New investigation findings on the 2006 Danvers,MA explosion

On November 22, 2006 the largest explosion in the history of Massachusetts occurred in Danvers, MA at approximately 2:46 am. This paper presents a detailed analysis into the potential causes and lessons learned from the Danvers explosion. Other investigative groups concluded that the cause of the explosion was an overheated production tank. However, the analyses presented here demonstrate that their proposed scenario could not have occurred and that other potential causes are more likely.Using the computational fluid dynamics tool FLACS, it was possible to investigate the chain of events leading to the explosion, including: (1) evaluating various leak scenarios by modeling the dispersion and mixing of gases and vapors within the facility, (2) evaluating potential ignition sources within the facility of the flammable fuel–air mixture, and (3) evaluating the explosion itself by comparing the resulting overpressures of the exploding fuel–air cloud with the structural response of the facility and the observed near-field and far-field blast damage. These results, along with key witness statements and other analyses, provide valuable insight into the likely cause of this incident. Based on the results of our detailed analysis, lessons learned regarding the investigative procedure and methods for mitigating this and future explosions are discussed.     

Using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for blast wave predictions

Explosions will, in most cases, generate blast waves. While simple models (e.g., Multi Energy Method) are useful for simple explosion geometries, most practical explosions are far from trivial and require detailed analyses. For a reliable estimate of the blast from a gas explosion it is necessary to know the explosion strength. The source explosion may not be symmetric; the pressure waves will be reflected or deflected when hitting objects, or even worse, the blast waves may propagate inside buildings or tunnels with a very low rate of decay. The use of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) explosion models for near and far field blast wave predictions has many advantages. These include more precise estimates of the energy and resulting pressure of the blast wave, as well as the ability to evaluate non-symmetrical effects caused by realistic geometries, gas cloud variations and ignition locations. This is essential when evaluating the likelihood of a given leak source as cause of an explosion or equally when evaluating the potential risk associated with a given leak source for a consequence analysis.In addition, unlike simple methods, CFD explosion models can also evaluate detailed dynamic effects in the near and far field, which include time dependent pressure loads as well as reflection and focusing of the blast waves. This is particularly valuable when assessing actual near-field blast damage during an explosion investigation or potential near-field damage during a risk analysis for a facility. One main challenge in applying CFD, however, is that these models require more information about the actual facility, including geometry details and process information. Collecting the necessary geometry and process data may be quite time consuming. This paper will show some blast prediction validation examples for the CFD model FLACS. It will also provide examples of how directional effects or interaction with objects can significantly influence the dynamics of the blast wave. Finally, the challenge of obtaining useful predictions with insufficient details regarding the geometry will also be addressed.     

Blood serum concentrations of perfluorinated compounds in men from Greenlandic Inuit and European populations

Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs), such as perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), are used in large quantities. They are persistent and found in measurable levels in human serum around the world. They have been associated with developmental, hepatic, and carcinogenic effects in animal studies. The aim of the present study was to describe levels of PFCs in serum among Inuits from Greenland and inhabitants from Warsaw, Poland and Kharkiv, Ukraine. Furthermore, the aim was to define social- and lifestyle related determinants of exposure for these compounds. Serum levels of seven PFCs were analyzed by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). The concentrations of PFOS and PFOA were the highest of all PFCs in all three populations with a total amount of almost 90% of the PFCs. The mean levels of PFOS and PFOA were in the Greenlandic Inuits 52 and 4.8 ng mL(-1), in Poland 19 and 5.2 ng mL(-1), and in Ukraine 8.1 and 1.9 ng mL(-1), respectively. Thus, levels of PFCs in the serum of Inuits on Greenland were among the highest described in a general population whereas the levels in Poland were similar to other industrialized countries. The exposure in Ukraine was rather low. In the Greenlandic Inuit population, intake of seafood, tea, age and area of living were significant determinants of PFOS concentrations and explained about 22% of the variation. For the other populations no strong determinants were found.     

Power generation with CO2 capture: Technology for CO2 purification

The goal of this paper is to find methodologies for removing a selection of impurities (H₂O, O₂, Ar, N₂, SO_x and NO_x) from CO₂ present in the flue gas of two oxy-combustion power plants fired with either natural gas (467 MW) or pulverized fuel (596 MW). The resulting purified stream, containing mainly CO₂, is assumed to be stored in an aquifer or utilized for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) purposes. Focus has been given to power cycle efficiency i.e.: work and heat requirements for the purification process, CO₂ purity and recovery factor (kg of CO₂ that is sent to storage per kg of CO₂ in the flue gas). Two different methodologies (here called Case I and Case II) for flue gas purification have been developed, both based on phase separation using simple flash units (Case I) or a distillation column (Case II). In both cases purified flue gas is liquefied and its pressure brought to 110 atm prior to storage.Case I: A simple flue gas separation takes place by means of two flash units integrated in the CO₂ compression process. Heat in the process is removed by evaporating the purified liquid CO₂ streams coming out from both flashes. Case I shows a good performance when dealing with flue gases with low concentration of impurities. CO₂ fraction after purification is over 96% with a CO₂ recovery factor of 96.2% for the NG-fired flue gas and 88.1% for the PF-fired flue gas. Impurities removal together with flue gas compression and liquefaction reduces power plant output of 4.8% for the NG-fired flue gas and 11.6% for the PF-fired flue gas. The total amount of work requirement per kg stored CO₂ is 453 kJ for the NG-fired flue gas and 586 kJ for the PF-fired flue gas.Case II: Impurities are removed from the flue gas in a distillation column. Two refrigeration loops (ethane and propane) have been used in order to partially liquefy the flue gas and for heat removal from a partial condenser. Case II can remove higher amounts of impurities than Case I. CO₂ purity prior to storage is over 99%; CO₂ recovery factor is somewhat lower than in Case I: 95.4% for the NG-fired flue gas and 86.9% for the PF-fired flue gas, reduction in the power plant output is similar to Case I.Due to the lower CO₂ recovery factor the total amount of work per kg stored CO₂ is somewhat higher for Case II: 457 kJ for the NG-fired flue gas and 603 kJ for the PF-fired flue gas.     

Emissions from heated indoor dust

Settled indoor dust was collected from a university building, and the fine fraction was heated in the temperature range of 50-250 degrees C. Emissions of compounds were analysed and identified in a system consisting of a thermal desorption unit coupled to a gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer (GC-MS). The heating took place in both an oxidative (air) and an inert (He) atmosphere. The results indicate that oxidation of adsorbed compounds occurred, as well as decomposition of the dust itself. The emission in air started somewhere between 150 and 200 degrees C, with aldehydes and ketones as the main compounds. When heated in the inert atmosphere, semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs) were emitted at temperatures above 150 degrees C. These compounds were not found in the air system, probably due to oxidation. Based on the obtained results we recommend that the temperature of hot surfaces in indoor environments should be kept below 150 degrees C to avoid oxidation of indoor dust and minimise the emissions.     

Preface

Water, Air, &; Soil Pollution: Focus -