本帖最后由 钢铁牛 于 2015-8-15 19:12 编辑
I am not familiar with the term "burn down principal" but the concept is not unheard of. I'll try and unpack this as neatly as I can from the perspective of the American fire service, West Coast. I am not a Haz-Mat guy beyond First Responder Operations and Decon training so this is not the ultimate answer but we can call it a start.
This incident should have, if not immediately then very quickly, been recognized and dispatched as a Hazardous Material with fire call.
That recognition would then steer the dispatching agency to notify the Haz-Mat response units within the city's jurisdiction.
Upon receiving the call data the Haz-Mat units should have been able to identify, at least to a minimal degree what chemicals were stored on scene and hopefully a rough estimate of quantities.
In the U.S. we use the Emergency Response Guide (http://phmsa.dot.gov/pv_obj_cach...) to assist us in recognizing what a chemical is based on placard ink or containment vessel. Once the substance is known then we can formulate a plan.
Depending on the substance the plan may be to aggressively attack, on one end of the spectrum, or isolate and deny entry on the other end. Some chemicals when exposed to fire require massive evacuation areas.
Civilians within the affected areas may be instructed to either evacuate, or shelter in place and await further instruction.
With an incident the size and scope of what was seen in China, it seems safe to say that any emergency response organization would be overwhelmed, at least in the early hours of an explosion of this magnitude. Based on what I saw in videos online, the blast wave and burning material that was thrown outward would have likely caused additional secondary incidents such as structure collapse and fires. Having limited knowledge of the particulars of this specific incident I can only speculate.
To address the meat of the question: yes, it is conceivable that the fire authority could have declared the firefight too unsafe to engage directly. It is also safe to say that at least several, safety systems failed to do their intended jobs so perhaps the possibility of an explosion seemed unlikely to first arriving crews. Whether it was an automatic extinguishing system or ignored safety practices that initiated this incident, does not really matter to the deceased right now. There will certainly be a comprehensive investigation and more will be learned in the weeks and months to follow.
I do know of one time in my response area a fire was allowed to burn was when a fuel truck wrecked and caught fire. The reason for allowing the fuel burn was to protect a nearby waterway from the fuel spill. By allowing the fuel to burn the road was partially destroyed but the waterway was protected, which in the grand scheme of things was a win.
In reference the an incident this size taking place in California, at a minimum our state office of emergency services would be activated and likely there would be a federal response as well. |
发表于 2015-8-15 13:44
| 