Tag Archives: explosion

Time Magazine: A Year After a Deadly Disaster, Fears Grow About the Danger of Crude Oil Shipped By Rail

Repost from Time Magazine
[Editor: The message is getting out far and wide with this mainstream publication’s observance of the one-year anniversary of the killer wreck in Lac-Mégantic.  An intensely personal account of what it is like to live near these rolling “bomb trains.”  – RS]

A Year After a Deadly Disaster, Fears Grow About the Danger of Crude Oil Shipped By Rail

Sebastien Malo, July 10, 2014

When 21-year-old mother Kahdejah Johnson was told two years ago that she’d secured a spot at the Ezra Prentice Homes, a quiet housing project in Albany, she felt confident she’d found a stable home to raise her newborn son. With its manicured lawns and tidy beige row houses, the Ezra Prentice Homes are a far cry from the crumbling housing projects of large cities. “When people come into town they’re like ‘These are your projects? These are condos!’” says Johnson.

But today, Johnson is losing sleep over how close her house is to railroad tracks congested, day and night, with tanker cars carrying crude oil, visible just outside her bedroom window. The fear of an accident is so great that Johnson has taken to evacuating her apartment some nights, to spend the night at her mother’s home, further from the tracks. “Now I’m afraid to be in my own home,” she says. “Do you know how fast we could die here?”

Albany is one of a growing number of cities where residents like Johnson fear the devastating consequences of accidents involving railcars filled with crude oil. They have reason to fear—on July 6, 2013, a train carrying oil derailed in the Canadian town of Lac-Megantic, causing an explosion that destroyed more than 30 buildings and killed more than 40 people. This past Sunday, Johnson and other Albany residents held a vigil to commemorate the Lac-Megantic derailment—and draw attention to the growing opposition to transporting crude oil by rail

“Jo-Annie Lapointe, Melissa Roy, Maxime Dubois, Joanie Turmel,” participants in the vigil intoned into a microphone, naming Lac-Megantic residents killed in the explosions. In a line, they held portraits of each of the deceased and read their names, pinning the pictures to a black metal fence. “You may not say that they lived right next door to you, but they were your neighbors,” said Pastor McKinley Johnson, who officiated part of the ceremony. “You may not say that you understand all the language, but they’re your sister and your brother.”

As in Lac-Megantic, oil tankers containing highly flammable crude oil from the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota and Montana roll right through their residential areas. Rows of train-cars filled with crude oil often stand idle for hours on the tracks that hug the curves of the housing project, so tightly only 15 feet at most separate the two in some areas. “Once I found out that these are the same tanks that were in Canada, I was like ‘Oh my God, someone pray for us, We’re in danger’,” Johnson said.

This fear is a consequence of the unconventional oil boom in states like North Dakota, where for the last several years producers have been using hydrofracking techniques to pump oil previously locked in underground shale rock. The new oil fields have helped America’s oil production rise to a 28-year high. But that crude oil has to get to refineries, most of which are located in coastal cities—and much of that oil is moving by rail. Nationally, transport of crude oil by train has jumped 45-fold between 2008 and 2013, according to a recent Congressional Research Service report.

While the U.S. has yet to experience a rail catastrophe on the scale of Lac-Megantic, the country has had its share of close calls. The National Transportation Safety Board counts five “significant accidents” of trains containing crude oil in the United States in the past year alone. The latest, in Lynchburg, Virginia, saw a train carrying crude Bakken oil derail and burst into flames in the town’s center this April, producing black plumes of smoke and billows of flames taller than buildings nearby. The crude oil also spilled into the James River, though one was injured.

The worrying trend has opened a new front to the national environmental debate. Some 40 cities and towns across the country scheduled similar events to mark Lac-Megantic’s one-year anniversary. Many of the rallies will take place in the usual hotbeds of environmental activism —in places like Seattle and Portland—but also in blue-collar tows like Philadelphia and Detroit, where activists will voice demands ranging from a moratorium on oil-trains traffic to increased safety controls.

But the problem has also presented environmentalists with a conundrum. One of the factors behind the rapid rise of railroad shipment of crude oil has been the shortage of oil pipelines, which could move greater quantities of oil from landlocked states to coastal refineries. Front and center to this debate is the multi-billion dollar Keystone XL pipeline project, which would connect the oil sands of western Canada to the Gulf Coast, but which President Obama has yet to approve—in part because of objections raised by environmentalists, who fear the potential for a spill.

Fewer pipelines has meant more oil moved via rail. “If Keystone had been built we wouldn’t be moving nearly the volume of oil that we’re moving by rail,” said Charles Ebinger, the director of the Energy Security Initiative at the Brookings Institution.

That has exposed the Keystone’s opponents to criticism that by standing in the way of pipeline projects, they are raising the risk of rail accidents. Though hazardous material like crude oil makes its way safely via rail 99.998 percent of the time, according to the Association of American Railroads, a plethora of research suggests that pipelines result in fewer spillage incidents, personal injuries and fatalities than rail. That includes an authoritative environmental review the State Department released last January, which concluded that “there is… a greater potential for injuries and fatalities associated with rail transport relative to pipelines.”

Still, environmentalists like Ethan Buckner of ForestEthics, the group coordinating the string of events to commemorate the Lac-Megantic tragedy, reject that dichotomy. “The industry is trying to present Americans with a false choice between pipelines and rails,” he says. “We want to choose clean energy.”

Back in Albany, the vigil was deemed a success, drawing a crowd of about a hundred. But Kahdejah Johnson wasn’t among them. Why not? Her fear, she said, got the best of her. “Honestly, I don’t really hang by my house,” she said. “I don’t like to be in that area if I don’t have to be there.” She is now on a waiting list to be transferred to another development—something she’s told could take up to four years. In the meantime, the trains will keep rolling.

Benicia OKs Sacramento request for more time to review crude oil rail shipment plans

Repost from The Sacramento Bee

Benicia OKs Sacramento request for more time to review crude oil rail shipment plans

By Tony Bizjak, Saturday, Jul. 12, 2014
Lac-Megantic-One-Year-Later
Family and friends cross the railroad track along the crash site after a memorial service early Sunday, July 6, 2014 in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, for the 47 victims of last year’s devastating oil train derailment (AP Photo/The Canadian Press, /Paul Chiasson

Benicia has granted a request by Sacramento officials and others for extra time to review a plan by Valero Refining Co. to run two trains daily carrying crude oil through downtown Sacramento, Roseville, West Sacramento and Davis to its Bay Area refinery. The Sacramento Area Council of Governments, which represents local cities and counties, had requested extra time, saying they are concerned about the project’s safety risks. The new response deadline is Sept. 15, officials said.

Valero is asking the city of Benicia for an OK to begin receiving daily crude-by-rail shipments, including possibly the more volatile oil from the North Dakota Bakken fields. Federal officials issued a warning this year about that fuel after several train explosions, including one that killed 47 people in Canada.

The Valero plan, involving two 50-car trains a day through Sacramento, is among the first of what California officials say is an expected boom in crude-by-rail shipments through the state, prompted by the lower cost of North Dakota and Canadian crude.

The draft environmental report, issued last month by Benicia, included an analysis that says a derailment and spill might happen only once every 111 years. That analysis was authored by a University of Illinois professor, Christopher Barkan, who formerly worked for the American Association of Railroads and does research supported by the association. Barkan, an expert on hazardous rail transport, said in an email that his work for Benicia was not influenced by his association with the railroad association.

Local officials say they plan to issue written responses to that assessment this summer. City of Davis official Mike Webb has challenged the report risk assessment, saying, “It only needs to happen once to be a real problem.”

Also on Friday, a coalition of activists who oppose rail shipments of crude oil called on the state Legislature or the governor to ban or place a moratorium on construction of any more crude rail terminals similar to the one Valero is proposing.

The state Office of Spill Prevention and Response announced it will conduct a series of public workshops later this month soliciting opinions on how it should expand its work to inland areas, including along rail lines. The new state budget includes funding, from oil refinery fees, for the spill office to deal with the expected increase in crude oil shipments by rail. The agency will release information on its “legal and regulations” Web page on Friday.

KPFA: Benicians oppose crude-by-rail ‘bomb trains’

Repost from AnnGarrison.com

Benicians win first victory in opposition to crude-by-rail ‘bomb trains’

KPFA Weekend News, 07.12.2014

On Thursday, Citizens of Benicia, California won a 45-day extension of the public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Report regarding Valero’s plan for bringing tar sands and shale oil to its Benicia Refinery. Activists opposing the shipments began calling them “bomb trains” after explosions around the U.S. and in Canada.

Transcript: 
KPFA Evening News Anchor Cameron Jones:This week the Benicia Planning Commission voted, 4 to 2, for the 45 day public comment period extenion on Valero Oil’s crude by oil The town of Lac Mégantic, Quebec, Canada, burned for four days after a crude-by-rail train derailment and explosion. Forty-seven people died and some of their bodies were never even found. plan. KPFA’s Ann Garrison spoke to Andrés Soto, KPFA host, Benicia resident, and organizer with Communities for a Better Environment. 

KPFA/Ann Garrison: Andrés Soto, could you tell us what happened at the Benicia Planning Commission meeting on Thursday evening? 

Andrés Soto: Yeah, two things occurred. One was that the local group Benicians for a Safe and Healthy Community held a rally that was designed to commemorate the 47 people who lost their lives at Lac Mégantic a year ago. It was part of a national campaign along with Forest Ethics, as well as a rally before going into the meeting. 

KPFA: Regarding Lac Mégantic, that’s the community in Quebec where 47 people died after a crude by rail car blew up?
Soto: Crude by rail train.
KPFA: Train.Soto: A crude-by-trail train derailed, and a number of cars exploded, and the town burned for four days, and 47 people were essentially incinerated. Some of their bodies were never found.

KPFA: OK, what happened when you got into the Planning Commission meeting, in Benicia.Soto: Once in the meeting, the Planning Commission had to deal with a couple of ideas. One was whether or not to extend the public comment period from the 45 days it is now to 90 days, and that occurred on a 4 to 2 vote, so the public was allowed to have a longer public comment period.

Before the Benicia Planning Commission meeting on July 10, Benicia residents commemorated the 47 lives just over a year ago, when a crude-by-rail train derailed and cars carrying Bakken shale oil exploded in Lac Mégantic, Quebec. And the other action was, they started to take comment from the public on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on Valero’s crude-by-rail project. They only were able to listen to about five or six people by the time they got around to that at 11:30 pm, so the meeting is going to be continued, and the public will be allowed to give more testimony at their next meeting in August. The crowd was overwhelmingly anti crude-by-rail. The Valero forces were able to turn out a few folks, mostly from the building trades unions, but the bulk of the people who were there were opposed to it. There was also an opportunity for people who live uprail, in Roseville and Davis and Vacaville and places like that. They allowed those folks to actually offer their commentary first, before the Benicia residents, because they had come from such a long way.

So we think we’re in a good place right now and looking forward to the next meeting.

KPFA: If you’re opposing crude by rail, then you’re basically opposing the transport of shale oil and tar sands oil from the middle of the country, right?

Soto: Correct. Valero and Union Pacific have teamed up to begin to try to deliver Bakken crude and tar sands crude, Bakken crude from North Dakota, and tar sands crude from Alberta, Canada by rail down here since there is no Keystone pipeline to the West Coast. And in the city of Benicia, Valero wants to shift from getting all of its oil delivered by ships, at their port, and converting to getting it all by rail. And we believe this puts the CIty of Benicia and the surrounding communities and the Suisun Marsh at an unnecessary risk. And our position is that they ought to leave that stuff in the ground, that just because they can get it out doesn’t mean we want it. What we support is a just transition from a fossil fuel based economy to one based on the expansion of renewable energies.

KPFA: And that was Andrés Soto, Benicia resident and organizer with Communities for a Better Environment. In Berkeley, for Pacifica, KPFA Radio, I’m Ann Garrison.

KQED: Benicia Extends Public Comment Period on Bay Area Crude-by-Rail

Repost from KQED Science

Benicia Extends Public Comment Period on Bay Area Crude-by-Rail

Molly Samuel, KQED Science | July 11, 2014

Benicia city officials are giving people more time to comment on a proposal to bring crude oil by rail to Valero’s refinery there. The Benicia Planning Commission made the decision on Thursday night after hearing two hours of testimony. All but three speakers were in favor of extending the comment period, citing summer vacations and the complexity of the project’s draft environmental impact report.

Valero is looking to take advantage of the North American oil boom by bringing the crude in by rail, instead of overseas by ship.

The Valero refinery in Benicia is one of five refineries in the Bay Area. (Craig Miller/KQED)

The project has raised safety concerns in the community. There have been several fiery oil train derailments in other parts of the country in the past year, and last summer a train carrying crude oil exploded in the town of Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, killing 47 people.

“That is not going to happen here,” said Dan Broadwater, business manager for the Napa and Solano County electrical workers union. He pointed out that Valero’s Benicia refinery is one of only two refineries in the state that are recognized by the California Voluntary Protection Program for its safety record. (The other is Valero’s refinery in Wilmington, a neighborhood near Long Beach.)

Other speakers said that it’s not just about safety at the Valero plant.

“We believe this is actually a regional issue,” Lynne Nittler, of Davis, told the commission. “Your decision here has a profound impact on those of us who live up-rail.”

If the project is given the go-ahead, two 50-car trains a day would travel on Union Pacific tracks through the Roseville rail yard near Sacramento. Combined, they would deliver up to 70,000 barrels of crude oil a day to the Valero refinery, offsetting crude delivered by ship. The refinery also receives crude from the San Joaquin Valley via pipeline.

Valero representatives have said the trains will be scheduled so that they don’t interfere with traffic in Benicia during rush hour. Union Pacific is responsible for dispatching trains on its tracks, including Amtrak’s Capital Corridor trains, which travel the same route.

Valero has also said it will use upgraded tank cars, rather than older cars that have been involved in the explosive derailments.

The public comment period on the project now ends on September 15, a 45-day extension. Comments can be submitted to Amy Million, principal planner: amillion@ci.benicia.ca.us.  Fax and snail mail address are available here.