# Red cloud of death :)



## patnor1011 (Jun 11, 2010)

not great quality and probably not sound. what basically happened is that truck from slovenia was traveling to poland. in slovakia somebody spotted that nitric (70%) is leaking and fuming from truck cargo hold. truck was stopped and then all hell broke loose. steel tank was 70 degrees celsia. they were not able to stop that so all went off...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h09t7kg3Uk[/youtube]


----------



## Irons (Jun 12, 2010)

Either the tanker wasn't compatible with Nitric or the Nitric was contaminated with something that attacked the tank walls.

What a waste of Nitric.


----------



## patnor1011 (Jun 12, 2010)

correct irons.
little update: tank was not suitable for acid. he did few hundred km and stopped for lunch break. people around told him about fumes coming from top of tank. somebody called fire brigade and cops. they asked him what is inside he replied I dont know 

couple thousands liters of acid either fumed out or flowed into river. funny thing is that local fire brigade boss told that they stopped leaking but leakage actually stopped when tank was empty.  poor fish in that river. that happened 20 km from my place of birth.


----------



## goldsilverpro (Jun 12, 2010)

The tank doesn't seem to have been properly made of stainless. Looks like mild steel to me.


----------



## patnor1011 (Jun 12, 2010)

yes GSP, no stainless just some type of steel or iron thats why red fumes..... 23ton of nitric. that is more than enough for any refinery...


----------



## goldsilverpro (Jun 12, 2010)

Looks like they sprayed water on it. That would dilute it and really increase the attack on the steel tank.


----------



## patnor1011 (Jun 12, 2010)

yes. it started fuming from top opening. acid was already attacking all tank and when they noticed that temperatire of tank is increasing to 70 degrees celsia they started cooling that with water. there was small hole on side but when they started with water that opening just started to grow... dont blame poor firebrigade for that decision as that part of country is rural area and they were not sure as to what is inside tank. only later some chemists and special army personnel come to deal with that...


----------



## goldsilverpro (Jun 12, 2010)

That middle picture looks like the outside of a few refineries that I have seen.


----------



## Noxx (Jun 12, 2010)

> That middle picture looks like the outside of a few refineries that I have seen.



:shock: Is that legal ? I guess it isn't anymore...


----------



## Palladium (Jun 13, 2010)

goldsilverpro said:


> That middle picture looks like the outside of a few refineries that I have seen.



I was thinking the same thing Chris, except for me it would be visible smoke from the stack of one of my aluminum sweet furnaces. I use to smoke up the whole valley when the weather was just right and it would just lay to the ground like a fog of death. There wasn't a skeeter within 50 miles. Those was the good old days before global warming and al gore. ROTFL


----------



## lazersteve (Jun 13, 2010)

It seems odd to me that they did not bring in a second truck and pump the acid out before it all went into the environment?

In reality the physical law of conservation tells us that the components of the nitric have always been here, now they are returning back to where they came from. Everything is a vicious cycle. It's really terrible that it all was released in one shot on the town.

Steve


----------



## EDI Refining (Jun 13, 2010)

Oil in the gulf of mexico.
23t of nitric into a river.
escrap waste in asia/africa.

our poor earth, our poor future generations.


----------



## lazersteve (Jun 13, 2010)

P3M said:


> Oil in the gulf of mexico.
> 23t of nitric into a river.
> escrap waste in asia/africa.
> 
> our poor earth, our poor future generations.



P3M,

I live in the Florida panhandle and we are beginning to get some of the oil on our beaches as of last week. The oil on the beach is not a pretty sight. The environment produced the oil that is now on the beach, it's just in a location where we can readily see it. In my opinion, as far as the earth is concerned the oil has merely been relocated by man.

Granted the impact on man and his way of life will be important to him, but I don't think the earth will suffer in the long run from the oil. It started out underground and now it's above ground. I feel the earth is perfectly capable of dealing with it, no matter where it is at. In the grand scheme of things the oil was manufactured by the earth and is a natural product.

Long after we are gone the earth will have cleaned up all of our messes. You give man too much credit in his ability to alter the progress of nature. In reality we are but a tiny speck in the cosmos and it would be foolhardy to think we are so important as to be able to alter the workings of the earth which have been working as designed through thick and thin for billions of years.

I love nature and animals as much as the next guy, but I a have a much broader perspective on the environmental issue. The earth may go through a cycle of cleansing to undo what man has done, but man will be the true victim of his actions. For this reason, man should be responsible in all of his actions as he will be the one who ultimately pays the price for what he has done.

Since the dawn of mankind we have been protecting ourselves from the environment, not the other way around. We know there is global warming on Venus, yet there are no people on Venus as far as we know.

The real impact of our actions will be realized by our children. 

Sorry for the rant.

Steve


----------



## qst42know (Jun 13, 2010)

lazersteve said:


> It seems odd to me that they did not bring in a second truck and pump the acid out before it all went into the environment?
> Steve



The driver not knowing what was inside may have delayed and prevented the transfer. 

I hope this incident results in severe punishment for the guilty parties.


----------



## glorycloud (Jun 13, 2010)

Steve you are a man who thinks and not just refines. 8)


----------



## Anonymous (Jun 13, 2010)

qst42know said:


> lazersteve said:
> 
> 
> > It seems odd to me that they did not bring in a second truck and pump the acid out before it all went into the environment?
> ...



I don't believe for a moment that the driver was unaware of the contents of the tanker, according to law he would have to have had read the manifest then displayed the appropriate DOT Safety card identifying the type of hazardous goods he was carrying.

The display cards on the cargo are for the very reasons that the Hazmat and Fire Dept people are able to identify the classification of the contents and use the proper retardants and or any other safety equipment that will not react with the contents.

Those DOT placards are a universal language, the trucker should have displayed Oxidizer.

Full list of placards http://ian-albert.com/misc/hazmat.php


----------



## patnor1011 (Jun 13, 2010)

Yes Gustavus. In any other country maybe. In Europe it is a known fact that hauling companies hire drivers form underdeveloped countries as they are paid way less than local man. Then of course they can blame them or agencies. That driver did not know what is inside and there are more suspects like croatian and polish manufacturer and receiver and haulage company. It is going on everywhere not only in EU that things looks good on paper but reality looks different like cutting corners, taking their chances, outsorcing, cutting costs...


----------



## qst42know (Jun 13, 2010)

I have a vague understanding of North American DOT regulations, however one would hope they have something simillar in Slovenia where this incident occured.

I would believe the trucker knew he was breaking some law, his denying knowledge of the contents only confusing the issue. Leaving a difficult choice for the authorities. After all what do you pump an unknown chemical with, and into? I would expect the reaction once begun proceeded quite rapidly with little time to make alternate arrangements.

I would hope the ultimate responsibility for loading a steel tank truck with nitric acid belongs with the company that filled it.


----------



## Anonymous (Jun 13, 2010)

patnor1011 said:


> Yes Gustavus. In any other country maybe. In Europe it is a known fact that hauling companies hire drivers form underdeveloped countries as they are paid way less than local man. Then of course they can blame them or agencies. That driver did not know what is inside and there are more suspects like croatian and polish manufacturer and receiver and haulage company. It is going on everywhere not only in EU that things looks good on paper but reality looks different like cutting corners, taking their chances, outsorcing, cutting costs...



UK trucks carting hazardous goods must display orange license plates front and rear, they must also display Haz Card

European Haz Cards http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/CategoryIN_4844-2_warning_signs_(vector_drawings)


----------



## goldsilverpro (Jun 13, 2010)

This didn't happen in the UK. It happened in Eastern Europe.

In the 70s, during the interim when the EPA, OSHA, etc started gaining real power, I can remember several hauling accidents where the driver really had no idea what he was hauling. I can easily see this happening today in countries where the law is more lax. And, even if there are similar laws in Slovenia and Poland, that doesn't mean that companies don't try to cut costs. Maybe the company had done this before and got away with it - SS tanks are very, very expensive. Maybe there were chlorides in the last batch hauled and they didn't clean it out. It's easy for me to believe that this driver didn't know what he was hauling. If he had any training at all, he surely wouldn't be carrying nitric in a mild steel tank. I'm sure that the company he was hauling for told him everything was rosy and he accepted that. The man's got to make a living. He probably didn't (He does now!) know nitric from apple butter. I'm just glad he didn't get hurt.


----------



## butcher (Jun 13, 2010)

give that river some time and the crops from its soil will grow some very large vegitables.


----------



## Palladium (Jun 14, 2010)

lazersteve said:


> P3M said:
> 
> 
> > Oil in the gulf of mexico.
> ...




I must say Steve you have my admiration 110%


----------



## glondor (Apr 7, 2011)

Steve. I have to say I agree with your view on our impact on our planet. 1 large volcanic eruption can do more damage than man has done in hundreds of years. Swamps produce massive amounts of methane. A thousand years ago the great plains of the world were home to hundreds of millions of grass eaters, bison buffalo caribou deer elk reindeer and on and on, many different species across the globe. They passed millions of tons of greenhouse gases each year. The Sahara desert used to be a lush tropical place. Where I live used to be under 7000 feet of ice. The planet does what the planet does, and will continue to do so with or with out us.


----------



## Barren Realms 007 (Apr 7, 2011)

If things keep going the way they are in Japan it will change the life cycle of the earth.. Nuclear exposions and changing the rotational axis of the earth.


----------



## Claudie (Apr 8, 2011)

I don't think the real concern should be what we are doing to the planet, but instead, what we are doing to mankind.... :|


----------



## Harold_V (Apr 8, 2011)

Claudie said:


> I don't think the real concern should be what we are doing to the planet, but instead, what we are doing to mankind.... :|


Exactly. The planet will go on, regardless of our antics. 

Harold


----------



## Remuck (Apr 9, 2011)

Regarding lazersteve's poignant remarks about "man's impact" and the Earth's ability to tend to her own wounds, I couldn't agree more. Don't get me wrong, ever since I was "called on the carpet" for littering when I was about seven, I've been a stern advocate of the principles of "leave the place cleaner than you found it"; however, our --- let's say "the" planet --- will endure man's short tenure.

Take WWll into consideration. ALL ships, laden with fuel oil and contaminents of every sort, were targets and to sink a carrier or a cruiser was considered a great days work. But, TANKERS, full of fuel and crude, were considered primary targets. Before the U.S. got smart and implemented blackouts on the eastern seaboard, thus not profiling the merchantmen against city lights, folk on the beach were "entertained" by the pyrotechnics provided by inumerable burning tankers which were victims of German Submarines. Walk the beaches and try to find traces of the millions of barrels that were spilled as a result, you won't find any.

Japanese tankers were also prime targets of American subs and aircraft in the South Pacific. Again, millions of barrels of fuel and oil were spilled, but the beaches on the countless islands and atolls in the tropics are yet pristine. Believe it or not, in heavy seas, it was a common practice for larger ships to disgorge vast quantities of fuel oil to smooth the way for smaller or crippled ships in their wakes. 

Sans the odd rusting field gun, tank, or sunken ship, one would be hard pressed to find any other trace of the ecological carnage wreaked upon the Good Earth by the hand of man during that hellish chapter.

This is not to say that it is not incumbent upon each of us as individuals to conduct ourselves and dispose of our wastes in as resposible a fashion as is humanly possible, it is simply my way of saying that we, as a species, tend to overstate our impact and importance in the overall scheme of things.

Enjoy your ride on this cosmic bus that we are riding on, but do try to avoid adhering your spent chewing gum on the bottom of your seat --- not for the sake of saving the bus, but for the sake of common decency.

Now that I have opined, I'm going to get back to the the task at hand ---- figuring out how to get that darned Au out of that dirt!!

Good luck to you all, get 'er done, and keep it clean,
New to the Forum, Lance


----------

