[HN Gopher] A study of lightning fatalities inside buildings whi...
___________________________________________________________________
A study of lightning fatalities inside buildings while using
smartphones [pdf] (2024)
Author : bookofjoe
Score : 34 points
Date : 2025-04-22 19:21 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (electricalsafetyworkshop.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (electricalsafetyworkshop.org)
| mike-the-mikado wrote:
| In all cases, the phone was charging at the time.
| LinuxAmbulance wrote:
| TL;DR: Don't hold your smartphone while it's connected to a wired
| charging cable and there's a storm outside.
| jihadjihad wrote:
| ... when in Brazil?
| LinuxAmbulance wrote:
| All the deaths happened in Brazil, your logic is shocking,
| but sound.
| NikkiA wrote:
| Since the study was authored by brazilians who only used
| data from brazil, it's hard to tell if the fatalities were
| enabled by the brazilian electrical system and would not
| happen elsewhere. Especially given that 4/5 were in rural
| areas.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| It does seem like there's potentially some kind of bad
| electrical system / lack of grounding issue going on.
| 0xDEADFED5 wrote:
| typically phone chargers aren't grounded, so probably not
| relevant? lightning travels through the ground, so i'd
| expect the ground wires to be rather dangerous. also,
| neutral is bonded to ground at the meter (at least
| here)... so also not good?
| dylan604 wrote:
| Neutral bonding to ground is definitely not how it is
| done everywhere. A proper ground according to modern
| standards will have a true grounding rod that the
| buildings ground wiring is connected. Of course wiring
| predating those standards are a mix of how they are
| handled. Some older wiring used the buildings metal
| plumbing as ground which is why people say not to shower
| during an electrical storm.
| quickthrowman wrote:
| A proper grounding system for a building will have the
| following things:
|
| -Ground and neutral bonded at the service entrance with a
| bonding jumper tied to the utility neutral, equipment
| grounding conductors, and service entrance enclosure
|
| At least two of the following grounding electrode types
|
| -Ground to building steel
|
| -Ground to water service entrance including jumper to
| bond to the supply pipe
|
| -Ground to natural gas piping
|
| -Ground rod (or rods) with 25 ohms or less of resistance
|
| -Ufer ground (concrete encased electrode)
| userbinator wrote:
| "potentially"? ;-)
|
| Look around on the Internet and you'll definitely see how
| a lot of electrical systems in Brazil are not quite up to
| North American standards. Grounding is part of it.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| My guess is that Brazil's infrastructure is not that
| different from other countries, since they run a 60Hz
| grid I'd imagine they use the system introduced by
| Edison's company General Electric.
| NikkiA wrote:
| That's actually a fairly recent (1970s) change, prior to
| that it was a mix of 50 and 60Hz, 110V and 220V, with no
| national standard.
|
| Also, rural household wiring is often dogshit all around
| the world with many places having bad earthing.
| AStonesThrow wrote:
| Are you crazy! If you die in Brazil, you die in _REAL
| LIFE!_ https://m.xkcd.com/180/
| foobarian wrote:
| Brazilian currency being the real, you would kind of die
| in "real life" indeed
| pixl97 wrote:
| Could also be that Brazil has a lot of high population cities
| in high lightning zones. Couple that with illegal electric
| hookups and it sets up a dangerous situation.
| Scipio_Afri wrote:
| I guess it's another good reason for why I shouldn't have my
| phone charging in the bed with me while I sleep; the other good
| reason being battery fires.
| sharpshadow wrote:
| And to avoid unnecessary RF exposure.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| although anyone saying this outloud likely wont have their
| mind changed, for the rest of you all that want to remain
| informed:
|
| cellular devices and radios do not emit ionizing radiation -
| which is the kind that messes up cells, and nonionizing
| radiation can only increase heat which is why all devices
| operate under a power limit
|
| people are studying other potential biological effects of
| nonionizing radiation and there is zero consensus of there
| being any. so some people, including some smaller government
| agencies, exercise caution
| someothherguyy wrote:
| What the parent comment was likely referring to:
|
| https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/coil-mattresses-cause-
| canc...
|
| What is known:
|
| https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-
| prevention/risk/r...
| codr7 wrote:
| Can you see any potential risks with blasting the body with
| same frequencies as it uses to regulate itself, while its
| supposed to be regenerating?
| olyjohn wrote:
| What radio frequencies does your body use to regulate
| itself?
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Be more afraid of taking a shower or bath during a storm.
| userbinator wrote:
| Lightning won't take a detour through you, it will follow the
| path of least resistance.
| sandworm101 wrote:
| Yes but if you are covered in electrolyte and standing atop
| a well-grounded drain pipe, you may just be that path.
|
| Also, lighting is not simple mathematical electricity. It
| is subject to innumerable, even quantum, fluctuations at
| the precise moment it chooses to move. Lighting also
| partially creates its own path as it ionizes air/water into
| plasma. That's why bolts are jagged and not smooth beams
| between cloud and ground. It may or may not choose to go
| through or around you. It is best to avoid needing to ask
| such questions.
|
| https://youtube.com/shorts/dvVW1e_trW0
| NoTeslaThrow wrote:
| odd choice to be forced to make, but I would prefer being
| electrocuted to burning my face off.
| bookofjoe wrote:
| >Why you should never take a shower during a thunderstorm
|
| https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2025/04/22/showering.
| ..
|
| gift link: https://wapo.st/3GjjuO2
| mscdex wrote:
| tl;dr: Use surge protectors when you care about your electronics
| and/or your health.
| capitainenemo wrote:
| I would not count on a surge protector to save you if there was
| a direct lightning strike. Even a hefty UPS, but especially not
| the small ones in a power bar or some consumer electronic
| chargers.
|
| Better to not have your laptop or phone plugged in at all when
| using it during a storm.
| zdragnar wrote:
| Surge protectors definitely help handling surges from distant
| strikes, but they won't survive a more direct one. Lightning
| measures in the millions of joules, well above what any
| available surge protector is rated for. Given that lightning is
| an arc through air, breaking the circuit once the surge has
| started won't save you if your circuit gets a direct or near-
| direct hit.
| foobarian wrote:
| Don't houses have spark gaps for that sort of thing? I don't
| remember this being a problem since I was a kid, when we used
| to have to unplug TVs and modems
|
| Edit: come to think of it that's when I moved to New England
| so it could just be the nonexistence of lightning here. Which
| I do miss.
| zdragnar wrote:
| My parents lost their treadmill during a storm in a midwest
| US house built circa 1998. I think the power came as a
| surge through the grid rather than directly from the
| environment, though.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| Surge protectors are not rated for lightning. There are
| protection systems for lightning (ham radio operators use
| them), but they're quite a bit more expensive and also involve
| driving a copper stake into the ground to establish a
| preferential path for the lightning.
| olyjohn wrote:
| [delayed]
| neilv wrote:
| I usually use my laptop plugged into AC, rather than on battery,
| but will unplug at the first thunder.
|
| If it sounds like a bad storm, I'll start unplugging other
| electronics.
|
| I thought I was doing overkill abundance of caution, but maybe
| it's actually a good idea.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I do the same thing. The 20-30 minutes it takes for a major
| storm to roll through is not worth the time/hassle/money of
| getting fried electronics replaced. Surge protector or not, I
| just unplug them. Since most of my equipment is connected to
| some sort of device with on/off switch, it reduces the number
| of plugs that need to be disconnected to 3. I feel like a surge
| protector is just there for when something happens to mains
| from human causes. Putting all of my luck on them for lightning
| is just too much faith in modern manufacturing and faith in
| companies honoring a warranty on those devices.
| taeric wrote:
| Its funny what you can get used to. We had so many storms and
| general bad weather events growing up, that I don't really give
| them any thought. Certainly didn't back then.
|
| Out in Seattle, though, if there is a single crack of thunder,
| everyone is at the windows trying to see what happened. It is
| almost comical on how this place never really gets a storm.
|
| Does make me somewhat at odds with the crowds that hate
| firework noise, "because it scares pets." I'm in agreement that
| it is just obnoxious and I don't miss it. I'm pretty sure
| thunder was far more frightening for any pets I had, growing
| up.
|
| All that is to say, probably wise advice on unplugging things.
| I know that quality of power has gotten a lot more relevant in
| recent years, such that you should only be worried about very
| local events. Still, seems safe enough not to take a risk, if
| you can avoid it.
| reneherse wrote:
| Living in storm prone regions for most of my life has given me
| the same habit. All my sensitive electronics get unplugged when
| storms approach.
|
| Two of my family members have had devices fried by lightning
| strikes over the years, and not even in regions known for the
| worst electrical storms.
|
| I keep some portable battery packs handy in case I need to
| charge a phone, and if I'm working will switch to my laptop and
| tablet screens.
|
| Of course, one can't conveniently unplug everything (HVAC, big
| kitchen appliances, etc.) but it's easy enough to safeguard
| work and lifestyle electronics.
|
| Turning the TV off and listening to the storm is usually a nice
| change of pace, too.
| Frieren wrote:
| > The data collection indicated a worrying series of fatal
| accidents in Brazil, all concentrated in five months. The
| recurrence of these accidents in rural regions and the intense
| sound of the discharge reported by witnesses indicate the
| proximity and intensity of the lightning during the accidents.
|
| So, rural areas without lightning rods nor any other safety
| mechanism. Good study that can save lives by taking prevention
| measures in rural areas in developing countries. But it will
| probably not affect anybody living in New York.
| 00N8 wrote:
| I found this bit at the start surprising: "Lightning is one of
| the leading causes of climate-related deaths worldwide. In recent
| decades, there has been a considerable increase in lightning due
| to worsening global warming [1], [2]."
|
| Increased lightning makes sense, but I'd still have expected most
| climate-related deaths to be caused by flooding, heat waves,
| disease & crop failures, with lightning being a much smaller
| factor. Do they just mean it's in the top 5 or 10 climate-driven
| causes, or is lightning really killing people on the same (or
| greater) scale as these other things?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-04-22 23:00 UTC)