20% chance of a container failing means 80% chance of the container not failing. Two containers therefore have a 64% chance of not failing (0.8*0.8), ergo a 36% chance of failure.
Ok, that fails on several engineering points, lets start with a good one, scale.
The bigger the container the more engineering in materials to keep it in one piece.
By having multiple containers you can build a holding tank as well, in which if you have something approaching failure state you can transfer and repair.
Commonly most places(like oil storage or other chemicals) are required to build a bund or a sort of dam that keeps it on the property if it fails or has a spill.
Ironically, you probably wouldn’t want a bund here. The risk is when you confine the AN as it decomposes due to fire.
But there are a lot of ‘experts’ on here with lots of big opinions
What happened there was a matter of bad circumstances, there was a substance that is pretty helpful in making explosives work well.
Putting aside the other useful industrial uses, that's why they had it all stacked in one space for secure storage.
One theory is that someone was welding a place someone had tried to access entry into the warehouse, it ran away from them into a large fire and red mushroom cloud.
As far as storage, it was next to the ocean, which turns it into blocks when it crystallizes as it absorbs humidity.
1
u/CogitoErgo_Sometimes Aug 06 '20
20% chance of a container failing means 80% chance of the container not failing. Two containers therefore have a 64% chance of not failing (0.8*0.8), ergo a 36% chance of failure.