"Michael" wrote in message
om...
"Dan Luke" wrote taken.
Man, you and I hve *definitely* been frequenting different chemical
plants.

Quite possible. I've mostly dealt with major plants operated by the
major refiners.

I ain't naming names! Anyway, there are enough low rent, half assed plants
around to make the U.S. a target rich environment.

A terrorist driving a bomb truck could roar through
the gates of one of these places and detonate it next to a tank of
enough evil stuff to create another Bhopal in south Alabama.

The only question is - how many people live there? Is that Bhopal
going to claim thousands (the way the real Bhopal did)?

If that's the case, then I see a lawsuit in their future as well.

That's what bankruptcy and reorganization are for - just ask Monsanto.

Security at a chemical plant is NOT a joke - it's serious. Getting in
without proper identification and a reason for being there most likely
won't happen, and you won't be bringing much of anything with you.

That's assuming you're polite enough to stop and get your cute badge and
wait for your escort, not just bust in driving a 2 1/2 ton truck full of
a fertilizer bomb. At a plant in Mississippi which I shall not name,
there is a narrow maze of concrete barriers at each entrance road,
built, one assumes, on the theory that terrorists would never simply
break through the adjacent chain link fences and drive in off-road.

Also assuming, of course, that the truck won't get stuck in the bog
that is 'off-road' in Mississippi

Depends on how the weather's been lately.

I've been to more than a couple of
chemical plants in Mississippi (including the hell that is
Chevron-Pascagoula)

Now, that's a hell of a coincidence, but I said I wasn't naming names...

and I must say that off-roading in a truck full of
explosives would not be practical anywhere I've been. That's the norm
all along the Gulf Coast.

A little careful reconnoitering is all it would take, with maybe a sapper
squad to blow the fence.

The driving force is risk management - insurance. Some plants carry
insurance, others (generally owned by the very largest conglomerates)
are self-insured, but in either case there are professional risk
managers reviewing the operation, including security, with an eye
towards reducing the probability of an accident.

They're worried about their employees screwing up or a visitor wandering
around and getting hurt.

Actually, they're more worried about the surrounding population.

That's the "employees screwing up" part. It's something they're pretty good
at controlling.

They know they have no hope of stopping a
determined terrorist attack without turning their plants into nuke
plant-like fortresses, which I've seen no sign they are willing to do.

Well, I've visited a couple of nuke plants. Yes, I must say their
security is better. I expect that this will become the norm for the
real dangerous chemical plants located in populated areas.

I guess I hope so, but at what cost? Sounds like another good reason to move
plants and jobs overseas.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM