Out of Control Candle

[How2FoldSoup]

Most recent EPA studies on fracking have declared it 'safe', although there is still a large group/political agenda which insists it isn't.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/09/the_science_is_settled_fracking_is_safe.html

http://blog.ucsusa.org/is-fracking-safe-now-what-the-epas-fracking-and-drinking-water-study-really-says-755

Define safe....

In the first article, it states that 130 wells were checked, and when professional and safety conduct was followed(keyword) it was not a problem. However, of those 130 wells there was contaimination of ground water systems. The point is, that mistakes will always be made. You can not expect oil companies who always want more more more not to rush the creation of new fracking facilities. Mistakes will be made. Fracking is obviously not safe if when doing so, mistakes are made, and water is contaminated. It's a contradiction..

Wow, the article also says this:

Earthquakes and volcanoes, both above ground and underwater, release huge quantities of gases into the environment on a regular basis.

When fracking has been known to increase the frequency and magnitude of earthquakes in heavily fracked areas. They are providing evidence for exactly the contrary of what the article is trying to prove.

You can see in this article from NPR which has a graph of number of earthquakes in Oklahoma, along with suitable evidence that links these quakes to fracked wells, both current and disposed.

https://stateimpact.npr.org/oklahoma/tag/earthquakes/

Your second article actually contradicts your point as well.

It covers whether a recent epa study headline was actually true or not, and states that there are actually many risks still associated with fracking, but ONLY talks about that there is no "systematic" contamination of groundwater. However, as we know because it was stated in your first linked article, there are cases where mistakes are made in safety when drilling these wells and ground water is still contaminated.

Take this information as you will.

Edited July 18, 2015 by How2FoldSoup

[LordFerret]

Define safe....

In the first article, it states that 130 wells were checked, and when professional and safety conduct was followed(keyword) it was not a problem. However, of those 130 wells there was contaimination of ground water systems. The point is, that mistakes will always be made. You can not expect oil companies who always want more more more not to rush the creation of new fracking facilities. Mistakes will be made. Fracking is obviously not safe if when doing so, mistakes are made, and water is contaminated. It's a contradiction..

Wow, the article also says this:

When fracking has been known to increase the frequency and magnitude of earthquakes in heavily fracked areas. They are providing evidence for exactly the contrary of what the article is trying to prove.

You can see in this article from NPR which has a graph of number of earthquakes in Oklahoma, along with suitable evidence that links these quakes to fracked wells, both current and disposed.

https://stateimpact.npr.org/oklahoma/tag/earthquakes/

You can site something for me there from a real authority, not the NPR, which has it's own agenda. The EPA, worst of the worst when it comes to such 'green' things, has conceded as reported. I have people in the industry who would tell you it was all bunk from the start... groundwater systems already 'contaminated' via natural means (metals, gasses, etc)... the flammable tap-water but one example (coal region). Either way, stocks-wise, we're making money on it.

As for the wax experiment... I'll go with Tex_NL, a bucket of sand, or a class 3 fire extinguisher.

[Sampa]

You can site something for me there from a real authority, not the NPR, which has it's own agenda. The EPA, worst of the worst when it comes to such 'green' things, has conceded as reported. I have people in the industry who would tell you it was all bunk from the start... groundwater systems already 'contaminated' via natural means (metals, gasses, etc)... the flammable tap-water but one example (coal region). Either way, stocks-wise, we're making money on it.

As for the wax experiment... I'll go with Tex_NL, a bucket of sand, or a class 3 fire extinguisher.

From what I have learned in my AMT class, I will also go with the Class 3 fire extinguisher

[Technical Ben]

Never douse fluid combustibles with water.

This is what happens:

Water mixes with molten wax

Water flash-boils

Molten wax gets dissipated through the air

All the wax reacts with oxygen

Violent deflagration

This.

[Sampa]

I double checked my info, Starwhip. Ylou need to have a fire extinguisher with a Class B rating for liquid fires

[PB666]

You can site something for me there from a real authority, not the NPR, which has it's own agenda. The EPA, worst of the worst when it comes to such 'green' things, has conceded as reported. I have people in the industry who would tell you it was all bunk from the start... groundwater systems already 'contaminated' via natural means (metals, gasses, etc)... the flammable tap-water but one example (coal region). Either way, stocks-wise, we're making money on it.

As for the wax experiment... I'll go with Tex_NL, a bucket of sand, or a class 3 fire extinguisher.

What the EPA actually said is the the claimants did not provide adequate evidence to draw a conclusion. The problem is that people who own wells is isolate areas own wells. Many never monitored their water before the fracking began. An well water quality ebbs and flows over time (I know this because I have a friend who has two wells on his property, one well has good water but goes dry easily. The other has bad sulfery water but is more consistent. The did the gas well on his property and guess what, the bad water still tastes bad.

They found that the quality of some well water was poor, but they could not determine if the cause was fracking other other cyclical or manmade induced problems. Methane gas is released from areas from time to time, an example of this is when the indian subcontinent slammed into Asia, it is speculated that huge natural gas and oil reserves were disrupted, causing a period of climate change 35 million years ago.

The other thing that was found is that the mini-quakes that are occurring, and could be the source of the gas leaking is not due to fracking, but due to reinjection wells used to dispose of the fracking fluids. What frequently would happen is that a driller(s) would create several fracking wells, the money they make is in each well. They would go to some proximal site and there is not money to be made in an injection well. So they inject fluid into an old well or a reinjection well. Since the volume going in is mulitiple times the volume going out the underground pressure markedly goes up in the area of the reinjection wells, and siesmic studies indicate they are causing cracking of bedrock. The problem is that the gas plays are not just one area, the shale covers huge areas, if you rupture the bedrock deep enough anywhere in north Texas or south Texas there is going to be some gas liberated. There are also safety issues that came up with reinjection and so now that companies are laying off contractors and more of the work is being done by people who work for the companies they are also responsible for safety.

Cryptically oil companies are being asked not to reinject, and if the reinjection sites are all filled they are being asked to tank the waste to depleted salt domes where the quake hazard is alot less. Back in the hey-day of frack drilling there were not enough trucks to transport the wastes, so companies just reinjected until the ground pressure was so high they could not inject any more waste, now the boom is over, shipping is not such a big problem.

As for the wax.

Have a fire extinquisher in your kitchen.

Have a cover for oil fires in the kitchen that is close by.

Wax is high meltiing point oil, never throw water on hot oil close to a flame.

The best solution was to move the candle to a cookie sheet, grab several sheets of aluminum foil. Stack them on top of each other and create a cone out of the foil then carryful

Invert the cone over the candle without touching the flame and carefully constrict the opening. Then take a piece of tape and tape around the crushed foil opening down to the stick of the candle.

The reason the candle got hotter when it was covered is that O2 is depleted slowly but you increased the temperature of the wax and decrease the deltaT required to reach the C-H ionization point, as a consequence more ions were being volatilized.

Certified Highrise Fire Warden training CoH. In a fire that reaches your ceiling you have - No time, no visibility, No breathable air, Unbearable heat. Standard kitchen fire- Cover, if spread- Fire extinguishers for 5 sec, Close door to affected area, warn, seal bottom of door if possible, evacuate, turn off electrical power (outside), call fire department.

Most common causes of housefires.

Electrical, space heaters, cooking, smoking and candles.

For emergencies have a rated battery powered latern. The new laterns use LED or flourescent lights and can produce for hours. An all purpose battery powered lantern can be obtained from any sporting goods store. Invest, it is worth the effort (Sheltered in place for Rita, Allison, and Ike).

[WinkAllKerb'']

If you fart too much in the bath then the corridor burn ? (oops ; )

[Tex_NL]

I double checked my info, Starwhip. Ylou need to have a fire extinguisher with a Class B rating for liquid fires

Class B should be enough as those are rated to extinguish things like cooking liquids, oil, gasoline, kerosene and paint.

- - - Updated - - -

...

As for the wax.

Have a fire extinquisher in your kitchen.

Have a cover for oil fires in the kitchen that is close by.

Wax is high meltiing point oil, never throw water on hot oil close to a flame.

The best solution was to move the candle to a cookie sheet, grab several sheets of aluminum foil. Stack them on top of each other and create a cone out of the foil then carryful

Invert the cone over the candle without touching the flame and carefully constrict the opening. Then take a piece of tape and tape around the crushed foil opening down to the stick of the candle.

The reason the candle got hotter when it was covered is that O2 is depleted slowly but you increased the temperature of the wax and decrease the deltaT required to reach the C-H ionization point, as a consequence more ions were being volatilized.

...

Why this elaborate method? We're talking about a simple candle here. What's wrong with simply blowing it out? People have been doing it that way for centuries.

[ElWanderer]

I've seen this done as a party trick at festivals. Put a tea light (a very small candle in a metal holder) on the camp fire, wait for it to heat up, then tip a bit of beverage onto it... and whoooomph. And then try not to look too guilty when security wander over and ask what you just did. I had never really wondered what the cause of the jet of flame was before.

The Wikipedia page on Boilover links to this, which has a video clip (gif I presume) : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wax_fire

[lajoswinkler]

It still doesn't explain how the hell did it heat itself that much. When such experiments with wax/oil is done, you actually heat the container with flame until it starts smoking.

[cantab]

Seems explained well enough. I suppose I wouldn't have expected it because you think of wax candles as solid, but of course the wax melts and vaporises to burn. Thinking about it any candle where the wax is in a container can make a decent pool of molten wax, tealights often completely melt for example. I'll file this away for future reference.

If you need to safely extinguish a candle and can't blow it out, snuff it out. A spoon will normally be fine, or maybe a coffee mug.

[How2FoldSoup]

You can site something for me there from a real authority, not the NPR, which has it's own agenda. The EPA, worst of the worst when it comes to such 'green' things, has conceded as reported. I have people in the industry who would tell you it was all bunk from the start... groundwater systems already 'contaminated' via natural means (metals, gasses, etc)... the flammable tap-water but one example (coal region). Either way, stocks-wise, we're making money on it.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/induced/

Or does anything from the government have it's own agenda? If that's the case, than your initial counter intuitive citing of the EPA is also poop since it's also a government agency. You cannot deny the correlation between the increase in fracking and along with the increase of frequency and intensity of nearby earthquakes. It's like denying the increase of smoke in a room after you blew out a candle, belonged to the candle! Regardless, your people in the industry know better than anyone else I'm sure, they couldn't possibly be the ones profiting off of all of this in the first place. Why paint a bad light on a good profit?

It's not worth going any deeper with you in this - I've seen you argue before there's no point in trying to talk to a closed door. You will believe what you will believe. However, if for every source I try and give you has an agenda then the very same must be true for yours, which means there's no problems right? The usgs(and NPR by extension) must be making these earthquakes up.

[YNM]

Probably the fact that they're held in glass bottles makes some of the wax stays liquefied (not a problem when you have those tall candles for example, they just melt and re-soldifies). And that's liquid fuel, you know about it. Glass broke because these things are hot, then you douse it with coldness.

Should be thread lock ? Main question well answered, oil wells aren't in his house.

[WinkAllKerb'']

that's where the bubblegum is useful to avoid leak xDr (1951 metaphorically quickly speaking because science talk would result in a wall of text ; )

;3 ;3 ;3

Edited July 19, 2015 by WinkAllKerb''

[r4pt0r]

Late to the thread, but whatever.

Citronella candles(for repelling mosquitos) do not handle water well.

On camping trips my dad, who is a bit of a pyro, has placed a bucket style citronella candle, in the firepit to liquefy it. Then some sprays of water will make it flare up, or plop an icecube(or lots of water) in for a good 6 to 12 foot fireball.

that might have been the cause.

[K^2]

Really?

If we still had those candles I'd check what the wax was made of.

Paraffin wax. While some candles are made from real bees wax, and there are variety of sealing wax candles, you pretty much have to be looking for these in specialty stores. Almost all modern candles, scented or otherwise, are paraffin.

And yes, paraffin is most definitely the fuel for the candle. Wick just helps turn liquid paraffin into flammable vapor. What Psycix described is precisely what you've seen happen. Flash boiling, droplets of paraffin in the air, big fireball.

[lajoswinkler]

Seems explained well enough. I suppose I wouldn't have expected it because you think of wax candles as solid, but of course the wax melts and vaporises to burn. Thinking about it any candle where the wax is in a container can make a decent pool of molten wax, tealights often completely melt for example. I'll file this away for future reference.

If you need to safely extinguish a candle and can't blow it out, snuff it out. A spoon will normally be fine, or maybe a coffee mug.

Paraffin wax. While some candles are made from real bees wax, and there are variety of sealing wax candles, you pretty much have to be looking for these in specialty stores. Almost all modern candles, scented or otherwise, are paraffin.

And yes, paraffin is most definitely the fuel for the candle. Wick just helps turn liquid paraffin into flammable vapor. What Psycix described is precisely what you've seen happen. Flash boiling, droplets of paraffin in the air, big fireball.

For paraffin to cause the water to flash into steam, you need paraffin at high temperature. Way higher than 100 °C.

A cup candle dissipates heat well enough so I don't see how the temperature of it can reach enormous values just by the flame on its wick. It's ridiculous to even think that could happen. No, there was something wrong with the "wax". It was probably something else in question.

[Tex_NL]

For paraffin to cause the water to flash into steam, you need paraffin at high temperature. Way higher than 100 °C.

...

How much higher are you thinking off? You don't need extreme temperatures AT ALL!

We KNOW flash boiling water can happen with cooking oil. YouTube is full of video's showing what happens. Most deep-fryers are set to roughly 180°C and regular paraffin wax ignites at 199°C to 249°C (depending on additives).

A candle flame reaches temperatures in excess of 1000°C easily heating the wax well past 100°C. If the glass bottled candle Starwhip described in the OP is what I think it is it's roughly the size of a coffee cup. If all is melted a small amount of water WILL instantly turn to steam!

[lajoswinkler]

How much higher are you thinking off?

We KNOW flash boiling water can happen with cooking oil. YouTube is full of video's showing what happens. Most deep-fryers are set to roughly 180°C and regular paraffin wax ignites at 199°C to 249°C (depending on additives).

A candle flame reaches temperatures in excess of 1000°C easily heating the wax well past 100°C. If the glass bottled candle Starwhip described in the OP is what I think it is it's roughly the size of a coffee cup. If all is melted a small amount of water WILL instantly turn to steam!

The Z-machine did a peak of 3.7 billion kelvin.

Does that mean there's a huge crater where Albuquerque was? Temperature =/= heat.

For actual paraffin wax, at least 200 °C is needed to reach flash point. If the wax isn't hot enough, not only water won't erupt, but nothing will ignite.

I'm telling you this was not paraffin wax. It had additives and needs to be banned because it's a fire hazard.

[Tex_NL]

It is NOT the paraffin wax that flash boils. It is the water!

A small amount of water in molten wax or oil at any temperature significantly over 100°C instantly turns to steam violently throwing out the oil or wax. Those small droplets of wax or oil then instantly ignite resulting in a huge fireball. Even common sawdust or non-dairy coffee creamer violently ignite when dispersed and exposed to a naked flame.

Only the core of a Z-machine reaches those temperatures for a fraction of a second. That core is NOT exposed to ANY flammable materials.

Edited July 19, 2015 by Tex_NL

[cantab]

A wax fire is a known, described phenomenon that accounts for what has been observed. "Additives" in the wax could make such a fire more likely when dousing a candle by making the wax easier to melt through or by making the candle burn more fiercely, but the likely mechanism remains the same - water flashing to steam and propelling the molten wax upwards into the ignition source of the candle flame. If you don't believe that can happen then what's your alternative hypothesis?

[lajoswinkler]

It is NOT the paraffin wax that flash boils. It is the water!

A small amount of water in molten wax or oil at any temperature significantly over 100°C instantly turns to steam violently throwing out the oil or wax. Those small droplets of wax or oil then instantly ignite resulting in a huge fireball. Even common sawdust or non-dairy coffee creamer violently ignite when dispersed and exposed to a naked flame.

Only the core of a Z-machine reaches those temperatures for a fraction of a second. That core is NOT exposed to ANY flammable materials.

I know how the thing happens. I've also done it many times. Yes, it's the water that does it, obviously.

Thing is, cup of water won't erupt into steam just like that. It needs heat. Lots of heat. Quantity a cup candle heated to expected temperatures simply doesn't have. It's a candle, not a cup of wax on a stove.

You can't seriously compare firefighting experiments where a small cup of water is added into a pan of smoking oil with this scenario. OP's candle was not made out of wax. It was something more volatile, more flammable.

No, small droplets of wax won't instantly ignite. They are not pyrophoric. They need flame.

[Tex_NL]

Lajoswinkler, please go back to page one and re-read the original post. Please focus on the following parts: "They were in glass bottles, and had some sort of scented wax." and "So, to put it out (Probably should have put a lid on it in hindsight) I put it in the sink and turned on the faucet."

We're NOT talking about a regular candle but on inside a glass bottle. So in basis is IS a cup of molten wax. And Starwhip was trying to extinguish the candle so there was an open flame. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Guess what; surprise surprise, it is a duck. 1 + 1 = 2

[Albert VDS]

The only way to solve this is for Tex_NL to recreate it.

[lajoswinkler]

Lajoswinkler, please go back to page one and re-read the original post. Please focus on the following parts: "They were in glass bottles, and had some sort of scented wax." and "So, to put it out (Probably should have put a lid on it in hindsight) I put it in the sink and turned on the faucet."

We're NOT talking about a regular candle but on inside a glass bottle. So in basis is IS a cup of molten wax. And Starwhip was trying to extinguish the candle so there was an open flame. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck. Guess what; surprise surprise, it is a duck. 1 + 1 = 2

I've done insane things in my life. All kinds of experiments, pyro ones as well. I can assure you that can not happen with paraffin wax. FFS, I used to extinguish candles like that. Yes, the ones in bottles. How on earth can a bottle heat itself up to those temperatures is beyond my understanding. The heat is being radiated, conducted and convected out of it all the time and the equilibrium can not be where temperature is so high. However, if it was not paraffin wax, but some mixture with other heavy esters, alcohols and fatty acids, it is a possibility that they are so volatile even some tiny initial splurt of water can cause the material to ignite and be carried by the agitated water (just by the force of the faucet) upwards. I can totally see that happening with very volatile oily stuff, but not regular paraffin wax.

If it was that hot, he'd burn his hand when grabbing the cup.