Category Archives: Rail Safety

Railroads agree to slow down crude oil trains in major cities

Repost from ABC News
IMPORTANT TO NOTE: “The agreement does not … address an estimated 78,000 flawed tank cars that carry crude and ethanol and are known to split open during derailments. The U.S. Department of Transportation said it would address the tank car issue separately.”

Oil Train Wrecks Spur Railroad Safety Measures

BILLINGS, Mont. February 21, 2014 (AP)
By MATTHEW BROWN and JOAN LOWY Associated Press

Railroads that haul volatile crude shipments have reached an agreement with U.S. transportation officials to adopt wide-ranging, voluntary safety measures after a string of explosive and deadly accidents.

The deal signed Friday calls for oil trains to be slowed from a maximum of 50 to 40 miles per hour through major cities, more frequent track inspections and better emergency response planning along routes that carry trains hauling up to 3 million gallons of crude each.

The new safety steps would begin going into effect in late March and be fully in place by July 1.

After a boom in domestic drilling in recent years, oil trains now travel thousands of miles from oil producing areas, including the Northern Plains, to coastal refineries and shipping terminals along the Mississippi River and other major waterways.

The agreement does not resolve concerns over another hazardous fuel, ethanol, involved in a spate of rail accidents in recent years. It also does not address an estimated 78,000 flawed tank cars that carry crude and ethanol and are known to split open during derailments.

The U.S. Department of Transportation said it would address the tank car issue separately.

By taking voluntary steps, the railroads will be able to act more quickly than if they waited for new safety rules to be drafted and approved by the government, said Robert Chipkevich, a former director of rail accident investigations at the National Transportation Safety Board.

But regulators will have little leverage to enforce the industry’s commitments, he added.

“It’s a positive step,” Chipkevich said. “But certainly there’s nothing to say they would have to continue following those practices. The only way you can enforce something like that would be for regulators to publish regulations and do periodic oversight.”

Federal officials said they would continue to pursue longer-term safety measures and use regular inspections to check for compliance with the industry agreement. With no formal rules in place inspectors could not issue fines or take other punitive measures.

“We expect for this to be a document that is fully adhered to, and are prepared to inspect accordingly and call out the industry as necessary,” Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph Szabo said in a Friday interview with The Associated Press.

The Association of American Railroads represents the major railroads in the U.S., Canada and Mexico. President Edward Hamberger said he expects all of them to sign the agreement.

At least 10 times since 2008, freight trains hauling oil across North America have derailed and spilled significant quantities of crude, with most of the accidents touching off fires or catastrophic explosions.

The deadliest wreck killed 47 people in the town of Lac-Megantic, Quebec. Others have occurred in rural areas of North Dakota, Alabama, Oklahoma and New Brunswick. The derailments released almost 3 million gallons of oil, nearly twice as much as the largest pipeline spill in the U.S. since at least 1986.

“Safety is our top priority, and we have a shared responsibility to make sure crude oil is transported safely,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said.

Members of Congress who had pressed for tighter safety rules — including Senators Heidi Heitkamp and John Hoeven of North Dakota and Mark Udall of Colorado — welcomed the industry agreement.

Bloomberg Businessweek: Trains That Go Boom

Repost from Bloomberg Businessweek

Trains That Go Boom

By

2:10 p.m., Dec. 30, 2013, Casselton, N.D.Photograph by Bruce Crummy/AP Photo2:10 p.m., Dec. 30, 2013, Casselton, N.D.

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 explosionsThe 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.

KQED Science report on WesPac, Pittsburg

Repost from KQED Science

Bay Area Residents Resist Crude-by-Rail as Accidents Rise

Molly Samuel, KQED Science | February 17, 2014
Bay Area Residents Resist Crude-by-Rail as Accidents Rise

The city of Pittsburg, 20 miles east of Oakland, is considering approving a new oil terminal to supply crude to Bay Area refineries. The oil would come via ship, pipeline and railroad. But there have been a number of recent accidents around the United States involving rail shipments of crude oil, and some locals are concerned about the safety of the project.

‘A Dynamite Factory in Our Backyard’

On a Saturday morning in January, about 150 people gathered at a playground in Pittsburg. Greg Osorio, a local pastor stepped up to a microphone and got the rally started.

“They want to put a dynamite factory in our backyard with crude oil bombs,” he said. “Right next to housing. Turn around and look at that.”

A cluster of faded yellow metal oil tanks sit just behind the park. Each one is the size of a house. Right now they’re empty, and have been for 15 years. But they soon could be filled with crude oil.

Riding the Crude-by-Rail Boom

Tank cars on the tracks in Pittsburg. (Molly Samuel/KQED)
Tank cars on the tracks in Pittsburg. (Molly Samuel/KQED)

WesPac, an Irvine-based company, is proposing to re-open and upgrade the tanks. The property, which includes a power plant that’s still in use, once belonged to PG&E and is now owned by an energy company called NRG. WesPac wants to take over the tanks to bring in oil, store it and redistribute it to Bay Area refineries to make into gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and other products. The $200 million project would be able to store up to 375,000 barrels of oil in 17 tanks.

“It’s consistent with the types of operations that are going on in that area already,” said Art Diefenbach, the project manager for WesPac. This is an existing facility in a traditionally industrial town, he says, so the project makes sense here. After the tanks were decommissioned, neighborhoods grew up around them, but Diefenbach says that won’t present a problem.

“We’ll be installing additional safety equipment and noise reduction equipment and air pollution control equipment so that it’s actually going to be better than it is today,” he said.

Better, he means, than sitting empty. Plus, the project would create up to 40 permanent jobs, though those wouldn’t be guaranteed to Pittsburg residents.

But community members aren’t just concerned about the oil in the tanks; they’re also concerned about the trains that would deliver it.

Barrels of oil coming into California by train, 2009-2013. Data from the California Energy Commission.
Barrels of oil coming into California by train, 2009-2013. Data from the California Energy Commission.

In 2008, there was no oil coming into California by rail. Last year in December alone, trains carried more than a million barrels into the state.

That’s because there’s an oil boom in North Dakota and Canada, explained Tupper Hull, the spokesman for the Western States Petroleum Association.

“The problem that we have is, there’s not a terribly good infrastructure to get oil to the coasts where most of the refining and frankly most of the customers are, for that energy, located,” he said.

Without pipelines, oil companies are turning to trains. While crude delivered by rail accounts for a little less than two percent of all the oil California uses now, that may be changing. WesPac is one of six crude-by-rail projects being considered in the state. If they all get approved, rail could provide a quarter or more of California’s oil, according to the California Energy Commission.

More Trains, More Accidents

But more crude-by-rail has led to more crude-by-rail accidents. Last summer in Quebec, 47 people died when an oil train exploded. In the past four months, there have been derailments in Pennsylvania, North Dakota, Alabama and New Brunswick, Canada.

KQED - Oil Train Accidents 17 Feb 2014“People here are concerned about that happening,” said Andres Soto, an organizer with Communities for a Better Environment. “They’d rather prevent it than respond to it.”

Pittsburg is a city that’s weathered industrial catastrophes before. In 1944, 320 people were killed when two Navy munitions ships in nearby Port Chicago exploded.

Andres Soto says he thinks oil companies aren’t being transparent about safety concerns.

“They don’t want to admit the risk,” he said. “Because if they did, the community would say, ‘Not in my backyard.’ And the people have a right to say that.”

There have been some responses: The National Transportation Safety Board is making recommendations to improve crude-by-rail safety; Governor Jerry Brown’s budget proposal boosts funding for the agency that cleans up oil spills; Attorney General Kamala Harris wrote a letter to the Pittsburg planning department, expressing her concerns about the WesPac project, particularly the impacts on air quality and the risk of accidents.

Tupper Hull says the companies he works with are aware of the safety concerns, and he expects there will be more regulations.

Pittsburg residents George and Lyana Monterrey are among those leading protests against the oil terminal. (Molly Samuel/KQED)
Pittsburg residents George and Lyana Monterrey are among those leading protests against the oil terminal. (Molly Samuel/KQED)

“We’re in one of these eras where the market has brought us good news, and now we’re catching up on the regulatory and the infrastructure side.” Good news, he said, because this is domestic oil—rather than from overseas—and it’s cheap.

Lyana Monterrey, a Pittsburg resident and one of the people leading the charge against the project, isn’t buying it.

“Not here,” she said. “Not next to a community. You don’t sacrifice people, community for your profits. That’s wrong. That’s an injustice.”

The city of Pittsburg is currently considering the project. The city council is expected to decide on its fate soon.

The oil tanks are the round shapes on the map.

“Bomb Trains” facebook page

For Facebook users: https://www.facebook.com/BombTrains

2014 — The Year In Bomb Train Derailments

February 16, 2014
This a running list of bomb train derailments in North America in 2014.

By “bomb train,” I mean those trains hauling one or more cars of crude oil, fuel oil, ethanol, methanol, propane, butane, liquified natural gas (methane), ammonium nitrate or high-nitrogen fertilizer, phosphoric acid or some other highly volatile or especially toxic or corrosive cargo. (The list does not include coal train derailments, which, of course, are a whole nuther problem.)  I’ve also indicated whether a detonation resulted.

So far in North America in 2014, we have seen an average of one bomb train derailment every 5 days ….

  • 1/07 – Plaster Rock, NB (6 days from Jan. 1), detonation
  • 1/20 – Philadelphia, PA (13 days later)
  • 1/26 – Edmundston, NB (6 days later)
  • 1/28 – Molino, FL (2 days later)
  • 1/31 – New Augusta, MS (3 days later)
  • 2/06 – Sedalia, CO (6 days later)
  • 2/11 – South Shore, KY and Jacksonville, FL (5 days later)
  • 2/13 – Vandergrift, PA (2 days later)
  • 2/16 – 3 days and counting ….

Like       Comment       Share