Train Derailment In North Dakota

[weilke]

Similarly the additional risk of being injured because of the increase in rail traffic from oil cars alone is also so small it would be near impossible to measure.

Well, I used to say that, after 47 people in Lake Megantic got burned alive in their homes, that argument has become a bit more difficult to make. Sure, this could have been a products or ethanol train, but to argue that shipping more crude on the rails has no safety implications misses the mark.

Trains derail ever so often, just 5 years ago an entire train of empty lumber cars got blown off a trestle only a couple of miles west of Casselton. Coal and wheat hoppers end up in the weeds multipe times every year. In 2002 a derailment involving Anhydrous Ammonia tankers killed one and injured 332 in Minot. Still safer than trucking the stuff, but moving 10,000tons of hazmat at a time through the center of cities does bear some risk.

 

[Henning]

Well, I used to say that, after 47 people in Lake Megantic got burned alive in their homes, that argument has become a bit more difficult to make. Sure, this could have been a products or ethanol train, but to argue that shipping more crude on the rails has no safety implications misses the mark.

Trains derail ever so often, just 5 years ago an entire train of empty lumber cars got blown off a trestle only a couple of miles west of Casselton. Coal and wheat hoppers end up in the weeds multipe times every year. In 2002 a derailment involving Anhydrous Ammonia tankers killed one and injured 332 in Minot. Still safer than trucking the stuff, but moving 10,000tons of hazmat at a time through the center of cities does bear some risk.

Yep, but piping every liquid or hazardous gas commodity is not possible either. There are hazards involved in a technical society, and you just can't spend the money to take the risks to zero especially since stupid human tricks always manage to find a way around every safe guard that's ever been instituted.

 

[denverpilot]

Yep, some refineries like the sweet stuff, some like the sour stuff. I know of two refineries that share a common fence, one is completely dependent upon tankers coming from Alaska, the one next door has a wharf for tankers and about a mile of train cars sitting outside waiting to offload. Guess which one has more flexibility?

Sounds like Willamette? Just a guess... I'd have to go pull up my old maps...

 

[Henning]

Sounds like Willamette? Just a guess... I'd have to go pull up my old maps...

More like Wilmington, or El Segundo.

 

[denverpilot]

More like Wilmington, or El Segundo.

Ahhh I meant Wilmington and typed Willamette. LOL...

Oh well, been a very long time since I had which types of crude the different refineries liked... nor was it really my "thing" when I worked there... just stuff you pick up when the traders are flipping out that they bought the wrong stuff for the wrong place and it's all stacking up in tanks and no one else wants it... hahaha...

 

[Henning]

Ahhh I meant Wilmington and typed Willamette. LOL...

Oh well, been a very long time since I had which types of crude the different refineries liked... nor was it really my "thing" when I worked there... just stuff you pick up when the traders are flipping out that they bought the wrong stuff for the wrong place and it's all stacking up in tanks and no one else wants it... hahaha...

Could also be Richmond.

 

[Geico266]

Keystone is supposed to head to Texas, there is already a huge backlog of oil in Cushing OK waiting to go. Bakken Crude mostly heads to the east coast. How would Keystone, which will be running Canadian oil sands crude at capacity prevent this? There's pipes running out of Bakken already, one of them just leaked all over a farmer's fields.

The key issue is to get away from this century+ old, out dated energy technology altogether.

The pipeline can carry different products and route product to different areas of the country, like a roads... Right?

 

[Henning]

The pipeline can carry different products and route product to different areas of the country, like a roads... Right?

If there's room, crude doesn't work exactly like product though. Product is fungible from the refinery to the rack, not so for crude from the field to the refinery. Every field, the crude is a bit different, sometimes a lot different, and certain refineries are set up to work with crude from certain fields.

Another thing is it can't haul it in two different directions. Most of the Bakken crude is heading to New Jersey on the train then gets loaded onto ATB Tug/Barge sets 246,000 - 345,000 barrels at a time for redistribution to the refineries up and down the Delaware River and for loading onto tankers taking it overseas. Another large quantity is being loaded on the Canadian east coast terminal ports.

It's also a lot cheaper to build some extra railroad cars and transfer terminals to haul over existing rails than to build a new dedicated pipeline. Pipelines are not cheap, nor are they simple. They require considerable energy to keep that liquid flowing.

 

[Geico266]

If there's room, crude doesn't work exactly like product though. Product is fungible from the refinery to the rack, not so for crude from the field to the refinery. Every field, the crude is a bit different, sometimes a lot different, and certain refineries are set up to work with crude from certain fields.

Another thing is it can't haul it in two different directions. Most of the Bakken crude is heading to New Jersey on the train then gets loaded onto ATB Tug/Barge sets 246,000 - 345,000 barrels at a time for redistribution to the refineries up and down the Delaware River and for loading onto tankers taking it overseas. Another large quantity is being loaded on the Canadian east coast terminal ports.

It's also a lot cheaper to build some extra railroad cars and transfer terminals to haul over existing rails than to build a new dedicated pipeline. Pipelines are not cheap, nor are they simple. They require considerable energy to keep that liquid flowing.

All I know is the Keystone Pipeline goes through ND. It is inconceivable to me to think they would want to build a crude oil pipeline through an oil field without wanting to transport that oil also. Maybe they mix or blend it?

 

[PaulS]

If there's room, crude doesn't work exactly like product though. Product is fungible from the refinery to the rack, not so for crude from the field to the refinery. Every field, the crude is a bit different, sometimes a lot different, and certain refineries are set up to work with crude from certain fields.

Another thing is it can't haul it in two different directions. Most of the Bakken crude is heading to New Jersey on the train then gets loaded onto ATB Tug/Barge sets 246,000 - 345,000 barrels at a time for redistribution to the refineries up and down the Delaware River and for loading onto tankers taking it overseas. Another large quantity is being loaded on the Canadian east coast terminal ports.

It's also a lot cheaper to build some extra railroad cars and transfer terminals to haul over existing rails than to build a new dedicated pipeline. Pipelines are not cheap, nor are they simple. They require considerable energy to keep that liquid flowing.

There's a nice wiki article about how building pipelines will lower the cost of crude......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipeline_transport#For_oil_or_natural_gas

 

[Henning]

All I know is the Keystone Pipeline goes through ND. It is inconceivable to me to think they would want to build a crude oil pipeline through an oil field without wanting to transport that oil also. Maybe they mix or blend it?

Nope, the tar sand crap it's meant to haul will not be mixed with the light sweet Bakken crude, that would be idiocy. The refineries for the Canadian crap are set up for the Canadian crap. Whether they build the system to pig between and interchange to an intermediary cutoff to send Bakken to a different refinery in TX or Louisiana would depend on if one of those refineries wants to start working the crude from the Bakken fields. Since most of those refineries are already set up to run whatever crude they are running, and are at pretty much full production, this is questionable. More likely is that another pipe goes to a Great Lakes terminal in Duluth or Milwakee for loading on tankers to ship to whatever refinery in the world.

 

[nddons]

Once again I'm awed at the liberal ability to construct strawmen.

You mean the drama queens who say let's shut down the railroads?

 

[Henning]

You mean the drama queens who say let's shut down the railroads?

I haven't heard anyone say that.

 

[Henning]

There's a nice wiki article about how building pipelines will lower the cost of crude......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipeline_transport#For_oil_or_natural_gas

Cost to whom? While it may reduce the cost of the crude at the refinery, it won't do anything to reduce the cost of the product coming out of the refinery. Remember our product price is not reflective of crude price, it is market driven, whatever the market will bear is what we get charged at the pump.

 

[nddons]

I haven't heard anyone say that.

Norman getting all hissy in post #35:

And I suppose shock cooling plays a part. People get killed at crossings as a result of their own stupidity. Let's ban railroads and see how your food and other items get where you need them.

I'm done discussing this with the ill informed.

 

[Bob Noel]

The greenie liberals think a pipeline is dangerous...

Years ago, at a safety seminer with a speaker from the NTSB, he said that pipeline is the safest method of transportation.

 

[Everskyward]

Much of the Keystone pipeline system is already built. The news is that the Cushing to Gulf Coast section will be operational this month.

OKLAHOMA CITY — The operator of a $2.3 billion pipeline between Cushing and the Gulf Coast expects to begin shipping oil Jan. 22.

http://journalstar.com/news/state-a...cle_f2337ac7-d838-5a6c-b95f-ab9eda6dc2a1.html

Looking at the map it seems that oil could then be piped all the way from the oil sands to the Gulf coast since the solid lines on the map already exist. The part that's missing is the section that goes through Montana, South Dakota and Nebraska.

According to the TransCanada site they are planning to ship crude from ND and Montana as well as the products from Canada. Whether this is a company pipe dream or not, who knows. I'm only reading it.

Along with transporting crude oil from Canada, the Keystone XL Pipeline will also support the significant growth of crude oil production in the United States from producers in the Bakken region of Montana and North Dakota.

- See more at: http://keystone-xl.com/about/the-project/#sthash.r3168EMb.dpuf

 

[Henning]

Norman getting all hissy in post #35:

I guess we need a separate sarcasm font to make it clear? He was indicating the exact opposite of shutting down the railroads. Our conservative contingent were those extolling the great dangers of railroads.

 

[weilke]

More likely is that another pipe goes to a Great Lakes terminal in Duluth or Milwakee for loading on tankers to ship to whatever refinery in the world.

That is the Sandpiper project from Beaver Lodge,ND to Clearbrook, MN and from there to Superior, WI. There is already a system in place dating back to the 50s and 70s oil booms, but it can't carry the capacity.

 

[PaulS]

I guess we need a separate sarcasm font to make it clear? He was indicating the exact opposite of shutting down the railroads. Our conservative contingent were those extolling the great dangers of railroads.

Yeah, that was a classic strawman, no one is advocating shutting the railroad.

 

[Henning]

That is the Sandpiper project from Beaver Lodge,ND to Clearbrook, MN and from there to Superior, WI. There is already a system in place dating back to the 50s and 70s oil booms, but it can't carry the capacity.

Figured. It takes time to build pipelines, they aren't going to leave the oil in the ground until then.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Yeah, that was a classic strawman, no one is advocating shutting the railroad.

Nor has anyone advocated ****ting down pipelines.


One person claimed Obama caused a train to derail and another guy claimed 3000 people were killed every year from train accidents.

 

[Norman]

I guess we need a separate sarcasm font to make it clear? He was indicating the exact opposite of shutting down the railroads. Our conservative contingent were those extolling the great dangers of railroads.

You're right. I should have added Caution; sarcasm intended.

 

[weilke]

I was just asked to fly a news photographer over the site.

Most of the mess is already cleaned up, the track is back open.

 

[Norman]

I was just asked to fly a news photographer over the site.

Most of the mess is already cleaned up, the track is back open.

Railroads don't waste time getting the track serviceable. Like props not turning, trains sitting don't make money.

 

[Henning]

Railroads don't waste time getting the track serviceable. Like props not turning, trains sitting don't make money.

Not just that, trains sitting cost penalties.

 

[Keith Lane]

I know somethingorother about trains, I guess....

Here are the statistics, by year, for grade crossing accidents for the US.

http://oli.org/about-us/news/collisions-casulties

Most of them are by sheer stupidity on the part of the motorist... More than you would think are deliberate suicides by people on foot.

EVERY state has a law that says in essence:
A motorist, before proceeding to cross tracks, shall stop at a point not less than 15 feet from the nearest rail and not more than 50 feet from the nearest rail, and then proceed only when safe to do so.
Do you stop at every grade crossing? Didn't think so.

Neither do I, but you bet I look for a train at every crossing.
All railroad tracks are legally considered private property. You are allowed to cross them only with the permission of the railroad, and by their rules. If you get hurt doing so, you did it at your own peril.
Does this mean the railroads are infallible? No. Does it mean if you or a loved one gets hit by a train, you cannot sue and turn it into the gravy train? No.
Seen it... Hundreds of times. Expert witness work has made my mortgage payment for a long time.
And BTW, Matt Rose, top dog at BNSF, i probably going to be Warren Buffet's replacement at Berkshire Hathaway.

 

[Norman]

EVERY state has a law that says in essence:
A motorist, before proceeding to cross tracks, shall stop at a point not less than 15 feet from the nearest rail and not more than 50 feet from the nearest rail, and then proceed only when safe to do so.

That applies to vehicles capable of carrying 14 or more passengers and all school buses. Also vehicles carrying hazmat. Does not apply to passenger vehicles.

 

[Keith Lane]

That applies to vehicles capable of carrying 14 or more passengers and all school buses. Also vehicles carrying hazmat. Does not apply to passenger vehicles.

I stand (somewhat) corrected. In almost every case, one must stop if there is almost any evidence of a train, flagman, horn, or any warning of any kind.

http://drivinglaws.aaa.com/laws/railroad-crossing/

I've got drawers and drawers of on scene photos, that would convince anybody that even thinking of trying to beat a train is a bad, bad idea.
I've also ridden many trains that we intentionally put into "emergency" while validating train stopping models. I's an odd feeling, you throw the handle, and except for a bit of noise, nothing changes for what seems like a long time... Then, very slowly, the speed begins to decrease. It must be an awful feeling, knowing you are about to hit a bus load of nuns, and there is nothing else you can do to stop it.
Really messes up the head of some of the crews I've met.

 

[weilke]

I've got drawers and drawers of on scene photos, that would convince anybody that even thinking of trying to beat a train is a bad, bad idea.
I've also ridden many trains that we intentionally put into "emergency" while validating train stopping models. I's an odd feeling, you throw the handle, and except for a bit of noise, nothing changes for what seems like a long time... Then, very slowly, the speed begins to decrease. It must be an awful feeling, knowing you are about to hit a bus load of nuns, and there is nothing else you can do to stop it.
Really messes up the head of some of the crews I've met.

Just earlier I talked to an older gentleman who worked as a brakeman and conductor for 40 years. He was involved in a number of those wrecks and from what he mentioned, the sights and smells stay with you for a long time. I dont think he ever hit a busload of nuns, but he did mention almost nailing a car with multiple kids in the back because dad was in a hurry.

 

[Keith Lane]

Just earlier I talked to an older gentleman who worked as a brakeman and conductor for 40 years. He was involved in a number of those wrecks and from what he mentioned, the sights and smells stay with you for a long time. I dont think he ever hit a busload of nuns, but he did mention almost nailing a car with multiple kids in the back because dad was in a hurry.

We "joke" about the busload of nuns, or maybe a BMW full of plaintiff lawyers and plaintiff experts, but we have worked many, many accidents where multiple family members were killed or horribly maimed. Seeing what parental stupidity leads to makes me physically sick and mad as hell.
Almost all locomotives now have a "Track image recorder" like a dash camera with sound. Often times you can hear the crew screaming before impact. The recordings of them calling it in to the dispatcher will stick with you for a while too.

 

[Geico266]

We "joke" about the busload of nuns, or maybe a BMW full of plaintiff lawyers and plaintiff experts, but we have worked many, many accidents where multiple family members were killed or horribly maimed. Seeing what parental stupidity leads to makes me physically sick and mad as hell.
Almost all locomotives now have a "Track image recorder" like a dash camera with sound. Often times you can hear the crew screaming before impact. The recordings of them calling it in to the dispatcher will stick with you for a while too.

Never had a pipeline hit me yet.

 

[Keith Lane]

Never had a pipeline hit me yet.

Me either. I think pipelines are better transporters of liquids and gases of all types.
Trains are better at going to places where the economics of delivery make better sense. Where oil companies and refiners want it delivered sometimes there is no pipeline.
Coal accounts for about 60% of all Class I railroad revenue. Oil is coming in third for now, but may be number 1 in a couple of years. I went to Texas 12 times in 2013 to commission new tracks just for Union Pacific just for new sidings to move oil trains better. And that is just Texas. I'll be back there even more this year. As a result of the Lac Megantic derailment and fire, oil trains are now required to have a "buffer car" between the locomotive and any oil tanker (usually a hopper car filled with sand). Also, the next time you see an oil train, look at each car. There is now a huge steel plate affixed on the ends of each car to try to prevent punctures from longitudinal impacts.
Lac Megantic was a pure act of human error. When the train was left unattended for the next crew, they did not set enough car's handbrakes to hold the train on that grade without the extra force of the locomotive brakes. When the locomotive's brakes were released as a result of a fireman ordering the loco shut down, it rolled away. (there was a small fire reported at the station) When the train entered the yard in Lac Megantic some 3 miles away, all downhill, it was going over 60 mph. The locos stayed upright and did not derail. The tanks did derail and impacted some loaded propane cars on a yard track... and the rest, so they say is history.

 

[Geico266]

We live in a society that requires energy to run. There will be accidents no matter how safe the systems and transportation modes are. **** happens.

It is a delicate balance of private enterprise and government control. The problem comes in when political zealots stop progress based on fear, and political agendas.

 

[PaulS]

Me either. I think pipelines are better transporters of liquids and gases of all types.
Trains are better at going to places where the economics of delivery make better sense. Where oil companies and refiners want it delivered sometimes there is no pipeline.
Coal accounts for about 60% of all Class I railroad revenue. Oil is coming in third for now, but may be number 1 in a couple of years. I went to Texas 12 times in 2013 to commission new tracks just for Union Pacific just for new sidings to move oil trains better. And that is just Texas. I'll be back there even more this year. As a result of the Lac Megantic derailment and fire, oil trains are now required to have a "buffer car" between the locomotive and any oil tanker (usually a hopper car filled with sand). Also, the next time you see an oil train, look at each car. There is now a huge steel plate affixed on the ends of each car to try to prevent punctures from longitudinal impacts.
Lac Megantic was a pure act of human error. When the train was left unattended for the next crew, they did not set enough car's handbrakes to hold the train on that grade without the extra force of the locomotive brakes. When the locomotive's brakes were released as a result of a fireman ordering the loco shut down, it rolled away. (there was a small fire reported at the station) When the train entered the yard in Lac Megantic some 3 miles away, all downhill, it was going over 60 mph. The locos stayed upright and did not derail. The tanks did derail and impacted some loaded propane cars on a yard track... and the rest, so they say is history.

I would think that railroad cars would be fail safe, so that when there is on input from the locomotive the brakes come on fully. Just saying.

 

[PaulS]

We live in a society that requires energy to run. There will be accidents no matter how safe the systems and transportation modes are. **** happens.

It is a delicate balance of private enterprise and government control. The problem comes in when political zealots stop progress based on fear, and political agendas.

City locations were based on the availability of abundant low cost energy such as water power hundreds of years ago. Cheap plentiful energy drives economies and civilizations. Progressive's drive to make energy expensive and elite is one of the biggest perversions of common sense I have ever seen. It is either wanton idiocy or willful imposition of misery, I can't figure out which....

 

[Henning]

I would think that railroad cars would be fail safe, so that when there is on input from the locomotive the brakes come on fully. Just saying.

Where will the sustained air supply come from? The Locomotive which produces the air does have a 'J Valve' and a tank of emergency air so that when the primary tank gets below a preset threshold, the emergency tank gets dumped into the brake system, however you have to have the air to begin with. Train cars do have a 'parking brake', a mechanical system which is basically a chain hoist hooked up to the main brake rod where when the brakes are set by the locomotive by air, the brakeman goes out and winds them on. In this case the brakeman was lazy and didn't wind on enough to hold the weight, and probably didn't put enough effort into winding them.

What also surprised me is that they parked on a grade and didn't clamp a derail on just downhill to derail the unit should it start moving.

 

[Henning]

City locations were based on the availability of abundant low cost energy such as water power hundreds of years ago. Cheap plentiful energy drives economies and civilizations. Progressive's drive to make energy expensive and elite is one of the biggest perversions of common sense I have ever seen. It is either wanton idiocy or willful imposition of misery, I can't figure out which....

Progressives want to switch to cheap abundant energy to bring the price down. The financial markets want to keep us stuck with a known quantity where they can predict good profits.

 

[Norman]

Me either. I think pipelines are better transporters of liquids and gases of all types.
Trains are better at going to places where the economics of delivery make better sense. Where oil companies and refiners want it delivered sometimes there is no pipeline.
Coal accounts for about 60% of all Class I railroad revenue. Oil is coming in third for now, but may be number 1 in a couple of years. I went to Texas 12 times in 2013 to commission new tracks just for Union Pacific just for new sidings to move oil trains better. And that is just Texas. I'll be back there even more this year. As a result of the Lac Megantic derailment and fire, oil trains are now required to have a "buffer car" between the locomotive and any oil tanker (usually a hopper car filled with sand). Also, the next time you see an oil train, look at each car. There is now a huge steel plate affixed on the ends of each car to try to prevent punctures from longitudinal impacts.
Lac Megantic was a pure act of human error. When the train was left unattended for the next crew, they did not set enough car's handbrakes to hold the train on that grade without the extra force of the locomotive brakes. When the locomotive's brakes were released as a result of a fireman ordering the loco shut down, it rolled away. (there was a small fire reported at the station) When the train entered the yard in Lac Megantic some 3 miles away, all downhill, it was going over 60 mph. The locos stayed upright and did not derail. The tanks did derail and impacted some loaded propane cars on a yard track... and the rest, so they say is history.

Those statistics are somewhat dated. Intermodal is now a huge factor in their revenue.

You're speculating on the Lac Megantic disaster. The Canadian TSB has not published a final report, and a criminal investigation is in progress. There is a possibility the train was tampered with. I'll wait for the final report, thanks.

 

[PaulS]

Where will the sustained air supply come from? The Locomotive which produces the air does have a 'J Valve' and a tank of emergency air so that when the primary tank gets below a preset threshold, the emergency tank gets dumped into the brake system, however you have to have the air to begin with. Train cars do have a 'parking brake', a mechanical system which is basically a chain hoist hooked up to the main brake rod where when the brakes are set by the locomotive by air, the brakeman goes out and winds them on. In this case the brakeman was lazy and didn't wind on enough to hold the weight, and probably didn't put enough effort into winding them.

What also surprised me is that they parked on a grade and didn't clamp a derail on just downhill to derail the unit should it start moving.

My understanding of semi trailer parking brakes is that without air pressure they are full on, a similar system could work.