|
Post by Arch on Jun 6, 2008 15:48:27 GMT -5
It was requested that I move my previous letters here.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 6, 2008 15:48:48 GMT -5
Most recent:
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I have sent you numerous detailed emails with information regarding the site hazards at location of Metea Valley High School (under construction) methodically spelling out the dangers of the large natural gas transit straws that run directly North and South through the middle of the property and their destructive capability in the event of an accident. This lethal capability circulates out over 700 feet in what is called a 'Potential Impact Radius' which is a radius that defines the area that with almost certainty would sustain loss of life and massive property damage in the event of a breach and explosion. There are two 36" diameter pipes and one 20" diameter pipe operating at pressures approaching and sometimes surpassing 700psi.
As you also know, the physical structure of MVHS will be sitting only 220 feet away from where these lines reside on the property and the entire building will be virtually inside this PIR (Potential Impact Radius). It is also known by everyone on this email list that the ages of those pipes are 57, 50 and 40 years old.
Constructing a school for 3,000 students almost entirely inside this documented blast radius of the pipes is, in many people's opinions, a reckless and negligent thing to do because of the certainty of loss of life and structure if the unthinkable ever happens in the decades to come.
Due to the age of the pipes, many people in the district believe the proper thing to do is not build there in the first place. Obviously the board decided differently and you chose to build there, minus one dissenting vote even after being handed pictures and informed of the explosion/fire/death event mentioned below at the school board meeting on April 14th, 2008 by someone making public comment (myself).
Since construction is now underway, now would be the time to insist that the plumbing company REPLACE all three pipes in their entirety for the length of the property and install Auto Control Valves, just off both the North and South portion of the property. Auto Control Valves are designed to close automatically when they detect a substantial pressure drop (from a breach of the pipes as an example). Having them on both sides of the property should ISOLATE the segment of pipe and cut the fuel flow relatively quickly and hopefully before it would ever have a chance to ignite.
At a plumbing explosion in Carlsbad, New Mexico in August of 2000, a single 50 year old 30" pipe exploded due to corrosion, ignited and burned uncontrollably for hours. During this time, the fire literally cooked 12 campers including children who were over 650 feet away. Keep in mind that this was the result of a single 30" gas line. At MVHS, there are 2 36" lines and one 20" line. Also keep in mind that these campers were over 650 feet away and still died a horrific death. MVHS building will be only 220 feet away and PE classes and other athletics will be held directly on top of the lines.
You have repeated that Kid Safety is a high priority. Please demonstrate it is by insisting with the plumbing operator that the pipes be replaced and the auto-control valves be installed as close to the property line on both the north and south edges to minimize the amount of fuel that could escape and fuel a subsequent fire in case the unthinkable happens.
Thank you for your time and attention in this matter,
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 6, 2008 15:49:11 GMT -5
2/16/08 Here is what a natural gas plumbing can do if breached. I think it can not fully be appreciated until viewed. Please take the time to watch each one and think about whether you want a $150 million dollar school sitting next to this potential event. Now, ask yourself if you want 3000 school kids in a building next to an event like that or people sitting in an athletic stadium. www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AqFegOhJ18&feature=relatedwww.youtube.com/watch?v=dlhB724STj4&feature=relatedwww.youtube.com/watch?v=wQOiJ3Ne7j0&feature=relatedwww.youtube.com/watch?v=NyMbaZ9FVjAThese are not things that we should be building a school next to. Pipes get old and they fail. They fail from corrosion (Even microorganism induced which cathodic protection can not guard against), they fail from mistakes made by an equipment operators, and unfortunately any number of countless other reasons. I'm sorry for sounding like a broken record about this site and its numerous hazards, but for me safety is paramount. There are reasons this site was disqualified the first time. Those reasons are still there. Please do not ink a deal that can potentially be looked back some number of years down the line as a very negligent and irresponsible decision because something unfortunate and beyond our control happened but we chose to put a school there anyway knowing full well ahead of time the potential dangers. If this does not change your mind, then please humor us in the district and do not assign schools to this site where this is the farthest site from their area. Some might call that concession "throwing someone else's kids under a bus" but if that's true then that confirms that the site is dangerous and should not be purchased as has been pointed out numerous times in prior emails. Thank you for your time and attention to our kid's safety,
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 6, 2008 15:49:37 GMT -5
1/24/08 Good morning, I'd like to thank you for your time and dedication to our district. I appreciate a person who rolls up his sleeves and gets things done. I watched the replay of the 1/22/08 School Board meeting where you said that Diesel fuel was burned at the peaker plant and it was burned only twice. Diesel was indeed the fuel and not "jet fuel" as some have called it, however, there is data on the web available www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia906_920.htmland www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia906u.htmlThese are databases/spreadsheets of Fuel amounts consumed and Electricity generated for power plants for their corresponding year. These show the Electric Junction Peaker plant using both Natural Gas and Diesel Fuel Oil (in very large quantities) since inception in June 1970 and even burned it (DFO) as late as 2003 to produce electricity. This leaves me with a very difficult question to ask you personally. Is the "only used 2 times" something you were told? If so, by whom? Unfortunately, according to this historic data they have their facts in error. When going through this data I noticed many month to month discrepancies such as this: This is the Year and amount of DFO (Diesel Fuel Oil) reported to be stored on site 1991 17514 barrels stored. None reported consumed at all. 1992 17514 barrels stored. None reported consumed at all. 1993 starts at 17514 barrels stored in Jan, Feb reports 16905 barrels stored but shows none consumed to produce electricity. August they used 238 barrels to produce electricity, dropping them to 16667 barrels stored, Dec used 1042 barrels, dropping them to 15625 barrels stored. The rest of the math for this period (1993) works out properly for Consumed/Stored. This leaves us with a question: What happened to 609 barrels of DFO that was stored on site between 1/1993 and 2/1993 but was not consumed to produce electricity? Is this one of the times there was a problem with 'spillage'? This same "What happened to the DFO" plays out through the 1970's according to their consumed/stored reported data. Also, According to SEC filings of ComEd and Unicom a Phase1 and Phase2 enviro study in June of 1999. Have they said if one was ever done or not and what were the results if one was done? Will the Phase2 testing we are doing be in and around the plant and follow the pipes and fuel delivery path from Tank to Turbine? There seems to be a very large amount of DFO that is just 'missing' from their stored amounts over the years and I hope we make sure we have all of our collective bases covered if we move forward with this property. Personally, I do not like it for this very reason and the natural gas main plumbing hazard. I have lived in too many parts of the country where mother nature and human error has done very bad things with hazards that otherwise should be benign. However, if the district really has no other choice, then we have no other choice. I've been criticized as being too cautious. I just want to ensure that wherever a school gets located we are not discounting real hazards (however unlikely) that surround or are on (or underneath) the property. Fema has a document about school site locations and risk assessments located here: www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/rms/rmsp428I hope the Administration can find this useful as we further negotiate for property to locate our badly needed third high school. If you would like to speak more about this or any other data, please feel free to contact me via email or phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Thank you for your time and I look forward to a full disclosure of the Phase2 tests that we will be doing on the property.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Jun 6, 2008 16:01:40 GMT -5
Arch, do you have any idea what the cost of this mitigation would be? I am not trying to put a price tag on safety but I just wondered if there was a ballpark figure for this.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Jun 6, 2008 16:08:21 GMT -5
Arch, do you have any idea what the cost of this mitigation would be? I am not trying to put a price tag on safety but I just wondered if there was a ballpark figure for this. Yes that might be an important thing to highlight, especially if it is relatively "inexpensive" in the big picture.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 6, 2008 16:35:57 GMT -5
I honestly do not have any clue what 4 36" ACVs and 2 20" ACV's would cost, or the cost of the sections of pipe to be replaced.
I look at it as a safety net that one hopes to heck never has to get used.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Jun 6, 2008 16:57:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 6, 2008 16:59:44 GMT -5
I echo my previous 'thank you' on the constructive criticism.
|
|
|
Post by gatormom on Jun 6, 2008 17:08:36 GMT -5
I wonder how many families who will have children go to Metea who might be interested in sending a letter to the district or signing a petition.
My concern is the use of the Carlsbad accident. There are a lot of differences between what happened there and our circumstances here. It really is like comparing apples to oranges.
Any time you use that type of sensationalism, it does kind of turn people away.
I really believe the pipes near Metea with the maintenance system and inspections are safe. I also agree that replacing them and adding the valves would be better.
|
|
|
Post by WeNeed3 on Jun 6, 2008 17:22:25 GMT -5
I do think if you had as many people as possible sign this, then it might get looked at with more consideration than it being from just one person.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Jun 6, 2008 17:41:30 GMT -5
I wonder how many families who will have children go to Metea who might be interested in sending a letter to the district or signing a petition. My concern is the use of the Carlsbad accident. There are a lot of differences between what happened there and our circumstances here. It really is like comparing apples to oranges. Any time you use that type of sensationalism, it does kind of turn people away. I really believe the pipes near Metea with the maintenance system and inspections are safe. I also agree that replacing them and adding the valves would be better. My kids will go there and this is exactly how I feel. I'm comfortable with sending them there as I am with them driving, riding anywhere and getting into a car accident. Both chances, in my opinion are slim, but not out of the realm of possibility. I certainly wouldn't turn away the offer if the pipes were replaced and valves put in. I do feel safe with it as is, as well, though.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Jun 6, 2008 17:44:12 GMT -5
I do think if you had as many people as possible sign this, then it might get looked at with more consideration than it being from just one person. Perhaps, but I'm not convinced the "lead author" should even be Arch (no offense). It might just be perceived as Arch knocking on the door again, but this time with a band of "dissenters". I really think it has to come from someone else if it is to be taken seriously. Again, no offense Arch, and I hope you know what I mean or what I'm trying to convey.
|
|
|
Post by momto4 on Jun 6, 2008 17:58:54 GMT -5
I do think if you had as many people as possible sign this, then it might get looked at with more consideration than it being from just one person. Perhaps, but I'm not convinced the "lead author" should even be Arch (no offense). It might just be perceived as Arch knocking on the door again, but this time with a band of "dissenters". I really think it has to come from someone else if it is to be taken seriously. Again, no offense Arch, and I hope you know what I mean or what I'm trying to convey. eb204 - I think this is a good idea, as are your edit suggestions.
|
|
player
Master Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by player on Jun 6, 2008 17:59:32 GMT -5
I do think if you had as many people as possible sign this, then it might get looked at with more consideration than it being from just one person. Perhaps, but I'm not convinced the "lead author" should even be Arch (no offense). It might just be perceived as Arch knocking on the door again, but this time with a band of "dissenters". I really think it has to come from someone else if it is to be taken seriously. Again, no offense Arch, and I hope you know what I mean or what I'm trying to convey. Folks, My $0.02 - Easy on the formal letters and petitions for now... we can come to that if and when needed. In my experience, and informal conversation with the SB members should precede this. Lobbying for this is more likely to aligh each individual before we ask the SB to act as a body. If we get formal from the git-go, human instincts are to view it as an attack, and get defensive. Let's see if we can get some one-on-one meetings with SB members and chat. My thinking is that we should get Kinder-Morgan to step up for this, and I believe the way to do this is to systematically get the citizens, SB, City of Aurora, Mayor, Senators, Congressmen, Obama... to agree that it is important, and then put pressure in unison to at least study the feasibility of making changes in the straw network near the HS. If our approach is to make this the SB's problem, I can guarantee we will fail. Lets informally align first and see what everyone feels. Cheers.
|
|