Ground Zero Fire ~ "No Danger of Collapse" says Bloomberg. Pictures worth 1,000 words.

August 19, 2007 ~ "Mr. Bloomberg said there was “no danger” that the building would collapse "

Full article here

Surprising that this 9 alarm fire had "no danger" of collapsing even though it was being torn down and had been severly damaged 6 years ago. It's also surprising that it takes 4 days to disasemble each floor, as described in another article about the building. See this article.

All that evidence and nobody seems to put it all together. And what about how this modern building became a "toxic waste dump"... how did all that toxic material get there??

It's also very telling what happens to steel when torches are used as seen in these pictures provided in the article. Notice the lack of slag in the DB steel compared with the imfamous WTC column pictured last:

Building burned for 7 hours....

In another article that I found after I posted this, it was stated that the building "was finally brought under control after seven hours" This related article also interviews commanders that stataed it was “a truly difficult fire".

Hopefully this will create some unanswered questions with those that are still in the dark.

Strange comments by Mayor Bloomberg

Strange comments by Mayor Bloomberg

In this CNN video, Bloomberg claims that the source of combustible materila for the fire was composed primarily of boxes fabricated from plywood to "encapsulate" the asbestos being stored before being removed from the building.


Bloomberg says that the fuel for this fire consisted primariily of "very flammable" plywood boxes full of asbestos.

Does anyone but me see anything totally bizarre in that statement?

He also said that amount of other combustible materials on the site, such as welding/cutting supplies in the form of bottles of compressed gases, were relatively insignificant.

Though you are subjected to an obnoxious dandruff shampoo commercial first, someone should try and capture this video:

Here is an NYT photo essay, "Unbuilding a Skyscraper Wounded on Sept. 11", whch contains 18 images of the deconstruction of the Deutsche Bank.

Article here:

Photo essay here:

That the reason for the Deutsche Bank demolition to take so long (almost 6 years so far) is because of the need to contain the asbestos. Bloomberg talks of plywood boxes "encapsulating" asbestos. However, in the NYT photo essay linked above, there is not one single photograph of a plywood box or boxes said to contain asbestos for safe removal.

Bloomberg claims that the fire's fuel was primarily composed of plywood boxes. However, in all of the photographs in the the essay, the bulk of the plywood seen is used to replace the glass when the windows are removed and to provide a barrier to material and workers from falling over the side. Like any construction/demolition site, there are debris piles here and there. However, a clean site is a safe site. And, it appears that the demolition managers prefer to maintain a safe site. Still, given that the reason this demolition has taken so long is due to asbestos abatement, why has the NYT not included even one photograph here illustrating the care be taken in the removal of this and other hazardous contaminants? The last time a reporter and a photographer were allowed in the building, they had to wear respirators and body suits.

“The question we have right now is, what is it that caught fire at the Deutsche Bank? Was it the debris? Was it the boxes containing the asbestos?” asked Ms. McVay Hughes, who lives one block east of the site.

"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)

45 degree cuts

I don't see any slag, but I do see the 45 degree cuts on some of the beams (not the columns, thank god). Does anyone have a good explanation for these, more time consuming cuts? Until we have a good explanation for these, perhaps we should not make them part of our case for CD.

Re: 45 degree cuts

I agree that we may not want to use the “angled cut” argument as basis for controlled demolition. While angled cuts do exist in all controlled demo’s… angled cuts also exist in other situations like the Deutsche Bank building as pictured above. Obliviously there is no slag with an acetylene torch… and in debates I’ve had people claim the opposite… so these pictures do offer some creditability about the clearly visible slag in the WTC picture.

Dr. Steven Jones has recently made statements, in Austin and perhaps elsewhere… that welders cut in straight lines… and this is why I began using this in my debates.

Nothing nefarious here... the way that the beams and columns were cut. Actually, these cuts allowed workers to employ gravity and control direction of the fall of the columns and beams. See this photo essay of the deconstruction above the asbestos abatement zone and I'm sure that you will agree:

Photo essay here:

Many of the 45 degree cuts to the columns were made to the bottom of the exposed portion of the column. In a sense, they were felled like trees (or goal posts) though, it required mini loaders to pull them down. The cuts were made deep enough that the colums would bend (or maybe snap?) on the small "hinge" of material left.

CD? Yes. This is a very tightly controlled demolition. CD explosives in use? No. Move on.

However, ask yourself how plywood boxes full of asbestos could fuel a raging inferno.

"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)

Re: "Move on" and burning asbestos ...

I wasn't suggesting that the Duetsche Bank building had anything to do with malicious agendas... I was merely comparing the cuts in steel as pictured vs. WTC.

That statement Bloomberg made about "asbestos burning" is pretty stunning... more like, pretty impossible since asbestos is a fire retardant. A quick search into the root of the word 'asbestos' revealed: 'The word asbestos comes from the Greek word meaning "inextinguishable" or "indestructible"'... apparently it has been used for centuries to block fire and even back then the health hazzards were documented.

The main point about the Deutche Bank building is that it burned for 7 hours... and nothing failed. It was so intense that firefighters died... but even a severely weakend steel structure cannot be toppled with fire alone.

Hopefully people that have seen WTC7 collapse will compare this event since it is so similar. The DB building was 40 stories tall and sustained massive amounts of debris. It also burned on 9/11... but didn't fail. The building was so badly damaged that it was abandoned. The dust that remained from WTC1, 2 and 7 was so toxic that they couldn't use explosives to bring it down because of the exact thing we saw WTC7 do to downtown NYC.

DB building burned on 9/11?

Are you sure the DB building burned on 9/11? I remember reading otherwise.

45 degree cuts: animation

This animation of the Deutche Bank shows a "Cut and Hinge" method of removing steel structural elements during the deconstruction phase. My question is: when did this method frist come into general use in building deconstuctions?

I'm not sure but,...

... I think that they probably got the idea from Paul Bunyon's original work in the area of toppling tall heavy objects.

"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)


Nice cheeky reply, I suppose, to an unclear question. The intent of the question was to ask whether-or-not this technique was in common practice (hinge and fold) prior to the Deutche Bank deconstruction work. I was surprised by the animation and time/$ spent to illustrate this work. They have money to spend on such unecessary fluff when they are in severe trouble with this recent financial meltdown. Perhaps they need the insurance money?

Recovered steel beam

There is a recovered steel beam in the Liberty Science Museum in Jersey City.
It might be interesting to show how it compares to the relatively small beams that held up to fire in the Deutsche Bank building.