Didcot Power Station Explosion

Looking at it through my non-expert eyes I think it's a collapse rather than an explosion. Tragic either way though.
 
This is sad only a stones throw from me, seems it was a collapse due to gutting the building for demolition - not an explosion.
 
The 'explosion' was possibly the sound of it collapsing, I mean look how big it is/was :eek: hard to gauge the scale when the video in the link first starts zooming out, then you realise :eek:
 
No?

Surely risking further lives for the sake of recovering a few bodies isn't a great idea. I'd certainly understand the viewpoint of safety over compassion in this instance.
 
If they consider it dangerous to continue then no.
It's sad for the families that have lost relatives, however it would be tragic if more lives were lost unnecessarily.
They are not saying they won't continue looking, just delaying until its safe.
 
OldCoals said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-36366768

Does anyone else find this pretty disgraceful on the part of RWE?
Click to expand...

No.

There isn't anything they can do to help the people that died, and it's not worth risking more people in the hope they'll be able to recover the bodies that little bit faster.
The priority should be the safety of the workforce, not rushing to retrieve bodies a few days sooner. Pretty much every emergency service and disaster recovery operation does the same thing, whilst there is a chance that they'll find survivors the risks taken by the rescue teams are allowed to be higher, but once it becomes a recovery operation the safety of the recovery personal is far more important.
 
To be clear, I don't think people should be sent in if it is dangerous.

I disagree with using explosives to bring down the rest of the building in order to make it safe, I am sure it could be dismantled with mechanical equipment.
 
This may sound callous, however the dead wont mind how its brought down.
Surely the quickest way would be to blow it then they can safely continue the search.
 
OldCoals said:
To be clear, I don't think people should be sent in if it is dangerous.

I disagree with using explosives to bring down the rest of the building in order to make it safe, I am sure it could be dismantled with mechanical equipment.
Click to expand...

The methods used have to be cost effective as well as safe. I'm 100% certain that this decision will have been through many HSE hoops before reaching this outcome.

I'm sure it "could" be dismantled using an elaborate system of giraffes, that doesn't mean its the right method.
 
OldCoals said:
To be clear, I don't think people should be sent in if it is dangerous.

I disagree with using explosives to bring down the rest of the building in order to make it safe, I am sure it could be dismantled with mechanical equipment.
Click to expand...

They're not going to put a big barrel labeled TNT in the middle and blow it all to smithereens. The explosives are in small quantities and targeted at the key structural parts so the building collapses in a controlled way. I personally don't see the problem.
 
OldCoals said:
To be clear, I don't think people should be sent in if it is dangerous.

I disagree with using explosives to bring down the rest of the building in order to make it safe, I am sure it could be dismantled with mechanical equipment.
Click to expand...

Both ways are going to be messy, mechanical demolition equipment requires access though.
 
WillyNelson said:
They're not going to put a big barrel labeled TNT in the middle and blow it all to smithereens. The explosives are in small quantities and targeted at the key structural parts so the building collapses in a controlled way. I personally don't see the problem.
Click to expand...

Oh you mean like it did first time round? :p
 
WillyNelson said:
They're not going to put a big barrel labeled TNT in the middle and blow it all to smithereens. The explosives are in small quantities and targeted at the key structural parts so the building collapses in a controlled way. I personally don't see the problem.
Click to expand...

Actually if they decide that Unit 3 and 4 are too unstable to safely send people into for structural weakening and explosive placement they would have to send ROV's to place an excess amount of explosive to bring it down.

Mechanical dismantlement of a power station boiler is very difficult because for thermal expansion reasosn the entire structure hangs from the top of the boiler house. You would have to cut sections away from the bottom and drop them to the basement and remove them. This would be extremely costly but also involves hundreds if not thousands of high risk lifting activities whilst working at height. No sane person would think that is the safest method. Explosive demolition then removal by mechanical plant is the least risk route.

This must be very difficult for the families but no-one involved will be doing anything without serious HSE scrutiny.

Dis86 said:
Oh you mean like it did first time round? :p
Click to expand...

It fell down, it wasn't explosively demolished.
 
Last edited:
A national scandal FFS!? It's not like they're leaving possibly living people in there.
Give Sarah Champion a hardhat and tell her to crack on if it's not that dangerous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom