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

Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 255 posts

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#181

Post by brailsafe »

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #149
bigiain wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A media report here in .au today told me only 1% of the ammonium nitrate sold here is for fertiliser, and 99% is used to make explosives for mining. (I can't find the article I read, but my guess is that writer got those numbers from here: https://www.worksafe.qld.gov.au/injury-prevention-safety/haz... )

But Australia probably has a pretty strong mining and relatively weak farming industry compared to most other nations.

Afaik, specifically cultivation of plants that require fertilizer might be lacking, but that farming animals (cow, sheep) is significant

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#182

Post by varjag »

ALittleLight wrote: post #177
varjag wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If prior to the explosion you were told that all dangerous cargo is stored in dangerous cargo area of the port, would you've thought it is stupid?

Would I have thought that storing a massive amount of explosives next to flammable material in the middle of a city was a bad idea? Yes. I don't claim to be a prophet, but it's hard for me to see why anyone wouldn't think that would be a bad idea.

That's probably how it's done in your nearest port, as well as anywhere else. With actual storage and fire safety procedures (hopefully) better followed.

Same reason you have ammunition depots in the military and not mixed storage of your howitzer shells with MREs and socks. Partitioning hazardous stuff into dedicated holds with heightened access and fire security is how it's done everywhere.

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#183

Post by rendall »

speedgoose wrote: post #140
colordrops wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump is saying that military intelligence indicates that it's a bomb: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tPvH-CqH7Q8 Edit: why am I being downvoted. I am not agreeing with him or saying he is right. Just stating what was said. It seems noteworthy that the president of the US commented on it regardless of accuracy or trustworthiness.

Unverified and likely false information (fake news) is downvoted. If you question the accuracy of the information it's better, still not good, but you didn't before your edit.

It is literally true that Trump said it was a military attack, as OP stated. This is verifiable.

That Trump's statement is false and dangerously irresponsible is not OP's fault.

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#184

Post by rendall »

colordrops wrote: post #118
p1necone wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump is not a reliable source for anything. He lies/misleads more than he tells the truth whenever he's talking about something verifiable as far as I can tell.

I agree with you, just thought his statement was related and noteworthy.

Agreed. Your downvoters were categorically confused.

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#185

Post by famouslastwords »

new2628 wrote: post #104
082349872349872 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you recommend using for fertiliser in its place? (I'm sure someone's thought about this idea before. Timothy McVeigh did his mad bombing with typical rural materiel. Not so fun fact: the VBIED predates the internal combustion engine.)

> What do you recommend using for fertiliser in its place? Horse manure :)

> What do you recommend using for fertiliser in its place?

> Horse manure :)

I surely don't want to be around when 2,750 tons of horse manure detonate :D

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#186

Post by nitred »

supernova87a wrote: post #109

The amount of material must have been ridiculous to store in such a place. The blast is staggering in size, almost like the Tianjin explosion a few years ago. Collected videos: Angle #1 https://streamable.com/xmmoa7 Angle #2 https://streamable.com/nscx9m Angle #3 https://streamable.com/zbjj5f Angle #4 https://streamable.com/saoafz Angle #5 https://streamable.com/4ga1vb Angle #6 https://streamable.com/lmivb2 Angle #7…

In Angle #6, did that crack in the roof occur in real time due to the explosion or does it just seem that way due to low resolution of the camera? If that crack was due to the explosion, then I'm concerned for much of the infrastructure which is within a 3 KM radius around the explosion.

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#187

Post by beowulfey »

TooSmugToFail wrote: post #175
ashtonkem wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could tell it wasn’t a military explosive by the noise. Military explosives tend to be of the high speed type, and tend to make a sharper snap. This looked and sounded more like what you’d see in mining, which is pretty close since ANFO (made with ammonium nitrate) is indeed a mining explosive.

But what about the regular shape of the blast? Looking at the videos of Tianjin disaster, there are multiple large explosions, each with a massive fireball, highly irregular, fiery projectiles flying everywhere etc. The massive blast in Beirut was a singular event, with no preceding or subsequent blasts of similar magnitude. As if the ignition of the material was very efficient.

How many blasts from fire have you seen? How many blasts of AmNH4? If it’s more than 3, you may be able to form a trend of what to expect.

But wait—-are you controlling all variables? Is every characteristic identical? Were they all open warehouses? The same amount of fuel? The same air humidity level?

My point is, there’s no way to know what a characteristic explosion should look like, unless you are an explosives expert with hundreds of prior experiences.

Also, I’d recommend taking the time to learn Bayes theorem. It’s currently also on the front page.

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#188

Post by Sharlin »

regularfry wrote: post #135
raducu wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it also used as a cost effective explosive in some places? I mean, perhaps thats the reason it was not made inert when it was fabricated in Ukraine. It was on the Lebanese authorities to properly store or dispose of it after they seized the shipping.

It's mixed with diesel and used as a quarrying explosive.

Not to mention as a historically popular homebrew explosive for less than legal uses.

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#189

Post by goodcanadian »

fuzzfactor wrote: post #124
nodesocket wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to imagine, but that would mean this explosion was nearly 3.5x larger than 2015 Tianjin[1] which was 800 tonnes of ammonium nitrate (336 tons TNT equivalent). The video[2] from Tianjin looked way bigger and apocalyptic, but perhaps just because of the the fireball. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Tianjin_explosions [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONsmJAyFAAw

2000 tonnes is a lot. Two ships loading ammonium nitrate, the Grandcamp and the High Flyer, detonated in Texas City back in 1947. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_City_disaster It says there was a 15 ft wave out into the Gulf of Mexico that lasted for almost 100 miles. And Texas City is not actually on the Gulf Coast, it is on Galveston Bay about a half hour away from the Gulf shore. And there is only a relatively…

As long as we are bringing up historical explosions, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halifax_Explosion in 1917.

Re: Order of magnitude estimate of Beirut explosion at 3 kilotons of TNT

#190

Post by Chris2048 »

varjag wrote: post #147
codebolt wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was also fireworks going of just before the blast. Storing 2750 tons of AN next to a fireworks cache seems cartoonishly stupid. https://twitter.com/ConflictsW/status/1290681902781861888?s=...

If prior to the explosion you were told that all dangerous cargo is stored in dangerous cargo area of the port, would you've thought it is stupid?

I'd expect the "dangerous cargo area" to be a specialised, and somewhat more highly scrutinised area of the port.
Post reply on HN