Accident LPG Truck Overturns on Phetkasem Road, Causing 10km Traffic Jam

[Georgealbert]

 

Pictures courtesy of Workpoint.

 

A liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) tanker overturned on the morning of 26 May, on Phetkasem Road southbound near Ban Wa Thon, Khlong Wan subdistrict, Prachuap Khiri Khan, blocking traffic and causing a congestion stretch of approximately 10 kilometres.

 

The crash occurred around 6:30 am at kilometre marker 320+270. The truck lost control, colliding with a central guardrail before tipping onto its right side in the rightmost lane. One man was reported injured.

 

Prateep Boriboonrat, Deputy Governor of Prachuap Khiri Khan province responsible for disaster prevention, arrived at the scene to coordinate the response alongside provincial energy and highway officials.

 

To ensure public safety and facilitate recovery, authorities closed both directions of Phetkasem Road at the crash site. Traffic was later, limited to a single lane when the scene was deemed safe, with vehicles released intermittently to avoid secondary collisions while awaiting heavy lifting cranes.

 

Two large cranes were deployed to right the truck, with firefighters and local rescue teams on standby. Water spray continued around the truck to suppress any possible gas release and help disperse released vapour.

During the recovery operation, officials detected a gas leak from a pipe joint on the LPG tank. Officers at the scene confirmed they were able to successfully sealed the leak.

 

The tanker was lifted back onto its wheels and all LPG was transferred to another tanker. The investigation into the incident is ongoing.

 

 

  Adapted by Asean Now from Workpoint 2025-05-27.

 

 

 

[smedly]

how many tanker trucks have been involved in serious accidents these last 2 weeks, it was a petrol tanker a few days ago

[impulse]

Those responders have bigger cajónes than I do.

 

Or maybe they've never experienced BLEVE training.  boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion  

 

I've gone through BLEVE training at several points in my life and I'll never forget the images of many yards of fire hose melted into the pavement in the aftermath of an explosion.  Anyone within 50 yards or so would have been toast.

 

[Georgealbert]

19 minutes ago, impulse said:

Those responders have bigger cajónes than I do.

 

Or maybe they've never experienced BLEVE training.  boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion  

 

I've gone through BLEVE training at several points in my life and I'll never forget the images of many yards of fire hose melted into the pavement in the aftermath of an explosion.  Anyone within 50 yards or so would have been toast.

 

Where is the risk of BLEVE in this incident.

 

For a BLEVE to occur you would need direct heat and flame impact on to the tanker, to weaken it. Any fire would not instantly produce a BLEVE, so responders would have time to assess and adjust their response, should a fire ignite.
 

There was no fire and water spray, as deployed here takes the LPG out of its flammable range and will help disperse the vapours.

 

So trained responders, correctly dealing with a non-fire incident, as you would expect any where in the world.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[impulse]

8 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

Where is the risk of BLEVE in this incident.

 

For a BLEVE to occur you would need direct heat and flame impact on to the tanker, to weaken it. Any fire would not instantly produce a BLEVE, so responders would have time to assess and adjust their response, should a fire ignite.
 

There was no fire and water spray, as deployed here takes the LPG out of its flammable range and will help disperse the vapours.

 

So trained responders, correctly dealing with a non-fire incident, as you would expect any where in the world.

 

Call me skeptical of the structural integrity of an LPG truck that's laying on its side after skidding along the pavement.

 

I didn't claim that they did anything wrong.  Just that they have bigger cajónes than I do.

 

 

[Georgealbert]

5 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Call me skeptical of the structural integrity of an LPG truck that's laying on its side after skidding along the pavement.

 

I didn't claim that they did anything wrong.  Just that they have bigger cajónes than I do.

 

 

Agree that any crash could damage the integrity of any tanker.

 

But there is still no risk of a BLEVE in this situation. Where is any possible ignition source.

 

Traffic was stop - no risk from combustion engines.

 

Personal deployed behind water spray lines, hence reducing the risk of any leak igniting, as it will be outside of flammable range.

 

Only electrical risk is overhead power lines, but vapour density of LPG means it sinks, heavier than air.

 

No signs of LPG leak and also no signs of a tank rupture as there is no pooling of liquid LPG.

 

A BLEVE can’t t occur without a fire and exposure to heat. Exposure to sunlight will not cause a BLEVE.

 

So responders are not being brave, just applying a competent understanding of the risks and hazards.

 

If it was on fire, then yes there is an increased risk of BLEVE, not just from structural integrity damage, but being on its side, the pressure relief value will probably be within the liquid LPG, depending on how full the tanker was. A relief value will not operate in the liquid level as it does not expand, hence why it is on top, so always within the LPG gas area.
 

Consideration also needed to be given to how full the tanker is at the time of the incident. A full tanker will have more liquid LPG and will be capable of absorbing more heat and hence lowering the risk of rupture .

[Etaoin Shrdlu]

When I hear of an LPG tanker overturning, I'm reminded of the inferno on New Petchburi Road back in September 1990.

 

What a nightmare that was.

 

 

[impulse]

59 minutes ago, Georgealbert said:

But there is still no risk of a BLEVE in this situation. Where is any possible ignition source.

 

BLEVEs can be caused by structural damage.  Not necessarily caused by heat.  LPG Boils when it leaks out to atmospheric pressure.  That's the B in BLEVE. 

 

A leak and a spark and it's off to the races.  That spark could come from anywhere given that they're working on a steel vessel using steel tools and steel cables.  A leak could have happened when they stressed something flipping it upright.

 

Again, I'm not claiming they did anything wrong.  I wasn't there.  Just saying that it was a dangerous situation no matter how well they handled it.

 

[Georgealbert]

26 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

BLEVEs can be caused by structural damage.  Not necessarily caused by heat.  LPG Boils when it leaks out to atmospheric pressure.  That's the B in BLEVE. 

 

A leak and a spark and it's off to the races.  That spark could come from anywhere given that they're working on a steel vessel using steel tools and steel cables.  A leak could have happened when they stressed something flipping it upright.

 

Again, I'm not claiming they did anything wrong.  I wasn't there.  Just saying that it was a dangerous situation no matter how well they handled it.

 

Sorry, but you clearly don’t understand BLEVE.

 

LPG is boiling all the time when in a tanker, hence it will always contain liquid and gas.

 

A spark could cause a leak to catch fire, but would not cause a instant BLEVE, like you seem to think.
 

It would take time to increase the pressure within the tanker, before the internal pressure causes a catastrophic rupture. Hence why in a fire situation cooling spray would be applied to the tanker at the same time attempts are made to extinguish the fire.

 

You also clearly have never attended an emergency, a basic incident size up will show that there was no risk of a BLEVE, here.

The first responders applied water spray until no leak was confirmed. When righting the tanker a leak occurred, hence hose-lines were in place, to disperse the vapour, dilute the vapour outside of its flammable range (typically LFL 2.1% and UFL 9.5%). Any spark would have caused a minor fire, easily controlled and extinguished and no BLEVE.