Safety risks in crude by rail clear: Local lives in peril

A CSX Corp train burns after derailment in Mount Carbon, West Virginia pictured across the Kanawha River in Boomer, West Virginia February 16, 2015.   Credit: Reuters/Marcus Constantino

Coming off the rails? Safety risks in crude by rail

By John Kemp   LONDON     Reuters     Mar 19, 2015

Trains carrying oil or ethanol have derailed and caught fire at more than a dozen locations across the United States and Canada in the last five years.

Train fires have prompted a fierce debate about the risks of moving large volumes of highly flammable liquids across the rail network and who should be responsible for improving safety....

....investigations focus on why all the safety systems were defeated at the same time, and what it reveals about hidden flaws and risks in the systems.


In the case of train fires, U.S. and Canadian accident investigators have identified human error and broken rails as the main immediate causes of derailments and collisions.

Once accidents occurred, however, they were made worse by the tank cars’ failure to contain their hazardous loads. Leaking tank cars created highly dangerous large pool fires. Design flaws proved to be a hidden safety risk.

And oil proved to be much more flammable than industry or regulators believed. Under hazmat regulations, crude has been treated as a low-risk hazard when it has behaved more like a medium or high risk one.....   more here

 

DOT's Feinberg Wants Energy Industry to Address Bakken Crude Accidents, Fires

David Bradley     NGI Daily    March 18, 2015

The energy industry needs to do more to control the volatility of oil and other fuels transported by the nation's railroads, according to Sarah Feinberg, acting head of the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).

Railroads have been pulling their weight in the effort to reduce the number of derailments and other accidents, but FRA is "running out of things that I think we can put on the railroads to do, and there have to be other industries that have skin in the game," Feinberg told reporters last week. She said she has been "calling on the energy industry to do more for weeks, if not months. Quietly for months, much more vocally for weeks." ......    more here

Danger zone: 326,170 Minnesotans live near oil train tracks

By Don Davis    Grand Forks Herald  03/19/15

ST. PAUL -- State officials estimate that 326,170 Minnesotans live within a half mile of railroad tracks that carry crude oil, a distance often known as the danger zone.

People within a half mile of tracks usually will be evacuated if an oil train could explode or catch fire after a derailment.

The estimate, released this morning after state officials could not answer a Forum News Service question about the issue last week, is the first time Minnesotans had an idea about the number of people that state transportation and public safety officials say could be in danger of oil train explosions like those seen elsewhere in the United States and Canada.,,,,   more here

 

Towns launch 'David and Goliath' challenges to crude-by-rail traffic

Blake Sobczak,  E&E Publishing     EnergyWire:    March 19, 2015

..... city leaders who challenge railroads can be hamstrung by eminent domain laws, federally pre-emptive regulations and other legal realities that favor interstate commerce.

"This is their property through our cities, and they intend to use it," noted hazardous materials consultant and rail safety advocate Fred Millar. "The railroads are going to be very careful not to give away anything that intrudes on their overall sovereignty."

In Crystal, Adams said he is not contesting the rail business or even crude shipments. Instead, he's calling on federal transportation regulators to require a full environmental assessment of BNSF's rail spur, a step he expects will highlight safety problems posed by blocked crossings. The Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970 gives some leeway to regulate railroads outside the federal level if "necessary to eliminate or reduce an essentially local safety or security hazard."

Adams said his town likely couldn't dissuade BNSF from the project if the Berkshire Hathaway subsidiary pitched a legal battle.

"We know we're dealing with someone who's got more power than we have, and we're just doing pretty much everything that we can," he said.....    more here