Join the discussion on the following article:
BNSF oil train wreck forces evacuation in Illinois, shuts down critical route
Wonder what caused the wreck, are they still using the older tank cars there suppose retired?
unless we go to “maglev” we will just have to live with wheels a rolling -things break .In my opinion there is no such thing as a puncture proof tank car and never will be…
Agree with you 100% Earl. This (oil train derailments) is getting out of hand… As much as I love railroading/trains this mode has clearly shown it is not safe enough for this type of shipment… not at the expense of people’s lives, homes and the environment… Time to put oil shipments on hold.
It looks like another choke point on an overburdened rail line. This should be double tracked all the way from Chicago to the Twin Cities and a little ROW reinforcement. There certainly is the traffic to warrant it. That or quit hauling crude oil trains.
As well, yesterday 16 empty residue tank cars derailed on the CN mainline 60 miles east of Hornepayne, Ontario. There was no leaks or fires. The line was back in service late Thursday night.
As Yogi Bera said: “DejaVu all over again”
The federal government will finally just ban oil shipments by rail outright. They will be forced into it, whether they want too or not.
As much as I hate to see more government regulation, I’m afraid that it is just a matter of time before we have a disaster with a derailment and fire in an urban neighborhood or a collision with an Amtrak or commuter train. I guess those who said that trains hauling crude oil are just as safe as pipelines were wrong. The blood of any people who die becasue the Keystone Pipeline isn’t built is on the hands of Obama and his Democrat cronies.
None of the Bakken oil would be carried in the Keystone Pipeline extension, so trying to turn this into a political statement is foolish.
I have 2 questions. Crude oil normally is inert so what causes the oil to explode? Maybe the chemicals causing the oil to explode should be separated prior to loading into the tank cars. Has there been any indication of rail tampering in any of the recent derailments?
There have been fuel line explosions that have resulted in deaths plus accidents with ships carrying crude oil. No means of transport of oil can be 100% safe as accidents will happen.
Mr. Brown, the oil coming out of the ground is light. There are no thick tars in it. It’s properties are pretty much like straight gasoline.
The Chicago Tribune reports BNSF as saying the cars involved are 1232 cars that are newer and supposedly better than older tank cars. What I’ve learned from Trains and other media reports are that 1) Bakken crude is flammable, 2) pipeline construction is at least a year or two away,) and “newer” tank cars can be breached in a derailment (you probably could build a tank car that can’t be breached but it would be so heavy you probably couldn’t move it). I don’t profess to know any answers to the problems. I’m sure the railroads don’t want to reduce train size or use pilot engines on every move. If the FRA adds restrictions to Bakken crude, then what about other flammable products that are leaving refineries? I’m sure there are some answers out there, and at the rate these accidents are happening I hope someone produces them soon.
For Mr. Miller from Michigan. First, your statement that the Keystone pipeline would not carry Bakken crude is flat out wrong. Keystone is proposed to carry both Alberta tar sands (which must be diluted to flow) and Bakken oil shale crude, but only to the Gulf of Mexico. A second pipeline is proposed for carrying Bakken and other oil from the primarily north-south pipeline system (both built and proposed) east through Iowa to a major terminal in Illinois from which it can be sent further east. This pipeline has not had the visibility of Keystone but is being fought just as hard by the anti-fossil fuel crowd.
Obviously, not enough is known about how to keep this type of train on the rails.
I’m sure the newer cars are an improvement, but it’s certainly false to act like “if we would only” replace all the 111s then everything would be ok. I think we need to get serious about limiting the flow of this stuff through urban areas. It’s crazy to me to argue that it’s not economically feasible to keep it out of cities when we know that it’s only a matter of time before one of these explosions happens in downtown Houston or Philadelphia - How economically feasible would THAT be?
If the railroads are going to haul this stuff, they should either treat it as dangerous cargo (like propane or chlorine) of it should be processed to remove the volatile gasses. How many times do you recall propane tank cars blowing up like this?
North Dakota is issuing regulations for this purpose, but they have been criticized as being too lax. The DOT has ducked the issue, which is so typical of Washington. From Reuters yesterday:
Exclusive: White House mulled, then balked at curbing explosive gas on oil trains
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/05/us-usa-train-vapors-idUSKBN0M11SA20150305
What percentage of freight traffic is oil? And what percentage of derailments are oil? If they’re the same or close, sounds like it’s not an oil problem but some other one, tbd. If its significantly higher, then something else. Are tank cars more top heavy than others? Also a big difference is when a grain train derails and spills it doesn’t go kaboom and make the nightly news, so we probably never hear of most derailments.
I sure would hate to live in Rochelle IL where UP and BNSF cross… Probably the highest concentration of crude oil traffic in the US.
Is it only me, but it seems strange that this “rash” of train derailments/wrecks seems to only involve oil-carrying trains. When was the last time we had a derailment of a string of just freight cars, or container cars, or hoppers, or…leave the tracks and destroy themselves or other property?
Or is the media/everyone else just ignoring any wrecks other than oil trains?