6 ms·

The Mythbusters did a show on this exact thing with spraypaint, hairspray, and propane canisters. They didn't explode even when wrapped with flaming rags, but s

by R0b0t1 5y ago

The Mythbusters did a show on this exact thing with spraypaint, hairspray, and propane canisters. They didn't explode even when wrapped with flaming rags, but sometimes the released material would combust. In some cases the gas rushing out actually extinguished the flame. You rarely by accident get a stoichiometric mix. With a slow leak into an enclosed container is usually how it happens. Otherwise there is too much fuel to O2 in the atmosphere. People really need to stop trying to sound smart by thinking of imagined dangers. That is what stopped nuclear power, it's what's stopping hydrogen as a fuel, it's what's stopping gene therapy research, etc. Get over yourself.

stevespang 5y ago
and what about historically substantiated accidents ? Chernobyl, 3 mile island, Fukushima, etc. Not to mention that ~115 of the of all the 460 operational nuclear reactors in the world are close to the sea, just waiting for Tsunami's
jjoonathan 5y ago
> People really need to stop trying to sound smart > Get over yourself. Right back atcha. Good grief, "stoichiometric mixture" is not a reasonable person's danger threshold. The mechanical energy alone is terrifying, which was the point of bringing up COPVs. While we're at it, let's put giant flywheels in chemical cars to do regenerative breaking. They'll probably have less mechanical energy than the titanic so they're probably no big deal, right? Right.
- R0b0t1 5y ago
  Look, this stuff has been studied and you can find it with just a little bit of looking. How this conversation has been going is a bunch of chaff gets thrown up and then people are expected to answer. I'm doing as best I can. I happened to have a coworker who was involved in alternative fuels research, specifically the H2 cylinders that operated at lower pressures using a carbon substrate. But even if you don't use that you can still construct and secure the container so it splits instead of shatters and contains most or all of the debris. You can install a shield bulkhead into the car to deflect debris to the ground. You can do loads of things. You are not original, you are not the first person to raise these concerns, and very competent people have been working on them. https://xkcd.com/793/ https://xkcd.com/793/

by R0b0t1 5y ago

stevespang 5y ago

and what about historically substantiated accidents ? Chernobyl, 3 mile island, Fukushima, etc. Not to mention that ~115 of the of all the 460 operational nuclear reactors in the world are close to the sea, just waiting for Tsunami's

jjoonathan 5y ago

> People really need to stop trying to sound smart > Get over yourself. Right back atcha. Good grief, "stoichiometric mixture" is not a reasonable person's danger threshold. The mechanical energy alone is terrifying, which was the point of bringing up COPVs. While we're at it, let's put giant flywheels in chemical cars to do regenerative breaking. They'll probably have less mechanical energy than the titanic so they're probably no big deal, right? Right.

R0b0t1 5y ago
Look, this stuff has been studied and you can find it with just a little bit of looking. How this conversation has been going is a bunch of chaff gets thrown up and then people are expected to answer. I'm doing as best I can. I happened to have a coworker who was involved in alternative fuels research, specifically the H2 cylinders that operated at lower pressures using a carbon substrate. But even if you don't use that you can still construct and secure the container so it splits instead of shatters and contains most or all of the debris. You can install a shield bulkhead into the car to deflect debris to the ground. You can do loads of things. You are not original, you are not the first person to raise these concerns, and very competent people have been working on them. https://xkcd.com/793/ https://xkcd.com/793/