At the weekend I filled up my car at the filling station. As I went in to pay I observed a group of women stood around outside gabbling in some foreign tongue, some on mobile phones.
As I got back in my car the group started to walk towards the coned off area where a fuel truck was filling the storage tanks. The poor driver was shouting his head off at these women who blatantly ignored the area covered in cones, hoses and uncovered manholes. He repeatedly shouted at them to switch off their phones but I'm guessing English wasn't their first language, especially expletive filled estuary Anglo-Saxon. I thought the bloke was going to physically wrestle the phones of them and he cursed like a docker as the group just waltzed past with no sense of danger.
But it got me thinking...has there ever been a case of an explosion cause by a mobile phone and by what mechanism could this happen?
I suppose the worst case scenario is one of the daft women could have caused a massive explosion in which case I wouldn't be on this website any more. Or they could have simply tripped or stumbled over the fuel hoses and sued some poor whatsits backside for negligence.
|
>> But it got me thinking...has there ever been a case of an explosion cause by
>> a mobile phone and by what mechanism could this happen?
No, but whatever you do, don't wear a nylon jumper.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=tuZxFL9cGkI
|
Extensively tested by Mythbusters, twice. Can't be done. No danger.
But there is danger from the static caused by getting in and out of the car, yes, so perhaps Mr Sweary would be better yelling at, well, everyone really.
Last edited by: Crankcase on Mon 17 Feb 14 at 20:47
|
I have had cars that charged me with static and sometimes there would be a spark between my hand and the door, which could sting and make me jump. I have usually worn rubber soled shoes which didn't spark. Just as well because petrol vapour is heavier than air and tends to lie along the ground. It might be a bad idea to do country dancing in hobnailed boots on the forecourt when the fuel truck is connected up, but actually the seal is usually quite good.
If you don't smell a very strong smell of petrol there won't be a kaboom. They're very, very rare.
|
I heard that the only possible way for a mobile to create a spark that could ignite fuel is if it was dropped and the battery detached from the phone.
So it's not exactly likely that (a) that will happen, and (b) the aforementioned one-off spark happens right next to some petrol fumes.
|
>> right next to some petrol fumes.
Not next to them, in them. And they will have to be just the right mixture to 'catch' the spark. If it's too rich a small spark - and your finger or a mobile won't make a big one - won't ignite it. An accidental forecourt explosion is very, very rare.
|
>> I heard that the only possible way for a mobile to create a spark that
>> could ignite fuel is if it was dropped and the battery detached from the phone.
The aforementioned Mythbusters did all that too, down to setting up and firing a spark repeatedly in the vapour. Still wouldn't ignite.
They had to force it way beyond any real situation before it would ignite, as I recall. It's probably on youtube if anyone cares.
|
One real issue with mobile phone usage is distraction. Filling the tank and chatting on a phone at the same time is foolish.
|
>>Extensively tested by Mythbusters, twice. Can't be done. No danger.
I know a Chemical Engineer who has a work-provided mobile phone that is specifically made to be suitable for use in petrol stations (or on his plant).
Not saying you're not right, Crankcase, just...
|
|
Oh, I don't hold out to be right or wrong. I almost never do. I'm just saying that a couple of popular tv presenters had a go and it appeared by the magic of editing to be a conclusion you could believe. But I'm more than happy to believe another more creditable source, as long as it's not just of the "I heard that" variety.
|
Mythbusters Cell Phone Destroys Gas Station
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABfIcmIjD0U
(haven't watched it)
|
Part two of that show is here, and the conclusion is at about minute 5:50 on.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdAKqogebPM
I note the video is reversed, which I imagine is do to with getting past Youtube copyright detection, so it might not be there long.
|
The loss of the Hindenburg has been attributed to a spark from static electricity.
The risk from mobile phones is undoubtedly small but why take any risk you don't have to if there is no downside? The right to chat about your love life or what you are having for dinner whilst refuelling your car is surely not an inalienable human right and the banning of their use at petrol stations doesn't therefore pose any problems.
|
>> The risk from mobile phones is undoubtedly small but why take any risk you don't
>> have to if there is no downside? The right to chat about your love life
>> or what you are having for dinner whilst refuelling your car is surely not an
>> inalienable human right and the banning of their use at petrol stations doesn't therefore pose
>> any problems.
Exactly right. A risk, albeit theoretical, has been identified. Do you wait and see if one day the holes in the cheese line up and theory becomes fact or do you impose a proportionate control measure?
|
>> The loss of the Hindenburg has been attributed to a spark from static electricity.
And the heavily doped silk covering, rather than the hydrogen it contained. Burned incredibly fast... the film of the Hindenburg crash, slowed down, is amazing.
|
|
Amazing too that only 35 of the 97 on board actually died. I suppose most of the fire went upwards.
|
"uncovered manholes"
Quite a hazard, if yakking on the phone while walking about!
I think the risks from phones are overstated (also in hospitals, which have pagers, wifi and mobiles all over the place, but somehow only patients' phones present a hazard).
I expect the driver just wanted members of the public out of the way while he got on with his job - petrol vapour is heavy and can also suffocate in the right (wrong!) circumstances.
|
The driver has strict procedures and a duty to ensure safety at all times.
The women breached that, whats the guy to do?
|
When I was enjoying the hospitality of the cardiac unit nobody seemed to bother about patients using mobiles.
I expect they realised that it took a lot of pressure off the nurses having to field calls from relatives and relieve stress for the patients trying to re-assure family.
Getting hold of SWM 24/7 was a big bonus in ordering stuff to be brought in on the next visit !
HO
|
|
I trust she bought decent food in. The Sheeite they serve up here in North Devon I wouldn't give to my dawgs.
|
The scran was surprisingly acceptable, Martin. Perhaps they serve better stuff when you're facing the grim reaper.
Give the rubbish to all the non life-threatening cases !
HO
|
|
Is it not something called Corona discharge? Seriously.
|
|
I thought that was cigar smoke.
|
Kaboom! Possibly? - Zero
