Oil Trains

Discussion of present-day CM&Q operations, as well as discussion of predecessors Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway (MMA) and Bangor & Aroostook Railroad (BAR).

Moderator: MEC407

Re: Crude Oil movement via MMA

Postby gokeefe » Sun Mar 31, 2013 11:12 pm

CN9634 wrote:The MMA has been moving more oil than Pan Am from the start. They have also been running it longer (time wise). They run about 3 unit jobs a week and many others mixed in general freight.


Really? Interesting! Thanks.
gokeefe
User avatar
gokeefe
 
Posts: 9931
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
Location: Winthrop, Maine

Re: Crude Oil movement via MMA

Postby fogg1703 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 1:41 pm

According to a report from RailsNB yahoo group, both CN and MMA have been running oil trains at a rate of 3-1 vs PAR in the last couple of weeks.
fogg1703
 
Posts: 671
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 5:55 pm

Re: Crude Oil movement via MMA

Postby gokeefe » Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:39 pm

fogg1703 wrote:According to a report from RailsNB yahoo group, both CN and MMA have been running oil trains at a rate of 3-1 vs PAR in the last couple of weeks.


Hard to believe MMA beating PAR at anything. At that rate their tonnage might actually begin to come close to PARs total tonnage rates from Waterville north.
gokeefe
User avatar
gokeefe
 
Posts: 9931
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
Location: Winthrop, Maine

Re: Crude Oil movement via MMA

Postby CN9634 » Mon Apr 08, 2013 9:37 pm

More traffic will be coming to PAR.
CN9634
 
Posts: 2207
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 5:50 pm

Re: Crude Oil movement via MMA

Postby gokeefe » Sat Apr 13, 2013 12:08 pm

CN9634 wrote:More traffic will be coming to PAR.


Interesting!
gokeefe
User avatar
gokeefe
 
Posts: 9931
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
Location: Winthrop, Maine

MMA Oil Trains

Postby CN9634 » Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:12 am

Here are some shots (Not mine) of a recent MMA oil train. They are still running about 2 - 3 a week

http://www.flickr.com/photos/railfan73/ ... 868113704/
CN9634
 
Posts: 2207
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 5:50 pm

Re: Oil Trains on MMA

Postby MEC407 » Sat Jul 06, 2013 11:23 am

Moderator note:

I've created a separate thread for the Lac-Mégantic train wreck, which can be found here: http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=151084
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
User avatar
MEC407
 
Posts: 10698
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Re: Oil Trains on MMA

Postby fromway » Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:11 pm

Article in Bangor News about PAN Am not sending in 3 cents per barrel fee for oil transported through Maine since April. Maybe MMA isn't the only line with problems.
fromway
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2013 6:48 pm

Re: Oil Trains on MMA

Postby gokeefe » Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:13 pm

fromway wrote:Article in Bangor News about PAN Am not sending in 3 cents per barrel fee for oil transported through Maine since April. Maybe MMA isn't the only line with problems.


Not likely. Recent sightings from all over the PAR system indicate very steady if not "heavy" volumes of freight.
gokeefe
User avatar
gokeefe
 
Posts: 9931
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
Location: Winthrop, Maine

Re: Oil Trains on MMA

Postby MEC407 » Fri Jul 12, 2013 10:51 am

From the Kennebec Journal:

Kennebec Journal wrote:Maine’s financial capacity to respond to an oil spill has been cut by 60 percent since 2005 because of a sharp decrease in tariffs collected from companies shipping crude oil and legislators’ decisions to raid a designated cleanup fund.

Meanwhile, as crude oil shipments across Maine skyrocket, oversight of the state’s 1,154 miles of railroads is largely left to one federal inspector and the private companies that own the lines.

Most of the track on those lines barely had the capacity to support a modern tank car filled with oil, according to a 2006 Maine Department of Transportation study.
. . .
According to the study, 92 percent of Maine’s active track would not support a 286,000 pound rail car, which the report said, “is quickly becoming the rail industry standard.”


Read more at: http://www.kjonline.com/news/Maines-cap ... uebec.html
MEC407
Moderator:
Pan Am Railways — Boston & Maine/Maine Central — Delaware & Hudson
Central Maine & Quebec/Montreal, Maine & Atlantic/Bangor & Aroostook
Providence & Worcester — New England — GE Locomotives
User avatar
MEC407
 
Posts: 10698
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 8:15 pm

Re: Oil Trains on MMA

Postby Gilbert B Norman » Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:30 am

Independent of any discussion of the Megantic incident, which has its own topic at this Forum, what is the normal routing of oil trains from the Bakken fields to St John, NB?

Likely the routings are different for trains originating on the BNSF than they are for those originating of the SOO.
Gilbert B Norman
 
Posts: 12937
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:52 am
Location: Clarendon Hills, IL (BNSF Aurora Sub; MP 18.71)

Re: Oil Trains on MMA

Postby gokeefe » Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:13 pm

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Independent of any discussion of the Megantic incident, which has its own topic at this Forum, what is the normal routing of oil trains from the Bakken fields to St John, NB?

Likely the routings are different for trains originating on the BNSF than they are for those originating of the SOO.


All BNSF originated traffic ultimately runs over PAR. I believe CSX is an intermediate in addition to NS.
gokeefe
User avatar
gokeefe
 
Posts: 9931
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
Location: Winthrop, Maine

Re: Oil Trains on MMA

Postby KSmitty » Sat Jul 13, 2013 1:41 pm

gokeefe wrote:
Gilbert B Norman wrote:Independent of any discussion of the Megantic incident, which has its own topic at this Forum, what is the normal routing of oil trains from the Bakken fields to St John, NB?

Likely the routings are different for trains originating on the BNSF than they are for those originating of the SOO.


All BNSF originated traffic ultimately runs over PAR. I believe CSX is an intermediate in addition to NS.


Bakken Oil (North Dakota sourced, light sweet)
-SOO originated oil for Saint John has, to this point, run solely across MM&A.
-BNSF originated oil for Saint John has run mostly* over Pan Am with a BNSF-CSX-PAR-EMRY/NBSR routing. There is no BNSF-NS-PAR routing currently. CN does have fair involvement in this oil, running on a BNSF-CN routing.
*I would say, based on recent reports, that a slight majority of BNSF sourced oil is running across Pan Am, rather than CN, but the gap might be as small as a 55%/45% split...

Tar Sands (Alberta sourced, heavier and dirtier than Bakken)
-I'm not sure but that Irving is refining some of the heavier oil from the Tar Sands fields in Alberta. I believe any and all of this shipping to Saint John follows an all CN routing.
KSmitty
 
Posts: 1930
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 1:29 pm
Location: Maine

Re: Oil Trains on MMA

Postby CN9634 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 4:10 pm

CN9634
 
Posts: 2207
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 5:50 pm

Re: Oil train disaster in Lac-Mégantic, Québec 07-06-2013

Postby joshg1 » Sat Jul 13, 2013 9:40 pm

How will Irving get Bakken oil if not by rail? Well obviously by sea, and not via Albany. Load tankers at Duluth and sail down the Seaway- it's not just for ore and imports. Oil is what I call dumb freight- bring it in with no great hurry and store until you need it. Refineries (no, not all), power stations, quarries, cement. Trains, even slow trains, are faster and more direct, but water borne freight is so cheap I can't believe more Bakken crude doesn't move this way.

Are there crude pipelines east of Montreal?
joshg1
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 10:05 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Central Maine & Quebec Railway (formerly Montreal, Maine & Atlantic / Bangor & Aroostook)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests