Austinist: County Commissioners to Tackle Explosive Issue

Sudo

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 13:29:09 -0600

You're right, Guest 10. At 44,799 kJ/kg, Jet Fuel has the same explosive value as auto gasoline (I thought it had more), and is slightly less volatile. Both are much more dangerous than diesel, the fuel Sun Coast says will be in 8 out of 10 of their tanks. Therefore, switching any tank from diesel to Aviation Fuel or Gasoline will result in increased risk. Another mistake in my comment above, the tank farm is across the street from a Middle School (Garcia Middle School). The elementary school (Barbara Jordan Elementary) is up the road about 10 blocks, but still between the tank farm and 183, and so I guessing will still be impacted by the tanker truck traffic.

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:27:40 -0600

While I don't think a tank farm should be right next to a middle school, I don't see the point of insinuating things about jet fuel like it's somehow worse than gasoline and diesel. Jet fuel's just kerosene.

Sudo

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 23:39:03 -0600

As long as we are comparing language, let's put "Sun Coast's proposed tanks would provide fuel to trucks that take gasoline from the refinery to gas stations" thru the ol' BS filter. Sounds like just another gas station - you know, maybe they'll have fountain drinks and breakfast tacos. Not so bad, right? Oh, but wait, a few extra clicks reveal that Sun Coast has nothing to do with the actual gasoline refinery. Instead, it "buys refined oil and sells it to third-party customers such as convenience stores, school districts, and companies in the construction industry" and offers "gasoline and diesel fuels, marine and aviation fuels, lubricants, and on-site and fleet fueling." And, wow, it won't be buying gasoline just from the little refinery down the street, but will connect via pipeline to refineries in Corpus Christi. It's a Tank Farm. They buy petroleum products, store them in massive above ground tanks, and then ship them by the tanker truck full to gas stations. Even if a gallon or hundred end up in the trucks fuel tank, the main purpose is to fill the back of these tankers. Sure, they will agree to only store gasoline and diesel - at least at the beginning. But do you really believe that they will not be soon claiming that market forces or some other excuse demands that they use these tanks for aviation fuel? Come on, they sell aviation fuels and they're right down the road from Bergstrom. So in that scenario, we end up with convoys of jet fuel filled 18 wheelers directly across the street from convoys of moms dropping off their elementary school kids, or said kids riding their bikes or walking to school. And even if the gas tank explosion in Dallas last week doesn't raise your terror alert level to red, consider East Austin's previous experience with a Gasoline Tank farm. Area residents began complaining of nose bleeds, headaches, and dizziness. Environmental tests began detecting contaminated soil, ground water, and Benzene and airborne pollutants known to be carcinogen. In just one year, 1992, home values in the neighborhood around the farm fell 50% or more, with one guy, 82 year old Milton Simon's property dropping to 1/3 of its valuation the previous year. To me, it's not a case of NIMBY, it's common sense.

SolMan

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 20:32:25 -0600

You mean I'm not a credible source? Some anonymous Internet poster? I'm insulted. OK, let's compare some of the language in S's article to the information that is readily available in a few clicks. First, Sun Coast Resources is described as a "chemical company". No. Dupont is a chemical company. Dow is a chemical company. Sun Coast is a fuel and lubrication services company. Check out their web site. The second item that triggered my BS filter was the claim that the site would be handling "volatile and explosive chemicals"! Yikes! That sounds scary! But, guess what, gasoline and diesel fuel are both volatile (in that they tend to evaporate) and explosive (that's why they burn in your engine). Let's look at the Statesman article. It says the following: "Sun Coast's proposed tanks would provide fuel to trucks that take gasoline from the refinery to gas stations." The refinery is about a mile up the road from the proposed Sun Coast facility. Ok, the neighborhood doesn't want a fueling station. Apparently they want to get rid of the refinery as well. Fair enough. But the Austinist article was alarmist and misleading. Getting distracted by this kind of nonsense wastes the energy and damages the credibility of the environmental movement.

guest

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 20:10:41 -0600

I assume the author would prefer these tanks were stacked on top of eachother and put downtown like he wants everything else.

danimal

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 17:50:19 -0600

Is there a link to some kind of article with more information? ie what chemicals, and for what purpose? Call me crazy but I'm not inclined to take SolMan's version without another source...

guest

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 17:37:25 -0600

Hey now, SolMan, take it easy. Austinist wants you to accentuate the positive and that kind of negatory attitude just won't cut the mustard.

guest

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 17:36:24 -0600

Nice sexist remark, SolMan. You're a champ.

SolMan

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 17:32:49 -0600

"Volatile and explosive chemicals!" Oh my, like maybe gasoline or diesel fuel. Please unwad your panties. How many gas stations do we have in neighborhoods in Austin? This is a fueling station for the trucks that service the refinery. It's not fricken rocket fuel. Looks like standard NIMBYism to me.

guest

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:46:29 -0600

Would this also raise insurance rates for the surrounding properties?

deadflowers

Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:34:30 -0600

Seems like an odd place to put 200,000 of explosive chemicals. Hopefully they get their heads screwed on straight and choose not to do this.