Re: Even the New York Times withholds the address

["Stephen Sprunk" <ssprunk () cisco com>]

Thus spake "Johannes Ullrich" <jullrich () euclidian com>
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/19/nyregion/19FUEL.html
> ...
> > While almost everyone on this list knows which building is the subject
> > of the article, we can discuss the issue without discussing the
> > particular building.
> >
> > On-site fuel storage is one of those double-edge swords.
>
> The article is comparing the relatively 'inert' diesel fuel to
> the aircraft fuel that caused the devastation at the WTC.
> Did the authors of this article ever hear about heating oil tanks?

Jet fuel ak.a kerosene is essentially the same thing as diesel.  The only reason
it's 'inert' is that it's too dense to explode like gasoline.  You have to mix
in oxidizers (e.g. fertilizer) or atomize it mechanically (e.g. BLU-82) before
ignition if you want a big boom.

The problem with the WTC was actually the lack of a big boom -- the slow-burning
fire lasted long enough to weaken the structure.  If there had been a couple
tons of fertilizer on those planes, you would have seen a massive fireball but
the buildings would have stayed up, just like in 1993.

Not sure how this is relevant to NANOG, but I find it interesting.

S