Last week there was a massive natural gas explosion in Wisconsin that
the reporters said actually "flipped" the house. The house was
completely destoroyed, resident killed, and several neighboring houses
were destroyed. Debris was found up to 13 blocks away. The fire
dept. said it's the worst they have ever seen.

I have friends who live near the place where this explosion occurred,
who told me about it, so I looked up the media coverage on the web.
Looking at the coverage and videos, is amazing.

I am posting this because I dont understand what they are saying (in
the article below).

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone? The reports said
that there was no leak underground before the meter. Obviously if the
meter showed the high usage, the leak was AFTER the meter. The meters
are right on the outside of the house and the pipes enter the basement
at that place.

If there was gas leaking into the basement, someone would have noticed
it after 3 weeks. (as stated in the article). Since no one noticed
it, it was obviously not entering the house before the explosion.
This makes me question where the gas was going.......
I sure the heck cant understand this. And you'd think that the fire
investigators surely could figure it out. I have been trying to
rationalize this, and it makes no sense.....

Anyone have any ideas?

---------------- The article below -----------------

From: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=616721

Exact source of Tosa leak elusive
Fire chief says evidence points to rapid buildup of gas in basement

June 7, 2007

Wauwatosa - Investigators believe a sudden buildup of natural gas in
the basement of a home caused the deadly explosion that killed an
elderly woman and destroyed three houses in Wauwatosa last week.

But they might never be able to pinpoint the exact source of the leak,
Wauwatosa Fire Chief Dean Redman said Thursday.

According to Redman, investigators found 10 places inside the home
where gas piping had split apart. But it could not be determined, he
said, whether those fractures were pre-existing or caused by the
blast.

Redman said the home's insurer might do additional tests in an effort
to determine that.

"But we may never know the exact point at which the gas escaped into
the house," he said.

Lorraine Gaulke, 80, died June 2 when the explosion ripped apart her
home in the 10900 block of W. Wisconsin Ave. shortly after 11 a.m. At
least two adjacent homes also were destroyed, and as many as 20 others
were damaged in the blast that sent debris flying as far as 13 blocks
away.

A medical examiner's report says Gaulke died of "mechanical asphyxia,"
meaning she could not breathe because of the weight of debris on her.

The Wauwatosa Fire Department and state fire marshal are completing
their reports. But Redman said all evidence - from meter readings to
the way Gaulke's house came down - points to a sudden surge of gas
pooling in the basement and being ignited by a pilot light or some
other source there.

Among the evidence, according to Redman:

*Gaulke had only three gas appliances - a furnace, dryer and water
heater - all in the basement.

*Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing through
Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas would
have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic. And
when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but left
the floor intact.

*The explosion pushed the house off its foundation and flipped the
first floor.

Both Redman and We Energies said there was no evidence to suggest a
leak outside the home.

Utility spokesman Barry McNulty said the company found no leaks in its
pipes or equipment around the home and no problems in a door-to-door
canvass of homes in the area after the blast.

McNulty said the gas meter at Gaulke's home was replaced in March. But
he and Assistant Fire Chief Jeff Hevey, who is heading the
investigation, said there is no evidence to suggest that was a factor
in the explosion.

We Energies received no reports of a smell indicating a gas leak from
the home over the last month, and two reports of such an odor in the
area since May 1 were unrelated, he said.

As standard procedure, McNulty said, We Energies is mandated by the
state Public Service Commission to recheck the area to ensure that the
force of the blast did not compromise any equipment.

"And we'll be doing that as soon as the fire marshal and fire chief
give us the high sign," McNulty said.

writes:

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone?

I don't think that's what happened. Probably the last meter reading
was done on May 11. The reading on June 2 indicated that *sometime
during that period* there was a high flow of gas, because the June 2
reading is higher than you'd expect from previous normal consumption.
But the gas flow might have been perfectly normal until 15 minutes
before the explosion, at which time something failed and started
leaking fast.

Now, reading the statement as written, you'd think that gas flow was
high for the whole 3 weeks, but unless the gas meter is some sort of
fancy electronic type that keeps a record of gas flow vs. time, there's
no possible way to tell the difference between a slightly high flow for
3 weeks and a normal flow for 3 weeks followed by a large leak.

I'd chalk this up to sloppy writing by the author.

Dave

Dave Martindale wrote:
writes:

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone?

I don't think that's what happened. Probably the last meter reading
was done on May 11. The reading on June 2 indicated that *sometime
during that period* there was a high flow of gas, because the June 2
reading is higher than you'd expect from previous normal consumption.
But the gas flow might have been perfectly normal until 15 minutes
before the explosion, at which time something failed and started
leaking fast.

Now, reading the statement as written, you'd think that gas flow was
high for the whole 3 weeks, but unless the gas meter is some sort of
fancy electronic type that keeps a record of gas flow vs. time, there's
no possible way to tell the difference between a slightly high flow for
3 weeks and a normal flow for 3 weeks followed by a large leak.

I'd chalk this up to sloppy writing by the author.

I'd agree w/ the assessment and add the writer probably had no clue what
was writing about...

I'd be _very_ surprised if an _expert_ forensic examination couldn't
pinpoint the actual explosion ignition point and pre- as opposed to
post-explosion leaks, but not too surprised if the resources required
weren't assigned to the task.

If I were a gas customer in the area, however, I'd surely be considering
doing some serious checking on conditions of my service lines...

--

--

"Dave Martindale" wrote in message
...
writes:

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone?

I don't think that's what happened. Probably the last meter reading
was done on May 11. The reading on June 2 indicated that *sometime
during that period* there was a high flow of gas, because the June 2
reading is higher than you'd expect from previous normal consumption.
But the gas flow might have been perfectly normal until 15 minutes
before the explosion, at which time something failed and started
leaking fast.

Now, reading the statement as written, you'd think that gas flow was
high for the whole 3 weeks, but unless the gas meter is some sort of
fancy electronic type that keeps a record of gas flow vs. time, there's
no possible way to tell the difference between a slightly high flow for
3 weeks and a normal flow for 3 weeks followed by a large leak.

I'd chalk this up to sloppy writing by the author.

A data logging electronic gas meter would need a back-up battery and ac
power plus some computer chips. I'd guess that you are correct that there
is no way to determine when high use occurred, other than during a
particular billing cycle.

Natural gas is lighter than air but still can collect in a basement if the
leak is severe. So, if something ruptured and filled the basement that
could explain the lifting of the house. The house most likely had a gas hot
water heater and when it ignited it could have touched off the explosion.

On Jun 10, 4:07 pm, (Dave Martindale) wrote:
writes:
I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"
The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone?

I don't think that's what happened. Probably the last meter reading
was done on May 11. The reading on June 2 indicated that *sometime
during that period* there was a high flow of gas, because the June 2
reading is higher than you'd expect from previous normal consumption.
But the gas flow might have been perfectly normal until 15 minutes
before the explosion, at which time something failed and started
leaking fast.

Now, reading the statement as written, you'd think that gas flow was
high for the whole 3 weeks, but unless the gas meter is some sort of
fancy electronic type that keeps a record of gas flow vs. time, there's
no possible way to tell the difference between a slightly high flow for
3 weeks and a normal flow for 3 weeks followed by a large leak.

I'd chalk this up to sloppy writing by the author.

Dave

The 3 week period is probably the period since the last recorded
reading of the meter. The gas leak probably started leaking vast
amounts right before the explosion. If natural gas it filled the
basement from the basement "ceiling" down to the floor where it was
most likely ignited by the water heater pilot.

Also, if the meter were not immediately destroyed it would have
recorded even more gas pouring thru it as gas continued to escape from
the damaged house piping system.

boom.....

About 15 years a go a house here was being slowly torn down, somehow
workers with heavy equipment busted the gas line...inside the
house.....couple hours after workmen left the house exploded. I was 3
houses down sitting on the bedroom floor gong thru some personal
papers. While the explosion didnt "lift me off the floor" it did shake
the house ...lol. Our home suffered no damage....only a church next to
the house that exploded suffered any damage.

On Jun 10, 3:26 pm, "Charles" wrote:
"Dave Martindale" wrote in message

...



writes:

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone?

I don't think that's what happened. Probably the last meter reading
was done on May 11. The reading on June 2 indicated that *sometime
during that period* there was a high flow of gas, because the June 2
reading is higher than you'd expect from previous normal consumption.
But the gas flow might have been perfectly normal until 15 minutes
before the explosion, at which time something failed and started
leaking fast.

Now, reading the statement as written, you'd think that gas flow was
high for the whole 3 weeks, but unless the gas meter is some sort of
fancy electronic type that keeps a record of gas flow vs. time, there's
no possible way to tell the difference between a slightly high flow for
3 weeks and a normal flow for 3 weeks followed by a large leak.

I'd chalk this up to sloppy writing by the author.

A data logging electronic gas meter would need a back-up battery and ac
power plus some computer chips. I'd guess that you are correct that there
is no way to determine when high use occurred, other than during a
particular billing cycle.

Natural gas is lighter than air but still can collect in a basement if the
leak is severe. So, if something ruptured and filled the basement that
could explain the lifting of the house. The house most likely had a gas hot
water heater and when it ignited it could have touched off the explosion.

I live the in the same city as the explosion. No fancy gas meters in
this area, and 99 / 100 houses here have a gas meter that provides low
pressure (8-10" on a water column) so no regulators are required at
the appliances.

Hard to imagine how enough gas could accumulate to cause this. The
pressure is so low that you can't imagine anything "bursting". I
would think that the most likely appliance to provide a huge gas flow
would be a range with a couple of unlit burners on, but there is no
information which indicates that the homeowner had one.

I actually looked at a "fixer-upper" property that was damaged by a
gas explosion. The dryer had been removed, and the owner turned the
supply valve "ON" thinking he was turning it "OFF" after the dryer was
disconnected. He then left the house which went BOOM about 1/2 hour
later. Less damage than this latest Wauwatosa house, but still pretty
bad. The explosion blew all the face brick off the house, and damaged
the framing where the wall studs met the roof framing.

Our local journalists leave much to be desired, so it would be no
surprise to see them get the story wrong or draw the wrong
conclusions.

JK
Wauwatosa, WI

In the report it says debris was found 13 blocks away. THIS WAS NOT A GAS
EXPLOSION only. Gas has a "soft" explosion, dynamite and other explosives
have hard explosions. When the forensic experts are finished determining
what happened I am certain they will find that the actual explosion was
generated by a high explosive, and the gas was just involved. This had to be
set.

In my city over about 10 years there have been 3 explosions that leaking gas
was blamed. In every case, it was gas, but it was purposely set by someone
by opening a pipe or connection. In all the gas explosions several houses on
all sides were damaged even destroyed but the damage did not extend more
than part of a block. Gas only explodes within a narrow range of gas to air
ratio, too little gas and it won't blow, too much gas and it cannot blow, so
more gas does not make a bigger bang.

40 years working with a major gas utility taught me a lot about gas.

wrote in message
...
Last week there was a massive natural gas explosion in Wisconsin that
the reporters said actually "flipped" the house. The house was
completely destoroyed, resident killed, and several neighboring houses
were destroyed. Debris was found up to 13 blocks away. The fire
dept. said it's the worst they have ever seen.

I have friends who live near the place where this explosion occurred,
who told me about it, so I looked up the media coverage on the web.
Looking at the coverage and videos, is amazing.

I am posting this because I dont understand what they are saying (in
the article below).

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone? The reports said
that there was no leak underground before the meter. Obviously if the
meter showed the high usage, the leak was AFTER the meter. The meters
are right on the outside of the house and the pipes enter the basement
at that place.

If there was gas leaking into the basement, someone would have noticed
it after 3 weeks. (as stated in the article). Since no one noticed
it, it was obviously not entering the house before the explosion.
This makes me question where the gas was going.......
I sure the heck cant understand this. And you'd think that the fire
investigators surely could figure it out. I have been trying to
rationalize this, and it makes no sense.....

Anyone have any ideas?

---------------- The article below -----------------

From: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=616721

Exact source of Tosa leak elusive
Fire chief says evidence points to rapid buildup of gas in basement

June 7, 2007

Wauwatosa - Investigators believe a sudden buildup of natural gas in
the basement of a home caused the deadly explosion that killed an
elderly woman and destroyed three houses in Wauwatosa last week.

But they might never be able to pinpoint the exact source of the leak,
Wauwatosa Fire Chief Dean Redman said Thursday.

According to Redman, investigators found 10 places inside the home
where gas piping had split apart. But it could not be determined, he
said, whether those fractures were pre-existing or caused by the
blast.

Redman said the home's insurer might do additional tests in an effort
to determine that.

"But we may never know the exact point at which the gas escaped into
the house," he said.

Lorraine Gaulke, 80, died June 2 when the explosion ripped apart her
home in the 10900 block of W. Wisconsin Ave. shortly after 11 a.m. At
least two adjacent homes also were destroyed, and as many as 20 others
were damaged in the blast that sent debris flying as far as 13 blocks
away.

A medical examiner's report says Gaulke died of "mechanical asphyxia,"
meaning she could not breathe because of the weight of debris on her.

The Wauwatosa Fire Department and state fire marshal are completing
their reports. But Redman said all evidence - from meter readings to
the way Gaulke's house came down - points to a sudden surge of gas
pooling in the basement and being ignited by a pilot light or some
other source there.

Among the evidence, according to Redman:

*Gaulke had only three gas appliances - a furnace, dryer and water
heater - all in the basement.

*Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing through
Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas would
have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic. And
when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but left
the floor intact.

*The explosion pushed the house off its foundation and flipped the
first floor.

Both Redman and We Energies said there was no evidence to suggest a
leak outside the home.

Utility spokesman Barry McNulty said the company found no leaks in its
pipes or equipment around the home and no problems in a door-to-door
canvass of homes in the area after the blast.

McNulty said the gas meter at Gaulke's home was replaced in March. But
he and Assistant Fire Chief Jeff Hevey, who is heading the
investigation, said there is no evidence to suggest that was a factor
in the explosion.

We Energies received no reports of a smell indicating a gas leak from
the home over the last month, and two reports of such an odor in the
area since May 1 were unrelated, he said.

As standard procedure, McNulty said, We Energies is mandated by the
state Public Service Commission to recheck the area to ensure that the
force of the blast did not compromise any equipment.

"And we'll be doing that as soon as the fire marshal and fire chief
give us the high sign," McNulty said.

"EXT" wrote in message
anews.com...
In the report it says debris was found 13 blocks away. THIS WAS NOT A GAS
EXPLOSION only. Gas has a "soft" explosion, dynamite and other explosives
have hard explosions. When the forensic experts are finished determining
what happened I am certain they will find that the actual explosion was
generated by a high explosive, and the gas was just involved. This had to
be set.

13 blocks - that's over a mile. Maybe the owner was storing her black
powder next to the furnace?

"But officer, I didn't know you couldn't have 20 lbs of serpentine in your
basement."


In my city over about 10 years there have been 3 explosions that leaking
gas was blamed. In every case, it was gas, but it was purposely set by
someone by opening a pipe or connection. In all the gas explosions several
houses on all sides were damaged even destroyed but the damage did not
extend more than part of a block. Gas only explodes within a narrow range
of gas to air ratio, too little gas and it won't blow, too much gas and it
cannot blow, so more gas does not make a bigger bang.

40 years working with a major gas utility taught me a lot about gas.

wrote in message
...
Last week there was a massive natural gas explosion in Wisconsin that
the reporters said actually "flipped" the house. The house was
completely destoroyed, resident killed, and several neighboring houses
were destroyed. Debris was found up to 13 blocks away. The fire
dept. said it's the worst they have ever seen.

I have friends who live near the place where this explosion occurred,
who told me about it, so I looked up the media coverage on the web.
Looking at the coverage and videos, is amazing.

I am posting this because I dont understand what they are saying (in
the article below).

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone? The reports said
that there was no leak underground before the meter. Obviously if the
meter showed the high usage, the leak was AFTER the meter. The meters
are right on the outside of the house and the pipes enter the basement
at that place.

If there was gas leaking into the basement, someone would have noticed
it after 3 weeks. (as stated in the article). Since no one noticed
it, it was obviously not entering the house before the explosion.
This makes me question where the gas was going.......
I sure the heck cant understand this. And you'd think that the fire
investigators surely could figure it out. I have been trying to
rationalize this, and it makes no sense.....

Anyone have any ideas?

---------------- The article below -----------------

From: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=616721

Exact source of Tosa leak elusive
Fire chief says evidence points to rapid buildup of gas in basement

June 7, 2007

Wauwatosa - Investigators believe a sudden buildup of natural gas in
the basement of a home caused the deadly explosion that killed an
elderly woman and destroyed three houses in Wauwatosa last week.

But they might never be able to pinpoint the exact source of the leak,
Wauwatosa Fire Chief Dean Redman said Thursday.

According to Redman, investigators found 10 places inside the home
where gas piping had split apart. But it could not be determined, he
said, whether those fractures were pre-existing or caused by the
blast.

Redman said the home's insurer might do additional tests in an effort
to determine that.

"But we may never know the exact point at which the gas escaped into
the house," he said.

Lorraine Gaulke, 80, died June 2 when the explosion ripped apart her
home in the 10900 block of W. Wisconsin Ave. shortly after 11 a.m. At
least two adjacent homes also were destroyed, and as many as 20 others
were damaged in the blast that sent debris flying as far as 13 blocks
away.

A medical examiner's report says Gaulke died of "mechanical asphyxia,"
meaning she could not breathe because of the weight of debris on her.

The Wauwatosa Fire Department and state fire marshal are completing
their reports. But Redman said all evidence - from meter readings to
the way Gaulke's house came down - points to a sudden surge of gas
pooling in the basement and being ignited by a pilot light or some
other source there.

Among the evidence, according to Redman:

*Gaulke had only three gas appliances - a furnace, dryer and water
heater - all in the basement.

*Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing through
Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas would
have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic. And
when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but left
the floor intact.

*The explosion pushed the house off its foundation and flipped the
first floor.

Both Redman and We Energies said there was no evidence to suggest a
leak outside the home.

Utility spokesman Barry McNulty said the company found no leaks in its
pipes or equipment around the home and no problems in a door-to-door
canvass of homes in the area after the blast.

McNulty said the gas meter at Gaulke's home was replaced in March. But
he and Assistant Fire Chief Jeff Hevey, who is heading the
investigation, said there is no evidence to suggest that was a factor
in the explosion.

We Energies received no reports of a smell indicating a gas leak from
the home over the last month, and two reports of such an odor in the
area since May 1 were unrelated, he said.

As standard procedure, McNulty said, We Energies is mandated by the
state Public Service Commission to recheck the area to ensure that the
force of the blast did not compromise any equipment.

"And we'll be doing that as soon as the fire marshal and fire chief
give us the high sign," McNulty said.

On Jun 10, 10:18 pm, "EXT" wrote:
In the report it says debris was found 13 blocks away. THIS WAS NOT A GAS
EXPLOSION only. Gas has a "soft" explosion, dynamite and other explosives
have hard explosions. When the forensic experts are finished determining
what happened I am certain they will find that the actual explosion was
generated by a high explosive, and the gas was just involved. This had to be
set.

In my city over about 10 years there have been 3 explosions that leaking gas
was blamed. In every case, it was gas, but it was purposely set by someone
by opening a pipe or connection. In all the gas explosions several houses on
all sides were damaged even destroyed but the damage did not extend more
than part of a block. Gas only explodes within a narrow range of gas to air
ratio, too little gas and it won't blow, too much gas and it cannot blow, so
more gas does not make a bigger bang.

40 years working with a major gas utility taught me a lot about gas.

wrote in message

...



Last week there was a massive natural gas explosion in Wisconsin that
the reporters said actually "flipped" the house. The house was
completely destoroyed, resident killed, and several neighboring houses
were destroyed. Debris was found up to 13 blocks away. The fire
dept. said it's the worst they have ever seen.

I have friends who live near the place where this explosion occurred,
who told me about it, so I looked up the media coverage on the web.
Looking at the coverage and videos, is amazing.

I am posting this because I dont understand what they are saying (in
the article below).

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone? The reports said
that there was no leak underground before the meter. Obviously if the
meter showed the high usage, the leak was AFTER the meter. The meters
are right on the outside of the house and the pipes enter the basement
at that place.

If there was gas leaking into the basement, someone would have noticed
it after 3 weeks. (as stated in the article). Since no one noticed
it, it was obviously not entering the house before the explosion.
This makes me question where the gas was going.......
I sure the heck cant understand this. And you'd think that the fire
investigators surely could figure it out. I have been trying to
rationalize this, and it makes no sense.....

Anyone have any ideas?

---------------- The article below -----------------

From:http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=616721

Exact source of Tosa leak elusive
Fire chief says evidence points to rapid buildup of gas in basement

June 7, 2007

Wauwatosa - Investigators believe a sudden buildup of natural gas in
the basement of a home caused the deadly explosion that killed an
elderly woman and destroyed three houses in Wauwatosa last week.

But they might never be able to pinpoint the exact source of the leak,
Wauwatosa Fire Chief Dean Redman said Thursday.

According to Redman, investigators found 10 places inside the home
where gas piping had split apart. But it could not be determined, he
said, whether those fractures were pre-existing or caused by the
blast.

Redman said the home's insurer might do additional tests in an effort
to determine that.

"But we may never know the exact point at which the gas escaped into
the house," he said.

Lorraine Gaulke, 80, died June 2 when the explosion ripped apart her
home in the 10900 block of W. Wisconsin Ave. shortly after 11 a.m. At
least two adjacent homes also were destroyed, and as many as 20 others
were damaged in the blast that sent debris flying as far as 13 blocks
away.

A medical examiner's report says Gaulke died of "mechanical asphyxia,"
meaning she could not breathe because of the weight of debris on her.

The Wauwatosa Fire Department and state fire marshal are completing
their reports. But Redman said all evidence - from meter readings to
the way Gaulke's house came down - points to a sudden surge of gas
pooling in the basement and being ignited by a pilot light or some
other source there.

Among the evidence, according to Redman:

*Gaulke had only three gas appliances - a furnace, dryer and water
heater - all in the basement.

*Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing through
Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas would
have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic. And
when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but left
the floor intact.

*The explosion pushed the house off its foundation and flipped the
first floor.

Both Redman and We Energies said there was no evidence to suggest a
leak outside the home.

Utility spokesman Barry McNulty said the company found no leaks in its
pipes or equipment around the home and no problems in a door-to-door
canvass of homes in the area after the blast.

McNulty said the gas meter at Gaulke's home was replaced in March. But
he and Assistant Fire Chief Jeff Hevey, who is heading the
investigation, said there is no evidence to suggest that was a factor
in the explosion.

We Energies received no reports of a smell indicating a gas leak from
the home over the last month, and two reports of such an odor in the
area since May 1 were unrelated, he said.

As standard procedure, McNulty said, We Energies is mandated by the
state Public Service Commission to recheck the area to ensure that the
force of the blast did not compromise any equipment.

"And we'll be doing that as soon as the fire marshal and fire chief
give us the high sign," McNulty said.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

A lot of issues might be resolved here by reading a more factual
account of the accident.
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/7805427.html

Eigenvector wrote:
"EXT" wrote in message
anews.com...
In the report it says debris was found 13 blocks away. THIS WAS NOT A GAS
EXPLOSION only. Gas has a "soft" explosion, dynamite and other explosives
have hard explosions. When the forensic experts are finished determining
what happened I am certain they will find that the actual explosion was
generated by a high explosive, and the gas was just involved. This had to
be set.

13 blocks - that's over a mile. Maybe the owner was storing her black
powder next to the furnace?

....

I wouldn't put too much faith in the newspaper reports...the "debris"
could, after all, be cellulose insulation carried by the wind, or it may
have had nothing at all to do w/ the explosion.

I wouldn't put it past gas to have done the damage, either. Have seen
the results of a couple of explosions at nearby collection stations and
a compressor station -- that one, the shock wave from right at 10 miles
away knocked snow off the roof of the house...nothing but natural gas,
no "hard" explosives at all involved...

--

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 20:56:01 -0700, hvacrmedic
wrote:


A lot of issues might be resolved here by reading a more factual
account of the accident.
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/7805427.html

I don't think so. Nothing's ever been gained by using facts.

Just tonight on one network's news they said that Joe Lieberman was
calling for an attack on Iran, and then they played the very words
they were referring to and where he said we had to be prepared to
something something attack. That is, he didn't call for an attack
now, he called for us to be prepared for a possible attack, some time
in the future. Those are strong words but that wasn't enough for the
news. They had to make them stronger.

I had heard the original interview, so I immediately knew they had
misparaphrased him.

WAUWATOSA - Lorraine Gaulke, 80, died in a house explosion Saturday in Wauwatosa.

Four other people were hurt, including one firefighter. Authorities believe all of those injuries are non-life threatening.

If one wanted to be really picky, he could point out that the
firefighter wasn't hurt in the house explosion, as it seems to say,
but after he got there.


But it's sad. Maybe it's an optical illusion, but the front wall of
the neighbor's house looks bent. It looks like a nice neighborhood.

I was not serious about disliking facts.

hvacrmedic wrote:
....

A lot of issues might be resolved here by reading a more factual
account of the accident.
....

Gee, where's the fun in that???

Wild rumor, conspiracy, criminal intent, and much more can be had so
much easier...

--

In article , dpb wrote:

hvacrmedic wrote:
...

A lot of issues might be resolved here by reading a more factual
account of the accident.
...

Gee, where's the fun in that???

Wild rumor, conspiracy, criminal intent, and much more can be had so
much easier...

--

Yeah, I've already convicted the son. He was "out of town" when the
explosion happened. Definitely guilty.

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 20:07:58 +0000 (UTC), (Dave
Martindale) wrote:

writes:

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone?

I don't think that's what happened. Probably the last meter reading
was done on May 11. The reading on June 2 indicated that *sometime
during that period* there was a high flow of gas, because the June 2
reading is higher than you'd expect from previous normal consumption.
But the gas flow might have been perfectly normal until 15 minutes
before the explosion, at which time something failed and started
leaking fast.

Now, reading the statement as written, you'd think that gas flow was
high for the whole 3 weeks, but unless the gas meter is some sort of
fancy electronic type that keeps a record of gas flow vs. time, there's
no possible way to tell the difference between a slightly high flow for
3 weeks and a normal flow for 3 weeks followed by a large leak.

I'd chalk this up to sloppy writing by the author.

Dave

OK, this makes much more sense. I was looking at what was written as
meaning the high gas usage was occurring from May 11 to June 2. I
dont think there are meters that detect record daily usage for gas.
For electric there are meters like this. I have one. No one reads
the meter, it sends a signal back to the electric company that tells
them just how much I am using, and when there was a short power outage
and I called, they looked at (whatever they use to read it), and knew
which homes were without power.

The reporter should have said "Meter readings taken on June 2, show
there was a larger than usual amount of gas flowing through Gaulke's
pipes since the last reading on May 11".

What gets me, is that there is no device to kill the gas flow when a
leak occurs. They highly regulate these 20lb propane tanks with these
new valves they started using some years ago. Those valves are
supposed to stop the flow where the gas flow exceeds a normal amount,
(such as opening the valve with nothing connected). You'd think that
natural gas supplies would have something similar at the meter,
whereas a busted pipe would cause the system to shut down. There are
so many regulations on everything else these days, but natural gas
seems to have been passed by. You'd also think they could design a
sensor such as a smoke detector that would beep when gas is detected.

wrote:
....

What gets me, is that there is no device to kill the gas flow when a
leak occurs. They highly regulate these 20lb propane tanks with these
new valves they started using some years ago. Those valves are
supposed to stop the flow where the gas flow exceeds a normal amount,
(such as opening the valve with nothing connected). You'd think that
natural gas supplies would have something similar at the meter,
whereas a busted pipe would cause the system to shut down. There are
so many regulations on everything else these days, but natural gas
seems to have been passed by.

Possible and probably is available for a price although I've not checked
for what is residentially sized. The problem for residential household
use as I see it as opposed to the tank is the extremely wide range of
"normal" for a given household. Everything from a single pilot light to
one or more large furnace units plus water heater plus gas logs in the
fireplace(s) plus double oven(s) plus... is all within an allowable
usage range. A leak in a small delivery line that could cause an
explosion such as the one in this news story could be a very small
fraction of any of those so the frequency of events curtailed would
probably be a minute fraction at best...

...You'd also think they could design a
sensor such as a smoke detector that would beep when gas is detected.

Think?

http://www.rewci.com/nagasdewibab.html

Something of the sort is undoubtedly the best bet. It's output then,
_could_ be used in an automated isolation system. That would probably
be pretty effective.

--

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 22:37:45 -0000, Big_Jake
wrote:

On Jun 10, 3:26 pm, "Charles" wrote:
"Dave Martindale" wrote in message

...



writes:

I'm referring to this part.
"(Meter readings show a larger than usual amount of gas flowing
through Gaulke's pipes between May 11 and June 2. In a slow leak, gas
would have migrated to other parts of the house, including the attic.
And when it ignited, it would have blown off the roof and walls but
left the floor intact.)"

The explosion was June 3. If the meter readings were high during
those approx. 3 weeks, where would it have gone?

I don't think that's what happened. Probably the last meter reading
was done on May 11. The reading on June 2 indicated that *sometime
during that period* there was a high flow of gas, because the June 2
reading is higher than you'd expect from previous normal consumption.
But the gas flow might have been perfectly normal until 15 minutes
before the explosion, at which time something failed and started
leaking fast.

Now, reading the statement as written, you'd think that gas flow was
high for the whole 3 weeks, but unless the gas meter is some sort of
fancy electronic type that keeps a record of gas flow vs. time, there's
no possible way to tell the difference between a slightly high flow for
3 weeks and a normal flow for 3 weeks followed by a large leak.

I'd chalk this up to sloppy writing by the author.

A data logging electronic gas meter would need a back-up battery and ac
power plus some computer chips. I'd guess that you are correct that there
is no way to determine when high use occurred, other than during a
particular billing cycle.

Natural gas is lighter than air but still can collect in a basement if the
leak is severe. So, if something ruptured and filled the basement that
could explain the lifting of the house. The house most likely had a gas hot
water heater and when it ignited it could have touched off the explosion.

I live the in the same city as the explosion. No fancy gas meters in
this area, and 99 / 100 houses here have a gas meter that provides low
pressure (8-10" on a water column) so no regulators are required at
the appliances.

Did you hear or feel the explosion? They said in the news that many
people did.

Hard to imagine how enough gas could accumulate to cause this. The
pressure is so low that you can't imagine anything "bursting". I
would think that the most likely appliance to provide a huge gas flow
would be a range with a couple of unlit burners on, but there is no
information which indicates that the homeowner had one.

They said she had an electric range, only water heater, furnace and
dryer, all in the basement. I noticed from the map they showed on one
article that there are railroad tracks nearby. I wonder if the
vibration from the trains could have caused a pipe to weaken and
eventually break. Otherwise, I'd place my bet on the dryer. Dryers
vibrate which can weaken the pipes, whereas a furnace or water heater
are pretty much stable.


I actually looked at a "fixer-upper" property that was damaged by a
gas explosion. The dryer had been removed, and the owner turned the
supply valve "ON" thinking he was turning it "OFF" after the dryer was
disconnected. He then left the house which went BOOM about 1/2 hour
later. Less damage than this latest Wauwatosa house, but still pretty
bad. The explosion blew all the face brick off the house, and damaged
the framing where the wall studs met the roof framing.


I have to say that the guy that did this must be really stupid. When
a gas pipe is opened, one can hear it, and smell it immediately.

Here is another area where gas should be better regulated. Most of us
know which way to turn a gas valve to the ON or OFF position, but many
people dont. The valves should clearly say ON and OFF on them.

Our local journalists leave much to be desired, so it would be no
surprise to see them get the story wrong or draw the wrong
conclusions.


I'll agree. Many of them dont really understand what they are writing
about. At least not the technical aspets of it. Of course I guess
they cant be experts in everything.

JK
Wauwatosa, WI

wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 22:37:45 -0000, Big_Jake
wrote:
....
Our local journalists leave much to be desired, so it would be no
surprise to see them get the story wrong or draw the wrong
conclusions.


I'll agree. Many of them dont really understand what they are writing
about. At least not the technical aspets of it. Of course I guess
they cant be experts in everything.

I don't think the average reporter (or reporterette) is an expert in
anything these days, what more something with any technicality at all in
it. Few can even manage to get subject and verb to agree, what more
provide factual accounts of any substance...

imo, ymmv, $0.02, etc., etc., ...

--

wrote:
....

Hard to imagine how enough gas could accumulate to cause this. The
pressure is so low that you can't imagine anything "bursting". I
would think that the most likely appliance to provide a huge gas flow
would be a range with a couple of unlit burners on, but there is no
information which indicates that the homeowner had one.

Large leak/short time -- small leak/long time can yield same total gas
accumulation. Elderly lady, poor sense of smell and/or not often in the
basement isn't at all difficult for me to believe...

They said she had an electric range, only water heater, furnace and
dryer, all in the basement. I noticed from the map they showed on one
article that there are railroad tracks nearby. I wonder if the
vibration from the trains could have caused a pipe to weaken and
eventually break. Otherwise, I'd place my bet on the dryer. Dryers
vibrate which can weaken the pipes, whereas a furnace or water heater
are pretty much stable.
....

I'd place odds far higher on simply long-term corrosion in either the
distribution line(s) or at a connection. Mechanical causation of the
type you describe would be way down on the list in my guesstimation.
Gas carries with it water and other impurities which are
corrosion-inducing and iirc, this was a house w/ some age on it...
Only hypothesis, of course, and only the forensics will tell, but that
would be my highest-likelihood guess.

--

On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:08:51 -0500, wrote:



OK, this makes much more sense. I was looking at what was written as
meaning the high gas usage was occurring from May 11 to June 2. I
dont think there are meters that detect record daily usage for gas.
For electric there are meters like this. I have one. No one reads
the meter, it sends a signal back to the electric company that tells
them just how much I am using,

I think it also doesn't send daily readings. Probably they ping it
once a month (and when they want to) and then it sends back a
reading,(not of how much you are using but how much you've used.)

There are
so many regulations on everything else these days, but natural gas
seems to have been passed by.

It's natural gas. They want it to be all-natural.

On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:22:04 -0500, dpb wrote:


Think?

http://www.rewci.com/nagasdewibab.html

Something of the sort is undoubtedly the best bet. It's output then,
_could_ be used in an automated isolation system. That would probably
be pretty effective.

Sounds like a good idea, but the reference to the smell of rotten eggs
in the additive doesn't inspire confidence in me. I don't think it
smells like rotten eggs. Is it supposed to?


Also " all to real" instead of " all too real"

mm wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:22:04 -0500, dpb wrote:

Think?

http://www.rewci.com/nagasdewibab.html

Something of the sort is undoubtedly the best bet. It's output then,
_could_ be used in an automated isolation system. That would probably
be pretty effective.

Sounds like a good idea, but the reference to the smell of rotten eggs
in the additive doesn't inspire confidence in me. I don't think it
smells like rotten eggs. Is it supposed to?

I didn't make any judgment (good or bad) on the referenced detector --
only posted link for other respondent that there is such a thing as
he/she didn't seem to think even existed. Whether this particular one
is/isn't any good I don't know which is what I presume your comment
refers to that you thought there was something not quite up to par on
their website. Can't say, didn't check...

Not particularly, like H2S to me in the normally low concentrations,
either. It's much more pungent in itself, of course.


Also " all to real" instead of " all too real"

??? Don't ken this...what you talking about?

--

Did you hear or feel the explosion? They said in the news that many
people did.

No, I didn't. I'm not positive that I was home when it happened.


They said she had an electric range, only water heater, furnace and
dryer, all in the basement. I noticed from the map they showed on one
article that there are railroad tracks nearby. I wonder if the
vibration from the trains could have caused a pipe to weaken and
eventually break. Otherwise, I'd place my bet on the dryer. Dryers
vibrate which can weaken the pipes, whereas a furnace or water heater
are pretty much stable.

While I agree with your logic, I have never seen a dryer here that
wasn't hooked up with a flex line.


I have to say that the guy that did this must be really stupid. When
a gas pipe is opened, one can hear it, and smell it immediately.

My guess is that he turned the valve, and left the area immediately.
The gas flow is pretty quiet, and the sound of a radio would be enough
to mask it. The other possibility is that the gas valve was 5'+ away
from the open end of the pipe.

Here is another area where gas should be better regulated. Most of us
know which way to turn a gas valve to the ON or OFF position, but many
people dont. The valves should clearly say ON and OFF on them.

Can't argue with that.

I'll agree. Many of them dont really understand what they are writing
about. At least not the technical aspets of it. Of course I guess
they cant be experts in everything.

No, but we can expect them to at least try to get it right.


JK
Wauwatosa, WI

In article ,
wrote:



What gets me, is that there is no device to kill the gas flow when a
leak occurs. They highly regulate these 20lb propane tanks with these
new valves they started using some years ago. Those valves are
supposed to stop the flow where the gas flow exceeds a normal amount,
(such as opening the valve with nothing connected). You'd think that
natural gas supplies would have something similar at the meter,
whereas a busted pipe would cause the system to shut down. There are
so many regulations on everything else these days, but natural gas
seems to have been passed by. You'd also think they could design a
sensor such as a smoke detector that would beep when gas is detected.

I was renting a house twenty years ago, up on a hill. The meter was down
by the street, so there was at least 1000 ft. of pipe feeding the house.
I was using, at the time, about $15 worth of gas every month. One day I
came home and found a note on my doorknob saying the gas had been turned
off. Called to find out that the meter reading had indicated about $1800
worth of usage in that month.

My landlord and a handyman type spent the next day digging up the
hillside, tracing the pipe as it zigzagged along. They kept cutting it
in sections and pressure testing each one until they found the leak. I
think the gas company gave him about a fifty percent discount on the
bill just to be charitable.

I'm not a fan of legislation that protects people from their own
carelessness, or isolates everyone from every single thing that could
possibly happen to them. (A local lady was reaching for a package of
tortillas in the supermarket a few years ago and the whole pile came
down on her head. She sued the market, the stockboy, and the
manufacturer of the tortillas. Now, if I had been the judge, I'd have
sentenced her to a public "stoning" with tortillas.) But, maybe an auto
shutoff on new gas meters should be considered, with older ones
grandfathered in.

On Jun 12, 9:03 am, Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,

wrote:

What gets me, is that there is no device to kill the gas flow when a
leak occurs. They highly regulate these 20lb propane tanks with these
new valves they started using some years ago. Those valves are
supposed to stop the flow where the gas flow exceeds a normal amount,
(such as opening the valve with nothing connected). You'd think that
natural gas supplies would have something similar at the meter,
whereas a busted pipe would cause the system to shut down. There are
so many regulations on everything else these days, but natural gas
seems to have been passed by. You'd also think they could design a
sensor such as a smoke detector that would beep when gas is detected.

I was renting a house twenty years ago, up on a hill. The meter was down
by the street, so there was at least 1000 ft. of pipe feeding the house.
I was using, at the time, about $15 worth of gas every month. One day I
came home and found a note on my doorknob saying the gas had been turned
off. Called to find out that the meter reading had indicated about $1800
worth of usage in that month.

My landlord and a handyman type spent the next day digging up the
hillside, tracing the pipe as it zigzagged along. They kept cutting it
in sections and pressure testing each one until they found the leak. I
think the gas company gave him about a fifty percent discount on the
bill just to be charitable.

I'm not a fan of legislation that protects people from their own
carelessness, or isolates everyone from every single thing that could
possibly happen to them. (A local lady was reaching for a package of
tortillas in the supermarket a few years ago and the whole pile came
down on her head. She sued the market, the stockboy, and the
manufacturer of the tortillas. Now, if I had been the judge, I'd have
sentenced her to a public "stoning" with tortillas.) But, maybe an auto
shutoff on new gas meters should be considered, with older ones
grandfathered in.

An auto shut off based on detection of what? Unless it's based on a
complex system with gas detectors placed within the building, I don't
see it doing much good. If you're proposing that it be based on some
sudden above normal flow of gas, I guess that could be done. But of
all the explosions, this would cover a very small number, because few
are caused by a sudden massive failure of a supply line. Most are
smaller leaks, not out of line with a flow rate that a home furnace or
similar would normally use, so a flow detector isn't going to be very
effective. And with any auto shutoff system, comes problems of it's
own, like false shutoffs.

On Jun 11, 12:53 am, Smitty Two wrote:
In article , dpb wrote:
hvacrmedic wrote:
...

A lot of issues might be resolved here by reading a more factual
account of the accident.
...

Gee, where's the fun in that???

Wild rumor, conspiracy, criminal intent, and much more can be had so
much easier...

--

Yeah, I've already convicted the son. He was "out of town" when the
explosion happened. Definitely guilty.


Talking about reporters who can't get stories straight, here's a
classic. A couple months ago, one of the major TV stations was
reporting live from the scene of a crash on the NY Thruway. A
tractor trailer had gone over an overpass and crashed onto the thruway
below. They were showing a live shot of it. And several times they
referred to it as a gasoline tank trunk that crashed and burned up.
I'm looking at it and the first thing you notice is it's rectangular,
obviously a regular trailer. Second thing you notice is you can
still read the big colored McDonalds logo and markings on the
trailer. Third, is the relatively small fire that occured was
confined to the forward area of the trailer, likely from the fuel for
the refrigeration unit.

According to mm :

Sounds like a good idea, but the reference to the smell of rotten eggs
in the additive doesn't inspire confidence in me. I don't think it
smells like rotten eggs. Is it supposed to?

Heh. Methyl Mercaptan is the chemical they use. It's in the
same chemical _family_ ("Mercaptans") as the primary ingredient in
"rotten egg" smell (which is H2S IIRC) and that of eau-de-skunk.
They are all very pungent, smell _similar_, but not exactly the
same.

Also, these days few people encounter "true" rotten egg smells, because
eggs are handled rather better than they used to be in the days before
refrigeration and public health inspections...
--
Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:59:08 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:

According to mm :

Sounds like a good idea, but the reference to the smell of rotten eggs
in the additive doesn't inspire confidence in me. I don't think it
smells like rotten eggs. Is it supposed to?

Before I answer, does anyone know what the two parts of the white are
called, or what the difference is, or anything about that?

I'm not talking about the yolk but the two parts of the white.

Heh. Methyl Mercaptan is the chemical they use. It's in the
same chemical _family_ ("Mercaptans") as the primary ingredient in
"rotten egg" smell (which is H2S IIRC) and that of eau-de-skunk.
They are all very pungent, smell _similar_, but not exactly the
same.

This is very interesting, because usually I find, and I even tell
people, that I have a very poor sense of smell.

But definitely, they don't seem the same to me. I've definitely
smelled H2S

Also, these days few people encounter "true" rotten egg smells, because
eggs are handled rather better than they used to be in the days before
refrigeration and public health inspections...

And I'm pretty sure I've smelled true rotten eggs, since I'm not one
of those natty guys who takes care that his eggs don't rot.

In fact, eggs will keep in the refrigerator for easily 3, probalby 6
months, probably longer some times, without problems. And even then
they usually don't rot in the fridge, but just dry out. So I must
have left them out of the fridge some time.

Even broken eggs can usually be used. Take all the other eggs out of
the egg carton and pour the egg into the pan. If the outer membrane
is not broken, the eggs will keep at least a day or two even if the
shell is broken.

According to mm :

But definitely, they don't seem the same to me. I've definitely
smelled H2S

They're similar, but not identical.

Also, these days few people encounter "true" rotten egg smells, because
eggs are handled rather better than they used to be in the days before
refrigeration and public health inspections...

...

In fact, eggs will keep in the refrigerator for easily 3, probalby 6
months, probably longer some times, without problems. And even then
they usually don't rot in the fridge, but just dry out. So I must
have left them out of the fridge some time.

Eggs can be stored for _years_ at 4C and the proper humidity level.

I think the main stench is when the yolks are broken and have
a chance to, er, percolate for a while. More readily available sulphur.
--
Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.