Trains.com

Getting tanked.

5038 views
40 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,825 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Monday, April 10, 2017 11:35 AM

sandiego

Some years back I went on a tour of an ethanol plant in Mason City, Iowa (out by Flint siding for you UP railroaders). Of course the topic of moonshine and drinking the product produced at the plant came up. Our host mentioned that the stuff was denatured with unleaded gasoline before shipping, but that the un-denatured product was no good for drinking anyway as it still had some aldehydes that cause some nasty hangovers. For beverage use ethanol is refined further to remove the aldehydes and other non-ethanol compounds.

 

Kurt Hayek

 

A few years ago there was a worker out at the Denison, IA ethanol plant who decided to sample the product.  Ended up in the hospital as I recall.

Jeff

RME
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 2,073 posts
Posted by RME on Monday, April 10, 2017 1:36 PM

ericsp
The reason why I asked about biodiesel is that I see many tank cars with logos for biodiesel around here (none have placards). I suspect it may not be suitable for shipment by pipeline. If so, it is much more likely that the tank cars could have been carrying fuel for the railroad (or perhaps quarry) than if they are using diesel.

I don't think there is any great reason why fatty-acid methyl esters that have been fully 'treated' (for best use as a modern engine fuel, with additives, etc.) would be unsuitable for pipeline slugging; it's much more likely that the plants are located away from convenient pipelining points.  The DOE Alternative Fuels Data Center indicates that B-5 is "sometimes shipped by pipeline" but that's probably because the blending is done at a refinery that commonly ships 'dinodiesel' in reasonable quantities.

Think of the 'biodiesel' emblem as cheap alternative-fuel promotion or advertising.  (You wouldn't expect painting it on a pipeline to be as effective!)  Whether it ships by rail or truck depends on the size of the operation, the proximity of a suitable rail operator, and the end use of the production in question (e.g., agricultural equipment, blending, etc.)

It is at least possible that the tankcars you see without placards are bringing in the oil stock used for the catalyzed esterification, which is likely to be no more hazardous than canola oil.

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,513 posts
Posted by zugmann on Monday, April 10, 2017 2:16 PM

tree68

 

 
erikem
I'd also wonder how clean the EtOH would have to be to get the 1170 classification.

 

I doubt you're going to see "pure" ethanol in carload quantities.  I don't know that you'd find it in truckload quantities - other than perhaps barrels in a box truck.

If it was "pure" ethanol, I suspect you'd encounter vandalism.  Ever heard of "Everclear?"

 

We handle lots of 1170 tank cars. They are for a mouthwash factory.

  

The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,857 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, April 10, 2017 2:59 PM

zugmann
We handle lots of 1170 tank cars. They are for a mouthwash factory.

Well, there you go!  Learn something every day!

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

RME
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 2,073 posts
Posted by RME on Monday, April 10, 2017 3:10 PM

tree68
If it was "pure" ethanol, I suspect you'd encounter vandalism. Ever heard of "Everclear?"

Everclear is very far from 'pure' - it's only about 190 proof.  "Pure" ethanol is anhydrous, 200 proof, and if you were to take a sip of it you would promptly be very, very sorry -- it will simultaneously scorch and dehydrate your mouth and lips.

I would assume that the same code (1170) would apply to distilled alcohol as to 'chemical' -- in fact, I'd expect a shipment to a mouthwash factory, or to a plant producing hand sanitizer, to be very similar to EverClear.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,857 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, April 10, 2017 3:18 PM

RME
Everclear is very far from 'pure' - it's only about 190 proof.

True that.  Still, 95% pure is still a lot closer to pure than the ~40% you find in most liquors.  Nonetheless, there are those out there who would figure out a way to make it palatable...  Or die trying.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Posted by zardoz on Monday, April 10, 2017 5:40 PM

ericsp

Diesel fuel is combustible so I believe it does not need buffer cars. If they were carrying diesel fuel they should have been placarded 1202 or 1993.

However, since every diesel-powered locomotive carries diesel fuel, wouldn't they by definition also need to be placarded?

  • Member since
    September 2016
  • From: Tennessee, USA
  • 41 posts
Posted by Kielbasa on Monday, April 10, 2017 5:47 PM

That's like every tractor trailer carrying placards for the fuel they need. Nonsense. Also, quantity is a factor and every first responder knows a diesel locomotive has the potential to spill diesel fuel and are trained to respond accordingly. 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 24,857 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, April 10, 2017 6:59 PM

zardoz
However, since every diesel-powered locomotive carries diesel fuel, wouldn't they by definition also need to be placarded?

Found a document from Michigan, which includes the following:

Fuel tanks (liquid or gaseous) permanently mounted to a vehicle to fuel equipment on the vehicle is usually excepted from the Federal Hazardous Materials Regulations (FHMR). There are some restrictions:

• The tanks must meet the requirements of Subpart E of Part 393 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR).

• The tanks must meet the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) standards.

• The tanks must not be used as a packaging for hazardous materials. In other words, the tanks cannot be cargo (such as extra cylinders or portable tanks) to be used once on-site. The tanks must actually fuel the equipment on the vehicle.

If all of these provisions are complied with, the tanks do not have to comply with the FHMR. If the tanks do not comply with any of these provisions, then the tanks are hazardous materials packages and all of the FHMR applies.

I'm sure the logic for locomotives is the same.

LarryWhistling
Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) 
Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you
My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date
Come ride the rails with me!
There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Tuesday, April 11, 2017 10:03 AM

A. Yes, the shipper is responsible for having everything correct--bill of lading, making sure that the carrier (I dealt with truck lines and some air) has the proper placards. On my first shipment of "empty" gas cylinders, I had two classes that could not be shipped together, and the truck driver who picked it up noticed my error.

B. 200 proof ethanol--ethanol is hydroscopic and 200 hunderd proof will absorb water from the air until it is 190 proof (constant boiling mixture). If you must have 200 proof stuff, you have to keep air away from it; the little we had in chemistry lab was under benzene, and had a piece of sodium wire (to react with water that did get in) in it--not nice stuff to drink. The 190 proof that we had was supposedly denatured (I was told with phenolphthalein, which had a somewhat laxative effect).

Johnny

RME
  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 2,073 posts
Posted by RME on Wednesday, April 12, 2017 7:50 PM

tree68
Nonetheless, there are those out there who would figure out a way to make it palatable...

There are ways.  I suspect that to a typical meth cook, some of those ways are child's play.

I won't go into them.  EverClear is good enough for me.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy