I worked hazmat response for over a decade.

If it makes you feel any better or at least maybe less pessimistic, this incident has had the most transparent reporting I think I've ever seen... although one may still need to have a base level understanding of hazmat response to read what they are saying. (As opposed to the daily reporting of the situation of East Palestine derailment, which it was VERY apparent that they were being less than truthful...)

I cant remember a time where Ive seen the Public Information Officer (PIO) of Unified Command reporting on a hazmat incident be so open about the lack of control they have of a pending "worst case scenario" (for the lack of a better phrase). My gut tells me that we are getting mostly honest info and only because the incident is in California, being managed by local authorities as opposed to being in a more conservative state.

And please understand that if the contents of that tank are able to be released to the immediate proximity of the tank, even if it hits the ground for subsequent remediation via immediate neutralization/stabilization, containment, recovery, and then final removal of impacted soil by excavation.... that result is infinitely better than if that tank goes boom.

As I understand it, the current situation is that the tank is being pressurized and heated up from the exothermic nature of the chemical reaction that the MMA in the tank is undergoing. The tank's pressure relief device (PRD) is non-functional because of the polymerization of the MMA gumming that shit up.

There is NO ONE involved that wants that thing to go boom. If it goes boom, then so do the surrounding tanks of other chemicals (which i believe are of the BIG BADA BOOM variety).

Anyway, you said you weren't sure if a leak versus a crack was any different or better... I would just state that pretty much anything that allows pressure/heat to escape that vessel slowly is a plus. Anything to prevent an explosion in this scenario is a plus.

A leak would mean the contents are actively escaping the vessel. A crack could mean a hairline fracture has been identified by thermal imaging where excess heat was observed to be escaping, but the identified fracture in the tankwall or roof isn't large enough for the actual chemical product to be escaping.

The "within normal range" air monitoring readings they are referring to are likely the readings outside of the immediate hotzone/exclusion zone.

All of this is just my own speculation based off of reading reports the last few days. My goal is only to add a little context from the little that I know. I am not personally involved in this incident or in hazmat response these days. There are much more informed/educated folks (chemical engineers, hazmat chemists, etc.) that have commented on posts about this incident.

With all of that said, if it does happen to go boom, I can only hope that Lee Zeldin is standing immediately next to it. That unqualified shitstained waste-of-good-oxygen goat fucker wouldnt know the first thing about hazmat response or any environmental response. Dont believe anything he says or trust anything he does. May he choke on his own tongue while huffing fumes of MMA.