Trains.com

Oil train safety concerns cast shadow over cross-border rail deal

1291 views
7 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Friday, November 27, 2015 8:55 PM

beaulieu

CP just reaches the fringe of the Bakken Oil Fields and has only 3 loadouts on their trackage. CP is much better positioned to move Canadian Heavy Oil.

 

The important thing is that they reach the Bakken field, and their loadouts can be ramped up to handle anything that comes there way.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Friday, November 27, 2015 11:47 AM

beaulieu

CP just reaches the fringe of the Bakken Oil Fields and has only 3 loadouts on their trackage. CP is much better positioned to move Canadian Heavy Oil.

 

That will probably wind down over the next few years, due to economics and the dramatic changes in leadership in both Alberta and Ottawa.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/23/alberta-to-introduce-carbon-tax

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: NW Wisconsin
  • 3,857 posts
Posted by beaulieu on Friday, November 27, 2015 4:33 AM

CP just reaches the fringe of the Bakken Oil Fields and has only 3 loadouts on their trackage. CP is much better positioned to move Canadian Heavy Oil.

  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Thursday, November 26, 2015 9:36 PM

I also don't see how train safety would be affected by the merger.  There may be more crude oil going over the CP/NS at the expense of BNSF, since CP would have a seamless line from the Bakken to the northeast refineries.  However, there would still be no net increase of overall crude-by-rail.

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Thursday, November 26, 2015 4:35 PM

Based on that one sided article, and many others, one can't help but wonder if the environmentalists have bought the media.

Norm


  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,218 posts
Posted by Euclid on Thursday, November 26, 2015 1:36 PM
I don’t see how oil train safety would be affected by the merger unless it results in increased oil traffic.  Would the merger do that?  If the oil is currently moving over the two railroads, why would the merger increase oil traffic? 
In any case, there is no legal limit to the oil traffic, so I don’t see the connection between oil train danger and the merger.
The article says nothing that would explain this obvious question.
However, if the merger would increase the oil traffic, then stopping the merger would be similar to killing the Keystone pipeline.    
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Thursday, November 26, 2015 1:14 PM

More against the wall to see if it can stick.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Kenosha, WI
  • 6,567 posts
Oil train safety concerns cast shadow over cross-border rail deal
Posted by zardoz on Thursday, November 26, 2015 12:18 PM

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