Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz
Wow, talk about jaw dropping stupidity:
Until last month, safety advocates’ chief worry was spills in derailments. After tanker cars blew up July 6 on a train in Quebec, investigators in Canada are considering whether the composition of the crude, which normally doesn’t explode, may have played a role in the accident that killed 47 people. The oil was from North Dakota’s Bakken shale
Now I'm no doctor, but having spent my entire career in the oil/gas industry, I can assure you that yes, in fact, crude oil does explode. If it didn't it wouldn't really be of much use to us.
|
In most cases, if you have a container of crude oil it will certainly start on fire and burn quite vigorously but most wouldn't call it an explosion. If you took that same container, filled it with propane and lit it on fire an explosion you will most definitely get. In order to make crude oil "explode" you'd have to light a fine mist of the stuff (think fire eaters...light a bit of alcohol on fire in a shot glass for some party fun vs blowing a mist of alcohol into the flame for real party fun). Or have a significant amount of material in the vapor phase through heating in a confined or poorly ventilated space You could also have a closed system that pressurizes due to heat which ruptures, thus producing said fine mist and explodes (something a rail car might do in a fire situation). Not arguing that it was or wasn't the case but typically crude oil doesn't "explode". Flammable yes but not explosively so unless certain atypical conditions are met (a train wreck could meet said conditions I imagine). That doesn't get into Lower and upper flammability limits, burn rates, flame propogation which are also (I believe) taken into account when moving most everything.