and Chernobyl), and Fukushima will be remediated within a decade.

In the mean time, we’ve had Exxon Valdez, Deepwater Horizon, Andover, San Carlos, CA, plus oil trains burning down entire towns, coal mine explosions, two Gulf Wars, and sea level rise due to global warming.

Pick your poison.

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#37

Post by mcguire »

acidburnNSA wrote: post #5
PhantomGremlin wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turns out 1% of a gigawatt is still a lot. Just to be pedantic, nuclear plants generate electricity at about 33% efficiency. So to get 1000 MW of electricity, you start with about 3000 MW thermal. Turns out 1% of three gigawatts is even more. :)

Truth. The ones I'm designing are generally like 38% efficient and 300 MWe scale so pardon my slightly unconventional sizing. It's definitely a lot. But nothing naturally-circulating sodium metal through 4 redundant NaK-air dump heat exchangers can't handle.

NaK-air? Doesn't NaK catch fire in the presence of air?

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#38

Post by userbinator »

jrjrjrjr wrote: post #8

Even my air compressors have blow off valves, did something get lost in the advancement of technology from the boiler days ???? it seems to be a pretty stupid design that doesn't have relief valves.

Compressed air can be released back into the atmosphere from which it came without much danger, but gas is not so harmless. Relief valves exist to prevent pipes from exploding due to the pressure, and during this incident they were probably wide open, but they just continued to release gas which eventually exploded anyway.

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#39

Post by joe_the_user »

I had believed such a catastrophe was all but impossible. The natural gas industry has many troubles, including chronic leaks that release millions of tons of methane into the atmosphere, but I had thought that pressure regulation was a solved problem.

Yeah, natural gas tech is old and over time has been worked into a multi-layer system that is close to "inherently safe". I remember years ago trying to light an old heater the most stupid way possible and only singeing my eyebrows in the resulting explosion.

But these events just show that if a company skimps enough on needed maintenance, ignoring constant smaller leaks and the similar despicable maneuvers done by this gas company, then the overall potential of piping an explosive gas into a city can be realized and people die and are injured, building are destroyed and so-forth.

In this context, it seems pretty obvious this isn't a "technological tragedy" but a "people doing bad things tragedy" and I hope it's obvious people deserve to go to jail for this and if they don't then other problematic aspect of this society are then to blame.

Re: Massachusetts gas fires: Another technological tragedy

#40

Post by userbinator »

I suspect the remote-sensing aspect of their regulation system was not well known, and thus the consequences of possibly opening the control loop weren't taken into consideration. It's a subtle but important point --- and I remember a friend telling me a story of destroying some very expensive electronics because the sense line of the power supply came loose.
Post reply on HN