Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on February 15, 2014
Trains That Go Boom
For most of the 14 years that Tinamarie Hatlee has lived in Ravena, N.Y., a small town south of Albany, she didn’t mind the trains that passed 50 feet from the back door of her house. They came only a few times a day and moved slowly, so the noise was bearable. But starting last summer, Hatlee says, the trains have been rumbling by every few hours, from early morning until well past midnight. And they go much quicker, as fast as 50 miles an hour, she estimates. Many are oil trains—hundreds of black tank cars filled with tens of thousands of barrels of crude, mainly from oil fields in North Dakota, on their way to refineries on the East Coast. “It’s terrifying to think of all that oil flying by so close to my house,” Hatlee says. “I don’t understand why they have to go so fast.”
They’re in such a hurry because there’s so much oil to move. Over the past three years, U.S. production has increased by more than 2 million barrels per day to 8 million, and railroads are hauling more fossil fuels than they have in a century. In the third quarter of 2013, trains carried 93,312 carloads of crude oil, or about 66 million barrels—about 900 percent more than in all of 2008. Almost all oil reaches its destination without incident. In recent months, however, an alarming number of oil trains in the U.S. and Canada have derailed, causing spectacular explosions that blackened the sky with burning crude. In July a 74-car train plowed into the Quebec town of Lac-Mégantic in the middle of the night, igniting an inferno that killed 47 people. In October a tank train derailed outside Edmonton, Alberta, forcing an evacuation. In November an oil train crashed in Alabama, spilling thousands of barrels into a marshland. In December two trains collided in Casselton, N.D., one carrying soybeans, the other crude. Eighteen tank cars ruptured and burst into flames, spilling about 400,000 gallons of oil.
Local, state, and federal officials, as well as the oil and railroad industries, are calling for tougher safeguards to prevent these kinds of accidents. Just what those protections will look like is anyone’s guess. The tangle of competing laws and regulations governing U.S. railroads allows everyone to claim that someone else is to blame.
Mayors and governors in states that oil trains travel through have been making the most forceful demands. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo wants to double the number of state rail inspectors from 5 to 10. Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is pressing for a hazardous materials fee on oil companies and refiners to pay for upgraded railroad tracks, more first responders, and disaster insurance for towns along oil routes. Emanuel doesn’t have the power to make that happen, though. Overseeing railroads is primarily the federal government’s job, in part because the industry would be paralyzed if it had to comply with widely varying local regulations each time a train passed through a town.
Washington doesn’t appear to be in a rush to address the problem. On Jan. 23, investigators at the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board made broad recommendations that would have big consequences: They said crude oil should meet the same restrictions as toxic chemicals, which must be routed on tracks away from population centers. In 2012 the NTSB said crude oil should travel only in upgraded tank cars with thicker, more puncture-resistant walls and sophisticated relief valves. This would require the industry to hasten upgrading its fleet of older, thinner-walled cars better suited to ferrying corn syrup than explosive fossil fuels. “The large-scale shipment of crude oil by rail simply didn’t exist 10 years ago, and our safety regulations need to catch up,” NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman said when she released the report. “While this energy boom is good for business, the people and the environment along rail corridors must be protected from harm.”
The government may require oil companies to upgrade aging oil tank cars to help prevent explosions
But Hersman can’t require oil and rail companies to comply with her recommendations, and they haven’t. President Obama could urge federal regulators to act quickly to come up with new safety rules. Congress could pass legislation. Neither has happened. Obama has been mostly silent on the issue, and congressional leaders haven’t pushed bills to increase rail safety. Hearings on the matter are getting under way on Capitol Hill this month. The government should be “embarrassed by how unprepared they were for this,” says Fred Millar, a rail safety consultant who’s worked for cities and environmental groups.
Instead, the problem has been left to make its way through the federal rulemaking bureaucracy. In April 2012 the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, a part of the U.S. Department of Transportation, began considering new standards to govern oil shipments, a process that requires months of gathering comments from various sides and months more of deliberations. The agency says it has until the end of the year to finish new rules, but under pressure to act quickly, it could come out with them as early as this month.
The Transportation Department could issue what are called interim final rules to immediately impose new speed limits for crude trains and standards that require them to stay farther away from densely populated areas, Millar says. The administration, however, has resorted to “quiet backdoor meetings with the railroads and oil companies,” he says, “to see what they’ll agree to do voluntarily.”
Of course, the industries don’t need to wait for the federal government to tell them what to do—they could act on their own to make crude trains safer. Railroads have largely placed responsibility for safety on the oil companies that use their tracks, pressing them to switch to the newer, rupture-resistant cars. “We are trying to show that we are taking this seriously, and we’re hoping that the Department of Transportation can follow suit,” says Edward Hamberger, president of the Association of American Railroads.
Oil companies aren’t eager to go along with the request, and they don’t have to because the older cars meet current federal guidelines. Of the 92,000 tank cars used to haul crude and other flammable liquids in the U.S., only 14,000 have the updated safety features. Modifying them could cost the industry about $5.2 billion, according to estimates by Bloomberg Government. Some oil companies are getting out ahead of whatever changes might be coming. On Feb. 6, Tesoro (TSO), one of the nation’s biggest refiners, announced it will replace all older tank cars it leases by mid-2014. “It is going to cost more to do, there’s no doubt,” says Senior Vice President Keith Casey. “But simply stated, we think it’s the right thing to do.”
Oil producers say the railroads that own the tracks the tank cars ride on, including CSX (CSX) and BNSF Railway, share responsibility for the train accidents. “The first step is to prevent derailments by addressing track defects and other root causes,” Sabrina Fang, a spokeswoman for the American Petroleum Institute, wrote in a Jan. 23 e-mail.
While the various sides maneuver for advantage, people such as Hatlee are anxious to see what, if anything, the government will do to prevent the next disaster. As it is now, “We’d be incinerated if there were an explosion,” she says. “There’s absolutely nothing to protect us.”
6 Comments on "Trains That Go Boom"
James A. Hellams on Sat, 15th Feb 2014 6:20 pm
That the railroads in this country are in bad shape, does not surprise me.
For decades, the federal government has heavily subsidized aviation and highway transportation; while always making rail transportation the poorest sister of transportation funding.
For every one dollar spent on rail subsidies, six dollars have been spent on aviation; and 14 dollars have been spent on highway transportation. Meanwhile, in foreign countries, which have always regarded rail service highly; their railroads are in better shape than our own.
Japan, for example, has the premier railroads, such as the Shinkansan which carries passengers at 180+ miles per hour; with no fatalities or derailments.
France, which also highly regards its rail service, carries people at high speeds with very few derailments or fatalities (or no derailments or fatalities, at all). Recently, a TGV train accomplished the world record speed for a train at 350 miles per hour, with no derailment or fatalities.
I will never forget an editorial cartoon that said it all about how lowly the US regards its railroads. In the cartoon, were depicted aviation and highway interests carrying huge bags of money down the steps of the US capitol building; while a railroad conductor was standing by the wall with a tin cup in his hand begging for money.
The US regards as lowly rail transportation; while many foreign countries regard rail transportation with much higher regard; and are constantly upgrading what they have with faster trains and better track.
Also, I might mention that when the oil supply collapses; the US will have NO chance of survival; because of what it has done to destroy its rail services; while many foreign countries WILL have a chance to survive; because they have not deliberately forgotten and destroyed their rail service like we have in the US.
You heavily bought into aviation and highway transportation and deliberately ignored the railroads in the US. You did not constantly upgrade the speeds and the tracks; while many foreign countries have constantly upgraded their railroads’ speed and track. As the time honored expression goes, “You get what you paid for”. Now, live with the reality of the poor railroad system that you have deliberately created!
rockman on Sat, 15th Feb 2014 6:20 pm
“Oil producers say the railroads that own the tracks the tank cars ride on share responsibility for the train accidents”. I would like to see the actual statement made by the “oil producers”. There may be some exceptions but I suspect none of the oil in any of the recent accidents belonged to the producers. Companies I’ve worked with for the last 40 years seldom if ever owned the oil being transported by rail, truck and pipeline. Once oil leaves my stock tanks I’m no more responsible for what happens with the oil then anyone here that drives an vehicle.
X Oil Company produces 100,000 bbls of oil, sells it Y Refining Company and pays Z Rail Company to deliver the oil to their refinery in either their rail cars or those owned by the railroad. If there’s an accident how is that anyone’s responsibility, including the folks consuming the refinery products, other that the train company?
Which, as the following shows, is starting to be addressed. In this case the refiner is having their own special rail cars built:
Reuters – Refiner PBF Energy Inc will rely entirely on newer railcars to move Bakken crude oil starting on April 1. The newer cars will also be deployed around June to carry Canadian crude, said the company, which runs refineries in Ohio, New Jersey and Delaware. “While we are expanding our rail operations, we are doing so with a keen focus on safety,” he told investors on a quarterly results call.
PBF said it expects crude trains generally to move more slowly across the country as the overall supply chain comes under scrutiny. Refiner Tesoro Corp said last week it was replacing older railcars as well.
The Railway Supply Institute, which represents tank car owners, has urged federal regulators to adopt safety standards already embraced in October 2011 by the Association of American Railroads, the rail industry’s trade group. Under those standards tank railcars known as DOT-111s built after October 2011 should have thicker hulls and reinforced valves to better protect against punctures or leaks in derailments.
rollin on Sat, 15th Feb 2014 9:31 pm
If you do not live or work near the railroad on hill with a tight curve, a junction or siding, the odds are low for a derailment. Watch the cars on the tracks in your neighborhood, if they wobble side to side a lot or the track appears to depress up and down as cars go over it , call the railroad and report it, then request it be repaired. Follow up with a letter.
If you see misaligned track, a break in the rail, rocks or trees on the track; report the problem immediately to the railroad. If a crossing gate seems to be malfunctioning do the same. Phone numbers are often posted at crossings.
Derailments in the US have dropped from 3000 per year in 1980 to 500 per year in 2010. There is over 130,000 miles of rail in the US, that is one derailment per 260 miles per year. Since most derailments are non-events as far as the public is concerned (the train hits the dirt and no hazardous spill or damage to the public occurs), the odds of having a hazardous event within a given mile is very small.
Mainlines with their high speed, large trains are have the greatest potential for disaster. They also have the best maintenance
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sat, 15th Feb 2014 11:03 pm
@James, I wish it was so simple i.e. trains means survival. I wish we could reintroduce train services to the US. We don’t need high speed trains. We need slow tech and make it free. It would still be cheaper than high speed after all the cost overruns. The US has an excellent freight train system which is seldom complimented I might add.
J-Gav on Sat, 15th Feb 2014 11:20 pm
Davy – Exactly! No need for high-speed trains – that’s a huge money trap. Keep those essential commercial lines viable of course – and progressively improve mainline passenger service as well – that’ll be useful once aviation takes its inevitable nose-dive.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sun, 16th Feb 2014 12:11 pm
@Gav – The US has an excellent rail infrastructure it is just freight dominated as we know. The money from the big rail freight co. have has resulted in beneficial infrastructure maintenance. We have many rail line grades still there but unused. You know like the katty trail in Missouri, a bike trail now. It would be much easier to put a line back if needed. If the energy or financial decent (which ever happens 1st) occurs gentle enough we may see a low tech rail renaissance. St Louis once had a wonderful street car network that could be brought back. They put a metro link in recently. His intercity rail is effective but not enough and pricy. It used some old street car connections and unused rail grades separate from the street system. With car usage trending off because of the coming energy gradient low tech rail and street cars will make a comeback for the usual reason $$$. Trade needs connections. Low tech rail is so much more effective than roads in a contracted world because of the bang for the buck, economies of scale of activities, physics of transport, and ease of maintenance. It is like so many sustainable practices, resilience economics, and permaculture AG the issue is BAU economics that make these great ideas hobbies or niche activities currently. If the right ingredients are present in the decent these ideas will find economic viability. I am just not sure at this point if the key variables of time, stability, and capital will be present. This will depend on the degree and duration of decent.
I am not sold on the electrified rail thing yet for the decent. We know it is not green if the electricity is produced by fossil impute. Conversion is a thermodynamic entropic reality. In an energy decent, conversion practices will suffer. Far better to use say steam with a multi fuel capability. Like my multi fuel camp stove. We are talking slow tech and simple. We have a huge salvage potential of freight rail car and locomotives parts to pull from. Electric rail is great now especially if it can be more renewable based but that future will be subject to fossil depletion as we know. This rail thing is an important part of our list of mitigation efforts in a contracting world. God help us this decent will be gentle with time.