Join the discussion on the following article:
Burkhardt: investigators question crude oil contents
The strangest comment here is about “fracking chemicals”. I know it’s socially popular to blame everything from baldness to babies being born naked on fracturing, but this is getting plum stupid. Some minor ingredients would be considered flammable, but the volume dilution is beyond measurement. This is a tragic situation, but shouldn’t effort be spent on prevention instead of searching for a scapegoat?
The strangest comment here is about “fracking chemicals”. I know it’s socially popular to blame everything from baldness to babies being born naked on fracturing, but this is getting plum stupid. Some minor ingredients would be considered flammable, but the volume dilution is beyond measurement. This is a tragic situation, but shouldn’t effort be spent on prevention instead of searching for a scapegoat?
I cannot imagine the motive behind Burkhardt inserting himself ( once again) into an ongoing investigation, especially since there are no definitive results regarding the content, as this search for contaminants may turn out to be negative.
Let the authorities do their job and let them inform the public as to the ongoing investigation. I cannot also imagine casting negative inferences toward a customer will be useful based only on suspicions, as there already enough suspicions to go around. Someone needs to inform him to “chill out” as they say.
Hydogen sulfide, or H2S is indeed explosive. In fact, H2S explosive limits in air are from about 4% to 46% which is a considerably larger range than from methane which is from about 4.4% to 17%. However, I doubt the H2S or sulfur content of the crude was very high as the refinery will have maximum limits that it will accept as feed stock. Of course, evidence of corrosion will be rather easy to find even with the damage from the fire.
Once the fire started, the contents of the tank cars will start to heat up and vapors evolve out of the liquid. If the pressure relieving devices on the tanks are not large enough to keep the pressure in the tank at the vessels design pressure (plus a designed in overpressure amount) the pressure in the tank will continue to build. Given enough heat, and possibily weakening of the tank metal from the fire, the pressure in the tank may eventually excede the burst pressure of the tank.
Another possibility is a BLEVE, or Boiling Liquid Evolving Vapor Explosion. These types of explosions are generally associated with a vessel containing natural gas liquids like propane, butane, etc. and if the crude oil was light enough (low specific gravity or high API gravity) then the crude could have caused the tank cars to explode from a BLEVE.
From my experience as a petroleum geologist, I would expect the Canadian (Canadien) folks to find hydrogen sulfide in the crude oil shipments if it is in oil as it is produced. The oil and gas folks minimize the escape of hydrogen sulfide from crude for environmental reasons. It is captured in the refining process. I do not believe it is explosive. Based on articles I have read, there were a number of propane tanks serving the buildings where the cars derailed. Those would easily explain explosions. Of course, Mr. Burkhart would love to see a report that the composition of the product was to a factor to some extent. It would lessen his company’s liability.
“NATHAN ANDERSON from Massachusetts said:
Who is responsible for verification of the contents of freight cars, the shipper or the railroad?”
The shipper is responsible for verification of the contents of all hazardous materials, no matter the packaging or mode of transport. The bill of lading describing the contents again falls with the shipper. But it is the railroad’s (train crew picking up the load) responsibility to verify that the placards on the container (tank cars) match up with what is described on the bill of lading and that the bill of lading is filled out properly and signed by the shipper, indicating the shipper followed the law and loaded the cars properly. Bottom line here is all this crap flows downhill and guess who is at the bottom of the hill? The shipper. Which is why the investigators want to know exactly what was in those tanks. If the shipper screwed up and didn’t notify the railroad, why would it then be the railroad’s fault? I know, as I deal with hazmat every now and then. Once I had to refuse shipment from a shipper because the shipper refused to load properly, label properly, or issue a proper bill of lading. By the way, and employee working for a transportation company cannot be fired for refusing shipment of an improper hazardous materials load.
I still believe some eco-terrorist group had this operation scoped out for some time and would like nothing better than to shut down oil by rail shipments. Especially now that President Scandal-A-Week has put an end to pipeline construction.
Who is responsible for verification of the contents of freight cars, the shipper or the railroad?
I’d expect a huge quantity of heat to be released as the energy of the train’s momentum rapidly goes to zero. A great deal is absorbed by massive amounts of metal crumpling, but if you’re ever fatigue-broken a wire coat hanger you can imagine the generated heat.
Does anyone else find it ironic or coincidental that this crash happened shortly after the article about Oil Traffic in the August 2013 issue of Trains? If the engineer didn’t screw up, is there ecoterrorism going on trying to promote construction of the pipeline?
Just some thoughts.
They just now figured out that crude oil does not explode?
They just now figured out that crude oil does not explode? Wait till an ethanol train derails, you haven’t seen anything yet !!!
An ethanol train did derail on the old Illinois Central on the outskirts of Rockford. The aftermath was not pretty. The recriminations among the railroad, police, and a local resident who attempted to notify CNR of a washout near the road crossing weren’t pretty either.
Crude oil can indeed explode. Crude contains all hydrocarons. fron the gases,methane, ethane, propane, and butane as well as natural gasoline . In a warm tank car there would be plenty of vapors and when the car is ripped open in a wreck, the sparks will ignite the vapors. other cars not ruptured will be heated until they burst.
Crude oil can indeed cause the type of explosion and fire that occured .Crude contains all the light gases; methane, ethane, propane and other light and very flammable materials. the ripping open of those cars would release these materials and the ignition source would be the sparks caused by the tearing metal.
Re: portable derails to secure the train from rolling. The general rule is that you never put up a derail on a “controlled track” such as a main line. The risk of accidentally leaving the detail up and causing a derailment of a properly authorized train is considered to be greater than the risk of a runaway train. If this train was tied down on the main line, then derails were not an option. Where derails are used is on tracks where trains are required by rule to operate at a low enough speed that they can visually verify the position of each derail (and switch, and other things) and stop short of any impediment.
Hindsight is always 20-20, but wouldn’t it have made sense to install a portable derail when parking an UNATTENDED train on a grade, especially on a main line. It would have been much better to drop on the ties right away than gather momentum and derail in the middle of town causing such devastation. I’m sure Burkhardt’s railroad will be paying quite a bit more than the cost of this device.
Some initial reports stated propane tanks already on site could have been ignited during crash. Fumes are going to come off ALL crude in varying amounts. Pinpointing fracked crude is more politics. Seems the luddites just have no shame.
Some initial reports stated propane tanks already on site could have been ignited during crash. Fumes are going to come off ALL crude in varying amounts. Pinpointing fracked crude is more politics. Seems the luddites just have no shame.
Several times each day mile long unit trains of North Dakota crude roll past my house near Downtown Chicago on the BNSF main. Within my view a thousand people live within 100-150 feet of these trains. I have seen 3 minor derailment right here and a string of container loaded flatcars lying on their sides just down the track. So if the Quebec wreck wasn’t set on fire by smashed propane tanks, a wreck of an oil train here or in any highly populated area should be an enormous concern, right?