I agree with you Pip
It's all very well having robust procedures to deal with these cylinders after the've been heated (including sharpshooters), but surely applying more rigorous legal controls may prevent some of these fires in the first place
AnAcetylene Cylinder Licensing Scheme could both control risk and, if the fees were set at the right level, act as a financial deterrent to those who routinely use acetylene who could be using less volatile gases such as oxy-propane and MAPP.
Any licensing scheme should be enforced by the local fire authority after all it's they who have to pick up the pieces in the evnt of a fire. They must set stringent standards in terms of fire precautions and fire safety management. A significant cost of the scheme should lay with the licensees so that only a limited extra burden on local taxpayers is levied
The responsible person would have to set out their case for the use of acetylene and show that they have considered/assessed other industrial gases. Reasons for rejecting other gases must be supplied. If agreement is reached that they do need acetylene for their process, the FRS would lay down strict conditions, including use, storage and signage to warn fire crews. The system should involve unannounced inspections and severe penalties, including the power to impose an immediate the suspension of the licence.
At present, these highly dangerous, highly disruptive cylinders are in widespread unnecessary use, often in environments which are not well managed/controlled.
It's about time the legislators got to work on this problem. Now that commuters who travel to leafy Surrey and Kent have been disrupted by two fires in a month (400 trains cancelled from London on Thursday!!), maybe something will happen at last