ATF: Cigarette likely causePerson at fault remains unknown; firefighters' actions triggered firestorm, report says By Tony Bartelme (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Tyrone Walker A firefighter walks in front of the burning Sofa Super Store in Charleston, S.C., Monday, June 18, 2007. Nine firefighters died fighting the fire which destroyed the store and a warehouse. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives Report on Sofa Super Store (PDF) Firefighter CoverageIn our special section with photos, videos, interactives, donation information and every story written about the tragedy.Someone probably ignited last year's Sofa Super Store fire by tossing a lit cigarette near trash and discarded furniture, but federal investigators haven't pinned down exactly who caused the deadly blaze and how it began, a report by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives shows. The ATF report, which has not been made public until now, also said Charleston firefighters "caused a fire storm" soon after they arrived because they opened doors and allowed oxygen to feed the flames. In addition, the report sheds new light on the pivotal moments before firefighters arrived, and how a passerby was the first to spot a "funnel type" of fire at the rear of the store. In a sad twist, the report also reveals that the fire may have begun in discarded furniture the city typically picked up from the store and used for fire training exercises. More than a year has passed since fire swept through the store on Savannah Highway, killing nine Charleston firefighters. But answers to basic questions about the fire's origin remain elusive: Did a discarded cigarette start the fire? Was it set on purpose? Who caused that first spark? The Post and Courier obtained the ATF's "origin and cause" report through the U.S. Freedom of Information Act. The Department of Justice blacked out names of firefighters, Sofa Super Store employees and others, but the document still provides a window into how investigators tried to piece together what happened. On June 19, 2007, with smoke still lingering over the blackened and twisted remains of the store, a 33-person team of ATF agents, chemists and fire experts began looking for clues, the report said. The ATF team quickly focused on a 10 1/2-foot by 33 1/2-foot area near the loading dock. There, they found charred sofas, recliners, an office chair, a mattress and other furniture the store was throwing out, along with numerous cigarette butts floating on top of the water. Tracing V-shaped burn patterns, agents determined that a mattress had been leaning against the wall near an exhaust fan, and that the fire probably crawled up the mattress into the building as well as from below through a crawl space. Investigators also interviewed the first person to spot the fire, a man who said he was driving on Savannah Highway in his work van at 6:56 p.m. and saw smoke coming from the rear of the store. This witness told investigators that he immediately drove onto the store's lot but was blocked by a locked gate behind the building. He went into the store to alert employees, and when he and a manager walked to the back, they saw a couch and mattress in flames. The witness told investigators that the spot looked like an employee smoking area, and that when he asked employees about it, one told him that "there was about 10 people smoking out there an hour ago." An assistant manager, meanwhile, tried to fight the fire himself, emptying one extinguisher. When he came back with a second extinguisher, the fire was too hot. Another employee told investigators that the couches in the smoking area were old pieces of furniture being stored until the city of Charleston took them away. Charleston firefighters often used these discarded sofas offsite for training. Several employees said they often smoked outside the building. One said that about an hour before the fire, he tossed a butt onto a paved area near the warehouse. Another said he smoked in the area but put his cigarettes into a bottle of water. A report by the city's panel of experts found earlier this year that the smoking area was a tinder box of combustible furniture, trash and other materials. The city's report cited another federal analysis of the fire that estimated flames around the loading dock released the equivalent of 50 to 125 megawatts of electricity — enough energy to temporarily run 50,000 to 125,000 homes. The ATF report revealed that the fire was well under way when firefighters arrived at 7:11 p.m. and entered the building. "The opening of the doors caused the fire to be fed more oxygen, which gave the fire a chance to burn faster and hotter," the report said. "This caused a fire storm affect (sic) that quickly spread throughout the structure." The ATF concluded its report by labeling the fire's cause as "undetermined." "It is the opinion of the fire investigators that either two possible events occurred: 1) the improper discarding of a lit cigarette or 2) the submission of an open flame by human intervention on the combustible materials in the discarded furniture pile," the report said. Gordon Routley, head of the city's consultants that studied the fire and the department's response, said the ATF report bolsters the theory that a cigarette sparked the blaze. "You can't rule out the possibility that someone just set fire to the stuff with a match. But there's no indication that's what happened. The assumption is that it's an accident." Routley said the ATF report jibes with his team's findings that the fire was spreading inside the store as employees frantically tried to put it out. An ATF official said its investigation is closed. Charleston Police Chief Greg Mullen would not comment on the specifics of ATF's findings, how the information will impact the city's criminal investigation or exactly when the local probe will be completed. "We certainly appreciate the work ATF has done," Mullen said. "We think this information will be helpful as we continue our investigation and hopefully we will have a resolution in the near future." Jean Dangerfield, sister of Assistant Engineer Michael French, one of the firefighters killed in the blaze, said it's frustrating that families are still waiting for definitive answers about the fire's cause. She worries that this question will remain unanswered when all the investigations and reports are finally in. The Fire Department has been held accountable for its decisions the night of the fire, yet the employees and management of the sofa store have not, Dangerfield said. Her family and seven others are suing the sofa store owner, furniture manufacturers and other companies. "Everyone needs to be held accountable for their actions," Dangerfield said. "Because of someone's actions my brother is not here today." Ron Menchaca and Glenn Smith of The Post and Courier contributed to this report. |
Article toolsSponsored Links |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 40 comment(s)
Posted by Thomas1776 on July 10, 2008 at 1:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The ATF report .... said Charleston firefighters "caused a fire storm" soon after they arrived because they opened doors and allowed oxygen to feed the flames.
OUCH!
And these greedy family members are trying to get rich by attempting to win a lawsuit against the SSS. I doubt any jury will rule in their favor on anything. No attorney in their right mind would try and sue the wrong people. Let their cases go to a jury and see what happens. They will come out losers and having to pay the SSS and all the other defendents attorney fees.
Rusty Thomas and Wacko Joe caused those men to die. And thats a fact that can never be refuted.
Posted by eatmorecollards on July 10, 2008 at 6:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I can imagine the guilt everyone there must feel who took a smoke break about that time. It could have been as simple as the sun focusing rays through a bottle of water left on the rubbish pile or as complicated as a endothermic reaction in the hot sun on that pile of volatal material.
Posted by lowcountrylover on July 10, 2008 at 7 a.m. (Suggest removal)
ALL THE DONATIONS, ALL THE WORKMANS COMP, ALL THE LIFE INSURANCE???? IT ALL GREED GREED GREED
Posted by bertdogg5454 on July 10, 2008 at 8:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
who cares what caused it, it happened, it's over, tired of hearing about it!
Posted by HighDef on July 10, 2008 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
another smoker kills others ! Wake up call Charleston, ban smoking on all grounds, make em stand in the middle of the street and pollute themselves.
Posted by Weeeee on July 10, 2008 at 9:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
HighDef, I think that's the most ignorant post I've ever read. People like you would have the gov't controlling where people take a dump.
Posted by easytiger on July 10, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
i agree HighDef. smoking kills. & more than just the person smoking. totally off the subject- but last week, i saw 2 pregnant girls SMOKING. that is beyond disgusting!
wee- i take it you are a smoker. & i think your post is the ignorant one i have ever read.
why should ANYONE -besides the idiot who chooses to smoke- be made to inhale that crap?! restaurants, outside buildings, anywhere. go find a sealed room to smoke in...i shouldn't have to inhale it & my environment shouldn't suffer so that you can smoke that grossness.
i believed that this was a cigarette from day 1. wonder who's carrying that weight on their shoulders?
SMOKING KILLS.
Posted by devilsadvocate77 on July 10, 2008 at 9:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
YOU STUPID IDIOT SMOKERS!!! You think the world is your ashtray. Look at the consequences of your inconsiderate actions.
Posted by Weeeee on July 10, 2008 at 9:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
easytiger, jump to conclusions much? No, I don't smoke. But even if I did, I still wouldn't believe the gov't has any right to control where I do it. As for your stupid crying about where smokers do it, continue to cry about it. Smokers don't MAKE YOU come to those "restaurants, outside buildings, anywhere". Stay in Charleston if you don't like it so much. Life is about choice. Learn it, live with it, or get left behind.
You would think that if everyone shared your opinion, smoking would be banned in more places.
Posted by mdtpace on July 10, 2008 at 10:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
How ironic that the POS lawyers are going to make more money off of tobacco. But hey, they are saving lives, that's why they do it.
And to all of you talking about each other's ignorant posts, please, Thomas1776 always has the most ignorant posts, so give the man his due. The story reports a cigarette started the fire, but Rusty and Riley are still to blame. What you smoking, Thomas?
Posted by summerville_guy on July 10, 2008 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The P&C needs to let this be the end of the "$ofa $uper $tore" coverage.
Posted by jameschucktown on July 10, 2008 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thomas, you are going to rot in hell and that is too pleasant a place for someone as sick as you.
Posted by BigSargeofSC on July 10, 2008 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I want to thank the SSS for setting up this mess.
Thank you, smokers, for your continued recklessness with your cancer-stick butts. And you wonder why people are supporting smoking bans, don't you?
Last of all, lets hear it for those well-trained people who thought giving a fire a big ol' gulp of air was the right thing to do. Couldn't have killed nine brave men without you.
"endothermic reaction in the hot sun on that pile of volatal material."- eatmorecollards
Gee, Captain Kirk, maybe it was an accidental discharge from a Klingon ray gun. What the..
Posted by drp7773 on July 10, 2008 at 10:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow now add all cig makers to the sue list since we don't know which brand they should all pay, and can't forget the Bic lighter company cause there is a chance their product was used to light the cig, might as well sue the match makers who knows this cig could have been lit by a match. oh oh Zippo look out your next.Dang almost forgot about the lighter fluid companies.Look at the Money here oh myyyyyyy
Posted by Weeeee on July 10, 2008 at 10:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
drp, don't forget the volatile chemical company...because that's what they do...make volatile chemicals
Posted by BigSargeofSC on July 10, 2008 at 10:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Lets throw in the people who made that shoes that allowed the smokers to stand outside to smoke. Oh, and don't forget the people who make the paper that the cigs are wrapped in. We should have been warned that the paper can catch fire. Last of all, lets sue the GEICO Cavemen. Wasn't it the Cavemen who discovered fire, yet failed to warn us of the danger of fire?
Posted by HighDef on July 10, 2008 at 11:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
weee- soon enough I'll be honking at smokers standing outside in 95% heat, puffing that sweet Nicotine. Look at the healthy national trend of banning smoking in other cities. Less smoking reduces our health care strain.... It will douse out the Southern Belt cities soon. Maybe a shark with lasers lit the cig ?
Let's forgive and move on PC !
Posted by easytiger on July 10, 2008 at 11:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
it is not stupid products. it is the stupid people. get over yourselves...
i dont think anyone should be sued. in today's world with the knowledge that is available- the only thing to blame is the DUMBA** that continues to smoke.
not the shoes, the lighter, the matches, the caveman.(seriously? BigSarge?! come on now!)
tell me why a smoker should have more rights than a non-smoker?
Posted by ColdBeer on July 10, 2008 at 11:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There was a time when you could smoke IN your work place. AT you desk. The anti-smoke crowd is responsible for these employees having to go out to a "smoking area" to smoke. The anti-smokers should consider themselves responsible for the deaths of the 9 firemen.
Yea, my argument is stupid. No more stupid than some of the other comments on here.
Posted by scmom07 on July 10, 2008 at 12:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
easytiger, as a non-smoker but someone who believes in fairness I have to ask: why should a non-smoker have more rights than a smoker? There a plenty of places I can go to eat drink an be merry and NOT have to worry about 2nd hand smoke affecting me or my family. This world would be a lot better off if people remembered some of what we learned in kindergarten: be nice and share!
Posted by SCHoser on July 10, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
NOTHING GOOD COMES FROM SMOKING! Nothing, nada-it only does harm, nothing else. If people want a government that is supposed to care for them and help protect them, smoking should be the first thing to go. We could get rid of a lot of the government controls we have now, which do infringe on our rights, but outlawing cigs would be a great government control worth the effort because it harms others who are not engaged in smoking. Again, NOTHING GOOD COMES FROM SMOKING-well, except making doctors, lawyers and cig manufacturers rich! One thing that might help change people's attitudes is ALL THE DAMN BUTTS THROWN AROUND!! Lord forbid if people do the responsible thing and throw them away! Imagine the money this country would save if there were no smoking....
Posted by SCHoser on July 10, 2008 at 12:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Also-I think it's heartless and moronic to call these families "greedy"! You have no idea what they have gone through and will continue to go through forever! It's cold and simply stupid to cast that kind of insult on them!
Posted by counterpoint on July 10, 2008 at 12:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I share my carcinogens with you all.
Posted by ColdBeer on July 10, 2008 at 1:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Personally, I could care less one way or the other. You see, I have the freedom to NEVER be around smokers if I don't want to be. When I am around a smoker, it is because I CHOSE to be around them.
Guess what... it's the same for you.
If you don't feel strongly enough about your anti-smoking stance to boycott any business that allows smoking or sells smoking supplies and to change jobs that force you to be around smoke then you are just... well... blowing smoke.
Put up or shut up... no one is stopping you.
Posted by im4usc on July 10, 2008 at 2:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
To get back to the original story, and the the P&C chose to run it.
Those of you who object--an honest answer--if you had seen the ATF report on TV but not in the paper--wouldn't you be saying "Why didn't the P&C run this story? Are they too busy writing (concert reviews, Gadsden Green stories)?"
Honestly, did one more paper sell because of the story?
Why did you read/comment on it?
Some people live just to bitch about something.
Posted by shoelaces on July 10, 2008 at 3:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hey, why don't we blame the one guy who was in the SSS when the lit cigarette caused Rusty Thomas, hired by Joey Riley, to cause the 9 firefighters to lose their lives.
That just about covers it.
As for banning cigarettes I don't have a problem with it. I don't like the government telling me or anyone else what to do but when it comes to smelling nasty cigarette smoke I don't miss it!!! It is a shame the smokers have to stand in the fronts of the buildings. Personally I feel they should have to stand at the back doors by the dumpsters....not throwing their cigs in them just near the rest of the trash.
CB, I respect and enjoy your posts, but this time I do have to disagree. It is sometimes hard to avoid the cigarette smoke even when you are somewhere they don't allow it.
I have children who will never know their grandfather because he made the choice to smoke. He started years ago before anyone thought it was bad for you. It is beyond me why ANYONE would choose to smoke knowing the damage it causes.
Off the subject, I know.
Posted by Peacock on July 10, 2008 at 3:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If this tragedy was the result of one lit cigarette -- don't you think things like this would happen a heckuva lot more often?
Quit scapegoating the freaking smokers. A fine cigar[ette] has probably saved more lives in the nerves that they calm, than they have cost.
Posted by im4usc on July 10, 2008 at 3:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Gadsden on July 10, 2008 at 2:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
im4usc:
Here's what I posted much earlier - you must have missed it:
"Ok - now we know. Please let this story die and quit picking the scabs to sell papers P&C!"
The point is there have been 100 to 1 stories by local media that pertained to melodramatic bs instead of pertinent info. Now we have the answer - no more BS emotional stories are needed.
Also posted earlier:
"Even Louis Mulkey's brother said the same thing: "Time to stop greiving, fix the problems and move on" - well said."
No Gads, I didn't miss it. Still waiting on answers to my questions, though. Why read / comment on it if you're sick of it???
And if Louis Mulkey's brother wants to "move on" (when/where did he say that anyway), then why agree that a movie be made about Louis' life? That doesn't seem like "moving on" to me.
Posted by shoelaces on July 10, 2008 at 4:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All jokes and finger pointing aside...
IF there is a movie I don't think it would be centered around the fire. It would be centered around Mulkey's relationship in coaching the Summerville High School Basketball team. According to the stories on ESPN he told these boys they would be state champs by their senior year. The fire happened prior to their senior year.
Go to YouTube and punch in his name. The story is truly amazing and a tear jerker. I think it would make a great
"cinderella story" movie. You can find out how it all turned out and almost didn't turn out...
Posted by im4usc on July 10, 2008 at 4:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by Gadsden on July 10, 2008 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"I commented because I, like many others, are sick of the P&C milking this story."
I admit I'm growing weary of it also but I'm not going to bitch about it as long as I'm still reading the articles. Before I bitch about it, I'll move on and not bother to read/comment.
This one is funny, though---
Posted by Peacock: "A fine cigar[ette] has probably saved more lives in the nerves that they calm, than they have cost."
I've never heard of anyone dying from nicotine withdrawal. LOL.
Posted by THISMUSTSTOP on July 10, 2008 at 4:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I love how Riley believes that the SSS owner is responsible for the deaths of 9 (nine) firefighters because of it's building code violations. How about the Fire Department's OSHA violations? How about the National Standards that the Fire Department ignored? Wouldn't that be the reason that these guys died?
If every building was fire safe, then we wouldn't need a fire department. I'm a firefighter and we are supposed to be reacting to the situation that we are faced with. Our leaders should have been trained to know about the dangers in this type of building. This type of building burns down about once a week in this country (from the report) and only Charleston Fire Department manages to loose 9 (nine) firefighters trying to put it out. SHAME!
Posted by wonderdog on July 10, 2008 at 7:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Now this has gone off topic and has become a smoker vs. non smoker issue. It doesn't really matter if the fire started because a smoker threw down a cigarette butt or if someone was playing with matches. The fire appears to have started in the "smoking area" by someone's carelessness. I would hate to have that on my conscience, and quite frankly, I hope the careless person who started the fire thinks about it - OFTEN. I am only addressing how the fire STARTED, as the rest of the events otherwise would not have taken place on that horrible night.
Posted by rollo on July 10, 2008 at 8:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'd like to have a look at the "Butt" that supposedly caused the fire.
It's at least as likely that spontaneous combustion of rags soaked with some brand of furniture finishing oil was the actual cause. I've supervised refinishing work on over 30 jobs as part of my job and I've had two fires erupt on jobs due to improper disposal of finishing rags. Fortunately, an alert employee caught one, I caught the other both were contained and extinguished before any damage was done to the properties.
I'm willing to admit that I might be wrong, But I've never
had a fire start on a property I was working because of a cigarette butt.
Posted by southerngirl45 on July 10, 2008 at 8:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
WHY NOT SUE THE EMPLOYEES-THE'RE THE ONES WHO STARTEDTHE FIRE TO BEGIN WITH!!!OOPS I HOPE I DIDN'T JUST PUT AN IDEA IN ALL THESE GREEDY PEOPLES MINDS.SOMEONE KNOWS WHO DID START THAT TRAGIC FIRE AND I FOR ONE COULD NOT LIVE WITH MYSELF IF I DID'NT COME FORWARD!!THE WITNESS SAID HE WENT INTO THE STORE TO WARN EMPLOYEES,BUT I THOUGHT THE STORE WAS CLOSED WITH THE TWO GUYS THERE WORKING ON REPAIRS? THIS SHOULD BE PUT TO REST SO EVERYONE CAN GET ON WITH THEIR LIVES!
Posted by moonpie on July 10, 2008 at 9:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Tripsa greatly said. This is what I have said all around.
Posted by THISMUSTSTOP on July 11, 2008 at 10:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
everyone is missing the point. who cares about the cig. the fire department burned down the building with their tactics. i know, i was there as a firefighter!
Posted by THISMUSTSTOP on July 11, 2008 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
the cig. started an outside trash fire, the fire department made it a structure fire.
Posted by NorthernTransplant on July 11, 2008 at 1:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Does anyone know if Rusty smokes?......
Since he opened the door to let the fire in, ordered the breaking of the windows to feed the fire and poured thousands of gallons on top of the FF's inside...
i mean its a theory with holes but one will never know.
Before you get angry...I was a Career firefighter in Northern Va and a member of the IAFF with all the "proper" certifications and training.
It is called the fire tetrahedron www.survivaltopics.com/survival/fire-tet... and i believe Rusty missed that day of FF1 training...sorry...he missed the course...i mean it is a realatively knew course in the last 100 years.
To all the family members who people say you are being greedy...YOU SHOULD BE GREEDY and I support only you folks and those FF's still standing the call.
Never quit fighting, I know the folks in the firehouse will not.
Posted by usmcredpatch on July 11, 2008 at 6:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All this crap on smokers..Whatever one does is their own business. why do people believe they need to make negative comments on someone that smokes?
If you got o a restaurant and sit outside, you inhale more toxins per second, then second hand smoke from a cigarette.
Do something intelligent before you make posts and research the amount of toxins in the air; outside, inside a building. You would be surprised at what you found folks.
Also, why sue the furniture manufacturers? Are you going to sue them for the toxins your furniture gives off in your home also?
How about your car? Over 140 known toxins are airborne in your vehicle right now. Stop being stupid folks. Again, research your info first.
Our country continues to decline when it comes to intelligence. Idiocracy, the movie, is a great example of what is to come.
Posted by usmcredpatch on July 11, 2008 at 6:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
CONT"D
As far as who is to blame. The fire MAY of been started by a cigarette. OK, so common sense says they should of not been allowed to smoke directly next to debris. However, the CFD and their lack of firefighting tactics, allowed 9 men to enter a building that was:
1- not inspected correctly upon arrival. Firefighting tactics say utilize proper ICS systems. First arriving officer does size up. 360 degree walk around on the EXTERIOR while your Captains do an interior check with a TIC( Thermal Imaging Camera) and proper tools ie. hooks, can and possibly even a charged attack line.
From the mouth of the first OIC, he said they just walked around inside, not using a TIC or any tools.
2- No command set up or accountability. Most fire depts use accountability tags that are left on the equipment they arrive on and a safety officer is usually put in place and second set of tags handed to the SO directly by that firefighter.
3- No mutual aid/automatic aid. This is set in place by most fire depts so that enough resources areon scene ASAP!!! Commercial structure fires are WAY diff. then residential structures. It is imperative to have many firefighters and equipment on scene, but RT was ignorant and egotistical. THIS IS THE MAIN REASON 9 MEN PERISHED THAT NIGHT!!
4- Inadequate supply lines. Most fire dept use 5in. supply hoses that deliever A LOT of water, right away. CFD was still using supply lines thta most fire depts gave up on 10 years ago.
5- No SOPS/SOGS for Truck Company usage. Truck Companies are utilized for mostly search and rescue and ventilation. For those of you who don't know fire dept tactics, a truck company is a vehicle that has a ladder attached to the vehicle. These pieces are imperative a commercial strucures.
CFD uses theirs for taxing ffs around.
6- No SOPS/SOGS for commercial structure firefighting. RT and his officers basically let EVERYONE do ANYHTING at the SSS fire. Their was absolutley no thought process used at this fire. No one identified the building as a truss roof constructed. As soon as they broke out the large picture windows in front, THEY DOOMED ALL!!! Anytime a large amount of oxygen is fed directly into a fire, all at once, you get a very bad thing.
I assume a majority of posts were made by non-firefighters so that is why I posted this.