Crews Begin Cleanup Work After Baton Rouge Train Derailment
08/01/2014
A train derailed in north Baton Rouge Friday, Aug. 1, 2014, near South Choctaw and West Dual streets. Six box cars near the center of the train overturned. Local HazMat crews, the state Department of Environmental Quality and Louisiana State Police were on scene. (Emily Lane, NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune)
BATON ROUGE, LA (NBC33) – Seven cars from a train travelling along tracks near S. Choctaw and N. Sherwood Forest Drive in Baton Rouge, LA, derailed around 9:30 AM, Friday.
Investigators on the scene say they’ve found residue of Difulourmethane, a hazardous material, on the scene. They say they are still investigating what caused the cars to come off the tracks. Patrick Waldron, a spokesman for Canadian National Railway Company (CN) says and empty tank car was last last carrying Difulourmethane, but the car is currently empty.
Mark Miles with the Baton Rouge Fire Department says it will take up to six hours for crews to clean up the mess. BRFD has re-opened the intersection of North Sherwood Forest and Choctaw.
Patrick Waldron, a CN Spokesman, says seven cars on an Eastbound train derailed. The train was headed from Baton Rouge, LA, to Jackson, MS. There were no injuries reported, and there is no indication of any leaks at this time. Crews are on the scene to conduct a full investigation of the incidents leading up to the derailment. The train had just departed the CN train yard in Baton Rouge, LA. Of the seven train cars that derailed, one was empty, one car was carrying fiber board, three cars were carrying plastic pellets, and two cars were carrying lube oil. Some of the plastic pellets have come out onto the ground, but none of the oil has leaked out of the cars.
CN crews are beginning the cleanup process to get the car back upright and repair damage to the track. At this point, Waldron says it’s unclear how much damage was done. CN crews will be better able to assess the damage once they’ve righted the derailed cars and moved them out of the way.
This particular train track goes between Baton Rouge, LA, and Hammond, LA, and it is closed to other train traffic until the necessary repairs are made to the track. CN officials could not provide details on any delays this might be causing to other freight trains in the area
Repost from Seattle PI.com [Editor: This is a challenging think-piece for opponents of crude by rail. Personally, I believe that sit-ins, songs and resolutions have a place in a multi-faceted approach to organizing against big oil and rail. But Connelly has a point – we need to think hard and long on serious strategies for success. – RS]
Publicity-stunt sit-ins, council resolutions won’t stop oil trains
Posted on August 1, 2014 | By Joel Connelly
A sight that won’t be stopped by sit-ins and City Council resolutions: A coal train passes an oil train after tanker cars derailed in Magnolia this morning. Oil and coal could become the Northwest’s “supreme shipping commodities” crowding our trade dependent economy.
In watching the Seattle City Council’s ritual of passing whereas-heavy, symbolic resolutions over the years, an observer can come way believing the council’s prime purpose in life is to send demonstrators home happy.
The response to oil trains, arriving in every greater numbers, is the latest example of Seattle’s insular, echo chamber politics. Its product is meaningless symbolism.
Councilman Mike O’Brien gins up an oil train resolution, much as he did on Occupy Seattle. Council member Kshama Sawant shows up at the BNSF tracks for her demonstration of the day. A Sawant mini-me running for the Legislature gets arrested. The news is telephoned to a Stranger reporter who is supporting the candidate.
Will any of this impact the Burlington Northern-Santa Fe Railroad? Will it influence the business of giant refiners like BP and Tesoro, increasingly dependent on rail shipments of Bakken crude oil from North Dakota?
Of course not. The carbon economy has the Interstate Commerce Act on its side. The U.S. Department of Transportation seems intent on accommodating shippers in its rule-making. Refineries support 2,000-plus jobs in northern Puget Sound.
For instance, the USDOT’s proposed safety rules tout a “two year” required phase out of old, explosion-prone tanker cars. When you read the fine print, phase out period begins in September 2015.
Concerned citizens rally for the need of a statewide moratorium on potentially dangerous oil-by-rail projects Friday, Feb. 21, 2014, at City Hall in Seattle. Oil trains have exploded in different regions in the U.S., causing death and property damages. (Jordan Stead, seattlepi.com)
Here is how critics can effectively put the heat on, and deal their way into the safety debate. The recent and ongoing coal port/coal train battle is a model for dealing with obtuse agencies and potentially more lethal cargoes:
– Mass support, not just driblets: Somewhere in Seattle, somebody (usually Kshama Sawant) is demonstrating every day. Protests pant after a moment on the evening TV news. Often, they leave as much impression as footprints in the snow.
By contrast, a well-planned event can signal (to politicians) that a movement has staying power. It registered when 395 people packed a Bellingham City Club meeting for a debate on the proposed Gateway Pacific Terminal. Sponsors had appears to have it greased. A bigger impression was made 2,500 people who showed up for a federal-state “scoping” hearing in Seattle.
– An agenda, not 1960′s slogans: Coalport/coal train port critics asked for an independent, comprehensive look at impacts trains will have across Washington. They wanted environmental studies to look at climate consequences of providing economical fuel to keep aging Chinese power plants in operation.
It is absurd, for instance, for the Army Corps of Engineers to limit “transportation” to the seven-mile spur line from Custer to Cherry Point in Whatcom County. Big coal, railroads and construction unions were flummoxed by a reasonable demand.
– A real coalition, not just a paper list: Seattle “coalitions” are populated by the usual suspects. A real movement gets a cross-section of recruits. Montana ranchers are not keen to see their land torn up. Firefighters worry that long trains will block waterfront access, and (with oil) that they’ll be left holding the bag when a 1960′s-vintage tanker car blows up.
The proposed Pebble Mine, near Alaska’s Bristol Bay, shows REAL reach-out. Opposition began with greens, quickly embraced Alaska’s commercial and sport fisheries, gained backing from the powerful Bristol Bay Native Corp., expanded to Washington fishermen, and found roles for restaurant chefs and major jewelry companies.
– Political work horses, not show horses: Behind all the posturing on coal ports, state Rep. Reuven Carlyle, D-Seattle, put together letters to the feds and state laying out — precisely — potential impacts that must be known. The letters helped shape the charge given by Gov. Jay Inslee to the Department of Ecology.
With oil trains, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., recently cornered — and treed — USDOT Secretary Anthony Foxx at a recent hearing. She delivered a message that MUST be driven home. Faux safety measures won’t cut it. Cantwell and Carlyle don’t go for whereas clauses.
– Fact and evidence, not just hyperbole: Exaggeration is a basic activist weapon, broadly deployed. It gets people riled, but has limited staying power. What’s needed are activist-experts who learn the stuff, and steep themselves in places to be impacted.
A lighter touch should be put on heavy handed manipulation of the media. Certain web sites and outlets can be counted on to spout the party line. Others aren’t content to simply be fed.
The carbon economy is coming our way — big time — with proposed coal export terminals, a big terminal to receive oil trains (in Vancouver, Wash.), coal and oil trains taking over the rails, plus pipeline terminals and oil export ports in British Columbia.
It’s not going to be turned back by sit-ins or Council resolutions in a city with less than 10 percent of Washington’s population.
Seattle politics is sandlot. What we’re facing, and trying to influence, is a big-league challenge.
Pittsburg: WesPac oil-by-rail storage project remains on hold
By Paul Burgarino, 08/02/2014
PITTSBURG — The brakes remain on a massive $200 million plan to transport domestic crude oil by railroad cars and ships, store it in refurbished storage tanks and pipe it to refineries throughout the Bay Area.
And after almost six months of no action, it may stay that way for a while.
Pittsburg officials said it will be at least early 2015 before the project is brought before city decision-makers — if it ever is.
“Right now, we’re kind of in a holding pattern and waiting for a green light from the applicant,” City Manager Joe Sbranti said.
In February, city leaders — prompted by a letter from the office of state Attorney General Kamala Harris urging further scrutiny on air quality and the risk of accidental spills, as well as fierce community opposition — told WesPac Energy that it would be reopening the public comment period on its draft environmental documents.
The WesPac project calls for an average of 242,000 barrels of crude or partially refined crude oil to be unloaded daily and stored in 16 tanks on 125 acres once used by Pacific Gas & Electric to store fuel oil two decades ago.
Since earlier this year, Pittsburg planners and a hired consultant have briefly discussed some of the issues raised, but that has ceased until WesPac decides whether it will put more money toward continuing the process, Sbranti said. All costs for studies of development projects are covered by applicants, he said.
The earliest a revised contract would be considered by the City Council is September, Sbranti said. After that, he estimated additional studies could take anywhere from six to 10 months.
“If and when they decide to come forward, they are entitled to and deserve a fair hearing,” Mayor Sal Evola said. “As it stands today, as far as we know, they’ve put the project on hold.”
Art Diefenbach, project manager for WesPac, said in an email, “We have nothing new to share about our project at this time.”
The facility, located on the western edge of town near homes, schools, churches and the Pittsburg Marina, would handle an estimated 88 million barrels of domestic and imported crude oil and partially refined crude. Its capacity is massive, and 20 percent of the state’s processed oil could pass through it over the course of a year, according to the Jan. 15 letter from Harris’ office.
Supporters of the $200 million project say it will bring jobs and revenue to the city, make use of a dormant industrial parcel, and help refineries meet their future needs at a time when oil production in California is declining and existing storage is near capacity.
The Pittsburg Defense Council, along with several environmental groups, is fighting the project over concerns about air quality, environmental issues and safety concerns involving the transportation of crude by rail.
“We’ve been keeping an eye out for when it comes back on city agendas, and being vigilant,” said longtime resident and Defense Council member Lyana Monterrey. The group has also been keeping an eye on crude-by-rail issues in Berkeley, Richmond and Benicia, she said.
The Pittsburg critics point to a train carrying Bakken crude that exploded in July 2013 in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, killing 47 people, and other derailments and explosions have occurred in the past year in Alabama and North Dakota.
Crude shipments by rail from the Midwest and Canada into the state have increased from about 1.1 million barrels in 2012 to about 6.3 million barrels in 2013, according to the California Energy Commission. One thing the WesPac issue has brought forward is a “heightened sense of awareness” about rail safety, as both the Union Pacific and Burlington North Santa Fe lines cut through Pittsburg, Evola said.
Pittsburg, he said, is lobbying for a bill currently in the state Assembly requiring railroads to report details of transports of hazardous materials on a quarterly basis to the state Office of Emergency Services.
FACTBOX-California crude sources and oil-by-rail projects
Mon Jul 21, 2014
HOUSTON, July 21 (Reuters) – California refiners remain far behind peers elsewhere in the country in replacing expensive imports with cheaper North American crudes from a new production boom.
No major crude pipelines cross the Rocky Mountains, leaving the isolated region dependent on rail to tap the burgeoning bounty in Texas, North Dakota and other growing oilfields.
More than half of the 1.7 million barrels of crude processed by California refineries each day is imported, largely from Saudi Arabia, Ecuador, Iraq and Colombia. The rest comes from California and Alaska, where output is declining.
Several refiners and logistics or pipeline companies are trying to tap U.S. and Canadian crude via rail, but California’s tough regulatory environment and growing opposition in light of fiery crude train crashes elsewhere could halt current projects and stop new ones from starting up.
Tesoro Corp and Savage Companies are proposing a 360,000 barrels per day railport at the Port of Vancouver in Washington that, if approved, could potentially replace more than 40 percent of California’s imported crude. Once railed to Vancouver, crude would be loaded onto barges or ships bound for West Coast refineries.
Here is a rundown of California’s crude slate and existing and pending oil-by-rail projects:
CALIFORNIA CRUDE
California’s 1.7 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude processed in 2013 came from these three main sources:
* Imports: 875,564 bpd, 51 percent of the total
* California, 631,441 bpd, 37 percent
* Alaska, 201,720 bpd, 12 percent
The non-California supply arrives via ships or barges except negligible oil-by-rail shipments, which reached 15,715 bpd in the first quarter of 2014.
That is less than 2 percent of the overall 873,967 bpd that originated on top U.S. railroads throughout the United States in the same period.
By comparison, in 2003 a little more than one-third of the 1.8 million bpd of crude processed in California came from imports:
* Imports, 636,923 bpd, 34 percent
* California, 792,920 bpd, 42.5 percent
* Alaska, 438,805 bpd, 23.5 percent
Source: California Energy Commission
(Reporting By Kristen Hays, editing by Peter Henderson)
You must be logged in to post a comment.