I’ve only read bits and pieces at work, but apparently the sugar plant fire in Georgia was very difficult to fight. Why is this? Is sugar extremely hot?
I’ve seen sugar (or at least forms of sweetener) light on fire. They turn into this charred goop and keep relighting (like those trick candles you put on birthday cakes). If I had to guess it breaks down into more base chemicals which proceed to have a reaction with each other, adding more heat to the system and relighting the fire.
I’m sure someone will be around to correct me shortly.
Sidebar: A 12th victim died today. 18 more still in critical condition.
Umm… not to question the scientific veracity of the fire dept claims, but (sucrose) sugar melts at 186 C. How can it be at maintaining physical integrity at 2800 to 4000 degrees F? It’s not rock, it’s an organic carbon compound.
Who says the sugar is necessarily maintaining physical integrity? The article says that it’s “molten sugar”.
Well, and the goo would ooze to other flammable things, right? 
“Physical integrity” in that it’s not volatizing and is still “sugar” . In my messed up pots and pans experience sugar burns and volatilizes at temps far below the 2600 & 4000 F range. I’m not seeing how it can be in a “molten” state at the the temps cited.
Fire needs three things to burn: heat, fuel, and oxygen. The role of water in extinguishing fires is to remove the heat. The problem with this large pile of burning sugar is that it is very hot and very dense. Water cannot penetrate to remove the heat.
I guess that would be the temperature of the outside - a mass of molten, boiling sugar vapourising and the vapour burning really hot, sustaining the melting and boiling. Sugar itself may not reach those temperatures, but the flames on it might.
Think about the science trick you were shown years ago. Try to light a sugar cube with a match. It won’t ignite. Try to light a sugar cube which has a little bit of ash on one side, and it will burn nicely. The ash acts as a catalyst, and once ignited, the reaction is self-sustaining.
Sugar has a very high calorific value, which would explain its massive energy output when burning, I’d wager.
Based on statistics alone, 6 to 12 of them will probably die. Massive 3rd degree burns are a horrible, horrible strain on the body’s healing powers.
ianad - and basic first-aide was a eon or two ago - but iirc, 3rd degrees aren’t the precise cause of death (other than massive shock shutting down the body soon after being burned) - it’s infection and/or dehydration.
we forget that the skin IS an organ whose main function is to provide a barrier against constantly-marauding germs and other big bads, etc. floating around out there. without skin, we’re incredibly susceptible to all kinds of nasty. cheery subject, what? 
I understand a dust explosion (which is how this mess started). But does the resulting fire have anything at all to do with the energy (the calories) in the sugar? Somehow I suspect it ought to, but the idea sounds silly.
More or less. We calculate calorific contentof food by putting it in an oxygen atmosphere and burning it to measure the heat produced: the more heat the more calories. Things that don’t produce heat when burned have few calories and things with lots of calories produce lots of heat when burned.
My understanding is that it has everything to do with the calories. Your body doesn’t just “burn” sugar metaphorically, it literally burns the sugar, breaking down the hydrocarbons and oxidizing them. The only difference is that your body controls the rate of oxidation chemically.
My older brothers used to make rocket fuel by melting down sugar with a certain oxidizer. Pretty hot stuff. Kinda messy, though. Tended to clog the nozzle and blow up.