Monday, April 22, 2024

C&EN: Disagreement about the decision to vent and burn the vinyl chloride

In this week's issue of Chemical and Engineering News, this comment: 

Thanks for publishing Priyanka Runwal’s fine article on East Palestine, Ohio, in the Feb. 26, 2024, issue of C&EN (page 24).

The Norfolk Southern train derailment should have received a prompt federal response since the onboard cargo was being used in interstate commerce (from Madison, Illinois, to Conway, Pennsylvania). The State of Ohio did respond to this disaster, but it took some poking and prodding for the state to act.

I spoke to the governor’s representative in my region, who indicated that the state maintains multiple boards and commissions. The State Emergency Response Commission looked like a good choice for active engagement. But membership was limited to elected officials, emergency management personnel, environmental advocates, firefighters, first responders, industry and trade personnel, law enforcement personnel, and utility personnel. Nothing to engage scientists and engineers in this emergency.

The lack of an expert in science and engineering in charge rendered communication of the facts to residents of East Palestine, people in the nearby communities, and those who sought answers to be spotty at best.

It is my considered opinion that the decision to vent and burn the vinyl chloride was made without expert consultation. As Runwal’s piece noted, former American Chemical Society president William Carroll pointed out in a hearing that the polymerization reaction of vinyl chloride to polyvinyl chloride requires an initiator. Free radicals, such as chemicals containing peroxides, can initiate polymerization. I don’t know whether the conditions existed for the polymerization of vinyl chloride to have occurred.

People in the East Palestine region are still suffering from the response to the derailment. The federal government response to East Palestine must not be the norm, and the states should expand the relevant boards and commissions to include scientists and engineers. In events such as East Palestine, the designated scientists and engineers would handle communicating the facts to those in the impacted communities and beyond.

ACS should play a central role in having regional experts available to the state and federal entities needing such guidance. This is a role in which ACS can make a real, quantifiable difference.

Mitigating disasters is important, as are the lives of the people in the impacted areas. While each incident is different, there is nothing more reassuring to the people in the impacted areas than knowing that they have the best available facts (in real time) and that we’ve got their backs.

David M. Manuta, Waverly, Ohio

I'm terribly curious to see what the various agencies report when the ultimately do so... 

3 comments:

  1. I am not an expert of the use of vinyl chloride or large volume transportation. However, I have used many problematic materials in my 34 year career as a practical synthetic chemist. I usually use vinyl bromide if I am making the Grignard, but at the 50L scale I am sure I have used vinyl chloride because of cost.
    I do not remember the details of the incident in Ohio. I do remember my recommendation to people who asked my opinion. At the time, after reviewing the information on hand, a controlled burn was the safest way to deal with the material. I would not send myself or another to see if the pressurized vessel holding this toxic gas (bp -13.9°C) was intact and that the ports where in working order to transfer the material to another vessel. Given the horrible choice between a possible death of one person and possible suffering of many; I would recommend possible suffering.
    Even under ideal conditions, transferring materials like these can be risky. This is compounded by the shear volume of material. In my opinion they made the right call to burn the material.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The list of the emergency response commission seems like exactly the right people for the situation. I don't think the letter writer has considered that many of them probably ARE scientists and engineers...or have them on staff.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So they should have tried to polymerize it instead of burn it? Is that what the commenter was getting at?

    I don’t know if it would have been possible to achieve a molecular weight high enough for it to matter.

    Maybe dumping literal truckloads of absorbent on it could have been the least harmful, but where are you gonna find truck loads of absorbent.

    ReplyDelete

looks like Blogger doesn't work with anonymous comments from Chrome browsers at the moment - works in Microsoft Edge, or from Chrome with a Blogger account - sorry! CJ 3/21/20