can you say anal retentive?


"Gideon" wrote in message
. ..
Yes, you are "asking after the fact." You asked "after the fact" if
what you did was safe. Re-read your original post. Your very first
sentence is:
Is burning copper dangerous?

Duh, that sounds like "asking after the fact" to me.

Your example of fake logs is worthless unless you know how
much copper is contained in a fake log compared to how much
copper you tossed on the campfire. Plus, how much copper
are you breathing in your family room when the fireplace has
a proper draft and a well-designed chimney, versus how much
copper is somebody downwind breathing while you are tossing
copper on the campfire?

You screwed up. You acted in ignorance. You were impolite
when challenged about your behavior. You are extremely lucky
that you didn't get punched out.



wrote in message ...
Well, if you take a piece of copper pipe and grind it on your grinder,
it's PURE copper (aside from any abrasive wheel dust that gets in).
What I tossed in the fire was exactly this, except not from copper
pipe, on a grinder, but from copper banding dust from a power hacksaw.
I am not asking "after the fact". I have been stuffing this copper
dust into a pill bottle for years. and always take some with me to
campouts. I get it at work and it is waste. It makes nice looking
flames both at camp, and at home in my fireplace.

Just for the record, you can buy fake logs, which are pretty much
nothing more than sawdust combined with parafin wax, and a little
copper dust to create colorful flames. These are sold at stores all
over the country, such as Walmart.

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005 03:25:06 -0400, w_tom wrote:

I am also rather troubled that he threw what he 'assumed'
was copper in the fire. In a fire without a chimney so that
others downwind would breath it. Previous posts have
demonstrated, copper does not burn in colors. Copper
compounds do. But the OP apparently does not know what he was
throwing on the fire. He is only concerned after the fact and
somehow assumes it was copper - that would not burn that way.
I find such actions of naivety to be very troubling -
potentially dangerous.

Gideon wrote:
Id be ****ed. Id say he was justified, enjoying his vacation , You
ruined it.

Burning many products will harm you, CCA treated wood can permanantly
poison you with heavy metal. Copper is a poison, Copper sulfate is
dangerous in powder and likely burnt, as metals will not burn up
completely at low campfire temps, mearly they are airborn.

You are an ass hole camper, camping is to be fun and enjoy the
outdoors, not having people pollute through noise, abuse or pollution.
Whether or not your product afected him he was inteligent to be worried.
So he was happy and drunk and a nice guy, and you ruined his vacation. I
hope you are proud you moron. You are lucky he wasnt a murderer, he
would have had a defence.

=====================

I agree. We are only hearing one side of the story and it may be
that there were 2 drunks involved in the incident.

Anybody downwind or nearby has the right to inquire when he
observes some moron dumping "chemicals" on a bondfire. I use
the word "moron" because the original poster is asking about the
safety of his act AFTER he has done it. Then he rants about the
other camper.

Copper chloride is one of the most commonly used chemicals for
producing vivid blue colors in pyrotechnics. This is generally regarded
as safe, although it should be pointed out that quantities are often
very small and/or the comps are ignited far from spectators and often
high in the air. Dangers associated with breathing non-trivial amounts
of copper compounds include metal fume fever, nasal ulcers, and
respiratory irritation.

The important point is not the dangers of the copper salts on the fire,
but the attitude of the original poster who feels that he can perform
the act without thinking, and then throw down the gauntlet when
somebody questions his actions.