The federal government will, for the first time, designate crude oil a highly dangerous substance and introduce tougher safety and testing measures for shipping oil by rail, Transport Minister Lisa Raitt has told The Globe and Mail.
The fundamental shift, in response to mounting concerns about crude safety, comes after a Globe investigation detailed how the oil that exploded in Lac-Mégantic, Que., last summer was far more dangerous than regulators and shippers considered. The investigation found that numerous warning signs about the volatility, corrosiveness and content of the crude were ignored before the disaster.
Until now, the government considered crude flammable, but not highly explosive. However, massive fireballs erupted in Lac-Mégantic on July 6 after a train carrying 72 tankers of crude oil derailed, killing 47 people and levelling much of the downtown. It is the worst railway disaster in Canadian history.
Ms. Raitt said on Thursday there is a clear need for higher safety standards to deal with the massive growth in oil being shipped by rail through cities and towns. Transport Canada also plans to pursue oil shippers who are not properly testing crude before shipping it in light of the Globe investigation, which found shippers were loading oil on trains without knowing whether it was potentially dangerous, despite an order from Ottawa to scrutinize shipments.
ROCKMAN wrote:Canoe - I haven't confirmed it but I just read that the feds are allowing more export exceptions. I don't know exactly what happened in the Canadian accident. While oil isn't generally explosive but once it's ignited it burns really hot. One possibility is that some unruptured tankers might have heated up to explosive pressure levels.
ROCKMAN wrote:The odd thing about the story is that all across the US and Canada there are many times more tankers of much more volatile, explosive, corrosive and toxic the crude oil. Consider a very strange accident in S Texas about 40 years ago. A propane delivery truck was rear ended, exploded and shot off like a rocket through a trailer park killing many. And about 10 years ago some locals in Houston got panicky when they found out some tanker trucks carrying napalm was moving thru the area. But napalm is designed to be less volatile and explosive than gasoline. Makes a much better (and vicious) weapon that way. IOW the many tens of thousands of tank trucks delivering gasoline to the stations in Houston every year were much more dangerous. But "napalm" is a much scarier word than "gasoline". Now, because of the accident many Canadians are more scared of trains hauling oil then they are of gasoline hauls.
The crude oil on that train came from North Dakota, where it was pulled from the shale of the Bakken formation, which stretches from western North Dakota into southern Saskatchewan and eastern Montana.
It’s the same oil Enbridge plans to pump through Line 9, a pipeline that cuts through the GTA if federal regulators approve plans to reverse the flow in the 38-year-old pipeline to supply Quebec refineries with cheaper products from western Canada and the Bakken region.
Producers use a toxic soup of chemicals, such as hydrochloric acid, a highly corrosive component that critics fear could eat away at pipelines and tank cars if not fully removed from the oil.
And Bakken crude can contain high levels of hydrogen sulfide, a toxic, corrosive chemical that’s extremely flammable.
Earlier this year, Enbridge got into a spat with shippers when it asked federal regulators for permission to reject crude oil with hydrogen sulfide levels higher than 5 parts-per-million — after tests revealed a batch of crude bound for a pipeline at its Berthold, N.D., facility had levels of 1,200 ppm.
Human exposure to hydrogen sulfide at 50 ppm or higher can cause death. The batch Enbridge successfully rejected contained 24 times the lethal level.
But it was Enbridge that pushed for that 5 ppm limit, which was protested by oil producers. No regulations require it. Some companies don’t have such limits.
Initial reports indicated that another freight then plowed into the derailment, but the sheriff's office said about 5 p.m. that it remained unclear which train was hit.
"At this time we're dealing with the fire, and we can't even get close enough to determine that," Sgt. Tara Morris told Inforum.
Residents within a two-mile radius were warned to stay inside. One resident about a half-mile from the derailment told KVLY-TV she could see large flames. Smoke could be seen 15 miles away.
But I do expect the POTUS to approve the border crossing section when it is politically safer to so. Since the entire KXL isn't scheduled to be completed there hasn't been a need to build that section any sooner.
I expect him to disapprove the KXL because if he approves then he will have a lot of very angry former supporters who might just take matters into their own hands in a violent way (another American revolution?).
Graeme wrote:I like Obama but some of his policies are now destroying our civilization. I have to hope that the delay to deciding to approve Keystone XL is a tacit acknowledgment of the administation's foolish policies. He is starting to make amends with his global warming action plan. I expect him to disapprove the KXL because if he approves then he will have a lot of very angry former supporters who might just take matters into their own hands in a violent way (another American revolution?). That situation may be even more difficult to deal with than if he disapproves. At least most of your infrastructure will remain intact. This decision may well be the trigger to change in the right direction (the beginning of the end of ff) whatever he decides. Meanwhile the world holds it's collective breath as atmospheric oxygen slowly declines. We are anxious to hear his decision because it could lead to fewer or more pipeline and train "accidents".
But why have Western security agencies developed such an unprecedented capacity to spy on their own domestic populations? Since the 2008 economic crash, security agencies have increasingly spied on political activists, especially environmental groups, on behalf of corporate interests. This activity is linked to the last decade of US defence planning, which has been increasingly concerned by the risk of civil unrest at home triggered by catastrophic events linked to climate change, energy shocks or economic crisis - or all three.
That year [2006], the Pentagon had begun developing a 20,000 strong troop force who would be on-hand to respond to "domestic catastrophes" and civil unrest - the programme was reportedly based on a 2005 homeland security strategy which emphasised "preparing for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents."
The Pentagon knows that environmental, economic and other crises could provoke widespread public anger toward government and corporations in coming years. The revelations on the NSA's global surveillance programmes are just the latest indication that as business as usual creates instability at home and abroad, and as disillusionment with the status quo escalates, Western publics are being increasingly viewed as potential enemies that must be policed by the state.
Crude oil produced in North America’s booming Bakken region may be more flammable and therefore more dangerous to ship by rail than crude from other areas, a U.S. regulator said after studying the question for four months.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration announced its preliminary conclusion today, three days after a BNSF Railway Co. train carrying oil caught fire after a collision in Casselton, North Dakota.
The North Dakota accident is the fourth major North American derailment in six months by trains transporting crude. Record volumes of oil are moving by rail as production from North Dakota and Texas pushes U.S. output to the most since 1988 and pipeline capacity has failed to keep up.
The regulator “is reinforcing the requirement to properly test, characterize, classify, and where appropriate sufficiently degasify hazardous materials prior to and during transportation,” according to a safety alert posted on its website today.
The agency’s findings may expedite the rail industry’s push for stronger tank cars for moving crude and other hazardous materials. It strengthens calls for the petroleum industry to accurately label tank-car contents and test shipments to make sure they don’t contain gases from the lighter oil produced in the shale rock in North Dakota.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 200 guests