Derailment and fire in Quebec

[dave1905]

I take your point, but actually the crewman didn't want the train to roll away irrespective of its load. Had it been inert - e.g. stone or coal - he would have had just the same basic concern for it staying put.

Exactamundo.  Any hazmat is dangerous if it gets out of its container.  Any car is dangerous if its moving uncontrolled.  The goal is to handle all hazmat safely and keep all cars under control. 

 

That's why I am more concerned about securement.  Y'all just see this one incident.  The vast majority of cars that get loose and move uncontrolled on the main don't come out of main track sidings, they get loose during switching operations where the cars were standing on the main or the derail would have been lined for movement.

[highpeak]

Meanwhile, oil traffic by rail to St. John appears to have declined as Irving shifts to overseas crude due to price changes:

http://http://www.pressherald.com/news/idle-tank-cars-signal-slowing-oil-by-rail-trend_2013-09-14.html

 

This illustrates the problems facing railroads in investing in their infrastructure to deal with a traffic that can disappear at short notice.

[kevinlms]

For example a "key train" in the US is a train with 20 or more hazardous loaded cars.  Doesn't matter what type.  Same restrictions apply  to all.  20 cars of fertilizer (oxidizer) is the same as 20 cars of gasoline (flammable liquid) is the same as 20 cars of LPG (flammable gas) is the same as 20 cars of ammunition (explosives 1.4).

 

The only difference was paperwork (the documentation was incorrect) and possibly in emergency response.

A quick question here. Would the rules allow a train of mixed hazardous materials in the one train, i.e. 5 each of the 4 types listed?

[dave1905]

A quick question here. Would the rules allow a train of mixed hazardous materials in the one train, i.e. 5 each of the 4 types listed?

Sure.

 

RSSM (explosives, radioactive, TIH, PIH) needs cover between each other and other hazmat, the other hazmat just needs cover on the engines and caboose.  But you can combine any combination of any quantity of hazmat in a train as long as the cover and separations required are followed.  Pretty much the trains coming of the Gulf (of Mexico) are loaded with any type of chemical you could imagine.

Edited September 19, 2013 by dave1905

[dave1905]

Among the worst of the methyl ethyl nasty chemicals is hydrocyanic acid ( more or less hydrogen cyanide gas) that travels in white tank cars with a red stripe around the middle and over the bolsters.  they have large placards of emergency response info on them (if you can read it then its not leaking).  They are affectionately known as "candy stripers".  Ironically I searched for images of candy striper rail cars and the first rail pictures that came up were of a train in the UK.  We in the US are not alone.

 

In one hazmat training presentation they had a picture of a derailment with a pile of candy stripers about 3 cars high.  There was one worker in the middle of the picture with his back to the camera and both hands in front of him at his waist.  He was relieving himself.  When asked why he was relieving himself there he said that because of the candy stripers he knew that would be the one place where nobody else would be.

 

A chemical company had a major release  of a toxic chemical in an Asian country resulting in multiple deaths.  They discovered that they had been shipping the same chemical by rail through the US for decades (without a single incident I might add).  So they became so concerned about it they only shipped that chemical  in special trains with track patrols ahead of it.  That lasted until they developed a way to modify the chemical to a less toxic formulation for shipment that could be reconstituted at the plants.

Edited September 20, 2013 by dave1905

[Fat Controller]

Among the worst of the methyl ethyl nasty chemicals is hydrocyanic acid ( more or less hydrogen cyanide gas) that travels in white tank cars with a red stripe around the middle and over the bolsters.  they have large placards of emergency response info on them (if you can read it then its not leaking).  They are affectionately known as "candy stripers".  Ironically I searched for images of candy striper rail cars and the first rail pictures that came up were of a train in the UK.  We in the US are not alone.

 

In one hazmat training presentation they had a picture of a derailment with a pile of candy stripers about 3 cars high.  There was one worker in the middle of the picture with his back to the camera and both hands in front of him at his waist.  He was relieving himself.  When asked why he was relieving himself there he said that because of the candy stripers he knew that would be the one place where nobody else would be.

 

A chemical company had a major release  of a toxic chemical in an Asian country resulting in multiple deaths.  They discovered that they had been shipping the same chemical by rail through the US for decades (without a single incident I might add).  So they became so concerned about it they only shipped that chemical  in special trains with track patrols ahead of it.  That lasted until they developed a way to modify the chemical to a less toxic formulation for shipment that could be reconstituted at the plants.

I suspect the white tank with a horizontal orange or red stripe is an international standard livery for material of this nature; I've seen similar throughout Europe, as well as in the UK. The HCN trains that ran in the UK (between Grangemouth, near Edinburgh, to Teesside) ran as a short block train. There had two barrier vehicles at each end; a flat wagon, and one with built-up ends. They also had a brake van (this is when guards normally rode in the rear cab of the loco) at the rear, so the guard didn't have to walk past a ruptured tank to protect the rear of the train in the event of an incident.

[Talltim]

I thought the UK white with orange stripe tanks were pressurised for carrying LPG and similar?

[Fat Controller]

I thought the UK white with orange stripe tanks were pressurised for carrying LPG and similar?

It went beyond pressurised gases to cover substances such as some forms of liquid chlorine, as well as seemingly innocuous materials such as CO2, liquid nitrogen and liquid oxygen.

http://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/icihydrogencyanide

http://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/bpcmchlorinetbb

I think it covers most of the substances covered in the following interview (apparently, this was the response given during an interview for a plant foreman at a place I used to work in)

Interviewer; 'What steps would you take in the event of a leak on the PO4 plant?'

Candidate: 'F***ing long ones'

He didn't get the job..

[Budgie]

seemingly innocuous materials such as CO2, liquid nitrogen

I wouldn't call these innocuous, seemingly or otherwise. Carbon dioxide is heavier than air, so is really dangerous.

[dave1905]

I wouldn't call these innocuous, seemingly or otherwise. Carbon dioxide is heavier than air, so is really dangerous.

CO2 might be dangerous in a closed space, but very few miles of railroads run through closed spaces.  By the time you mix a leak of CO2 into the atmosphere its hazard is greatly reduced.  You still need all the breathing apparatus but its not going to explode, its not going to burn, its not going to poison you. It has a much shorter list of bad things that will happen to you and equipment you need to keep bad things from happening to you.  If there is a choice of responding to a leaking car of chlorine, ethylene oxide or  a leaking car of CO2, sign me up for the CO2.

[Fat Controller]

CO2 might be dangerous in a closed space, but very few miles of railroads run through closed spaces.  By the time you mix a leak of CO2 into the atmosphere its hazard is greatly reduced.  You still need all the breathing apparatus but its not going to explode, its not going to burn, its not going to poison you. It has a much shorter list of bad things that will happen to you and equipment you need to keep bad things from happening to you.  If there is a choice of responding to a leaking car of chlorine, ethylene oxide or  a leaking car of CO2, sign me up for the CO2.

In tank-load, or even train-load, quantities, the hazard's not too great. However, this makes for sobering reading:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Nyos

There have been several events like this in central Africa.

[Edwin_m]

It went beyond pressurised gases to cover substances such as some forms of liquid chlorine, as well as seemingly innocuous materials such as CO2, liquid nitrogen and liquid oxygen.

http://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/icihydrogencyanide

http://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/bpcmchlorinetbb

I think it covers most of the substances covered in the following interview (apparently, this was the response given during an interview for a plant foreman at a place I used to work in)

Interviewer; 'What steps would you take in the event of a leak on the PO4 plant?'

Candidate: 'F***ing long ones'

He didn't get the job..

Presumably the common factor here is that these tanks are pressurised, including substances that are gases at normal pressure but liquid under the pressure of the tank.  I guess firefighters need to know that there is a risk of sudden depressurisation if the tank is punctured and also that heat may result in boiloff and pressure increasing beyond the limits of the vessel. 

[RJS1977]

 

Interviewer; 'What steps would you take in the event of a leak on the PO4 plant?'

Candidate: 'F***ing long ones'

He didn't get the job..

 

I believe Brian "Johnners" Johnston gave a similar response during his WW2 Grenadier Guards days when asked what steps he would take if he saw a platoon of German soldiers approaching!

[pH]

MM&A have had their operating licence extended until February 1, 2014 - http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/transport-agency-extends-mm-a-railway-s-licence-to-feb-1-1.2074633 . Presumably, since the agency involved is the Canada Transportation Agency, this applies to their Canadian operations. I don't know what the situation is in the US. 

[peach james]

I believe Brian "Johnners" Johnston gave a similar response during his WW2 Grenadier Guards days when asked what steps he would take if he saw a platoon of German soldiers approaching!

 

From "Ignition"

 

It is, of course, extremely toxic, but that's the least of the problem. It is hypergolic with every known fuel, and so rapidly hypergolic that no ignition delay has ever been measured. It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers, not to mention asbestos, sand, and water-with which it reacts explosively. It can be kept in some of the ordinary structural metals-steel, copper, aluminium, etc.-because of the formation of a thin film of insoluble metal fluoride which protects the bulk of the metal, just as the invisible coat of oxide on aluminium keeps it from burning up in the atmosphere. If, however, this coat is melted or scrubbed off, and has no chance to reform, the operator is confronted with the problem of coping with a metal-fluorine fire. For dealing with this situation, I have always recommended a good pair of running shoes.”

 

 

Ref: ClF³

 

At work the nastiest stuff I work with regularly is OTTO II fuel...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTTO_fuel

 

James

[pH]

A CN train, with 9 cars carrying liquefied petroleum gas and 4 carrying crude oil has derailed at Gainford, west of Edmonton. Some of the cars are on fire, the small town has been evacuated and a major east-west highway paralleling the tracks has been closed - http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/cn-fuel-cars-derail-explode-west-of-edmonton-1.2126678 
 

Edited October 19, 2013 by pH

[Oldddudders]

"It's still a volatile situation". Good word, huh?

 

The wise will be snapping up shares in pipeline companies, I suspect.

[BG John]

The wise will be snapping up shares in pipeline companies, I suspect.

They have a habit of springing leaks!

[Oldddudders]

They have a habit of springing leaks!

I'm sure they aren't perfect, either. But public opinion is probably getting a bit twitchy about oil etc on rail just now, so I'm sure there's a future in pipelines.

[dave1905]

I'm sure they aren't perfect, either. But public opinion is probably getting a bit twitchy about oil etc on rail just now, so I'm sure there's a future in pipelines.

Wanna buy some stock in the Keystone XL pipeline?

 

Reality is you can't build pipelines to carry every commodity between every producer and every consumer. Small "retail" shipments will have to go over roads or railroads.

 

I wonder how the "replace all the 111 tank cars" crowd will react since the tank cars that ruptured were a heavier duty design similar to what they want build.

[pH]

Wanna buy some stock in the Keystone XL pipeline?

 

It`s not really the Keystone XL pipeline that would be involved here. There is a proposal to build the `Northern Gateway` pipeline to carry Alberta tarsands bitumen to the BC coast at Kitimat, to be loaded on to tankers and exported to China. There has been considerable opposition, and CN have been pushing the idea of using rail to move it instead. 

[highpeak]

I'm sure they aren't perfect, either. But public opinion is probably getting a bit twitchy about oil etc on rail just now, so I'm sure there's a future in pipelines.

They aren't perfect, but they have the considerable advantage that failures don't tend to incinerate places. A pipeline dumps 20,000 barrels (equivalent to just under 900,000 gallons of the stuff) all over a few acres of farmland, you don't hear much about it really. Not even any pictures of dead birds or animals to get it on the headline news, no sinking tanker, no freight cars, no fires. Works well for the pipelines really, out of sight, out of mind.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/17/tesoro-spill-northdakota-idUSL1N0I71QW20131017

[Jim Martin]

We're heading OT here Edwin but I - and many other railway men - were appalled that two extremely simple and totally unambiguous phrases which were easily taught were taken out of teh Rule Book largely at the behest of a bunch of non railway people who wanted 'plain English' which in teh event reintroduced past ambiguities and dangers plus a higher level of risk.

 

I don't care where people worked before they worked on the railway - on the railway a key principle and need is for safety and a total lack of ambiguity but the pleas of experienced railwaymen continue to be ignored.  Apparently it doesn't matter that one day someone might get killed because of such ignorance - just as others were killed in the past by use of sloppy wording. Rant mode disengaged.

 

It's been quite a while since I checked this topic (seems to have been going mostly in circles for quite a while now), but this post reminded me of an NTSB report that I'd read a number of years ago: take a look at http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2004/RAB0402.pdf, particularly page 3, the section headed "Nomenclature Consistency".

 

Jim

[pH]

They aren't perfect, but they have the considerable advantage that failures don't tend to incinerate places.

 

Are you sure about that? E.g. - http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=96090 or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Pipeline_explosion

[dave1905]

It`s not really the Keystone XL pipeline that would be involved here. There is a proposal to build the `Northern Gateway` pipeline to carry Alberta tarsands bitumen to the BC coast at Kitimat, to be loaded on to tankers and exported to China. There has been considerable opposition, and CN have been pushing the idea of using rail to move it instead.

The point I was making was that pipelines are even less popular than handling hazmat by rail. The Keystone XL pipeline is a huge controversy in the US, and has been blocked on several levels, just as there has been to the Northern Gateway pipeline.