Train Derailment In North Dakota

N801BH said:
The greenie liberals think a pipeline is dangerous...:mad2::mad2::mad::redface:
Click to expand...

It's not danger that is the big issue, it's the freaking mess that is the issue. Actually the train mess is very minor compared to when a pipeline ruptures, and in this case it probably burned away for the most part. Bakken is very gassy crude, I used to take it from the rail cars in New Jersey across the Delaware River to Philly and it was light stuff.

However the primary reason it goes by rail and we have no pipeline is that Warren Buffet owns that rail.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, look at the big mess the Alaskan pipeline has made, what a disaster.
 
PaulS said:
Yeah, look at the big mess the Alaskan pipeline has made, what a disaster.
Click to expand...

The one in 78 that spilled 16,000 barrels, 2001 that spilled 4200 barrels, or 2010 that spilled 7000 barrels.

How about the 17,000 barrels in Greenville TX earlier this year, or the 12,000 barrels in Arkansas?
 
Henning said:
The one in 78 that spilled 16,000 barrels, 2001 that spilled 4200 barrels, or 2010 that spilled 7000 barrels.

How about the 17,000 barrels in Greenville TX earlier this year, or the 12,000 barrels in Arkansas?
Click to expand...

Repair pipeline, clean up mess, repeat.

6 years ago gas was $2.00 a gallon. 100ll was $4.50.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
Repair pipeline, clean up mess, repeat.

6 years ago gas was $2.00 a gallon. 100ll was $4.50.
Click to expand...

Yep, I don't really care either way. Neither method is accident proof. I just think that a lot of pipeline that should be getting replaced is being neglected. At least rail and cars get regular inspection and maintenance.
 
Henning said:
Yep, I don't really care either way. Neither method is accident proof. I just think that a lot of pipeline that should be getting replaced is being neglected. At least rail and cars get regular inspection and maintenance.
Click to expand...

It's the old pipelines that are going, usually. Many are over 50 years old. Even the Alaska line is old technology now.

The crude oil train derailment in Quebec a few weeks ago killed 49 people, IIRC. Not many pipelines do that.

Dan
 
Dan Thomas said:
It's the old pipelines that are going, usually. Many are over 50 years old. Even the Alaska line is old technology now.

The crude oil train derailment in Quebec a few weeks ago killed 49 people, IIRC. Not many pipelines do that.

Dan
Click to expand...

Yep, no good answers within that industry.
 
Henning said:
Yep, I don't really care either way. Neither method is accident proof. I just think that a lot of pipeline that should be getting replaced is being neglected. At least rail and cars get regular inspection and maintenance.
Click to expand...

I don't know about the entire pipeline system, but I have seen how they inspect and maintain pipelines around here. They launch a robot to inspect every inch of the pipe line and repair specific areas of concern. The process is amazing. Still the most efficient and safest way to transport petro products.
 
Geico266 said:
Why don't they use an underground pipeline? :rolleyes: ;)
Click to expand...

The public utilities commission public hearing on the sandpiper pipeline is on Feb 19th in the UND law-shools Baker Courtroom. 8:30, be on time.
 
Geico266 said:
I don't know about the entire pipeline system, but I have seen how they inspect and maintain pipelines around here. They launch a robot to inspect every inch of the pipe line and repair specific areas of concern. The process is amazing. Still the most efficient and safest way to transport petro products.
Click to expand...

A lot of pipe is 50+ years old, buried steel is only good for so long.
 
Geico266 said:
I don't know about the entire pipeline system, but I have seen how they inspect and maintain pipelines around here. They launch a robot to inspect every inch of the pipe line and repair specific areas of concern. The process is amazing. Still the most efficient and safest way to transport petro products.
Click to expand...

stick a robot into a crude pipe line and see what happens.
 
N801BH said:
The greenie liberals think a pipeline is dangerous...:mad2::mad2::mad::redface:
Click to expand...


Pipeline construction is a slow process. North Dakota oil is a fairly recent phenomenon. Also, fracking requires drilling lots of wells, each of which depletes rapidly. The pipeline companies may be concerned that by the time the pipeline is ready, the amount of economically recoverable oil remaining may not be worth it.
 
Henning said:
Yep, I don't really care either way. Neither method is accident proof. I just think that a lot of pipeline that should be getting replaced is being neglected. At least rail and cars get regular inspection and maintenance.
Click to expand...

According to BNSF, it was the grain train that derailed while it was passing the oncoming crude train.

This stretch of track is heavily travelled, mostly powder river coal but recently more and more crude.
 
We can thank Obama for this.
 
weilke said:
According to BNSF, it was the grain train that derailed while it was passing the oncoming crude train.

This stretch of track is heavily travelled, mostly powder river coal but recently more and more crude.
Click to expand...

Yeah, pretty irrelevant as to the details, accidents happen one way or the other, typically due to someone scrimping on maintenance. Time will tell why it derailed but likely it's due to not having run a geometry car and tamping crew trough and letting the trains run at speed over uneven rail if I had to take a guess.
 
Follow the money. Who owns the railroads has a lot of influence on what pipelines are approved. There is plenty of oil in North Dakota to fill pipelines to make them financially viable. Our fracking has been an awesome assert to the horizontal drilling that has increased production astronomically! Lots of jobs... Lots of cold weather gear being sold...and a bunch of great pilots in Minot... What else could you ever want? Lol
 
Tom-D said:
stick a robot into a crude pipe line and see what happens.
Click to expand...


They run "pigs" down them regularly. Whether one thinks the technology on board a typical pig is high enough to be considered a "robot" probably is debatable. But they're not low-tech devices. And no one has a solid definition of "robot" really.
 
Henning said:
However the primary reason it goes by rail and we have no pipeline is that Warren Buffet owns that rail.
Click to expand...

I think most who are truly familiar with the transportation of oil would disagree. Rail gives the flexibility to take the oil where it's needed; pipelines don't. Much of the Bakken crude is transported to refineries near the east coast. There are currently no pipelines to accomplish that, and with the current administration's attitude there won't likely be any in the near future.

BTW, Bakken crude is not the only oil being transported by rail. A lot of west Texas crude is currently being shipped on the tracks.
 
Kind of one of the big new learnings is that shipping crude by rail is economical AND allows for unrivaled flexibility. Refineries all over can adjust supply of incoming crude to be optimal in methods and ways impossible with pipelines.

The need for pipelines is overstated by people who listen to AM radio.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Kind of one of the big new learnings is that shipping crude by rail is economical AND allows for unrivaled flexibility. Refineries all over can adjust supply of incoming crude to be optimal in methods and ways impossible with pipelines.

The need for pipelines is overstated by people who listen to AM radio.
Click to expand...

Shipping crude by pipeline costs a fraction of shipping it by rail. One reason we have to ship crude all over gods creation is that the paperwork process to build a new refinery (or even to expand an existing one) is so cumbersome.

The price of ND crude has has allways been discounted due to the lack of shipping capacity. As a result, it only made sense to drill when prices are high. It doesn't have to be the keystone XL, but projects like the Sandpiper are key to making the oil boom in western ND sustainable.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Kind of one of the big new learnings is that shipping crude by rail is economical AND allows for unrivaled flexibility. Refineries all over can adjust supply of incoming crude to be optimal in methods and ways impossible with pipelines.

The need for pipelines is overstated by people who listen to AM radio.
Click to expand...

And those people who's homes were destroyed and their lives disrupted by derailments, and people killed at RR crossings. Let alone the pollution and noise of locomotives blaring their horns at all hours of the day and night.
 
weilke said:
Shipping crude by pipeline costs a fraction of shipping it by rail. One reason we have to ship crude all over gods creation is that the paperwork process to build a new refinery (or even to expand an existing one) is so cumbersome.

The price of ND crude has has allways been discounted due to the lack of shipping capacity. As a result, it only made sense to drill when prices are high. It doesn't have to be the keystone XL, but projects like the Sandpiper are key to making the oil boom in western ND sustainable.
Click to expand...


Ignoring that some refineries can deal with ND crude and others can't.

Refiners are willing to pay a minor premium in transport for the benefit of flexibility.
 
Geico266 said:
And those people who's homes were destroyed and their lives disrupted by derailments, and people killed at RR crossings. Let alone the pollution and noise of locomotives blaring their horns at all hours of the day and night.
Click to expand...


Are those different than the people in Arkansas with oil running down their streets from pipeline breaks? Or the farmers with standing oil in their fields after pipeline breaks? Only some homes and disrupted lives matter?

Any guess on the number of crude oil trains compared to the number of coal trains? Or grain trains? Never heard of an anti-train movement. But, I guess people who move near railroad tracks should have the right not to have noisy locomotives disrupting their lives. And, while we are at it, same for people who move near airports. They shouldn't have to suffer noise pollution at all hours of day and night.
 
JoseCuervo said:
Are those different than the people in Arkansas with oil running down their streets from pipeline breaks? Or the farmers with standing oil in their fields after pipeline breaks? Only some homes and disrupted lives matter?

Any guess on the number of crude oil trains compared to the number of coal trains? Or grain trains? Never heard of an anti-train movement. But, I guess people who move near railroad tracks should have the right not to have noisy locomotives disrupting their lives. And, while we are at it, same for people who move near airports. They shouldn't have to suffer noise pollution at all hours of day and night.
Click to expand...

Ever see a grain car or coal car explode? :no:

We could not possible supply all of the petroleum needs of this country by rail only. You need to stop listening to Comedy Central.
 
Last edited:
Geico266 said:
And those people who's homes were destroyed and their lives disrupted by derailments, and people killed at RR crossings. Let alone the pollution and noise of locomotives blaring their horns at all hours of the day and night.
Click to expand...

And I suppose shock cooling plays a part. :mad2: 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.
 
Norman said:
And I suppose shock cooling plays a part. :mad2: 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.
Click to expand...

We need both. Put the volatile petroleum in pipelines with the rest of our petroleum and nat gas products. Do you have any idea how many millions of miles of pipelines we have in this country?

Talk about ill informed. :mad2:
 
Last edited:
Railroads are safer and more energy efficient than trucks.
Pipelines ar safer and more energy efficient than railroads.

This battle was fought and won 120 years ago when rockefeller moved oil shipping to the pipeline.

One of the reasons why small east coast refineries like Trainer shut down was the lack of reasonably priced crude.
 
Once again I'm awed at the liberal ability to construct strawmen.
 
Geico266 said:
Ever see a grain car or coal car explode? :no:
Click to expand...

Not personally, but both kinds of hoppers have exploded, usually from dust explosions during loading operations.
 
Norman said:
I think most who are truly familiar with the transportation of oil would disagree. Rail gives the flexibility to take the oil where it's needed; pipelines don't. Much of the Bakken crude is transported to refineries near the east coast. There are currently no pipelines to accomplish that, and with the current administration's attitude there won't likely be any in the near future.

BTW, Bakken crude is not the only oil being transported by rail. A lot of west Texas crude is currently being shipped on the tracks.
Click to expand...

And most who are familiar with politics would disagree with you.

The Keystone pipeline is to go right through the Bakken, yet thanks to lobbying from folks like Buffett, it's not being built for political reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top