Could Mobile Phones Really Cause Fires at Petrol Pumps?

  • Thread starter chaoseverlasting
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Pumps
In summary: I saw an in-depth treatment of this over a year ago (TV show), and their take was that static sparks were responsible for igniting gasoline fumes. Start fueling in cold weather, duck inside the vehicle to stay warm, and when you slide out of the vehicle, you can accumulate enough static charge to make a good spark. Whether or not the driver was using a cell phone was incidental, it seemed. The hazards of static sparks have been appreciated for a long time....
  • #36
Again, from the conclusion in Evo's report above, it shows a remote possibility it could happen, but also outlines that it has never happened and that there are far greater risks of ignition than cell phones.

I do agree with you turbo. I think it's all about dodging liability and giving people such as health and safety far too much power.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
turbo-1 said:
Signs are cheaper.

This. Times about a billion. In the end it's all about money and liability.

Put it this way. You don't put a sign up saying don't smoke, someone smokes and blows themselves up. In the modern day, especially in the US you would be sues for every penny you have ever seen. Although common sense says don't put hot things near fuel vapour, some idiot will do it.

Although it's a far smaller risk from a mobile, it is distinctly non zero. Therefore it's cheaper to put up a sign and then your liability if reduced just incase. It doesn't matter if it's never happened, as everything dangerous 'has never happened' until it does.
 
  • #38
xxChrisxx said:
Although it's a far smaller risk from a mobile, it is non zero. Therefore it's cheaper to put up a sign and then your liability if reduced just incase.
I'll try to find the link, again, but one of the European manufacturers, IIR (Nokia?) said that if there was any risk from cell phones it would have to be from a dislodged battery causing a spark - not from actually using the phone.
 
  • #39
turbo-1 said:
I'll try to find the link, again, but one of the European manufacturers, IIR (Nokia?) said that if there was any risk from cell phones it would have to be from a dislodged battery causing a spark - not from actually using the phone.

It's in Evos report above. The one I keep referring to.

FFS people. Read.

I've given the whole conclusion which outlines the risk. If you read through the rest of the report it tells you how perfect conditions would have to be for ignition to occur.
 
  • #40
turbo-1 said:
I'll try to find the link, again, but one of the European manufacturers, IIR (Nokia?) said that if there was any risk from cell phones it would have to be from a dislodged battery causing a spark - not from actually using the phone.

Yeah I know if it, mostly from the fact you aren't really allowed mobiles on oil rigs. (you can't get signal anyway)
 
  • #41
I had a video of a refuelling truck catching fire because one of the attendants used his mobile phone. I can't seem to find the link though.
 
  • #42
xxChrisxx said:
You'll never manage to ignite liquid fuel when the ignition source is submerged like that, even if you did majorly bugger up the wiring. It's certainly more safe than having the majority of the wiring above the liquid fuel where all the vapour is.

Safe as houses.

This is true, but anyone not susceptible to irrational thoughts at all just isn't human. Plus, a fuel pump is a lot easier to replace when the fuel tank is nearly empty (getting drenched in gasoline when you open the seal wouldn't be much fun). In fact, running out of gas is a situation where the fuel level isn't high enough to reach the intake, let alone completely submerge the pump.

Too bad they didn't have cell phones back in the days of the Ford Pinto.
 
Last edited:
  • #43
The quote I remembered came from a Motorola spokesperson, not Nokia.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/cellgas.htm

Cell phone makers including Motorola and Nokia have included warnings about not using cell phones around gas vapors. In August of 1999, David Rudd, a spokesman for Motorola, told the San Francisco Chronicle that his company's warning was because of the remote possibility that a dislodged battery cause cause a spark, not because of the transmission of radio signals.
 
  • #44
BobG said:
This is true, but anyone not susceptible to irrational thoughts at all just isn't human.

It's changing the wheels for me, I know I've torqued up all the nuts properly but I still have that feeling the wheels about to fly off.
 
  • #45
turbo-1 said:
The quote I remembered came from a Motorola spokesperson, not Nokia.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/cellgas.htm
Of course the problem is with the physical aspects of the phone, not radio waves. Did someone in this thread say it wasn't?

Also, people should remember that just because the gas station is an unlikely place for events to be correct for a cell phone to ignite fumes, cell phones do ignite combustible gases and are forbidden in areas where volatile dust and gases collect (unless they are IS rated for the danger level they will be operated in).
 
  • #46
Evo said:
Of course the problem is with the physical aspects of the phone, not radio waves. Did someone in this thread say it wasn't?
Not that I recall, but the myths that circulated through emails and the media were very non-technical, leading people to believe that using a cell phone at a gas station could cause a fire. By the same token, dropping any battery-powered device could start a fire if the battery were dislodged

Actually, you're more likely to be able to start a fire by slipping in and out of the driver's seat wearing a sweater or a fleece jacket. Static electricity on dry days can produce some pretty impressive sparks.
 
Back
Top