• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How much steel was recovered from WTC?

GregoryUrich

Graduate Poster
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
1,316
Does anyone know of any additional resources that have the amounts of steel recovered from the World Trade Center?

This link:

http://disaster.pandj.com/World%20Trade%20Center%20Forensic%20Recovery.pdf

gives the impression that all debris was processed at the Staten Island Land Fill except for 165,000 tons of steel removed directly from the ground zero site. The report states that 35,000 tons of steel were separated at the land fill. This gives 200,000 tons.

I have seen on a previous thread that people give 360,000 tons of steel being recovered. I assume this is from FEMA Appendix D which actually gives "more than 350,000 tons". The FEMA report was released in May, 2002. The Forensic Recovery document linked above is from later than July 26, 2002.

I have seen reports of sales to three steel companies or scrap yards:

Boasteel 50,000 tons
Hugo Nue Schnitzer's 25,000 tons
Metal Management in Newark 40,000 tons (25,000 in other articles)

I haven't seen anything about how much (if any) was received by Blanford and Co. in Keasbey, NJ.

What happened to the rest of the steel? (I am not suggesting it was vaporized.)
 
are you "suggesting" anything then, or just curious (like I am about my nextdoor neighbour's strange lawn ornaments...lol)?

TAM:)
 
Does anyone know of any additional resources that have the amounts of steel recovered from the World Trade Center?
How much was recovered? All of it. There was none left at the site when they were done.
 
ALL

Does anyone know of any additional resources that have the amounts of steel recovered from the World Trade Center?

This link:

http://disaster.pandj.com/World%20Trade%20Center%20Forensic%20Recovery.pdf

gives the impression that all debris was processed at the Staten Island Land Fill except for 165,000 tons of steel removed directly from the ground zero site. The report states that 35,000 tons of steel were separated at the land fill. This gives 200,000 tons.

I have seen on a previous thread that people give 360,000 tons of steel being recovered. I assume this is from FEMA Appendix D which actually gives "more than 350,000 tons". The FEMA report was released in May, 2002. The Forensic Recovery document linked above is from later than July 26, 2002.

I have seen reports of sales to three steel companies or scrap yards:

Boasteel 50,000 tons
Hugo Nue Schnitzer's 25,000 tons
Metal Management in Newark 40,000 tons (25,000 in other articles)

I haven't seen anything about how much (if any) was received by Blanford and Co. in Keasbey, NJ.

What happened to the rest of the steel? (I am not suggesting it was vaporized.)
Go ask Fetzer and Woods, they know it was dustified. Or ask Jones, the steel was all molten from thermite.

Actually, all the steel from the WTC was removed. All is the answer. Wait. Yes, I have studied and research and all the steel was recovered. The amount is all. You ask the easiest questions.
 
Last edited:
Protec statement on steel

Go ask Fetzer and Woods, they know it was dustified. Or ask Jones, the steel was all molten from thermite.

Actually, all the steel from the WTC was removed. All is the answer. Wait. Yes, I have studied and research and all the steel was recovered. The amount is all. You ask the easiest questions.

All of it = 200,000 tons

According to Protec all steel was taken to Fresh Kills where only 200,000 tons was received.

ProtecSteel.jpg
 
So can we quote you that you believe the protec to be a valid article?

No wait, let me guess, only the info in it which supports the CT angle is valid, all the other points they make are obviously faked...right? Am I correct wrt your stance on the article, or will you admit to the entire paper being valid?

TAM:)
 
So can we quote you that you believe the protec to be a valid article?

No wait, let me guess, only the info in it which supports the CT angle is valid, all the other points they make are obviously faked...right? Am I correct wrt your stance on the article, or will you admit to the entire paper being valid?

TAM:)

I suspect Protec is as wrong about this as they were about "95% of the debris being forced away from the footprint of the structure".

Again, insinuations about me manipulating information to promote CT. I am now convinced you are just trying to cast me in an unfavorable light because you never have any evidence. Kindly refrain from such attacks or I will stop responding to you.
 
So can we quote you that you believe the protec to be a valid article?

No wait, let me guess, only the info in it which supports the CT angle is valid, all the other points they make are obviously faked...right? Am I correct wrt your stance on the article, or will you admit to the entire paper being valid?

TAM:)

You'd have to accept the same standard and deal with the language of NIST, FEMA, Thomas Eagar and others whose info might contradict some part of an official explanation.
 
I suspect Protec is as wrong about this as they were about "95% of the debris being forced away from the footprint of the structure".

Again, insinuations about me manipulating information to promote CT. I am now convinced you are just trying to cast me in an unfavorable light because you never have any evidence. Kindly refrain from such attacks or I will stop responding to you.
All! is still the quick answer. Unless you are a dustification guy.

You? A member of the biggest woo group around, "scholars". The group formed around thermite? The group formed due to some dream by Jones and he made up thermite and dropped cinder blocks in his back yard? "scholar"? Your OP is indicative of the poor research and made up ideas of "scholars". You do not need an unfavorable light you are a "scholar". The renown Journal of 9/11 studies, is the top in its field of woo. Relax, I know what you are. You are a biased politically motivated "scholar", you make up stuff about 9/11 to promote disinformation and clearly try to support the ideas of 9/11 truth. You joined a cult of "scholars". Your ability to present unbiased ideas is impaired. You post here is trying to back pedal but your membership in "scholars" prove you are just a cult follower. A real independent person would accept the facts when presented and not have to backpedal. A real independent person on 9/11 would start his one group of investigators to answer questions, no make up junk. You are known now as a "scholar" and you act like a typical "truther". Just making observations. Have a great Sunday.
 
All! is still the quick answer. Unless you are a dustification guy.

You? A member of the biggest woo group around, "scholars". The group formed around thermite? The group formed due to some dream by Jones and he made up thermite and dropped cinder blocks in his back yard? "scholar"? Your OP is indicative of the poor research and made up ideas of "scholars". You do not need an unfavorable light you are a "scholar". The renown Journal of 9/11 studies, is the top in its field of woo. Relax, I know what you are. You are a biased politically motivated "scholar", you make up stuff about 9/11 to promote disinformation and clearly try to support the ideas of 9/11 truth. You joined a cult of "scholars". Your ability to present unbiased ideas is impaired. You post here is trying to back pedal but your membership in "scholars" prove you are just a cult follower. A real independent person would accept the facts when presented and not have to backpedal. A real independent person on 9/11 would start his one group of investigators to answer questions, no make up junk. You are known now as a "scholar" and you act like a typical "truther". Just making observations. Have a great Sunday.

My opening post (if that's what you mean by OP) is a presentation of the resources I have and a request for any other resources that anyone may have. Typical woo fanatic, wanting to examine available evidence.

I consider your other comments personal attacks and I will stop responding to your posts if you continue in that manner.
 
My opening post (if that's what you mean by OP) is a presentation of the resources I have and a request for any other resources that anyone may have. Typical woo fanatic, wanting to examine available evidence.

I consider your other comments personal attacks and I will stop responding to your posts if you continue in that manner.
Watch out for the guys from South Philly. Do not accuse them of taking any steel.

Have you really joined the "scholars", or have they hijacked your name?
 
The New York Police and FBI are investigating the theft of over 250 tons of steel from the remains of the collapsed WTC towers. Apparently, the steel was hauled away by trucks involved in the official clear-up operation (see September 12-October 2001), but instead of being taken to Fresh Kills—the FBI-controlled dump on Staten Island where it was intended to go—the steel was driven to three independently-owned scrapyards, two in New Jersey and one on Long Island. The London Telegraph says the scrap metal value of the stolen steel would have been roughly $17,500. Investigators believe the theft was organized by one of New York’s Mafia families. [Daily Telegraph, 9/29/2001] Consequently, on November 26, 2001, the city initiates use of an in-vehicle Global Positioning System (GPS), to monitor the locations of nearly 200 trucks removing steel from the WTC collapse site, at a cost of $1,000 per unit. This system sends out alerts if any truck travels off course or arrives late at its destination. One driver involved with the clear-up operation is subsequently dismissed simply for taking an extended lunch break. [Access Control and Security Systems, 7/2002]
Entity Tags: World Trade Center, New York City Police Department, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline, 9/11 Timeline

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=alate0901steelstolen#alate0901steelstolen


Looks like some of the boyz were busy that month.....
 

Back
Top Bottom