Mobile phones/static cause fires at service stations

[MLCrisis]

NOTE: Title changed in response to overwhelming demand!!

Hi, everyone. I work in the oil industry in Occupational Health & Safety. I just received the attached note regarding fires being caused at service stations by mobile phones and by static from people getting in and out of cars. The fire occurs because a flammable cloud of fuel vapour is created around the filler nozzle as you fill up. Any source of ignition will then cause the cloud to ignite and it may flash back into the fuel tank of the car. The "flash fire" of the cloud will burn anything within it - which means you, standing there next to the nozzle.

Sources of ignition could include:

any mobile phone that goes off - even in your pocket - or someone tries to use!

any idiot who decides to have a smoke or who has got out of their car with a cigarrette stuck in their mouth (including anyone walking past you!)

static electricity caused by you getting out of the car and discharging when you touch the car body or the fuel pump or even the pump dispenser nozzle.

Fuel stations in Australia do not have pump dispenser nozzles that can be locked, due to regulation. (But some smart buggers stick their car filler cap in the handle to jam it open. Don't do this! The reason that there is no lock is to stop the flow of fuel if anything happens and you let go!)

So the problem with going back in the car with the fuel flowing should not be too likely here, but I have seen people go back in the car half way through the fill up, leaving the hose dispenser nozzle in the car - even though it isn't flowing, the fuel tank is open and the fuel vapours are still present.

So take care! I know I will make sure that my phone is not in my pocket - I don't fancy serious burns to the legs and groin!!!!!!! This is definitely an area where public education is lacking. Tell your friends and family - and this is not one of those internet scams. As a safety professional, I have seen a number of reports of this type of incident.

Cheers.

[Demon Dave]

In my youth I worked in a petrol station back in the UK and we had similar regulations. I recall them seeming a little extreme and somwhat OTT at first, but after having personally witnessed a fireball produced at one of the pumps as someone got out of their car (dunno what caused the spark) I can safely say there is a real risk...

strangely in Japan regs are pretty lax. Most pumps by design can be locked on (i.e they'll pump unattended) and people routinely chat on the phone, fill up with their engine running and even smoke around the pumps....

[MLCrisis]

Follow the link in the note attached above for a load more info. This shows it is all pukka. Scary stuff!

Cheers.

[Laurence]

I expect more of people on this forum...

At least take two seconds to read the link that this fake document cites.

http://www.pei.org/faq/index.asp?CATE=0#2

p.s. MLCRisis I hope you have "confirmed your netbanking details" via email...

[MLCrisis]

I expect more of people on this forum...  

At least take two seconds to read the link that this fake document cites.

http://www.pei.org/faq/index.asp?CATE=0#2

p.s. MLCRisis I hope you have "confirmed your netbanking details" via email...

Take it as you like it, mate. I got this note through the Shell organisation, so I am reasonably confident of its authenticity. There have been a number of reports of mobile phones causing fires at fuel stations over the last three or four years, which has caused much discussion in my profession, partly because it was not well documented. I only sent this one on because it was from a reliable source and gave more definite information on the subject. Have you considered that this info was issued since the last update to the pei.org website?

There is no doubt that there is a flammable cloud created when refuelling - as evidenced by the discussion of ignition from static. The only point at issue then is whether a mobile phone creates enough energy to ignite the cloud. Are you so confident that the info about the phones is dodgy that you will ignore the advice? You certainly would not be allowed to take a mobile phone into a refinery or similar site, because they are not intrinsically safe.

As for your other comment, my sides are still aching from the mirth induced.

Cheers.

[Evo_Lee]

Dave, there was a test done a few years back it's all bullshit. But people buy it, the use of mobilephones at a petrol station will not spontaneous ignite the fumes.

[Flaps]

Yeah i heard it was found to be a load of :bs!: about 9 months ago.

It was found that the spark produced by a mobile phone next to a fuel pump is way to tiny to ignite it. The chance of it happenin is something in the billions.

Personal choice in the end i guess.

[Laurence]

...Are you so confident that the info about the phones is dodgy that you will ignore the advice?

I bet my electrical engineering degree on it.

As for your other comment, my sides are still aching from the mirth induced.

Well while my mirth induction skills may be somewhat lacklustre I would like you to have a really good think about the email you got. In the same way that the emails currently circulating trick people into giving out their details actually includes a copy of information from the bank's website specifically telling them not to do what the email is asking them to do. The email you have forwarded refers to the site I mentioned above which clearly states that while static is a danger, cell phones are not. They are just relying on people not checking the "fine print" as it were. You claim that the site backs the letter up, yet you obviously did not check it before forwarding it.

Also an email from a large company would never ever finish with "I ask you to please send this information to ALL your family and friends..." if that doesn't wreak of chain letter than nothing does...

You state that the events are not well documented. There are video cameras (these days with very high quality) at every single petrol station, if there ever was an event the footage would get out.

The environment at a refinery is very different to that of a petrol station as anyone from Shell who has walked down a steel gantry surrounded by pipes and vapours will tell you...

I have worked for a number of large companies and there are gullible idiots in all of them that spammed my email with the latest fake virus warnings or "watch out or you will lose your kidneys" email. Shell is no different.

But if you are happy with absence of proof not indicating proof of absence I have some WMD to sell you.

[Evo_Lee]

Well one should still exercise due care with any electronic devices near fammable liquids.

The test I read was a good few years back and I also remember my lecturer in uni saying it was all bullshit during our transmission and radiowave lecture...but this was a good 10 years back, mobile phones designs could be different these days. But I still fail to see how IC these days which operate on even lower eletrical current can ignite fumes. Back then it was not the use of mobilephone as radio waves are always around us, but the fact that little bit of electrical pulse used when pressing the key in answering or ending a call or making the phone vibrate upon ringing was the source...but that was also tested to be insufficent to ignite.

In my line of work I'm very familar with EMC standards which are very strict on electronic devices.

I would say in the above 3 recorded cases the mobile phone itself was faulty unfortunate for the victims, else we all would have been burnt to hell in the number of occasions some idiot decided to use his mobile phone at a petrol station.

[MLCrisis]

The email you have forwarded refers to the site I mentioned above which clearly states that while static is a danger, cell phones are not. They are just relying on people not checking the "fine print" as it were. You claim that the site backs the letter up, yet you obviously did not check it before forwarding it.

Also an email from a large company would never ever finish with "I ask you to please send this information to ALL your family and friends..." if that doesn't wreak of chain letter than nothing does...

You state that the events are not well documented. There are video cameras (these days with very high quality) at every single petrol station, if there ever was an event the footage would get out.

The environment at a refinery is very different to that of a petrol station as anyone from Shell who has walked down a steel gantry surrounded by pipes and vapours will tell you...

I have worked for a number of large companies and there are gullible idiots in all of them that spammed my email with the latest fake virus warnings or "watch out or you will lose your kidneys" email. Shell is no different.

But if you are happy with absence of proof not indicating proof of absence I have some WMD to sell you.

I am happy to admit that I did not check all of the pei website regarding phones. My comment about events not being well documented was meant to reflect that there has been continuing doubt about them. I have been aware of this discussion and these doubts for several years. Also I agree that the likelihood of a mobile phone being the ignition source in any incident is low. It is probable that many of the incidents attributed to phones were caused by other, higher energy, ignition sources, with static being the most likely.

I also agree the "tell all your friends" line is a classic sign of an internet fake, but a similar line is occasionally used in official safety notices which affect people outside work. I took the source from which I received this to be sufficient proof of its authenticity. I will check back with them.

Meanwhile, the environment in a refinery only differs in relation to the likelihood of a flammable gas cloud being present. In a refinery there are many potential leak sources (and I have walked through plenty myself), although the frequency for any one of them leaking is low. The majority of leaks would produce a flammable cloud. In a service station, there will always be hydrocarbon vapours present when a car is being filled. In most instances, the concentration of these will be outside the flammable limits, but in some conditions a flammable cloud clearly can develop. Apart from the risk arising from a cloud being ignited, a key difference between refinery and service station is in the degree to which these hazards are identified and managed.

As for gullible idiots in large companies, I shall make sure I enquire with my colleague and check how he ranks on this scale. If I find that he ranks pretty high and that I have proved to be as gullible as him, you can rest assured that you, and all of your friends and family, will be the first to know.

[Demon Dave]

Troy,

as I said, I do not know what caused the spark that ignited the petrol vapour - just saw a big flash and the women getting out of the car almost dive to the floor for cover.

I personally don't think mobile phones could produce a spark that could ignite fuel the fumes present around petrol station. But, being an attendant I had to follow the regulations and they clearly stated any potential sources of ignition must be removed from the pump area. This also included the use of mobile phones and I recall being under strict instructions from my manager not to allow anyone to fill up while engaged in a phone conversation...

[lwells]

Yawn. I can't believe this shite is still doing the rounds. MediaWatch on the ABC did a little debunking on this awhile ago:

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcrip...pts/s911863.htm

LW.

[Demon Dave]

I reiterate that I was working in England and following UK regulations which prohibited the use of mobile phones while dispensing fuel...

[lwells]

I reiterate that I was working in England and following UK regulations which prohibited the use of mobile phones while dispensing fuel...

Not sure if that's directed at me... but regardless, according to MediaWatch's investigation there has been no proven case of mobile phones causing fires. The transcript is worth a read if your bored

LW.

[Demon Dave]

Nah, it wasn't directed at you specifically mate I just want to make sure that people aren't getting confused. The belief, and the law, in England (when I was working there many a year ago) was that mobile phones posed a real risk of igniting petrol fumes, and as such were banned from being used while pumping fuel...

[lwells]

Pretty much the same deal here to some extent. Media gets a whiff of some sensational story, doesn't bother investigating it properly, whips everyone into a lather and it just becomes accepted that its the truth.

LW.

[Ronin 09]

Damn Engineers....

here we go...

Petrol is a flammable liquid. The chemical propertices of flammable liquids are described by cetain terms, being:

*Flash point

*Flammable range

*Ignition temperatures

Flash point is the temperature at which a particular flammable liquid gives off vapours (vaporizes) and therefore can ignite. The flash point differs for each type of flammable liquid. Petrol has a flash point of around 40 degrees; ie. petrol requires a temperature of only 40 degrees to vaporize to cause an explosion or fire. But, when will the concentration of petrol vapour in air be enough to ignite? More on that below...

Flammable range refers to the percentage of a flammable liquid, in its gaseous state, to air to create an explosive mixture. This varies with different flammable liquids - petrol has a flammability range of 1.4 to 7.6 percent, so, it will ignite when there is 1.4 parts of petrol mixed with 100 parts air. Thus, 1.4 percent is known as the lower flammable limit and 7.6 percent is the upper flammable limit. A product mixed with air below the low end of its flammable range is too lean to burn. A flammable liquid which exceeds its upper flammable limit is too rich to ignite. So how hot does the 'trigger' need to be to ignite the vapour, if the concentration of vapour is within this range?

The ignition temperature is the temperature required for a liquid to continue to emmit vapors which can and sustain combustion. Petrol will ignite when a heat source or electrical spark of at least 853 degrees comes in contact with it.

Dammit, I know that mobiles emit radiation as heat, but I'm not putting any phone to me ear at 853 degrees!

Hope that helps.

[MLCrisis]

QUOTE (Ronin 09 The ignition temperature is the temperature required for a liquid to continue to emmit vapors which can and sustain combustion. Petrol will ignite when a heat source or electrical spark of [b)

at least 853 degrees comes in contact with it[/b].   Thanks for that, Ronin. I agree with almost everything you say (although my credibility on the overall topic is clearly in question!). My understanding of the science of ignition of a flammable mixture is that it is the energy available has to be sufficient to start the combustion reaction. This can come about from contact with a hot surface, as one means. Autoignition temperatures are generally lower than hot surface ignition temperatures , as another means. Sparks and static discharges are different again. (You can get a PhD measuring the temperature of a spark, if you really must.) You can have a spark without significant change in temperature for the surrounding material and that spark can contain a lot of energy. For example, you can be electrocuted from a light switch, if your hand is wet and you are standing on a wet floor. So it is conceivable that an otherwise low energy system can produce a spark sufficient for ignition of a flammable mixture. Whether a phone would or not is clearly a moot point. But your keyboard is accepted as one potential ignition source that would not be allowed in a hazardous area. As I said, I am checking back with the guy from whom I got the note. Incidentally, the note came with a video clip of a girl getting back into her car, with the fuel dispenser nozzle locked on, then when she got out and touched the nozzle, there was a flash fire. Fortunately for her, a small one. Static, not a phone. But there you go. Cheers.

[Laurence]

Yes static is definitely a worry. I should get a static strap for the car I think.

I have zapped myself on the car a few times, one time I even SAW a spark

But anyway, it is all good and we are all friends again.

[MLCrisis]

But anyway, it is all good and we are all friends again.

Cheers, Gojira. No worries.

Just to add to the mix, I have received a follow up message from a different Shell contact, which refers to the first note. (See attached). This confirms for me that the first note is genuinely from the Shell organisation. This note implies that the identification of mobile phones as a problem is confirmed by the analysis of problems with static, which as you guys have observed, is not the case. Whether the three cases that they referred to in their first note have been proven or not is worth finding out. I shall endeavour to do so through the contacts that I have.

Cheers.