Skip to footer

Do old US Coast Guard cables present a risk of explosion?

Old US Coast Guard cables, similar to one involved in an explosion at a Rhode Island beach last summer, have been reported in 48 areas throughout the US. States and the Coast Guard are uncertain about what to do with them.

|
Steve Szydlowski/Providenc­e Journal/AP/File
Authorities investigate a blast that threw a beachgoer into a nearby jetty at Salty Brine beach in Narragansett, R.I., July 11. Scientists determined that the explosion was probably caused by the combustion of hydrogen that had built up around the cable. The US Coast Guard said there are 48 sites in 12 states where there may be an inactive cable similar to the one that caused the explosion in Rhode Island. Michigan, with 21 potential sites, has the most, according to information released to The Associated Press through an open records request.

New information reveals that the cable blamed for a Rhode Island beach explosion last summer may be just one of dozens of abandoned cables lurking beneath US beaches, waterways, and harbors.

In total, there are 48 sites in 12 states where old Coast Guard cables, like the one that caused the Rhode Island explosion, have been left, according to a Coast Guard list given to The Associated Press. The cables originally powered lights on lighthouses, buoys, and other Coast Guard beacons, but were abandoned when the lights were switched to solar power.

The list shows where the abandoned cables were left, but it is unknown without digging whether they are still there. The Rhode Island explosion has sparked a debate over whether these remaining cables could pose a safety hazard.

The explosion occurred in July at Salty Brine Beach in Narragansett, shocking beachgoers as it launched a woman out of her beach chair and into a rock jetty 10 feet away. Scientists were originally puzzled by the explosion, some citing a build up of methane from decaying seaweed while police said the cause may never be known. Scientists later concluded the explosion was from a build up of hydrogen, aided by the corroded Coast Guard cable.

Coast Guard officials have said they do not believe the other cables pose safety risks. Spokeswoman Lt. Sarah Janaro told The Associated Press the other sites have different environmental factors that place them at less risk and no other problems have been reported.

Not everyone is convinced.

"You would think they would be on top of it more if they had a problem," said Stuart Anderson, lead lineman for the electric department in Two Harbors, Minn. Two Harbors has one cable on the Coast Guard list that runs underneath a sidewalk, next to a rocky beach, and reaching to a breakwall. Mr. Anderson told the AP he wasn’t sure if the cable was dangerous or not.

Chris Reddy, a senior scientist at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute in Massachusetts, has followed the investigation into the Rhode Island explosion closely and believes the cables are a problem that needs to be addressed.

However, he cautioned against pulling up all the cables as a “knee-jerk reaction.” "The Coast Guard will have to weigh the costs and the potential risks involved with removal with the chances of another explosion injuring beachgoers. Another alternative could be to post signs warning beachgoers of the presence of such cables," he told the AP.

The state of Michigan has the most cable sites, with 21 in total. It is followed by Wisconsin with eight, Illinois with five, Indiana and Ohio with three each, and Minnesota with two.

This report includes material from The Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to Do old US Coast Guard cables present a risk of explosion?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2016/0108/Do-old-US-Coast-Guard-cables-present-a-risk-of-explosion
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe