Especially if you eat mindfully rather than stuffing your face to get it over with like many people seem to. I can eat like an Indian even though I'm in the UK: fresh vegetables every day and all the spices you can imagine. Meanwhile many people are still eating barely better than Shackleton's men stuck on the ice for months on end.
The previous point is fair though. What is the energy density of gasoline in a stoichiometric mixture with its oxidizer and not already detonated? That's where TNT beats it by a long shot. The mixture with any chance of being stored would be some relatively low pressure gas.
Edit: Or, a fair closed-system comparison to a battery would need to include a liquid oxygen tank or similar so you have the two components stored but can control the delivery...
In the context of the conversation, it doesn't actually refute the point though, which is that explosive danger is contingent on a much broader set of relations than simple energy density. Gasoline just demonstrates the disconnect. Tacking on additional conditions to make high-density batteries dangerous is exactly what the engineering goal should be.
As a stupid example, if we have a high density battery technology that never explodes unless, say, under magnetic forces only seen being produced by magnetars, that's a pretty safe battery.
Gasoline + LOX beats TNT on energy density per unit mass and per unit volume, no?
There's a reason that kerosene+h2o2 is a classic rocket fuel, and TNT is not.
It's usually kerosene + O2, not H2O2. But H2 + O2 is another classic liquid rocket fuel that has higher specific energy (energy per mass), but lower energy density (energy per volume) than kerosene, and is used mostly as a 2nd stage fuel (where mass is most important). Its lower density and the need to keep it very cool mean heavier tanks, and it's also hard to work with due to being such a small molecule that likes to leak, which causes development costs to be higher.
> The previous point is fair though. What is the energy density of gasoline in a stoichiometric mixture with its oxidizer and not already detonated? That's where TNT beats it by a long shot. The mixture with any chance of being stored would be some relatively low pressure gas.
eeeh that still doesn't matter really. Gasoline is safe(r) because it needs conditions to explode (spreading into area then ignition), instead of just detonator. Diesel even more so
A damaged gasoline tank that's near empty might explode but more likely it will just leak and start burning, and probably at that moment be still extinguishable. Explosives, well, you won't have time to blink.
Batteries ? Zero chance to extinguish, gonna let it burn thru. THAT is the problem
To stoichiometrically burn 1 gram of gasoline requires 3.5 grams of oxygen, so an energy density of 9.5 MJ/g, still more than double TNT. The state of the oxygen doesn't impact its mass.
That's a huge assumption that won't always be the case though. A gasoline tank with a small hole in it is a lot safer than a liquid-electrolyte battery with a hole in it.
I can remember several situations where “a little bit of gasoline” caused a lot of problems. It’s a relative term. You need a lot of air to make it really shine, but “a little bit of gas” goes a long way lol.
98% of any particular audience at a live event is well behaved. Unfortunately, in an audience of 1,000 people, that means 20 people are not well behaved, and if each of those 20 people ruins the event for their neighbors, that means at least 200 people had a bad time.
If 2% of your users complain and leave bad reviews, and only 1% leave good reviews...
