Skip to main content

juniata guy's post above is a good summary of the situation.  Even the new "safe" cars are subject to leaks or rupture in a major accident.

  Shipping by trucks is not an option because of lack of equipment and drivers, to say nothing about congested highways.

  Most petroleum products are shipped by pipeline which is safer and cheaper than rail or truck and do not go through the middle of major metropolitan areas.

  It is only a matter of time until the Keystone pipeline will be built and a lot of very dangerous cargo will be taken off the rails until then we will have to live with the risks of rail shipment.

  Most crude will not explode like the tank cars in West Virginia did, volatile gases separating out is a good explanation but I am not sure if that is the cause or not.

  It is fortunate there was not greater loss of life or property.

Douglas  

I Know many of the farmers who are having their family land seized by a foreign corporation. Unconstitutional!!!!!!  If the Cheap OOs would separate the volatile gases from the bitumen before shipping it is much safer to ship. The are forced to by law in TX and OK because refineries there have already dealt with the loss of life in the past these cheap practices expose the people ,workers and environment too. This is all about GREED. Don't let them sell you any more lies . if you think the pipe is made in the USA think again its already here from china and their quality control is legendary. If you don't believe me I'll go and shoot photos of the stacks waiting by the railyards that have been rusting know for 2 to 3 years. Griffin pipe closed down in Council bluffs because they lost the contract for the pipe as well as other enviromental concerns. Jobs are another bogus lie. this stuff can be transported by rail safely l with the proper safety measures but that will hurt the precious bottom line . GREED will kill us all if were not vigilant or careful.

Originally Posted by Lima:

On the bright side,  less highly corrosive to fuel systems and lower mileage Ethanol means longer, healthier life for cars right with less Ethanol tank cars?

 

Read in a business book the Ethanol lobby was the golden star winner for forcing us to support an industry.

Ethanol will someday be exposed as the largest fraud ever forced upon the public. I live near a gas station that sells pure gas.....IE no Ethanol. I get 10-15 mpg better when I use it and my Honda is certified as a ZEV (zero emission) so how is ethanol doing us ANY good??? Read about it...be educated.

 

Back to trains.......I will be heading that way in 2 weeks....interesting to see what the results of the wreck.

Originally Posted by juniata guy:

Well, as a tank car shipper of chemical products, I reckon I'll weigh in here. 

 

 

The tank car industry currently has an annual production capacity of somewhere around 32-33,000 cars.  The current industry backlog for new cars is about a year and a half to two years.  If we suddenly have to replace 50-75,000 111 tank cars and still have the normal requirement for newly built cars to replace aging ones, the leadtime for a new car could easily go to 4-5 years. 

 

So, in short, the industry is prepared to make whatever changes are required by PHMSA; we simply need an adequate amount of time in which to do it.

 

Curt

 

 

I found Curt's post very informative.  I had no idea that the industry was building 30,000 plus new tank cars per year and still can't keep up with demand.  I do think that  government and industry needs to quickly finalize on a design so that all new cars can be built to the standard.  This needs to be a priority of the Dept. of Transportation or whomever is in charge of design approval.

 

I wonder if production at manufacturing plants can be shifted from say intermodal cars or hoppers to tank cars in order to ramp up capacity.  Maybe plant capacity can be expanded thus creating more jobs.

 

Another post mentioned the Keystone pipeline.  This is my understanding:  The Keystone  pipeline is to built from Canada to existing pipelines in the midwest.  The existing USA pipelines will then carry Canadian crude to refineries along the Gulf of Mexico.  The crude will be turned into gas and other products which will be exported overseas.  

 

The Keystone line will not transport North Dakota crude anywhere nor will it provide oil products to the USA.  The pipeline is expected to create a 1,000 or so jobs during construction and around 50 permanent USA jobs when it is in operation.  

 

North Dakota crude will still need to be transported by train.  I don't think that there is any plan to build a pipeline from North Dakota to refineries in Yorktown, VA - the destination of this train.  I haven't heard of any plan to build a pipeline from ND to the SF Bay Area refineries.  This is why the UP wants permission to bring ND crude to the Bay Area.

 

Oil transportation will be a continuing debate.  No one wants a new refinery or a pipeline built in their neighborhood.

 

Most of the old refineries that were built out in sticks now have homes, schools and shopping malls surrounding them.  At least this is what has happened here in the SF Bay Area.  Unfortunately, the oil industry just doesn't have a good safety record.  There is a fire, spill, or toxic release at a SF Bay Area refinery a couple of times a year.  A few workers are usually injured or killed during these events.  

 

Joe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think it has been said in multiple places...once Keystone is built this will not remove all the oil from the railroads.  Different directions...different customers.  Those customers and shippers using rails have already invested in rail loading terminals and like the flexibility offered by rail.  I would think they have already analyzed the situation about the pipeline and figured that into their calculation before investing.  I also feel BNSF etc has done the same before dropping billions on capacity improvements.  They are not just sitting there thinking "oh this pipeline won't happen."  I'm sure they know it will happen but the business will still be there.  On the positive side...maybe this will result in much safer conditions or new tech that can predict the otherwise random natural occurrence that damages track.

Originally Posted by Mike W.:

I think it has been said in multiple places...once Keystone is built this will not remove all the oil from the railroads.  Different directions...different customers.

Not to mention that the Keystone pipeline well be providing oil products from Canada, and thus will have nothing to do with the product that is presently coming out of the Dakotas. 

Absolutely fabulous!!!!  Education has occurred.  The only solution that is practical is to build a refinery in ND.   plenty of empty space there.  Canadian sands can be processed there as well.  This and only this can fulfill all the promises ; lies , being sold to the American public about Keystone, and would greatly benefit America. The real issue will continue. until  we all realize it is intrinsic to our society that everyone has a livable wage job and corporate greed is the real problem here. If tracks are maintained well  and simple safety rules are followed there is no reason why tankers, trucks, and pipelines cannot be operated safely. We have done all this and more as a nation before just not without labor and such massive profit going to the top, so quickly.

Blast hits Southern California refinery

wonder if the railroads will be blamed for this? kinda like folks who don't obey crossing and flashing red lights gates?

 

oh, what, EXACTLY, is a Living wage? Does it have to do with getting no education, training or a willingness to work and learn? if everybody received a "living wage" no matter what they did or how long they did it or how much education they have to do the job, wouldn't that define communism? 

Originally Posted by paperboys:

Blast hits Southern California refinery

wonder if the railroads will be blamed for this? kinda like folks who don't obey crossing and flashing red lights gates?

 

oh, what, EXACTLY, is a Living wage? Does it have to do with getting no education, training or a willingness to work and learn? if everybody received a "living wage" no matter what they did or how long they did it or how much education they have to do the job, wouldn't that define communism? 

That's the Mobil refinery down the street from my Wife's work. She thought it was an earthquake at first. UP has track going thru that area but nowhere near the chemical towers. Looks like the main processing facility in the refinery center is pretty much gone. Gas prices will for sure increase for CA residents.

The earlier post regarding the required buffer cars on oil trains is interesting because there is a Youtube video (search "CSX train before derailment") of the train that clearly shows only one buffer car between the engines and the first tank car along with a single buffer car at the end of the train.  This is also what I have seen many times while railfanning Norfolk Southern at Alliance, Ohio.

If this is the wreck I am thinking of, I read that the train was made up of the newer supposedly puncture proof tankers.  But judging from flaming pictures, I guess it is back to the drawing board.  That ND crude is practically gasoline or lighter.

 

I recall several years ago where engineering math and calculations showed that a new RR tanker design would be OK in collision.  So they built and tested by having one car run into other.  Tanker punctured.  Engineers said it was due to "strange unanticipated accident angles" that could not be accounted for and unlikely to happen in real world (REALLY??).  "But our equations said this can't happen (and Titanic can't sink)"

The CPC-1232 style car is supposedly resistant to breaching at speeds up to 25 mph.  The train involved in this accident supposedly was running at 33 mph. 

While I suppose engineers could design and build a tank car that wouldn't breach at normal operating speeds up to 50 mph, it would be so heavy as to be economically unviable for transportation.

As the head of the American Petreum Institute said last year, "keep the **** cars on the track and there is no problem".

Curt
Originally Posted by juniata guy:
The CPC-1232 style car is supposedly resistant to breaching at speeds up to 25 mph.  The train involved in this accident supposedly was running at 33 mph. 

While I suppose engineers could design and build a tank car that wouldn't breach at normal operating speeds up to 50 mph, it would be so heavy as to be economically unviable for transportation.

As the head of the American Petreum Institute said last year, "keep the **** cars on the track and there is no problem".

Curt

An excellent point.

 

Back in the late 1950s, or early 1960s, the Norfolk & Western railroad had a pretty sever train wreck, where the lead diesel unit bent its frame pretty severely. The N&W Mechanical Dept. sent a letter of complaint to EMD. The Chief Engineer at EMD sent a nice response back to the Chief Mechanical Officer of N&W, to the effect that, "If you will let us know what sort of collision you plan to have, and the parameters surround same, we will be happy to design a locomotive to withstand such an event.".

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×