Georgealbert

You are right, the airlines get their information from IATA (International Air Transportation Association), who state they have a comprehensive database used by virtually every airline, and information gathered from over 1,000 official sources worldwide. https://www.iata.org/en/services/compliance/timatic/travel-documentation/#:~:text=You can count on the,over 1%2C000 official sources worldwide.

Also good to see in the above report, the use of the DDPM, LUF 60, firefighting robot, to help reduce the risk and exposure to responders, instead of just being used for PM 2.5 dust/pollution dispersal.

This abandoned factory has been reported to Rayong Authorities for over 10 years and subject to legal action before the fire. This fire is known to have started in one warehouse, so any investigation of arson should focus on this area, as the initial seat of the fire, to determine the cause. Inspections before the fire, found that the factory had 5 warehouses, storing chemicals and waste plastic materials, paper, and contaminated oil, contaminated gasoline, corrosive substances, and used motor oil, all which are packed in 200 litres drums, stacked in all the warehouses and outside. Around the factory there are a number of contaminated oil storage ponds, some covered with canvas. The video below, shows the conditions before the fire.

US Justice Department to decide by late May whether Boeing violated deferred prosecution deal. https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/us-decide-by-late-may-if-boeing-violated-prosecution-deal-sources-say-2024-04-24/

Yes Phuket Airport did not disclose the specific flight, but FlightRadar24 data indicates that it was Aeroflot flight SU626 from Yekaterinburg, operated by an Airbus A330-300, registration number RA-73783. Details appeared in Russian language media. https://www.novostiphuketa.asia/polomka-laynera-aeroflota-pri-posadke-sorvala-grafik-reysov-na-phukete-20061.php

This opinion piece fully supports what you are saying; “Residents near the Rayong warehouses had been voicing concerns for over a decade about the warehouse, their protests culminating in a lawsuit that saw the facilities abandoned but not cleared of hazardous waste. The indifference to these warnings nearly resulted in a catastrophe when the warehouses, filled with poorly documented chemical waste, caught fire. Similar negligence led to an environmental disaster when floods last year caused some of these chemicals to leak.” https://www.thaienquirer.com/52111/thai-government-must-put-people-over-profit-after-warehouse-fire/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0BMQABHQifDfN2bX6G4Uy5wd1PdU5raa95XLECgCxP_w80lp1KOZTxL1rVr0pYNw_aem_AWrLeCisUS7Ndcp7i6ZP786ZGPk2QDJCS2fMfHairSbnkfqXAJCwOmiNGHvdGjK0zsA

The latest update say that local authorities have reported approximately 95% of the fire has been extinguished. Of the five warehouses on the site, four have caught fire, with two being completely destroyed. Fortunately, the fire was prevented from reaching the warehouse where oil wastes were stored. The owner of the warehouses is currently being summoned by the police and the police are also investigating a potential link between this fire and another incident that occurred in Ayutthaya. The cause of the fire is still under investigation, but it’s suggested that the electricity supply to the warehouses was cut off over two months ago. Residents who were evacuated yesterday are now permitted to return home, However, due to the lingering smell of burnt chemicals in the air, residents have been advised to continue avoiding exposure to any smoke.

Sorry, are you sure it was not the junction, on the other side of crossing?

This fire is being linked to another fire from the same company, which was believed to be arson. “They returned to the site to search warehouse 3 and found several more items suspected to have been used in the arson attack, such as cherry bombs, petrol containers, degraded electrical wires and a large bag containing sawdust.” https://www.thaipbsworld.com/police-claim-fire-at-ayutthaya-chemical-storage-facility-was-arson/

Seems this is the second fire being linked to the factory owner. The Ministry of Industry, believes the fire in Rayong is linked to the incident at a factory at Phachi Ayutthaya Translation below from Thai news site. “23 April 2024 from the recent fire incident at a chemical factory in Rayong, Ms. Pimpattra Wichaikul, Minister of Industry. Mentioning this case after it was thought that it might be connected to the factory where the previous fire occurred in Phachi District, Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Province, that He also stated that he had received the report since yesterday (April 22) from the provincial industry. which he ordered to the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Industry and the Director-General of the Department of Industrial Works went to look into this matter immediately. "Thank you to the governor of Rayong Province. and agencies in the area that helped put out the fire. Last night he was informed that the flames had been dealt with. But this morning there was another report that There are still flames, and today Rayong Province will meet again. including the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Will go in and look at air quality and the amount of chemical residue.” When asked about the connection between the two fires, it was noted whether or not it was the destruction of evidence. Ms. Pimphattra stated that the two were linked in the matter of the factory owner and the burning to destroy evidence. In this matter, it is better to wait for the conclusion from the police first. “This story is truly epic. Not only the areas in Phachi District and Rayong Province, including the Ratchaburi Province area as well, which has ordered the Department of Industry to take responsibility for this issue as well. The truth must be brought to answer society. Is it true to the allegations? which had to go down and inspect the scene to find residue Look at air quality to see if it has an impact on people or not. Including water leaking into the nearby canal area or not. Most importantly, we know that bedridden patients have been evacuated since yesterday.” The reporter further asked if this incident seemed suspicious or not. Ms. Pimpattra stated that there was definitely a case but asked the police to be the one to summarize the matter of the case. But for his part, he will take care of the disposal of chemical waste in that area. The litigation is currently underway as to how the remaining waste will be disposed of from now on.“ This would appear to be the other fire. https://www.thaipbsworld.com/police-claim-fire-at-ayutthaya-chemical-storage-facility-was-arson/

Seems this environmental problem was first found by an inspection in 2010, and even after legal action, very little or nothing has been done. Now with the fire the issues can only be worse, with further pollution released by the fire. https://www.earththailand.org/en/article/717 Seems this is the second fire being linked to the factory owner. The Ministry of Industry, believes the fire in Rayong is linked to the incident at a factory at Phachi Ayutthaya

The area around the factory has been safely evacuated and hazard monitoring put in place. The fire seems to be surrounded and contained within the site snd responders will have no idea what chemicals are on the site. As it is chemical waste disposal, you would assume, flammable gases, liquids or solids, compressed gas cylinders, possible water/air reactive, toxic materials, poisons, corrosives, oxidising agents, combustibles, etc. Each type of material will pose it own risks, but when mixed in a fire situations, the new compounds, will have untested and unknown reactions, volatility, flammability, explosive risk, toxicity and health hazards. So responders must be firstly aware of their own safety as the priority, as there is no justification for anyone to take any risks on an abandoned building, which is not going to be saved. AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) is a synthetic firefighting foam concentrate, primarily used to extinguish flammable liquids. It forms a water film between the flammable liquid and the foam, and this allows the foam to spread easily and knock down the flames. It will also form a vapour barrier to prevent the release of harmful/toxic/flammable vapours into the atmosphere. There was another thread on this yesterday.

Yes I have mentioned it in the past, but the property owner will not risk it, as the climbers are wrapped around the electricity and other cables. We are lucky as the PEA are always fast in responding, at any time, day or night, so I now just leave it to them.

The Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (DDPM) has four Ka-32A11BC helicopters, fitted for firefighting operations, manly deploying water drops. These helicopters are currently being used on the mountain/hill fires in the north. DDPM was also recently refused additional budget for further helicopters. It would also be a very rare occurrence, that aerial firefighting, would be considered on this type of fire. Dropping water or chemicals onto a roof, does not work, as roofs are designed to keep things out, plus it the roof collapses or it causes structural damage, it will make access to the seat of the fire a lot more difficult. The accuracy of dropping water from the air onto a specific target, can be challenging, with the smoke and heat rising above the factory. Responders on the ground are better equipped to aim water, foam and firefighting agents directly at the source of the fire. The use of aerial water drops is more commonly employed for fighting large forest/grass wildfires, where the spread of the fire over a wide area makes it difficult for ground-based responders to access and contain.

Also seems that in 2021 that the Pollution Control Department was demanding the company pay compensation of more than 1.3 billion baht for damage caused to the environment and the community near the factory, This legal action is ongoing, and the fire likely to have caused more environmental damage.

Went to have a look at the one near us. The net is now hanging off, so offers no protection. Also the pole is near a boundary wall/fence and is a bit overgrown. Nothing I can do as it is on a neighbour’s property, and PEA only seem to come when it needs resetting.

Maybe, have not seen any images from inside the factory that would confirm, but proving arson could be challenging, but not impossible, due to the extensive damage and the evidence of poor storage/housekeeping in the images above. If we take the basic signs of arson, we see where the investigators should be looking, (my comments in brackets). 1. The damage is significant. (Yes) 2. Burn pattern discrepancy, unusual burn patterns, high heat stress.(easy to identify once inside) 3. Lack of accidental causes. (Was electricity isolated, anyone living at site, was the site being used at all) 4. A unidentifiable point of origin for the fire. (Was the fire started at a strange or unexpected location, or not clear where it started) 5. Multiple points of origin. (Pictures and videos shows fire staring in 1 unit, before spreading) 6. Accelerants are present. (Difficult to identify due to chemical storage.) 7. Responders notice fire not burning normally. (Difficult with the amount of different chemicals present) 8. Property owner acts suspicious. (Has reasons, but factory has been closed, under legal action for 4 years already).

Yes agree, the pole that affects us has the net fitted, the problems is that pole is next to a boundary wall, near neighbouring buildings and a few trees..I have seen snakes getting onto the wires from these, so bypassing the nets. Our power outages only happens 4 or 5 times a year, but with rainy season due, the chances normally increase.

Thai media report of fire. “The Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Public Health revealed that the fire was under control. It was found that 2 villages were affected. There were 6 patients stuck at home and bedridden who had to be evacuated. One rescue worker had a sore eye after extinguishing the fire, and one citizen had itching symptoms and was taken to a hospital for treatment. The air quality test results are still ongoing. Dr. Opas Karnkawinpong Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Public Health, said a report was received from the Rayong Provincial Public Health Authority that the incident occurred today at a factory that operated a recycling and disposal business. waste whose license was canceled, and is currently undergoing legal actions. Initially black smoke was blowing to the northeast and there were 2 villages affected: Village No. 8, Bang But Subdistrict, and Village No. 11, Nong Bua Subdistrict. Temporary shelters and first aid stations have been established at Nong Phawa Temple and there was one injured person, a rescue worker, with burning sensation of the eyes. There were 2 bedridden/housebound patients who were evacuated to Nong Phawa Temple. Another evacuation point at Nong Bua Subdistrict Administrative Organisation, had approximately 35 people from Village No. 11 , where one person was found to have a rash all over his body and was taken to Ban Khai Hospital for treatment, and there were 4 bedridden patients, 1 who were evacuated to Hua Chuat Subdistrict Health Hospital, 1 case at Nongkrap Subdistrict Health Hospital, and 2 cases at Khlong Khanun Subdistrict Health Hospital. A small amount of chemical vapour was found in the air, about 4 kilometres north of the factory. However, the results of preliminary air quality inspections in the surrounding communities, on the downwind side, northeast and north of the factory area were found within normal limits and it does not cause any health effects, said Dr. Opas.”

This site it seems was inspected in 2020, after local complaints of severe deterioration of natural water sources, and questions were raised on what operating license were in place.

This fire at an abandoned warehouse, seems a daunting challenge for the responders, I would image there is no records of what is stored and in what quantities. As it is chemical waste disposal, you would assume, flammable gases, liquids or solids, compressed gas cylinders, possible water/air reactive, toxic materials, poisons, corrosives, oxidising agents, combustibles, etc. Each type of material will pose it own risks, but when mixed in a fire situations, the new compounds, will have untested and unknown reactions, volatility, flammability, explosive risk, toxicity and health hazards. The impact of this fire on the health and environment of the local people should not be ignored. Burning chemicals in the air can cause serious health problems. The smoke and ash from the fire can cause respiratory problems, eye irritation, and other health issues. Hopefully those at risk, in a suitable evacuation zone, have been moved upwind of the smoke plume and the testing and monitoring is not just a 24 hour affairs, but covers, air testing, water testing, and ash/dust/soil testing, until everything is declared safe.

It should be possible to get UK car insurance with a foreign driving licence, but it is often expensive, as international drivers are generally considered to be at higher risk of an accident and are therefore more likely to make a claim. As with all insurance policies, costs will depend on the type of car you have and the level of insurance required, third party only cover, third party, fire and theft or comprehensive cover. Insurers will normally also ignore any no-claims years accrued on the foreign licence, so the premiums will be increased. Think @HauptmannUK gave good advice, you may find it cheaper to hire a car or use taxis.

Sorry but this was a ice factory using ammonia, as a refrigerate and probably water purification , standard process everywhere. Dry ice is solid carbon dioxide, totally different process

Many thanks for giving such a detailed and interesting response. My comments are more generic and general hazmat procedures, hence why I said before, at any incident, the on site specialist is the person to advise emergency responders. The hazmat leak sealers kits I have used before, were normally made of plugs, stoppers, patches, bandages, clamps and sealing putty and were designed for sealing up punctures, gashes, cracks and fractured pipes/valves, not relevant in this situation, as this now seems to have been a valve left open, and emptying the tank.

NTSB chair refutes whistleblower claim of Boeing document cover up, and that the company concealed key documents related to the Alaska Airlines flight. “Jennifer Homendy was responding to comments made the same day by Ed Pierson, a whistleblower and former manager on Boeing’s 737 line, during a subcommittee hearing of the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Government Affairs.” https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/ntsb-chair-refutes-whistleblower-claim-of-boeing-document-cover-up/157872.article