It's not safe to stay in bed in the morning, nor to get out of bed. There is only statistically safer.
The DOT-111 is a staple of the American freight rail fleet. But its flaws have been noted as far back as a 1991 safety study. Among other things, its steel shell is too thin to resist puncturing in accidents, which almost guarantees the car will tear open in an accident, potentially spilling cargo that could catch fire, explode or contaminate the environment.
“It’s too early to tell. There’s a lot of factors involved,” Ross said. “There’s a lot of energy here. The train came down on a fairly significant grade for 6.8 miles (11 kilometers) before it came into the town and did all the destruction it did.” He said the train was moving at 63 mph (101 kph) when it derailed.
Focus on Earlier Blaze in Quebec Train Derailment
http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/127622/Focus_on_Earlier_Blaze_in_Quebec_Train_Derailment/?all=HG2
Nantes Fire Chief Patrick Lambert said that when the same train caught fire hours prior to the accident, the engine was shut off per the standard operating procedure dictated by Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway.
The blaze was extinguished within about 45 minutes. And that’s where the fire department’s involvement ended, Lambert said.
“The people from MMA told us, ‘That’s great — the train is secure, there’s no more fire, there’s nothing anymore, there’s no more danger,’” Lambert told reporters. “We were given our leave, and we left.”
Edward Burkhardt, the president and CEO of the railway’s parent company Rail World, Inc., suggested that the decision to shut off the locomotive to put out the fire might have disabled the brakes. “An hour or so after the locomotive was shut down, the train rolled away,” Burkhardt told the Canadian Broadcast Corp.
Meanwhile, crews were working to contain 100,000 liters (27,000 gallons) of light crude that spilled from the tankers and made its way into nearby waterways. There were fears it could flow into the St. Lawrence River all the way to Quebec City.
This is going to be a very interesting case, with lots of far reaching repercussions, considering it was US oil, owned by a Canadian refiner, being carried by a US RR, with a terrible safety record.
I thought that the US was not permitted to export crude? I also thought that crude was not explosive. Do they do something to the crude when it is transported by ship to make it less explosive? I don’t understand how any of this happened.
re: “federal regulators and others say that pipelines are safer”
Oh, yeah, let’s see - WHO is the ONE who has done everything possible to stop, to delay the pipeline to Canada??
Note the “reporter” is more concerned about spilled gallons than lives lost.
Just more liberal paranoia. Drill here, Drill now, save the planet and the USA.
One advantage that rails have over pipelines is government subsidies. The government pays for most of the rail improvements and the local towns are responsible to pay for any mitigation such as over passes, under passes. In some cases, the government even pays for the additional land purchases for new sidings, etc, as well as all the environmental studies for new rails.
Any idea of what constitutes an "incident"? In order to qualify as an "incident", would a spill have to be a tea cup...a pint...a gallon....10 gallons......?
The lead Transportation Safety Board investigator says the rail tankers involved in a derailment and explosions that wiped out the heart of a small town in Quebec have a history of puncturing during accidents.
Ya....haven’t you seen all of the coverage on ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN??!?!!?!
NYT Headlines?!?!
I assume that was crude oil on the train. How does crude oil “explode?”
There have been reports that the accident is the result of tampering. If so, I wouldn’t be surprised if an environmental group did this just to stop the only way we have of getting Canadian oil moved without the Keystone pipeline.