Moderator: MEC407
joshg1 wrote: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?
But the repercussions of the explosion extend well beyond the ravaged town. Questions have been raised about safety standards set by the Canadian government and the American company that owns the Montreal, Maine and Atlantic Railway. More broadly there are questions about the wisdom of moving oil by rail, which has seen a stratospheric increase in the past four years as new production comes on stream often far from existing pipelines.
The Portland Press Herald wrote:The 2013 tragedy in Quebec has raised significant issues that should be resolved before the railroad creates a timetable for reviving the oil transport link.
Last Friday, when Giles announced plans to restart oil shipments through Lac-Megantic, he was quick to add that he intends to carry out safety measures. Namely, $10 million in repairs to sections of the track so that train speeds can be safely increased to 25 mph.
That’s a step in the right direction. But the CEO didn’t address the contradiction between his company’s plans and calls in Lac-Megantic for the tracks to be rerouted so they don’t pass through the center of town – a project that could cost anywhere from $50 million to $80 million.
Lac-Megantic’s mayor has raised another valid concern: whether railway operators have enough insurance to cover the costs of future disasters. The now-bankrupt company involved in the Quebec derailment had only $25 million in insurance; the price tag for the cleanup of last summer’s tragedy is expected to reach $200 million.
KEN PATRICK wrote:finally. it appears the railroad folk are thinking clearly. keep the trains moving. why? unlike some posts herein. cash flow. each car has a market value of $74k. i guess the mma division is $8k. no one will move bakken crude to irving by rail. think of the cash tied up in a 20 day barge move versus a 2 day rail move. i believe pas has awakened to this great opportunity also. and what of the 'trans-canada pipeline? i suspect it is a chimera. no way it can be financed against smooth rail operations.
as for hos. my position is that hos rules in current railroad operations reflect old thinking. as with everything in our technical world, hos should be re-structured to reflect equipment and operations improvements. the 125 mile metric is no longer in play but the thinking remains. all class i's are running at 29 mph system fluidity. its time for all parties to throw aside arcane thinking and establish a thoughtful hos-bonus program. legislate what is necessary to break the stranglehold. ken patrick
KEN PATRICK wrote:can anyone truly believe this tragedy was not the result of hos? contrast the facts against the ephemeral 'fatigue factor'. please, how trying is it to drive a train? certainly not physical like a truck. mental? staring at track and responding to a few signals? i'm thinking that the 125 mile deal reflected some physical conditions absent in today's climate-controlled and computer-assisted decision -making control environment. face it. railroad hos rules are union-supported arcainiana. i remain perplexed about railroad management's non-legislative action to modify hos. certainly it's time for some corrective actions. i would love to sell a plan to both employees and management. low-hanging fruit for both parties. ken patrick
Return to Central Maine & Quebec Railway (formerly Montreal, Maine & Atlantic / Bangor & Aroostook)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests