FTA:"…QUEBEC CITY, Quebec – Two Canadian National crude oil trains that derailed in northern Ontario in the past month were carrying synthetic crude for Valero’s refinery near Quebec City, Reuters reports. Synthetic crude is created from bitumen, which undergoes a chemical treatment that makes it suitable for refining.
“We take safety very seriously, so we’re concerned anytime there’s an incident,” Valero spokesman Bill Day says. “Despite the number of rail incidents recently, it is very rare for cargo not to be delivered to its destination safely.”[snipped] Most readers here are very aware of the discussions taking place in this Forum; referencing the mentioned incidents on CNR’s Ruel Sub.
I can’t speak for everyone, but I generally, picture ‘crude oil’ being the product that comes out of wells in oil fields. Bakken Crude, being the product of similar oil bearing shale strata [ failry near the surface, rater than down very deep in the earth], and pumped to the surface. Oil from ‘Tar Sands’ is a product that is more or less open pit-mined in Western Canada, and maybe to a lesser extent in other locales(?) The oil from the Tar Sands is heated, processed, and a 'liquid is extracted(?).
FTA:"…QUEBEC CITY, Quebec – Two Canadian National crude oil trains that derailed in northern Ontario in the past month were carrying synthetic crude for Valero’s refinery near Quebec City, Reuters reports. Synthetic crude is created from bitumen, which undergoes a chemical treatment that makes it suitable for refining.
“We take safety very seriously, so we’re concerned anytime there’s an incident,” Valero spokesman Bill Day says. “Despite the number of rail incidents recently, it is very rare for cargo not to be delivered to its destination safely.”[snipped] Most readers here are very aware of the discussions taking place in this Forum; referencing the mentioned incidents on CNR’s Ruel Sub.
I can’t speak for everyone, but I generally, picture ‘crude oil’ being the product that comes out of wells in oil fields. Bakken Crude, being the product of similar oil bearing shale strata [ failry near the surface, rater than down very deep in the earth], and pumped to the surface. Oil from ‘Tar Sands’ is a product that is more or less open pit-mined in Western Canada, and maybe to a lesser extent in other locales(?) The o
More to it than that. Midland Mike will have more to add in detail, but there is a substantial difference between dilbit and synbit. Here is one reference from a company that works with ‘syncrude’. A quick Google on ‘synthetic crude oil’ will quickly provide other references that go into key differences in the diluents and general product purity that make the ‘synthetic crude’ more useful to refiners than the various proprietary dilbits are.
Another thing to consider is that not all crude oils are alike. Bakken crude is similar to Brent (North Sea) crude in that it is sweet (less sulfur) and contains more high-end hydrocarbons. West Texas crude is sour, Venezuelan crude is heavier and has more low-end hydrocarbons, more suited for lubes than fuel.
“A Dilbit Primer: How It’s Different from Conventional Oil” "
“Bitumen extracted from tar sands has the consistency of peanut butter and must be diluted to flow through pipelines. And that’s just the beginning.” by Lisa Song Inside Climate News: 26 June 2012
[Admittedly, the article concerns Dilbit moviang by a pipeline and what happened when it escaped the pipeling at Marshall, Michigan in July of 2010] The explanation seems to be pretty thorough of Dilbit and its properties(?)
Synbit: is a a product also coming out of the Tar Sands in Alberta, It has undergone more processing before transportation; This linked story is about the 2nd CNR ‘Gogama’ derailment and has some interesting statements and information about the products transporte
That article seems to conclude that the discovery of the explosion hazard of tar sands oil shipped by rail leads to the conclusion that tank cars cannot be made safe. That seems like a red herring to me. All the recent tar sands derailments prove is that tar sands oil is just as much of an explosion hazard as Bakken oil.
The tank car problem is not changed by the discovery of the tar sands oil explosiveness. The tank car problem is only related to the ability of the tank cars to wreck without breaching. The industry has been assuring us that the 1232 tank cars and the even newer 117 cars will solve the breaching problem. Apparently that is now seen to be false.
Consider this quote from the article, and note the sentence that I have highlighted in red:
“We now know, thanks to Gogama 1 and Gogama 2, that neither dilbit nor synbit, the synthetically diluted variant of tar sands oil, are safer than untreated Bakken crude. Consequently, the strategy for renewal of the tank car fleet is based upon an entirely erroneous premise. The whole schedule must be recalculated, based on the evidence that bitumen, diluted for transportation, i
Euclid: This is a link to a site I had found; but not included before. It contains information on the distilates added to the’Dilbit product’ to enhance its ability to flow:See @ http://www.crudemonitor.ca/crude.php?acr=SYB
And another point, are the last several sentences of the article, linked and posted by BaltACD:
[snipped] FTA:'…Let’s hope that someone in the White House Office of Management and Budget asks the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) why it did not assess the risks of dilbit and synbit before submitting its timeline for tank car transition. It is unquestionably an astonishing regulatory failure by the nation’s highest authority for the classification and handling of hazardous materials.
The entire strategy underlying the proposed oil train reforms is now simply nullified by facts on the ground. The problem of exploding oil trains cannot be fixed by an extra eighth-inch of steel. The lading is exploding, not the cars.
If Reuters news is right that President Obama himself ordered PHMSA to back off from requiring the treatment of crude oil before transportation, what looks on the surface like an inexplicable bureaucratic failure may prove to be an even bigger case of ill-advised interference in the regulatory process. The country deserves an explanation.
The error could become scandalous should the White House approve the current proposals for the perverse assignment of DOT-111 cars to tar sands service. An entirely fresh start on oil train safety is required, based on the knowledge that the cargo, not the cars, is the explosive factor…"[snip]
[and continues, several more sentences to the end of the linked article.]
and then there was this paragraph in the article I had posted earlier in this Thread:
Sam, what we are looking at here are actualy three different products.
Dilbit, is essentially raw bitumen that has had it’s viscosity reduced by mixing it with a diluent. In most cases, the diluent is naptha. The naptha eases the handling of the bitumen, and allows for transport and processing at it’s destination.
Synbit, is bitumen that has been mixed with synthetic crude oil in order to reduce the viscosity, and compared to the other two products, is relatively rare. A significant portion of the product, is synthetic crude, so it’s value is much higher.
Synthetic crude oil is the result of upgrading bitumen through coking and sulphur removal. There are several different grades of synthetic crude, ranging from products that are very comparable to conventional oil, to premium products that look very much like refined motor oil. The premium products have many different fractions mixed in them…as in feed suitable for refining into many different products accross the oil spectrum.
I’m unaware of which of the above three categories the oil in question fits into, as I do not know which source they came from. However, Dilbit is the most volatile, due to the diluent content. Synbit is quite stable, being that it doesn’t contain the quontities of substances such as naptha or petroleum distillates that dilbit does. Synthetic crude is also very stable. In reality, it’s not much more volatile than conventional motor oil. That being said, it is a bit more hazardous due to lighter fractions still contained in it. Like pretty much all hydrocarbons, it will burn, and burn ferociously once ignited, but it’s quite a bit harder to light off than Bakken products.
Incidentally, synthetic crude is usually referred to as SCO, and not Syncrude. Syncrude is actually one fo the companies that produces one of the premium SCO products, called Syncrude Sweet Premium.
I am less familiar with synthetic crude (as a geologist my work was with natural crude oils) and I was hoping that Greasemonkey (who is familiar with Alberta) would fill in the details, which he has now done.
In addition, there are some other advantages to synthetic crudes:
-They are a more readily usable feedstock to more refineries than bitumen.
This is in reference to the fact that the administration was going to allow the new North Dakota Bakken crude seperation order become effective before the feds might step in. Oil and gas regulation has been a state’s function since the beginning, over a hundred years ago. Not only would this have been seen by Congress as a big federal power grab, but it would have been bitterly contested by the States.