Let’s assume that the school came later. I’m sure it did. School boards and local government are not noted for intelligent placement of schools. Rather, they are noted for land grabs, without even a thought of what is nearby or where they are placing it. In this respect the local officials are surely to blame.
Did you miss the part of my question that said “required by law”?
Caret to try again?
Here’s a USGS map of West from 1970. There are a couple of buildings marked that appear to be the same as the plant today. The school doesn’t seem to be there.
But, but they’re part of the government. And the government always does what is best!
Wouldn’t safety features, not required by law, be a triumph of deregulation?
The Texas plant that was the scene of a deadly explosion this week was last inspected by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in 1985. The risk plan it filed with regulators listed no flammable chemicals. And it was cleared to hold many times the ammonium nitrate that was used in the Oklahoma City bombing.
[…]
Safety advocates say the problems go well beyond the individual case, which is under investigation by the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, EPA and OSHA.
The ratio of OSHA inspectors to workers has fallen over the past three decades, and there are now 2,200 for the country’s 8 million workplaces and 130 million workers. In Texas, OSHA conducted 4,448 inspections in the last fiscal year, a pace that would mean it would visit every workplace in 126 years, according to a report by the AFL-CIO.
[…]
Lobbying groups for these plants say the risks are limited and they now face a panoply of regulations and oversight.
“It’s extraordinarily out of the ordinary to have this kind of experience,” Kathy Mathers, vice president of the Fertilizer Institute in Washington, said in an interview. “Both the producer and retailer side are heavily regulated.”
[…]
On July 25 about 50 groups sent a petition to the agency asking it to invoke a provision of the Clean Air Act to implement rules mandating the use of non-hazardous chemicals, or changes in processes at those plants to reduce the risks, such as lowering concentrations or changing temperatures.
The petition was signed by groups such as the United Steelworkers, Sierra Club (FSUSX), Greenpeace and Air Alliance Houston.
“Chemical plant safety is a high priority issue, and EPA is committed to continuing to work with our federal partners and stakeholders to pursue opportunities to increase the safety of chemical plants,” Johnson, the EPA spokeswoman, said via e-mail when asked yesterday about the Greenpeace petition.
Since receiving the petition, EPA hasn’t responded and it faces no deadline to do so.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-19/texas-explosion-seen-as-sign-of-weak-u-s-oversight.html
Why are you concerning yourself with “facts”? Facts are irrelevant. We have a tragedy here, and the most important thing to do is exploit it to push our political agenda. Please get with the program.
Possibly. Possibly not.
When everyone depends on “regulators” to take care of them, they just assume that regulations are in place and they don’t need to trouble themselves with making their own assessments. Build a school near a potentially dangerous plant? No problem, regulations are in place to mitigate the danger.
Just to interject some facts and knowledge into the discussion, it’s important to understand that there is not necessarily a contradiction here. In regulatory and workplace safety terms, “flammable” and “explosive” are different, and very specific, terms of art. It is entirely possible that something that is extremely explosive can be technically not considered “flammable,” and vice-versa.
Ammonium nitrate is not considered a highly flammable substance. Depending on whcih country’s MSDS sheet you’re reading it is either not flammable, or slightly flammable. That isn’t West Fertilizer saying it. That is the actual official designation of ammonium nitrate by, like, everyone who knows anything about it, including governments. Here are MSDS sheets for ammonium nitrate:
http://www.csbp.com.au/home-ammonium-nitrate/pdf/1210898960_ammoniun_nitrate.aspx
http://fscimage.fishersci.com/msds/01290.htm
A lot of people in here, and on the Interweebs, are confusing terms of art for everyday words, much the same way people think “theory” in science means the same thing as it does on a detective show.
Has anyone asked the families of the victims? I’m going to hold off forming an opinion until I hear what they have to say, or at least until they’re standing next to someone giving a speech.
That doesn’t mean it was safe not to have sprinklers, it just means they shouldn’t have used standard water sprinklers. There are plenty of other options, though I have no clue if they would be better for the specific situation.
so far you’ve stated that Republicans, Libertarians and Fox news are evil. Could it be that this thread you started is a fruit offering to your god(s)?
That’s kind of glib. We have civilization because it’s more efficient if everybody doesn’t have to keep re-inventing the goddamn wheel.
From here:
Texas is dotted with thousands of two-bit towns, some with colorful and interesting names, but most as dull as dishwater. If such a town has an employer, the employer owns the town, because there is seldom more than one. If the fertilizer company were to ask for a city wide referendum exonerating them of any responsibility, they would probably win.
The Texas regulatory agencies…no, the “regulatory agencies”…most remind one of the line in the Dylan song: “The cops don’t need you, and man, they expect the same.”
They will get away with it.
:dubious: This was a small plant that employed 9 people.
Now Texas is dotted with a lot more than two bits of West, Texas.
That’s certainly an important piece of information, but still doesn’t address the claim I asked to be substantiated:
“The fertilizer plant had little or nothing in the way of safety features.”
Plus, from your own cite the DHS inspections are focused on security and terrorism, not safety (per and OSHA type inspection), if they even manage to do an inspection in the first place. The plant was on the radar of agencies that actually are supposed to inspect for safety:
This source says fifteen died and sixty are missing. Picnickers, basking in the ammonia-scented breezes, perhaps?
employees, fire fighters and other dead people you wish to make light of.
From Reuters: The company, which has fewer than 10 employees, had provided no contingency plan to the EPA for a major explosion or fire at the site.
Oh, heavens no, I’m not mocking them! I’m mocking you!