Well, Paul, maybe old age has blunted my fears. I went through the era when the A-bomb was going to detroy civilization, when the Bolskeviks were going to take over the world, when anything you ate was poison, when there were satanist cults out to kidnap your children and Lord knows what else.
Now I'm a bit fatalistic and the BNSF hauls mostly coal. You're probably right, but I'm not going to worry about it.
Tharmeni wrote: Check it out:www.baltimoresun.com/news/nationArticle is "Deadly cargo to roll on". (I could not post the exact link for some reason, but you'll find it)The Sun reporter interviews some Baltimore residents (who apparently just moved near tracks) and they want CSX to bypass the city with hazardous materials. Accuse the railroad of not complying with federal law. Be sure to read the blogs that follow the story, too. In another post, we have been discussing the fact that the media and the public doesn't know beans about railroads and I think this pretty much seals the matter. (And I am a former member of the news media)
Check it out:
www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation
Article is "Deadly cargo to roll on". (I could not post the exact link for some reason, but you'll find it)
The Sun reporter interviews some Baltimore residents (who apparently just moved near tracks) and they want CSX to bypass the city with hazardous materials. Accuse the railroad of not complying with federal law. Be sure to read the blogs that follow the story, too.
In another post, we have been discussing the fact that the media and the public doesn't know beans about railroads and I think this pretty much seals the matter.
(And I am a former member of the news media)
Why is it that so many little TV reporters and beat journalists think they are competent to do our thinking for us? Some of these folks need to go back to school and learn how to write an unbiased story -- they might be surprised at how many of their remarks are "editorial" (opinion).
I do understand that most newspapers have been "featurized" since the 1960s, but there are ways to do that that are journalisticallly honest, and some not. I mean, Walter Lippman certainly had opinions, but his readership could distinguish them from fact -- and he is best known today as a writer of editorials or what today we'd call "op ed."
Thsnk you for letting me get that off my chest.
IRONROOSTER wrote: This appears to be another case of the federal government closing off the local governments efforts to regulate safety. By making it part of the FRA, who then basically give responsibility to the railroads, there is no effective oversight. Unfortunately, the public has no way to accurately assess the danger except through serious incidents involving hazardous materials Since these occur too frequently, rerouting appears to be the only safe choice.
This appears to be another case of the federal government closing off the local governments efforts to regulate safety. By making it part of the FRA, who then basically give responsibility to the railroads, there is no effective oversight. Unfortunately, the public has no way to accurately assess the danger except through serious incidents involving hazardous materials Since these occur too frequently, rerouting appears to be the only safe choice.
Isn't it in the best interest of the federal government, to regulate interstate commerce? If you let each state,county, city and municipality start making and enforcing it's own rules, what would you have? If you let Baltimore limit what can be shipped there, what stops a state line Iowa, for example, from prohibiting shipment of certain items through it's state?
IRONROOSTER wrote: The telling part was when the railroads suspended shipments while the president was at the football game. Personally given the dangers, I would try to live and work at least a couple of miles from any track. But for many people that's not an option.Paul
The telling part was when the railroads suspended shipments while the president was at the football game. Personally given the dangers, I would try to live and work at least a couple of miles from any track. But for many people that's not an option.
Paul
Seems like it might be easier, to just make sure the railroads are as safe as possible.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Ishmael wrote: IRONROOSTER wrote: This appears to be another case of the federal government closing off the local governments efforts to regulate safety. By making it part of the FRA, who then basically give responsibility to the railroads, there is no effective oversight. Unfortunately, the public has no way to accurately assess the danger except through serious incidents involving hazardous materials Since these occur too frequently, rerouting appears to be the only safe choice. The telling part was when the railroads suspended shipments while the president was at the football game. Personally given the dangers, I would try to live and work at least a couple of miles from any track. But for many people that's not am option.Paul How frequently do they happen? I've lived next to the BNSF since back when it was the Frisco and they operated black and gold diesels, 45 years to be exact. There has been precisely one wreck, and that was about 30 years ago. I remember a RR employee riding on the flatcar in front of the "Big Hook" inviting my kids and I to ride down about half a mile and watch them put the cars back up on the track. We did and had a great time. I remember it was coal cars and one boxcar full of LCL.My daughter lived in Hampstead MD next to the WM tracks for 10 years. We used to sit on her front porch and watch the trains go by.Should we have been afraid? As to the President's safety, the 2003 "Classic Trains" told about Harry Truman actually spending some time at the throttle of a moving B&O train. What's to fear?
IRONROOSTER wrote: This appears to be another case of the federal government closing off the local governments efforts to regulate safety. By making it part of the FRA, who then basically give responsibility to the railroads, there is no effective oversight. Unfortunately, the public has no way to accurately assess the danger except through serious incidents involving hazardous materials Since these occur too frequently, rerouting appears to be the only safe choice. The telling part was when the railroads suspended shipments while the president was at the football game. Personally given the dangers, I would try to live and work at least a couple of miles from any track. But for many people that's not am option.Paul
The telling part was when the railroads suspended shipments while the president was at the football game. Personally given the dangers, I would try to live and work at least a couple of miles from any track. But for many people that's not am option.
How frequently do they happen? I've lived next to the BNSF since back when it was the Frisco and they operated black and gold diesels, 45 years to be exact. There has been precisely one wreck, and that was about 30 years ago. I remember a RR employee riding on the flatcar in front of the "Big Hook" inviting my kids and I to ride down about half a mile and watch them put the cars back up on the track. We did and had a great time. I remember it was coal cars and one boxcar full of LCL.
My daughter lived in Hampstead MD next to the WM tracks for 10 years. We used to sit on her front porch and watch the trains go by.
Should we have been afraid?
As to the President's safety, the 2003 "Classic Trains" told about Harry Truman actually spending some time at the throttle of a moving B&O train. What's to fear?
May 18, 2008 Lafayette, La appears to be the latest with thousands evacuated from theoir homes
From purchasing.com
Rails report 54% more hazmat spills By Dave Hannon -- Purchasing, 3/5/2008 9:52:00 AM The number of incidents where railroad cars released hazardous materials increased in 2007 from 28 to 43 in the U.S. According Federal Railroad Administration data, the total number of trail accidents has declined 14% in 2007, but an Associated Press report points out that hazmat incidents increased.
The number of incidents where railroad cars released hazardous materials increased in 2007 from 28 to 43 in the U.S. According Federal Railroad Administration data, the total number of trail accidents has declined 14% in 2007, but an Associated Press report points out that hazmat incidents increased.
Too many for me to live close to the tracks.
IRONROOSTER wrote: Since these occur too frequently, rerouting appears to be the only safe choice. Paul
Since these occur too frequently, rerouting appears to be the only safe choice.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-te.hazard25may25,0,3839063.story
Some of the blogs were good. Most if not all were for the railroads
http://www.youtube.com/user/pavabo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulvbox
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.