North America - Oil Transport By Rail

Just what Is needed when the President has been presented with legislation from Congress to have Keystone move forth:

http://www.wvgazette.com/article/201502 ... /150219451" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fair Use quotation :

CHARLESTON, W.Va. — A train carrying crude oil derailed in Fayette County on Monday afternoon, sending at least one car into the Kanawha River, setting a house on fire and leading to the evacuation of nearby residents.

The 109-car CSX train derailed in the community of Adena Village near Mount Carbon and Deepwater. At least one tank car ended up in the Kanawha River, and another car slammed into a house and burst into flames, said Lawrence Messina, communications director

Mr. O'Keeffe, I'm sure you think I'm Calamity Jane, but Keystone, if enacted, will adversely affect railroad industry intrests.

disclaimer: author holds long positions CSX KSU UNP

And this happened on Saturday:

Reuters wrote:TORONTO (Reuters) - Seven rail cars were on fire in northern Ontario after a train carrying crude oil derailed late on Saturday night, Canadian National Railway said on Sunday.

The train, heading from Alberta to eastern Canada, derailed shortly before midnight about 80 km (50 miles) south of Timmins, Ontario, a CN spokesman said. Canada's largest rail operator said 29 of 100 cars were involved and seven were on fire.

Source: http://ca.reuters.com/article/domesticN ... S920150215" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The continuing issue here is not the derailments but the tank car construction. The design simply is not durable enough for the class of HAZMAT that is being carried. Fix the design flaw and these stories will become non-issues. Tank cars will still derail but they will not burst into flames. Spills maybe. Fires, hopefully not.

Can someone contact me about a video posted to your YouTube account that indicates it was the train prior to derailing. Thank you: [email protected]

powelldennis wrote:Can someone contact me about a video posted to your YouTube account that indicates it was the train prior to derailing. Thank you: [email protected]

Whose YouTube account, and which train, are you referring to?

Unfortunately, Mr. O'Keefe, Reuters has now reported that the Tanks at Adena Village were of a reinforced design:

http://reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0LK1ST20150217" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fair Use quotation;

An oil train was still on fire and leaking in West Virginia on Tuesday, a day after it derailed and erupted in flames, according to CSX Corp, which said the train was hauling newer model tank cars, not the older versions widely criticized as prone to puncture.

The train, which was carrying North Dakota crude to an oil depot in Yorktown, Virginia, derailed in a small town 33 miles southeast of Charleston, causing 20 tank cars to catch fire. Several were still leaking oil on Tuesday. All the oil tank cars on the 109-car train were CPC 1232 models, CSX said late Monday.

And now; for 15 million households to see in Living Color:

http://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/vid ... 0606787551" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Freeze the video @ :26, then look at the Tank top left with a visible reporting mark. Reuters knows what it is talking about.

disclaimer: author holds long position CSX

From the Portland Press Herald:

Portland Press Herald wrote:The train’s tanks were a newer model – the 1232 – designed during safety upgrades voluntarily adopted by the industry four years ago. The same model spilled oil and caught fire in Timmins, Ontario on Saturday, and last year in Lynchburg, Virginia.
. . .
Just Saturday – two days before the West Virginia wreck – 29 cars of a 100-car Canadian National Railway train carrying diluted bitumen crude derailed in a remote area 50 miles south of Timmins, Ontario, spilling oil and catching fire. That train was headed from Alberta to Eastern Canada.

Source: http://www.pressherald.com/2015/02/18/w ... tank-cars/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Note: diluted bitumen is commonly known as "tar sands" oil.)

So... the new "safe" cars aren't safe enough, AND it's not just Bakken crude that's causing problems...

Could have figured; a Wall Street Journal columnist has played the "safety card" following President Obama's veto of the Keystone XL legislation:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/holman-jenk ... 1424821559" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fair Use quotation:

Which raises a question: What are Mr. Obama’s true policy convictions, if any?

After the midterm elections, we might have expected him to try to tempt the new Republican majority with a tax-reform deal in return for a carbon tax. Even if the effort didn’t bear immediate fruit, the way would be pointed toward a long-term bargain to restore growth while addressing climate-change fears.

We also would have expected him finally to wave through the Keystone pipeline, if only out of irritation with green allies for tormenting him over a phony symbolic issue.

Wrong on both counts. Polls show the public supports the pipeline; labor wants the jobs. But for Mr. Obama, the balancing factor is clearly the criticism he would receive from the Sierra Club, the hostile tweets that might be directed at him from millennials, and the money that a handful of green billionaires might redirect to the Clinton Foundation rather than Mr. Obama’s own post-presidential occupations.

What seems absent from his calculations are any practical considerations outside the political bubble, such as the millions of barrels of flammable liquid that will be rumbling through America’s residential neighborhoods aboard mile-long oil trains.

Obviously, any holder of rail interests (and I will certainly state I am one of such) can be thankful that the President was able to see through the claims of all the jobs that would be created and that they simply would be short term jobs. Railroad jobs lost could well exceed those gained (after construction is complete) in the pipeline industry. To what extent the President has been beholden to railroad industry interests I know not; it appears that the environmental interests have garnered most of the headlines.

But on the downside; no longer can derailments and "booms" be dismissed with "oh it was on a mud ballast excuse of a railroad cutting every corner there was to cut" as that they have occurred on well managed roads observing all applicable Rules for train handling - and with reinforced cars as well.

There is only one solution at hand for the railroad industry's handling of crude oil - make it safe!

Obviously, any holder of rail interests (and I will certainly state I am one of such) can be thankful that the President was able to see through the claims of all the jobs that would be created and that they simply would be short term jobs.

Those holders would not feel so thankful if the government denied the building of a railroad-funded line extension/expansion to relieve a corridor's highway congestion on the same grounds. It's not the government's job to decide whether such a project should be approved based on the number of jobs created. If it's built with private capital, the government should be limited to saying yea or nay based on a project's environmental impact which, in this case was deemed acceptable by the state department.

Another month, another oil train wreck&fire...

Chicago Sun-Times wrote:GALENA, Ill. — A freight train loaded with crude oil derailed in northern Illinois on Thursday, bursting into flames and prompting officials to suggest that everyone with 1 mile evacuate, authorities said.

The BNSF Railway train derailed about 1:05 p.m. in a rural area where the Galena River meets the Mississippi, according to company spokesman Andy Williams.

The train had 103 cars loaded with crude oil, along with two buffer cars loaded with sand.

Source: http://chicago.suntimes.com/nationworld ... ils-galena" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I couldn't agree more with your sentiment, Mr. Maine Central.

Once again, Bakken Crude is the "usual suspect". Since the days of when a station agent would personally inspect every originating car at his station to ensure what was represented on the Bill of Lading was actually what was loaded are long gone. There simply has to be trust between the shipper and the carrier, and that certainly includes measuring the properties that make Bakken quicker to go "boom" than other North American crudes.

The evidence is simply piling up; the stuff doesn't care if it is on a well managed, properly maintained road such as the BNSF or some "mud ballasted excuse of a railroad" such as was MM&A with a "management team" recruited from Clown Alley. It doesn't care what kind of Tank Car it is be it DOT-111 or however the so called reinforced cars are designated. It doesn't care if the outside temperature is frigid or torrid.

But handling crude represents such a lucrative new source of traffic for the roads to offset the reduction of coal (wasn't that nice; if it derails, you just sweep it up and be on your way) and the impending loss of high value traffic from PANAMAX, that the shippers and the industry must, repeat must, "make it safe". Otherwise, it won't just be Keystone XL; there will be East-West pipelines built as well from both Bakken and West Texas.

The industry could well be looking at a return to the 70's-80's "Dark Ages" .

Finally, one could have figured that "alternative media" would pick up on this "Barry and Warren buddies" theme resulting in the veto of XL:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-0 ... bursts-fla" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Disclaimer: author holds long positions CSX KSU UNP; all are YTD15 S&P "underperform".

And here we go again...

CTV News wrote: A CN freight train carrying crude oil derailed early Saturday in northern Ontario, causing at least 10 cars to jump the tracks.

Ontario Provincial Police said the derailment happened near Gogama, Ont., around 2:45 a.m. Saturday morning, with some of the cars catching fire and others falling into the Mattagami River.

A CN spokesperson said that an initial assessment indicated that five tank cars landed in the waterway and that a bridge had been damaged by the derailment. Some of the tanks were still on fire early Saturday evening. Emergency crews were still trying to determine the exact number of cars that derailed.
. . .
...the agency said the upgraded cars still "performed similarly" to those in involved in Lac-Megantic, and that last month's incident "demonstrates the inadequacy" of the new standards.

Source: http://www.ctvnews.ca/cn-train-carrying ... -1.2268703" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I guess I should change my sentiment from "another month" to "another week"...

Surprising that reduced train lengths haven't been at least temporarily adopted; 14,000 trailing-tons moving at track speed has awesome kinetic energy.

Look what greeted me when I went outside to pick up my Journal:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/train-wreck ... 1425861371" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Fair Use quotation:

In a string of recent oil train derailments in the U.S. and Canada, new and sturdier railroad tanker cars being built to carry a rising tide of crude oil across the continent have failed to prevent ruptures.

These tank cars, called CPC-1232s, are the new workhorses of the soaring crude-by-rail industry, carrying hundreds of thousands of barrels a day across the two countries.

But the four recent accidents are a sign that the new tanker cars are still prone to rupture in a derailment. The ruptures could increase momentum for rules aimed at further reducing the risk of shipping crude by rail.

In the last month, there have been significant derailments of crude-carrying trains in West Virginia and Illinois, plus two in Ontario, including one Saturday in a remote part of the Canadian province

The article is "front page above the fold".

While responsible news sources such as The Journal are hardly about to call for a prohibition of crude by rail, and obviously I'm not about to, (now just watch The Times or Journal editorialize for just that and make me a liar) I know on a personal level how after Megantic I reassured at least one neighbor "it won't happen here". "The BNSF is probably the best managed railroad in the country; what happened was on some poorly managed corner cutting excuse for a railroad that I'm will be out of business".

For the sake of the railroad industry's future (and my stake), let's make it safe!

disclaimer: author holds long positions CSX KSU UNP

I wonder if both CN trains were Irving bound? I want to say yes but I have not heard anything yet.

I understand too both derailments were short distances apart, add on the oil spill in Moncton NB last year as well as 2 derailments here and their track record isn't looking too positive.