Gas Stoves and Indoor Pollution
- Thread starter blackstone
- Start date
Help Support :
Well, as explained above... the earthquake itself was irrelevant for the line (which is basically a flexible hose, just like any other.
What damaged the line was the front panel falling (that thing is quite heavy), mixed with a hose too short, basically stretched to the limit.
If it was ME installing the furnace, I'd never use a hose so short. If the hose was a bit longer, it would simply flex and nothing would have happened. My landlord (whose brother works at Williams) looked at that line and said "Well, this is definitely not right. The replacement line is way longer, so now it can do what lines are supposed to do: flex. Even if the whole furnace falls from the wall, (if an earthquake is strong enough to do it, it probably won't make any difference because part of California will simply disappear in the ocean) it can now flex.
last night, after i posted the previous reply, I started wondering... "Why the hell a company based in California (Williams) would make a wall furnace that has front panels that fall every time a silly earthquake happens because the hooks that keep it in place are smaller that those "saw hooks" that hang pictures. Even a "trainee" designer would have considered that."
I decided to inspect the furnace closer and voilá. each panel is supposed to have a screw on top that secures the front panel and the screws are MISSING!
I've been through 4 earthquakes that dropped the furnace panels, twice they fell out of nowhere (once in the middle of the night while I was sleeping) and as far as I remember once i dropped one of the panels when the HORRIBLE Hoover "purple ankles" constellation hit it.
It took almost 4 years for me to realize that a simple screw could have avoided that mess.
What damaged the line was the front panel falling (that thing is quite heavy), mixed with a hose too short, basically stretched to the limit.
If it was ME installing the furnace, I'd never use a hose so short. If the hose was a bit longer, it would simply flex and nothing would have happened. My landlord (whose brother works at Williams) looked at that line and said "Well, this is definitely not right. The replacement line is way longer, so now it can do what lines are supposed to do: flex. Even if the whole furnace falls from the wall, (if an earthquake is strong enough to do it, it probably won't make any difference because part of California will simply disappear in the ocean) it can now flex.
last night, after i posted the previous reply, I started wondering... "Why the hell a company based in California (Williams) would make a wall furnace that has front panels that fall every time a silly earthquake happens because the hooks that keep it in place are smaller that those "saw hooks" that hang pictures. Even a "trainee" designer would have considered that."
I decided to inspect the furnace closer and voilá. each panel is supposed to have a screw on top that secures the front panel and the screws are MISSING!
I've been through 4 earthquakes that dropped the furnace panels, twice they fell out of nowhere (once in the middle of the night while I was sleeping) and as far as I remember once i dropped one of the panels when the HORRIBLE Hoover "purple ankles" constellation hit it.
It took almost 4 years for me to realize that a simple screw could have avoided that mess.
bradfordwhite
Well-known member
JFYI, the coast of California is not going to "fall into the ocean" as the media garbage like to pretend a while back to pump their ratings.
The coast is moving a few inches a year North and cities like L.A. and Sanfrancisco will eventually be part of Oregon, then Washington, and possibly Canada....
This is possible because of the Hayward fault.
The coast is moving a few inches a year North and cities like L.A. and Sanfrancisco will eventually be part of Oregon, then Washington, and possibly Canada....
This is possible because of the Hayward fault.
Sounds like somebody "screwed" up!
Glad you got that fixed.
Meanwhile I'm dealing with my insurance company, the California Earthquake Authority, and a contractor to try to get the seismic retrofit that was done on this home recognized in order to get a big (25%) discount of my earthquake insurance. Such fun.[this post was last edited: 5/19/2020-20:37]
Glad you got that fixed.
Meanwhile I'm dealing with my insurance company, the California Earthquake Authority, and a contractor to try to get the seismic retrofit that was done on this home recognized in order to get a big (25%) discount of my earthquake insurance. Such fun.[this post was last edited: 5/19/2020-20:37]
Hayward Fault
No, the Hayward Fault is not responsible for the movement of the California coast northwards. It's just a rather small part of the overall faulting along that coast. The biggest source of South-North movement is the good old San Andreas Fault. Other faults - bigger than the Hayward, are, in addition to the San Andreas: Calaveras, Greenville, March Creek, Concord, Pleasanton, Rodgers Creek, Maacama, San Jose, to name just a few of the 50 or more new faults found along the coast. But the San Andreas is the longest, stretching about 750 miles or more.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/
No, the Hayward Fault is not responsible for the movement of the California coast northwards. It's just a rather small part of the overall faulting along that coast. The biggest source of South-North movement is the good old San Andreas Fault. Other faults - bigger than the Hayward, are, in addition to the San Andreas: Calaveras, Greenville, March Creek, Concord, Pleasanton, Rodgers Creek, Maacama, San Jose, to name just a few of the 50 or more new faults found along the coast. But the San Andreas is the longest, stretching about 750 miles or more.
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/
Well, the very first thing we learn when we live in Los Angeles is "DO NOT TRUST HOLLYWOOD"
Los Angeles was destroyed thousands of times. From the US Bank building falling (San Andreas)to the ground simply swallowing Wilshire boulevard and a giant Randy's donut rolling down the street and exploding a Chevron station (2012)
I won't even mention the impressive number of time the Hollywood sign collapsed (Earthquake, San Andreas, 2012, Independence day, and all possible other movies you can imagine).
Actually the sign was destroyed so many times that I seriously think the screenwriters have something against it. LOL)
Now back to real world. Everybody that felt a strong earthquake knows that they NEVER happen like in the movies. The only time I watched an earthquake that was "somewhat" similar to a real earthquake was on 9-1-1 second season, first episode. (and of course it was a little exaggerated, even for a 7.1 earthquake)
I don't want to imagine how strong an earthquake has to be to make a mug jump off the desk and hit the ceiling or make a police interceptor Ford Explorer literally jump and land 3 lanes to the side on the 110 north. If someday an earthquake can cause that, probably the whole world would be destroyed. LOL
Sliding into the ocean is virtually impossible (anybody that has a minimum engineering knowledge knows it would need a freaking absurd earthquake magnitude "50" or more to cause that.
What is NOT impossible in Los Angeles is the opposite, the ocean invading the land (tsunami) and also liquefaction, which could cause an apocalyptic scenario with thousands (if not millions) of deaths.
But of course, for that we would also need a freaking absurd earthquake. It's still statistically easier to win the lottery twice in a row.
Believe it or not, what keep us "reasonably" safe is the super high seismic activity. It's like splitting a huge fart into tiny ones to avoid the noise. Those "microquakes" release energy slowly... it's zillions of times better than no earthquake happening for long periods and then suddenly all the energy is released at once.
Also, those silly but annoying microquakes that constantly happen don't cause significant damages (most times cause no damages at all) but they keep people "alert" and always thinking proactively about prevention.
Brazil doesn't have a history of earthquakes. Once there was a massive earthquake in Chile that could be felt in Brazil the magnitude in Brazil was less than 2.5, some people could feel it and the whole country stopped, all channels showing breaking news, etc.
Here, a 2.5 is literally nothing. We can notice it, it feels like a heavy truck just passed on the street, eventually we may give no more than 5 seconds of attention to it so irrelevant it is, however, every time we put something on a shelf or hang something, instinctively we think "What if an earthquake happens?" This is so automatic for us, as we constantly have those microquakes that we don't even realize we thought about that but that helps keeping us "alert and safe"
Los Angeles was destroyed thousands of times. From the US Bank building falling (San Andreas)to the ground simply swallowing Wilshire boulevard and a giant Randy's donut rolling down the street and exploding a Chevron station (2012)
I won't even mention the impressive number of time the Hollywood sign collapsed (Earthquake, San Andreas, 2012, Independence day, and all possible other movies you can imagine).
Actually the sign was destroyed so many times that I seriously think the screenwriters have something against it. LOL)
Now back to real world. Everybody that felt a strong earthquake knows that they NEVER happen like in the movies. The only time I watched an earthquake that was "somewhat" similar to a real earthquake was on 9-1-1 second season, first episode. (and of course it was a little exaggerated, even for a 7.1 earthquake)
I don't want to imagine how strong an earthquake has to be to make a mug jump off the desk and hit the ceiling or make a police interceptor Ford Explorer literally jump and land 3 lanes to the side on the 110 north. If someday an earthquake can cause that, probably the whole world would be destroyed. LOL
Sliding into the ocean is virtually impossible (anybody that has a minimum engineering knowledge knows it would need a freaking absurd earthquake magnitude "50" or more to cause that.
What is NOT impossible in Los Angeles is the opposite, the ocean invading the land (tsunami) and also liquefaction, which could cause an apocalyptic scenario with thousands (if not millions) of deaths.
But of course, for that we would also need a freaking absurd earthquake. It's still statistically easier to win the lottery twice in a row.
Believe it or not, what keep us "reasonably" safe is the super high seismic activity. It's like splitting a huge fart into tiny ones to avoid the noise. Those "microquakes" release energy slowly... it's zillions of times better than no earthquake happening for long periods and then suddenly all the energy is released at once.
Also, those silly but annoying microquakes that constantly happen don't cause significant damages (most times cause no damages at all) but they keep people "alert" and always thinking proactively about prevention.
Brazil doesn't have a history of earthquakes. Once there was a massive earthquake in Chile that could be felt in Brazil the magnitude in Brazil was less than 2.5, some people could feel it and the whole country stopped, all channels showing breaking news, etc.
Here, a 2.5 is literally nothing. We can notice it, it feels like a heavy truck just passed on the street, eventually we may give no more than 5 seconds of attention to it so irrelevant it is, however, every time we put something on a shelf or hang something, instinctively we think "What if an earthquake happens?" This is so automatic for us, as we constantly have those microquakes that we don't even realize we thought about that but that helps keeping us "alert and safe"
Thomas,
I wouldn't get too concerned about tsunamis from California earthquakes. That's because the most common type of fault here is strike-slip, which is consistent with the California coast moving inches to the north each year with regard to the rest of North America. This type of movement does not displace much ocean water.
The type of fault that produces tsunamis is the uplift type, such as off Japan where a huge amount of water is displaced, up or down, and the resultant wave can sweep over the coastline and cause major death and destruction. So that's one thing Californians can generally not worry about, unless there's a cataclysmic uplifting quake hundreds of miles off the coast in the Pacific ocean. Which is far less likely than the San Andreas doing its north south dance.
I lived through the Loma Prieta quake in '89. I was fortunate in being miles away to the north-east of there, on relatively solid ground. I could tell it was a big quake, but where I was, the motion was more rolling than jerking. I've been in smaller quakes but closer to the epicenter than those can be quite alarming, with sharp jolts and lots of vigorous shaking. As with social gatherings, it's the jerks that cause the most destruction. LOL.
I wouldn't get too concerned about tsunamis from California earthquakes. That's because the most common type of fault here is strike-slip, which is consistent with the California coast moving inches to the north each year with regard to the rest of North America. This type of movement does not displace much ocean water.
The type of fault that produces tsunamis is the uplift type, such as off Japan where a huge amount of water is displaced, up or down, and the resultant wave can sweep over the coastline and cause major death and destruction. So that's one thing Californians can generally not worry about, unless there's a cataclysmic uplifting quake hundreds of miles off the coast in the Pacific ocean. Which is far less likely than the San Andreas doing its north south dance.
I lived through the Loma Prieta quake in '89. I was fortunate in being miles away to the north-east of there, on relatively solid ground. I could tell it was a big quake, but where I was, the motion was more rolling than jerking. I've been in smaller quakes but closer to the epicenter than those can be quite alarming, with sharp jolts and lots of vigorous shaking. As with social gatherings, it's the jerks that cause the most destruction. LOL.
bradfordwhite
Well-known member
California has Tsunami zones. Eureka in particular, which also has quite a few earthquakes just off shore. Used to live about 10 minutes from the beach. Heard them.
Also didn't have gas service where I lived.
No, I don't care to revisit the area....
Also didn't have gas service where I lived.
No, I don't care to revisit the area....
Los Angeles has that too. Some parts of the city (Santa Monica, Venice and Redondo Beach, for example) even has tsunami sirens.
Tsunami Sirens
Yes, but tsunamis are quite rare in California, and my point stands: the San Andreas fault is not of the type what will produce a tsunami when it ruptures.
There may be other faults far to the west, north and south that generate uplift or slumping that could create a tsunami, but I do not believe that in my lifetime a California based fault has ever caused a tsunami.
"Oh, but what about Crescent City in 1964?" you might ask.
Well, guess what? That was the result of a huge earthquake not in California, but in Alaska. My point stands: California faults do not create the kind of conditions that create tsunamis. I concur that tsunamis can be generates by fault ruptures hundreds to thousands of miles away, and those may impact the California coast. Just not from a California quake.
Similarly, the 2011 Japan quake generated a tsunami that reached California, resulting in zero deaths and a relatively paltry $40,000 in damage.
In 2018 a 7.9 quake, again in Alaska, generated tsunami warnings along the California coast, but it fizzled.
So yeah, they can happen here, but not from California-based earthquakes.
Also, the California tsunami zones tend to be located in areas where the coastline creates a lens that might concentrate and focus the wave. Like Crescent City or Santa Cruz Harbor.
[this post was last edited: 5/21/2020-14:29]
https://www.abc10.com/article/news/local/how-often-do-tsunamis-strike-in-california/103-510976740
Yes, but tsunamis are quite rare in California, and my point stands: the San Andreas fault is not of the type what will produce a tsunami when it ruptures.
There may be other faults far to the west, north and south that generate uplift or slumping that could create a tsunami, but I do not believe that in my lifetime a California based fault has ever caused a tsunami.
"Oh, but what about Crescent City in 1964?" you might ask.
Well, guess what? That was the result of a huge earthquake not in California, but in Alaska. My point stands: California faults do not create the kind of conditions that create tsunamis. I concur that tsunamis can be generates by fault ruptures hundreds to thousands of miles away, and those may impact the California coast. Just not from a California quake.
Similarly, the 2011 Japan quake generated a tsunami that reached California, resulting in zero deaths and a relatively paltry $40,000 in damage.
In 2018 a 7.9 quake, again in Alaska, generated tsunami warnings along the California coast, but it fizzled.
So yeah, they can happen here, but not from California-based earthquakes.
Also, the California tsunami zones tend to be located in areas where the coastline creates a lens that might concentrate and focus the wave. Like Crescent City or Santa Cruz Harbor.
[this post was last edited: 5/21/2020-14:29]
https://www.abc10.com/article/news/local/how-often-do-tsunamis-strike-in-california/103-510976740
bradfordwhite
Well-known member
It's interesting to think that the West coast could feel and see results of a earthquake on the other side of the vast sea.
It underscores the fact that we live on a finite planet. The ocean can act like a dishpan full of water and someone bumps the side.
https://www.scpr.org/news/2011/03/11/24864/tsunami-warning-issued-southern-california-coast/
It underscores the fact that we live on a finite planet. The ocean can act like a dishpan full of water and someone bumps the side.
https://www.scpr.org/news/2011/03/11/24864/tsunami-warning-issued-southern-california-coast/
Yes, there was little to no wave action here from the 2011 Japan quake. I'm on the east side of the bay, about 40 ft above sea level. But any tsunami from off the coast would first have to come through the relatively narrow Golden Gate, which would limit the magnitude considerably. And then I'm about 20 miles south of the gate, which also would limit the intensity here. As it was, nada.
Mostly it seems California could get hit by tsunamis generated far out in the Pacific, like Japan, and by the time they get here, they are relatively dissapated. Or from Alaska, again, dissipated and the effects mainly far to the north of the SF Bay Area.
Of more concern should be folks on the East Coast of the USA. That's because the big volcano on the Canary Islands could someday collapse into the ocean. And since it's facing west, the resultant tsunami could wipe out some of our east coast cities, towns, harbors, docks, etc.
Just sayin'....
Mostly it seems California could get hit by tsunamis generated far out in the Pacific, like Japan, and by the time they get here, they are relatively dissapated. Or from Alaska, again, dissipated and the effects mainly far to the north of the SF Bay Area.
Of more concern should be folks on the East Coast of the USA. That's because the big volcano on the Canary Islands could someday collapse into the ocean. And since it's facing west, the resultant tsunami could wipe out some of our east coast cities, towns, harbors, docks, etc.
Just sayin'....
"ONE of the world’s foremost volcanologists has warned that if a very active volcano on the Canary Islands is the next to blow, the coasts of Europe, the UK and the USA could be devastated by huge mega-tsunamis.
"Professor Stephen Sparks, based at the University of Bristol, made the revelation about Cumbre Vieja, a very active volcano on the island of La Palma, adjacent to the popular holiday destination of Tenerife. He explained to Express Online: “When you have volcanic islands sticking out of the sea, they’re very unstable. And, in some cases, you can get gigantic landslides when part of the island essentially collapses into the sea.
"Professor Stephen Sparks, based at the University of Bristol, made the revelation about Cumbre Vieja, a very active volcano on the island of La Palma, adjacent to the popular holiday destination of Tenerife. He explained to Express Online: “When you have volcanic islands sticking out of the sea, they’re very unstable. And, in some cases, you can get gigantic landslides when part of the island essentially collapses into the sea."
Now, in all fairness, scientific opinion is divided on this. But it seems to me that our east coast will be severely impacted by a tsunami is as likely as our west coast south of Eureka suffering the same fate. Just remember: the Atlantic Ocean is a lot more narrow than the Pacific... LOL...
https://www.express.co.uk/news/worl...ing-of-Fire-Canary-Islands-La-Palma-Indonesia
"Professor Stephen Sparks, based at the University of Bristol, made the revelation about Cumbre Vieja, a very active volcano on the island of La Palma, adjacent to the popular holiday destination of Tenerife. He explained to Express Online: “When you have volcanic islands sticking out of the sea, they’re very unstable. And, in some cases, you can get gigantic landslides when part of the island essentially collapses into the sea.
"Professor Stephen Sparks, based at the University of Bristol, made the revelation about Cumbre Vieja, a very active volcano on the island of La Palma, adjacent to the popular holiday destination of Tenerife. He explained to Express Online: “When you have volcanic islands sticking out of the sea, they’re very unstable. And, in some cases, you can get gigantic landslides when part of the island essentially collapses into the sea."
Now, in all fairness, scientific opinion is divided on this. But it seems to me that our east coast will be severely impacted by a tsunami is as likely as our west coast south of Eureka suffering the same fate. Just remember: the Atlantic Ocean is a lot more narrow than the Pacific... LOL...
https://www.express.co.uk/news/worl...ing-of-Fire-Canary-Islands-La-Palma-Indonesia
Distance between Japan and SF: about 5,400 miles
Distance between La Palma and Florida: about 3,900 miles
Distance between La Palma and Florida: about 3,900 miles
vacerator
Well-known member
Yes,
Discovery channel or Learning channel aired that 20 years ago about LaPalma. Miami would be in trouble.
Discovery channel or Learning channel aired that 20 years ago about LaPalma. Miami would be in trouble.
cornutt
Well-known member
Gas space heaters
When I was a child, we spent a lot of time in the houses of relatives that were heated in part with unvented gas room heaters. They weren't considered particularly unsafe. However, everyone that had them knew what the flame was supposed to look like. I remember my grandfather showing me how to adjust the air shutter. He taught me to open it until the flame started to lift off of the burner orifices, and then close it back slowly until the flame just touched back down. He told me that if I ever saw one burning yellow, to shut it off and tell an adult.
They probably considered them a big safety improvement (not to mention convenience) over the coal stoves that preceded them. I was told many stories about people who either died of, or barely escaped from, the "coal damp".
When I was a child, we spent a lot of time in the houses of relatives that were heated in part with unvented gas room heaters. They weren't considered particularly unsafe. However, everyone that had them knew what the flame was supposed to look like. I remember my grandfather showing me how to adjust the air shutter. He taught me to open it until the flame started to lift off of the burner orifices, and then close it back slowly until the flame just touched back down. He told me that if I ever saw one burning yellow, to shut it off and tell an adult.
They probably considered them a big safety improvement (not to mention convenience) over the coal stoves that preceded them. I was told many stories about people who either died of, or barely escaped from, the "coal damp".
