Extinguished After 109 Hours… "Warning from 3 Years Ago Repeats"

[Anchor]

The fire at the Incheon Coupang logistics center was completely put out last night (the 22nd), four days after it started. It took 109 hours to completely extinguish, making it the second longest-running logistics center fire in South Korea. It has been confirmed that the risk factors that fueled this fire were already warned about one by one in a government-commissioned research project three years ago.

Reporter Je Hui-won takes a deep dive into why these warnings became reality.

[Reporter]

The 6th floor of the logistics center, presumed to be the initial ignition point of the fire, was densely packed with household goods wrapped in cardboard boxes and plastic packaging on 10-meter-high shelves.

The fire compartmentation, which should have prevented the spread of combustion, practically failed to function, and this was not the first time.

This is experimental footage from a research project commissioned by the fire authorities to identify the cause and formulate alternatives after a firefighter died in the line of duty during the fire at Coupang Deokpyeong Logistics Center in 2021.

The research team stacked 600 boxes in a scaled-down, 3-story experimental structure with a height of 6 meters and set a fire on the 1st floor.

In less than a minute, red flames gushed out, and soon the entire structure was engulfed in thick gray smoke.

When water began to be sprayed, a phenomenon was observed where the temperature on the 3rd floor, where flames were not previously visible, surged to over 600 degrees Celsius and persisted for 2 to 3 minutes.

This is well above 538 degrees Celsius, the critical temperature at which steel structures begin to lose their strength, meaning the structure could collapse at any time.

After spraying water, hot gases were instead pushed up to the upper floors, increasing the possibility of re-ignition throughout the space.

It was already pointed out three years ago that the mezzanine floors, where people climb up to work, are still brought in as industrial equipment and treated like furniture, exempt from fire compartmentation requirements under the Building Act.

[Ham Seung-hee / Professor of Fire and Disaster Protection Engineering, University of Seoul: There is no reason for building owners to consider which choice is safer or reduces risk. We need to comprehensively look back at where failures occur despite complying with legal regulations.]

Countries like the U.S. and Germany classify the combustion risk of stored items starting from the warehouse design stage, and determine fire compartmentation, sprinkler performance, and water supply volume accordingly.

The structure is designed so that if fire compartmentation is excessively reduced, insurance premiums rise significantly, forcing companies to consider both safety and cost.

Earlier this year, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport requested data on the installation status of rack systems from logistics companies nationwide, but Coupang refused to disclose it, citing business information.

(Photo courtesy of Yang Ji-hun | Video by Kim Yun-seong | Graphics by Jang Chae-woo)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.