Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday August 08 2014, @10:41PM   Printer-friendly
from the if-you-can't-breathe-don't-vape dept.

A man has died after an e-cigarette exploded while charging, causing a small fire and igniting the oxygen tube of an oxygen concentrator, which may have been in use by the occupier. The Merseyside Fire & Rescue Service have planned to give out advice on safe use of e-cigarettes.

Merseyside Fire & Rescue Service will carry out a reassurance campaign in Wallasey on Friday, where people will be given advice surrounding the safe use of E-Cigarettes.

Area Manager Myles Platt said: "The investigation into the cause of this fire is continuing but at this stage it is thought that the charging device being used at the time may not have been the one supplied with the E-Cigarette.

"We urge people to always use electrical equipment in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and guidance, always ensure that no electrical items are left charging overnight or left unattended for a long period when being charged and do not mix parts from different E-Cigarettes.

"Only use the original charger or electrical cables supplied and ensure you purchase electrical items from a reputable source" said Platt.

Merseyside Fire & Rescue Service note that there have been nine fires involving E-Cigarettes in Merseyside since January 1, 2013, including the incident on Penkett Road in Wirral.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @10:58PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @10:58PM (#79150)

    Oxygen doesn't burn, as it's only a part of combustion. In order for something to burn, it has to oxidize rapidly (with the flame, smoke, and heat being the byproducts), but oxygen cannot burn without a fuel source.

    • (Score: 1) by Guppy on Saturday August 09 2014, @03:18PM

      by Guppy (3213) on Saturday August 09 2014, @03:18PM (#79339)

      Oxygen doesn't burn, as it's only a part of combustion. In order for something to burn, it has to oxidize rapidly (with the flame, smoke, and heat being the byproducts), but oxygen cannot burn without a fuel source.

      True, but those fuel sources can be anything remotely flammable, and they will burn rapidly -- possibly explosively -- in the presence of oxygen. There's a reason why fittings for oxygen-carrying equipment state "Use no lubricant", as even a tiny dab of grease on the pipe threads may heat up and burst into flame from spontaneous oxidation.

      I wouldn't be surprised if the heating element in his e-cigarette ignited the volatilized nicotine liquid mix he was using (the mix varies, but is typically a mix of propylene glycol, glycerin, and alcohol), or something along those lines.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday August 08 2014, @10:59PM

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Friday August 08 2014, @10:59PM (#79151) Homepage

    I worked on O2 concentrators, and this article is bullshit. When you need Oxygen, whomever provides you with your breathing apparatus clearly states that you will pay full damages if you do dumb shit like smoke tobacco into the concentrator.

    " David Thomson, 62, was found in the living room of a house in Penkett Road, Wallasey."

    Fuckin' moron. I've seen plenty of these kinds of situations, and whomever decides they should smoke while receiving oxygen therapy should not only forfeit their warranty on the concentrators (Hey fuckheads - there are a bunch of valves and compressors, just like your heart), but they should explode into a fiery death*.

    *O2 concentrators don't explode, they're designed for fire in mind, the cannnula is like a fuse, the fire engulfs it until it meets the case, then it fizzles unceremoniously and nothing happens.

     

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by SlimmPickens on Friday August 08 2014, @11:15PM

      by SlimmPickens (1056) on Friday August 08 2014, @11:15PM (#79158)

      As usual, I disagree with your tone, however I have to admit that 'Darwin Award' was the first thing I thought.

      • (Score: 2) by AnythingGoes on Friday August 08 2014, @11:24PM

        by AnythingGoes (3345) on Friday August 08 2014, @11:24PM (#79159)

        Darwin Awards only work if the recipient has not had any offspring, else the genes are still in the human gene pool..

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @11:27PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @11:27PM (#79160)

      When you need Oxygen, whomever provides you with your breathing apparatus clearly states that you will pay full damages if you do dumb shit like smoke tobacco into the concentrator.

      I'm sure they did tell him that; the last thing that went through his mind before the fireball was probably, "I'm not smoking tobacco and don't have an open flame, so it'll be fine."

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:30AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:30AM (#79173)

      Err, what part of the "E" in "E-Cigarette" did you not notice in your rush to make First Post (which you missed)?

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by c0lo on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:31AM

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:31AM (#79174) Journal

      Interesting but irrelevant to the case. Cf TFA, the accident happened while the ecigarette was charging, there's absolutely no indications that the person smoked inside the oxygen concentrator. Reading TFA, seems to me the fact that was an eCigarette kit involved is irrelevant - simply charging some batteries with a wrong adaptor caused an initial fire, which afterwards ignited the oxygen tube. The message of the fire dept is:

      "We urge people to always use electrical equipment in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and guidance, always ensure that no electrical items are left charging overnight or left unattended for a long period when being charged, and do not mix parts from different e-cigarettes.

      ...

      BTW, e-Cigarettes don't emit smoke, they emit vapours. True, the most used liquids for vaporizing are glycerin, propylene glycol and/or polyethylene glycol 400 [wikipedia.org]. I'd say substances one should consider mixing with pure oxygen even less than smoke or dried vegetable matter, but in any case a boiling temperature well under the ignition point of the majority of materials.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:19PM

      by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:19PM (#79303) Homepage
      > who*m*ever provides you

      Don't do that please. I provide them, he provides her, who provides whom.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
  • (Score: 2) by e_armadillo on Friday August 08 2014, @11:08PM

    by e_armadillo (3695) on Friday August 08 2014, @11:08PM (#79156)

    Even them "new-fangled" cancer sticks will kill ya . . .

    --
    "How are we gonna get out of here?" ... "We'll dig our way out!" ... "No, no, dig UP stupid!"
    • (Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:54AM

      by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:54AM (#79183)

      eCigs lack the carcinogenic compounds found in normal cigs and there have been no studies (that I am aware of, corrections?) to date that ecigs cause cancer.

      That said ecigs are still nicotine delivery devices, and nicotine is a poison. Enough of it at once will kill you on the spot, and even in the small amounts found in ecigs it raises blood pressure, pulse and decreases blood flow. Just the sort of thing you want to use when your brain isn't getting enough oxygen as it is. Which would appear to be the case this time.

      Pity he doesn't qualify for a Darwin, At 62 it is likely he has already passed on his genetics by now.

      --
      "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
      • (Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:57AM

        by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:57AM (#79184)

        Just found this;

        http://motherboard.vice.com/read/a-new-cancer-study-found-e-cigarettes-affect-cells-the-same-as-tobacco-smoke [vice.com]

          e_armadillo is right;

        "Even them "new-fangled" cancer sticks will kill ya . . ."

        --
        "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
        • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @07:22AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @07:22AM (#79249)

          > "Even them "new-fangled" cancer sticks will kill ya . . ."

          Even water will kill ya. [scientificamerican.com] What matters is how easily it kills you. Given that 70 different carcinogens are in tobacco smoke [lung.org] while e-cig vapor can only have 3-4 tops because it only has 3-4 total ingredients, it's pretty clear that e-cigs are significantly less cancerous. Precisely how significant, well, that is one for the researchers.

      • (Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday August 09 2014, @08:01PM

        by sjames (2882) on Saturday August 09 2014, @08:01PM (#79423) Journal

        A lot of things will kill you if you take enough at once. The list includes caffeine, alcohol, water, salt, and oxygen. Not enough of the last three will also kill you.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by gallondr00nk on Friday August 08 2014, @11:46PM

    by gallondr00nk (392) on Friday August 08 2014, @11:46PM (#79164)

    It's interesting how the little anti E-cig thing is building up in the UK - there's press on practically every accident or hypothetical risk that involves them.

    It makes me think of one of the arguments the pro-smoking lobby used back in the 90's - that the anti smoking lobby were really just a bunch of curtain twitching Puritans who were digusted and afraid of anything they considered unseemly.

    At the time, I suspected it was mostly bullshit, but I wonder if there's actually more truth to it than I realised. I bet it's exactly the same people who are against it - Wales has already banned e-cigs in public places.

    Or perhaps it's just the media's addiction to hysteria again.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @11:58PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 08 2014, @11:58PM (#79166)

      Ad hominems are the best way to win debates.

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by Tork on Saturday August 09 2014, @03:38AM

        by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 09 2014, @03:38AM (#79219)

        Are you all really going to listen to a guy who's too dumb* to create an SN account?

        * ;)

        --
        🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
        • (Score: 2) by Tork on Saturday August 09 2014, @02:49PM

          by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 09 2014, @02:49PM (#79332)

          Whoever modded my post 'Troll' should read the comment I was replying to.

          --
          🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
    • (Score: 1) by pranadevil2k on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:04AM

      by pranadevil2k (1795) on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:04AM (#79169)

      Or it could be the standard cigarette companies pushing every ecig story to stop them from stealing their customers and profits.
      See also: Tesla car fires

      • (Score: 2) by Vanderhoth on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:20AM

        by Vanderhoth (61) on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:20AM (#79171)

        I don't think that's the case. I'd bet ecigs are owned and sold by the same group, they're diversifying. There are so many regulations against cigarettes now they need a new product to get back in the game. ecigs are mostly unrestricted, but with all the lies from them and 20-20 hindsight people are skeptical, which the media likes.

        --
        "Now we know", "And knowing is half the battle". -G.I. Joooooe
      • (Score: 2) by cafebabe on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:42AM

        by cafebabe (894) on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:42AM (#79177) Journal

        If we're going to discuss media hysteria and cars, I'm waiting for the Daily Mail to discover that self driving cars can be used by terrorists. Or that vehicle electronics can be hacked for nefarious purposes [youtube.com].

        --
        1702845791×2
      • (Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:42AM

        by Buck Feta (958) on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:42AM (#79198) Journal

        All of the traditional tobacco companies either sell or are developing an "e-cig".

        --
        - fractious political commentary goes here -
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @02:15AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @02:15AM (#79203)

          Even if they don't sell the e-cigs, they're in the perfect position to sell the concentrated nicotine used with them.

          • (Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Saturday August 09 2014, @04:02AM

            by Buck Feta (958) on Saturday August 09 2014, @04:02AM (#79224) Journal

            Actually, they would prefer to let competitors pay a higher margin for raw materials. Tobacco profits aren't a function of manufacture, but of branding.

            --
            - fractious political commentary goes here -
    • (Score: 2) by cykros on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:33AM

      by cykros (989) on Saturday August 09 2014, @12:33AM (#79175)

      Why, you don't feel it's reasonable to blame this issue of a battery being charged resulting in an explosion on what the battery was to be used in? /s

      Had this happened due to a charging cell phone, or ANY other rechargeable battery, would we see people questioning the safety of those other devices that use batteries? Or would we (sanely) just zoom in on whether or not that particular brand of battery and battery charger were made according to safety regulations, and whether they were being used correctly?

      This kind of reporting is absolute filth...kind of surprised it got by the editors.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Saturday August 09 2014, @09:05AM

        by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Saturday August 09 2014, @09:05AM (#79260) Journal

        This kind of reporting is absolute filth

        Well, to answer the title of your own post - yes, you do seem to be exhibiting a little bit of hysteria. ;)

        Or would we (sanely) just zoom in on whether or not that particular brand of battery and battery charger were made according to safety regulations, and whether they were being used correctly?

        I'll let TFS answer that:

        "We urge people to always use electrical equipment in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and guidance, always ensure that no electrical items are left charging overnight or left unattended for a long period when being charged and do not mix parts from different E-Cigarettes.

        "Only use the original charger or electrical cables supplied and ensure you purchase electrical items from a reputable source" said Platt.

        It seems that is precisely what I did - I focused on the problem being the (probable) incorrect use of the charger. Now if I had just printed the warning about the charger, someone would have complained that I hadn't printed the story which necessitated the warning in the first place. So I did that as well!

        kind of surprised it got by the editors

        It didn't 'get by' the editors - I put it there quite intentionally.

        Now, if I have misunderstood the point you are trying to make, then please come back and let me know - I wouldn't want to miss an important aspect of this discussion. However, if this is simply not the kind of story that interests you, feel free to skip it or, even better, submit another one - your stories have been accepted in the past and we sure could use a few more. Have a good one!

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:19AM

      by sjames (2882) on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:19AM (#79193) Journal

      Here in the U.S. as well. Groups that should be celebrating the invention of the e-cig are working hard to get it banned on any pretense they can dig up. It's as if smoking bothers them, but people being able to stop smoking without suffering REALLY bothers them.

      • (Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:24AM

        by PinkyGigglebrain (4458) on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:24AM (#79242)

        If the ecigs ACTUALLY helped people quite smoking then I suspect there would less outcry against them. As it is you trade one nicotine delivery device for another.

        --
        "Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Saturday August 09 2014, @07:14AM

          by sjames (2882) on Saturday August 09 2014, @07:14AM (#79248) Journal

          I vape myself. I do use nicotine. I do not smoke and haven't for years. I do not inhale tar or carbon monoxide or particulates. I also skip the vast majority of the carcinogens.

          Why should the American Cancer Society care if I vape now that I've dumped the stuff that causes cancer?

          Why should the Lung Association be upset now that my lungs have cleared and my cough went away?

          Even the heart association should be happy, most of the heart and circulatory problems are caused by the chronic carbon monoxide load.

          Even the level of addiction goes down once the MAOIs from cigarettes are eliminated.

          Meanwhile, the patches and gum have only an 8% success rate so they rarely ACTUALLY help people quit smoking. There hasn't been enough time to study it, but the rate of quitting after switching to e-cigs is non-zero.

          All these organizations will do by prohibiting e-cigs is drive people back to smoking or reduce the chances that they will ever quit.

          • (Score: 1) by Nollij on Sunday August 10 2014, @06:07PM

            by Nollij (4559) on Sunday August 10 2014, @06:07PM (#79710)

            The short answer is that while e-cigs are better than traditional cigarettes, they are still believed (Science is still out on this) to be harmful.
            In other words, cigarettes < e-cigs < using neither.

            The [cancer.org] Longer [cancer.org] Answer [cancer.org]

            (BTW: "A study done by the FDA found cancer-causing substances in half the e-cigarette samples tested" [cancer.org]

            • (Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday August 10 2014, @07:22PM

              by sjames (2882) on Sunday August 10 2014, @07:22PM (#79732) Journal

              Wouldn't it make a LOT more sense to work on banning the known harmful cigarettes rather than the questionably harmful e-cigs? They don't seem concerned about the thousands of other things we ingest in a day that haven't been proven safe.

              It's odd that they seem unconcerned about the known carcinogens found in all patches and gums.

              So I ask again, why are they taking actions that are more likely to switch people back to cigarettes? One would think they would prefer nearly anything over that!

              It's odd that there is all this trumped up alarm over 'marketing to youth'. The commercials come on late night TV only and only for the most outrageously overpriced brands that require a credit card to buy them. The more reasonable vendors all require a credit card, don't advertise on TV at all, and refuse to sell to minors. They primarily advertise on e-cig message boards that do not allow anyone under 18 to read them. They do that voluntarily. I have never seen one actually claim that they would help you stop using nicotine.

              As for the other major ingredient, it most certainly IS considered safe for inhalation. It is used as a carrier for approved inhaled drugs as well as for theater fog and as an atomized disinfectant in hospitals.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @11:51AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @11:51AM (#79287)

      > I bet it's exactly the same people who are against it - Wales has already banned e-cigs in public places.

      It seems plainly obvious that anyone against e-cigs is also against regular cigarettes. But it does not follow that everyone, or even a large minority of those, against cigarettes are also against e-cigs.

    • (Score: 2) by Rivenaleem on Monday August 11 2014, @09:58AM

      by Rivenaleem (3400) on Monday August 11 2014, @09:58AM (#79979)

      If only we had a suitable car analogy...

  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:07AM

    by kaszz (4211) on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:07AM (#79187) Journal

    Sounds like the charger either delivered to much juice or the battery were somehow damaged. Especially lithium chemistries are like fireworks or thermite if not treated properly. The other factor is how easily damaged the oxygen tube was. Any insight of the material used for those? It must have some minimum shrapnel proofing.

    As the charger were replaced. It's highly suspected as the initial culprint. But if it were Lithium batteries they should have a built in protection. And oxygen bottles should be shrapnel proof.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Foobar Bazbot on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:13PM

      by Foobar Bazbot (37) on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:13PM (#79395) Journal

      A brief primer for those not familiar with the e-cig market and its conventional nomenclature: there's essentially two types of cigarettes -- there's the cig-a-likes (including some examples decidedly unlike cigarettes in appearance), which contain a permanently-installed battery inside a "battery" unit (which contains the Li-poly battery, a pressure or pushbutton switch, and some variable amount of additional electronics to handle charging, voltage regulation, etc.), and ones powered by removable batteries (most commonly Li-ion cylindrical cells), commonly referred to as "mods" because they originated as cig-a-likes modified to accept rechargeable batteries, even though there's now quite a variety of "mods" produced as such. In both cases, there is usually a threaded coaxial connection between the "battery" and the atomizer; in the case of cig-a-likes, this connection is also used for charging the "battery", while "mods" usually have no provision for recharging, and require the user to remove the batteries and charge them normally, as for e.g. Li-ion flashlight batteries.

      So without knowing more specifics about the e-cig, batteries, and charger in use, there's a wide variety of possible problems. If it's a mod type, then it reduces to the same issues as occasionally bite some poor schmuck using Li-ions in flashlights -- basically a bad combination of corner-cutting on the charger and the battery's PCB, deliberate use of naked (PCB-less) Li-ion cells without the almost-paranoid caution they deserve, or some such. Oh, and since it's the UK, with >200V mains, there's the all-too-common issue where cheap switching power supplies as found in cheap chargers (the sort one finds on direct-import sites such as dx.com) are designed and labeled for, say, 100-250V input, but sometimes the capacitors and diodes are changed for "equivalent" parts with lower rated voltage to save a few pennies -- they work fine on 120V mains, but quickly die (usually with a relatively harmless puff of smoke, but it could quite conceivably be worse with a higher oxygen concentration) when used on the upper end of the labeled input voltage range.

      If it's a cig-a-like, though, there's a particularly dangerous situation I've noticed -- some different e-cig batteries from different manufacturers have the same mechanical connection but opposite polarity (AFAICT, for no other reason than to create vendor lock-in while benefitting from the cheapness of commodity connectors, like the ATX-but-not-quite motherboard/PSU connection in some Dells), and since the atomizer is electrically just a nichrome coil, which doesn't care about polarity, they are compatible w/r/t atomizers. Of course, while the chargers are mechanically compatible, the polarity matters very much for charging; while both the battery and charger should implement protection against this, it's definitely a possible danger, and it makes me quite annoyed at the companies who create this risk to get lock-in profits.

      • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday August 09 2014, @09:48PM

        by kaszz (4211) on Saturday August 09 2014, @09:48PM (#79465) Journal

        Interesting!

    • (Score: 1) by Wierd0n3 on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:33PM

      by Wierd0n3 (1033) on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:33PM (#79399)

      I suspect it to be a simple matter of faulty construction. We sell 3 varieties of E-cigs, and we also get about 20% of the battery packs back as defective. They seem to be bottom of the barrel batteries, and i'm not surprised they could fail like that. (for those interested, Blu is the worst brand, almost all of the kit sales get returned, and people buy the throw-away units. they get returned too, thankfully newport has a return policy for those)

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @03:36AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 09 2014, @03:36AM (#79218)
    the tobacco companys have a 35 billion a year profit to protect.

    the fud machine is just getting going.
    • (Score: 1) by Ellis D. Tripp on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:50PM

      by Ellis D. Tripp (3416) on Saturday August 09 2014, @01:50PM (#79314)

      themselves. Mostly the disposable kinds at the moment. But where do you think the nicotine that goes into all the e-cig "juice" comes from? TOBACCO.

      E-cigs are NOT really an esistential threat to the tobacco industry. Just a shift away from the simpler technology of wrapping shredded dried leaves in paper tubes.

      --
      "Society is like stew. If you don't keep it stirred up, you end up with a lot of scum on the top!"--Edward Abbey
      • (Score: 1) by Wierd0n3 on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:37PM

        by Wierd0n3 (1033) on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:37PM (#79402)

        blu = newport (lorilard)
        Vuze = Camel
        Mark-ten = Marlboro

        Yeah, we had a big push by the vendors to carry them. My boss was holding out until there were "made in america" varieties. I honestly believe the flavor cartridges MAY be, but the batteries are lowest bidder.

  • (Score: 3) by hamsterdan on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:35AM

    by hamsterdan (2829) on Saturday August 09 2014, @06:35AM (#79243)

    "The investigation into the cause of this fire is continuing but at this stage it is thought that the charging device being used at the time may not have been the one supplied with the e-cigarette."

    Darwin wins this one...