Talk:2007 New York City steam explosion: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 18:16, 17 January 2024

This article was nominated for deletion on 20 March 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

New York City Mid‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Photos

There were 6 similar long-distance shots of the steam cloud from Flickr, of which I chose and uploaded 3. Which one do you think is best?

NYC steam explosion.jpg
NYC steam explosion 2.jpg
NYC steam explosion 3.jpg

The original 6 on Flickr are: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. -- BlastOButter42 ^See Hear _Speak 12:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a bunch of photos under CC-BY-SA-2.0 here: [7]. I've uploaded one at Image:NYC steam explosion 2007 people debris.jpg and will add it to the article. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 12:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move to New York steam pipe explosion?

The Steam didn't explode, the pipe did. AceKingQueenJack 18:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is unnecessary qualification. The explosion was caused by the steam escaping suddenly from the pipe. The pipe did not explode either. Technically it was not an explosion, because the blast wave was not supersonic. But explosion was the term used by RS, so that is how it is known now. There was a similar issue with TWA 800. Dhaluza 22:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Background

Hi - I'm a relatively new Wiki user, and don't know the procedures for editing a page. I thought I'd pass on a link about the Con Ed Steam System regulatory overview. The Consolidated Edison Company of New York (http://www.coned.com) owns the Steam Business Unit (http://www.coned.com/steam/). (Or maybe they're technically called "Con Edison steam operations", I'm not sure.) The NY Public Service Commission (http://www.dps.state.ny.us/) regulates rates and revenues of the Steam Busniess Unit in the same general way that it regulates New York State's electric, gas and other utilities.

The most recent rate plan was adopted by the Commission and became effective September 22, 2006, in Case 05-S-1376 (Proceeding on Motion of the Commission as to the Rates, Charges, Rules and Regulations of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. for Steam Service.) That Order is available at http://www3.dps.state.ny.us/pscweb/WebFileRoom.nsf/Web/55664328E5E50A53852571EE0054B5ED/$File/301A_05S1376.pdf?OpenElement

Also note: In a press release, "Con Edison is urging all customers in the East Midtown area of Manhattan to discontinue their use of non-essential electrical appliances and equipment until problems on electrical cables can be resolved following yesterday’s steam-main rupture." See http://www.coned.com/messages/pr20070719_2.asp

Last, a decent overview of the Steam system is at http://www.coned.com/steam/pdf/Steam_ops_overview.pdf

Energy4U 13:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know what pressure this steam pipe was at? And was ConEd able to isolate the line after the explosion? Are there any automatic safety systems to isolate the line on low pressure signals? It seems like this is not the case given the long duration of steam release, unless the steam is at an exceptionally high pressure.

Rukky 15:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since this info has broader implications than just this incident, I think this should go into a new article, perhaps Manhattan steam network or ConEd steam network or ConEd steam operations. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 16:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I see someone started New York steam system. I'll make these links redirects to that. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 16:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This part of the explanation under 'Cause' seems to be incorrect:

"Water hammer is a phenomenon that occurs when cold water enters a steam pipe, causing the steam inside to condense into liquid water, increasing the pressure, and thus causing the pipe to burst..."

Converting water to steam increases the pressure. Steam condensing back to water should REDUCE the pressure. PV=nRT and all that.

Water hammer is when a mass of moving water is suddenly stopped (typically by a closing valve) and the pressure spikes. I'm not sure if compressible steam is capable of hammering the same way that incompressible water can hammer.

165.154.46.175 02:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Water Hammer: good point, that does look incorrect. I had understood that the mass of water causes more condensation (becasue it's already colder than steam), gets pushed along by steam pressure that builds up behind it, picks up velocity, then crashes into a valve or bend in the pipe with enough force to cause a sudden rupture. The steam mains are supposed to carry (I think I recall) 125 pounds of pressure or so, which is quite a lot but I wouldn't say "exceptional". I believe the steam keeps flowing until it's manually shut off, so from a pipe of the diameter that ruptured there's plenty of volume coming down the pipe to expand in a cloud above the street. Energy4U

Death by heart attack

Trying not to sound callous; should the death be attributed to the explosion? It was a heart attack, possibly brought about by poor health and panic. Isn't it speculation to attribute it directly to the incident? --Monotonehell 05:09, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, all other news sources do, including the New York Times. -- BlastOButter42 ^See Hear _Speak 23:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since I placed the above question the article has been edited and now doesn't outright attribute her death directly to the accident. The previous version was what I had a problem with. The current version is okay. --Monotonehell 13:54, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What Happened to the Cop?

The New York City Fire Department gave the event a five-alarm response, sending more than 200 firefighters from 40 units, three of whom sustained injuries, along with one police officer.

Does that mean one police officer was sent, or one police officer was injured? Whoever wrote that (or knows the answer), please fix it.

Water Hammer

Try looking at the Spirax Sarco Website they describe water hammer correctly.

I agree, but verification should be in order here. Either water hammer or the phenomenon described in the article (water contact/steam condensation) could have caused a rupture, but it would be unusual for both to occur at the same time. I think it was one or the other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.66.101.126 (talk) 21:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Respirators/Frozen Area

"However, anyone entering the containment zone was still required to wear a respirator and protective clothing during the clean-up."

I went into the frozen area without a mask (after going through a police checkpoint). A lot of the police, etc wore masks, but not everyone was required to. I know this is original research, so I'm not editing the page. But, the statement is also not supported by the sources given. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.188.199.11 (talk) 20:03, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deadlinks

Reference 21, used 4 times, does no longer exist. The disadvantage of using newspaper articles as references. Adacus12 (talk) 00:59, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]