Death Toll In California Dangerous Natural Gas Explosion Limited to Four People.

[NNadir]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/10/california.fire/index.html?hpt=T1">California fire scene: 'Like a moonscape'

San Bruno, California (CNN) -- Firefighters have fully contained a massive gas-fueled blaze in California that killed four people, while search efforts and attempts to determine the cause of the fire were still under way on Friday.

The fire triggered by a ruptured natural gas transmission line sent giant fireballs shooting 80 feet into the air in a quiet neighborhood of San Bruno, near the San Francisco airport.

"It looks like a moonscape in some areas," said San Bruno Fire Chief Dennis Haag, who was visibly shaken at a news conference.

Scorched homes and the shells of burned-out cars lined charred streets as firefighters battled hot spots and residents clamored to know the cause of their town's devastation. By Friday afternoon, the fire was reported to be fully contained.

California Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado said he was shocked by the "horrible tragedy..."

California's dependence on dangerous natural gas electricity has made it the fastest growing form of electrical energy generation in California:

http://www.energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity/electricity_generation.html">California Electrical Generation Profile.

Predictably this, um, explosive growth has been accompanied by lots of horseshit about so called "renewable" energy, which, with the exception of hydroelectric is not now, nor ever has been a significant producer of energy in California.

Notably the gas dependent wind industry actually produced less energy in 2009 than it did in 2007 and was trivial compared to gas and in fact, trivial compared to all major forms of energy production in California.

The solar industry in California was clearly a joke, just as it is on the rest of the planet.

The largest single source of climate change gas free electricity in California as of 2009 was nuclear energy, followed closely by hydroelectricity.

There is no word on whether even a single drop of water in the Colorado River flowed across the Mexican border in 2009.

Have a nice evening.

[tabatha]

1. gas energy has been around for decades

surely "natural gas electricity" means that electricity generated from natural gas is distributed to houses as electricity, not gas

and the pipe that blew is very, very old.

[NNadir]

3. I don't know what kind of service this line provided. It may be residential but...

a few years back when a dangerous natural gas line blew up in a residential area, it served powerplants and residential needs.

The largest dangerous natural gas plant in California is the plant at Morro Bay, which dumps millions of metric tons of dangerous fossil fuel waste into its favorite waste dump, the planet's atmosphere each year.

I don't know where the gas lines for this plant are located.

In any case, they are speaking of adding dangerous fossil gas terminals in SF Bay, showing once and for all that California has no intention of phasing out dangerous fossil fuels, no matter how many people they kill.

That's is obvious.

[Possumpoint]

2. Be Scared, Very Scared

There are Natural Gas Transmission lines feeding the Northeastern States that carry 1100psig during winter heating season. These pipes originate in the Gulf states. Some of these pipes may be as much as 60 or more years old. One ruptured in Fauquier County, Virginia in the early 70's. Flames went up for thousands of feet and the smoke plume reached 40,000 feet. It dug itself a trench over a thousand feet long. The only causality was one cow. In Fairfax County, Virginia, subdivisions are now built adjacent and very close to these lines. This situation is probably duplicated up and down the heavily populated areas in the mid Atlantic and Northeastern States.I wonder if those residents are fully aware of what lies underground near them.

Approximately 15 years ago a petroleum line ruptured near the Potomac River spilling hundreds of thousands of gallons of Kerosene into it. The cause of that break was an improper weld done during the installation of the line compounded by improper bedding of the pipe during installation many years prior.

Do you know what lies underground near your home?

[jpak]

4. LOLOLOLOLOL!!!111

Same old kookoo nonsense for the last 8 years....

:rofl:

[NNadir]

5. Same old lack of comprehension of numbers.

If one can comprehend numbers, it is perfectly clear that California's electricity production is rather like that vast natural gas waste dump in, um, Maine, where in the percentage terms favored by anti-nukes, renewables declined from 1998-2008 from 32.2% in 1998, to 23.7%.

Meanwhile dangerous natural gas use for power generation climbed in the same period from essentially zero percent, to 43.8%.

Heckuva job.

As a disaster manager, the anti-nukes all look like Arabian Horse Show Horseshit shovelers.

The amusing thing is that all the anti-nuke gas spoiled children come here from time to time to pretend that they give a shit about climate change.

Not. One. Of. Them. Gives. A. Rat's. Ass.

The innumeracy is a big indicator.

Have a nice dangerous fossil fuel dumping day:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/st_profiles/sept05me.xls">Maine's Electricity Generation Profile By Energy Source.

[kristopher]

6. A lack of comprehension of numbers is what plagues your diatribes

(edited for copyright purposes-proud patriot Moderator Democratic Underground)

Jacobson's analysis is unambiguous. Yes, it is crystal clear AND it is based on the best numbers available in the academic community. The conclusion - nuclear is a third rate solution to our climate change and energy security needs.

Abstract here: http://www.rsc.org/publishing/journals/EE/article.asp?doi=b809990c

Full article for download here: http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/revsolglobwarmairpol.htm


Energy Environ. Sci., 2009, 2, 148 - 173, DOI: 10.1039/b809990c

Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security

Mark Z. Jacobson

Abstract
This paper reviews and ranks major proposed energy-related solutions to global warming, air pollution mortality, and energy security while considering other impacts of the proposed solutions, such as on water supply, land use, wildlife, resource availability, thermal pollution, water chemical pollution, nuclear proliferation, and undernutrition.

Nine electric power sources and two liquid fuel options are considered. The electricity sources include solar-photovoltaics (PV), concentrated solar power (CSP), wind, geothermal, hydroelectric, wave, tidal, nuclear, and coal with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. The liquid fuel options include corn-ethanol (E85) and cellulosic-E85. To place the electric and liquid fuel sources on an equal footing, we examine their comparative abilities to address the problems mentioned by powering new-technology vehicles, including battery-electric vehicles (BEVs), hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (HFCVs), and flex-fuel vehicles run on E85.

Twelve combinations of energy source-vehicle type are considered. Upon ranking and weighting each combination with respect to each of 11 impact categories, four clear divisions of ranking, or tiers, emerge.

Tier 1 (highest-ranked) includes wind-BEVs and wind-HFCVs.
Tier 2 includes CSP-BEVs, geothermal-BEVs, PV-BEVs, tidal-BEVs, and wave-BEVs.
Tier 3 includes hydro-BEVs, nuclear-BEVs, and CCS-BEVs.
Tier 4 includes corn- and cellulosic-E85.

Wind-BEVs ranked first in seven out of 11 categories, including the two most important, mortality and climate damage reduction. Although HFCVs are much less efficient than BEVs, wind-HFCVs are still very clean and were ranked second among all combinations.

[OnlinePoker]

7. Do you have to keep trotting out this same article every fucking time?

For Christ's sake, develop some of your own thoughts rather than parroting others all the time. Nads is just as bad, but you put this thing in post after post (sometimes multiple times in the same thread) and it is bloody annoying!

[DrGregory]

8. It's a matter of perspective

For Christ's sake, develop some of your own thoughts rather than parroting others all the time. Nads is just as bad, but you put this thing in post after post (sometimes multiple times in the same thread) and it is bloody annoying!
============================

Look at it from his point of view. When you have ONLY ONE
guy that agrees with you - what else can you do but quote
the same thing OVER and OVER and OVER.....

Dr. Greg

[kristopher]

11. Yes, I do.

This study summarizes and tallies the various technologies that are ready and available to address our climate change, energy security and air pollution mortality issues. With the exception of costs, it covers the entire gamut of considerations that go into the decision about the future energy supply. There is cadre of nuclear supporters that are dedicated to the spread of false information and they are prolific posters trying to drown out the facts by the sheer volume of falsehoods. In the normal world when a person is shown to be wrong there is a social network that acts to shame them if they persist in promoting those false statements. Here it doesn't work that way and the same falsehoods are repeated endlessly in an effort to inflate the cost of responding to the point where no one not on a payroll can keep up.

They are exploiting what is called "the time value of information" in order to turn a liberal message board into a tool for promoting the right wing agenda of a massive build=up of nuclear power. The Jacobson study is a peer reviewed, rock solid study and is drawn from the best data available on the subject. It address nearly all of their repeated specious claims with all references provided. There is absolutely no reason for me to spend an inordinate amount of time rewriting in an inferior fashion what has already been done. That simply plays into their hands by dramatically escalating the time costs to me and the truth.

There is an ignore button that is available for your use, but I'd recommend you download and carefully read Jacobson's full paper.

[Dead_Parrot]

12. "What has already been done."

Where? Back in '08, when you first posted this, we asked why the delay costs for tidal wind, PV and CSV were identical (and as Josh pointed out, largely uncited and ass-pulled); why there was no range of values for those technologies; why wind industry figures were used (let's face it, Cape wind is taking a little while but only if you look); and why nuclear power = proliferation = nuclear war even when you are talking about countries that already have hundreds of warheads.

You've never answered these criticisms, and I suspect the Earth will be swallowed by the sun before you do.

Hey ho. Here's a picture of an exploding nuclear plant:

Just to make the point that I can produce more original content with 60 seconds and box of crayons than you can in two years.
:hi:

[kristopher]

13. Your criticisms are shallow and meaningless.

Jacobson's paper is very well regarded by the scientific community. The most substantial critique to date (written by someone at the Nuclear Energy Institute) included your wish to reject the link between nuclear power and nuclear proliferation, however that critique COULD NOT MAKE IT THROUGH PEER REVIEW and was rejected out of hand by the journal.

And speaking of the journal, that is another point of attack by the peanut gallery of nuclear promoters we have here at DU. It has been derided in every fashion imaginable, but the fact of the matter is that the journal Energy & Environmental Science is a "new journal linking all aspects of the chemical sciences relating to energy conversion and storage, alternative fuel technologies and environmental science" and it is a product of the Royal Society of Chemistry, which is as solid as they come.

[Dead_Parrot]

14. A simple "Nowhere" would have sufficed

But ahh, then we would have missed out on the indignant appeal to authority. A veritable masterclass that leaves us all enriched.

[joshcryer]

9. Um, I don't think this is funny.

Disgraceful.

[joshcryer]

10. Apparently one of the first confirmed deaths was a utilities worker who specialized in safety...

...her daughter died with her. Found her Facebook. Beautiful lady, such a tragic story.

[Dogmudgeon]

15. SEVEN -- as of Sunday morning

That takes it above the death toll in the Kleen Energy disaster in Connecticut earlier this year.

This is getting to be a regular thing.

--d!