schlimm \ And the rail industry resists retrofits.
\ And the rail industry resists retrofits.
Don't let the facts get in the way of your rant there dude....
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303559504579196303848431002
An "expensive model collector"
schlimm zugmann So Schlimm - what do we do next? What should the railroads do, the shippers do, the governments do? What should they do right now to satisfy you? You really don't get it, do you? It's not about me, what I want , satisfying me. And it isn't about you. It's about doing all that can be done to minimize the probability that the next accident isn't 40 tank cars overfilled with Bakken crude exploding in a metro area. It's what the public wants.
zugmann So Schlimm - what do we do next? What should the railroads do, the shippers do, the governments do? What should they do right now to satisfy you?
So Schlimm - what do we do next? What should the railroads do, the shippers do, the governments do?
What should they do right now to satisfy you?
You really don't get it, do you?
It's not about me, what I want , satisfying me. And it isn't about you. It's about doing all that can be done to minimize the probability that the next accident isn't 40 tank cars overfilled with Bakken crude exploding in a metro area. It's what the public wants.
Our modern society entails risks. There's no way around that. What the public wants is something that doesn't exist. Namely all the modern gadgets and conveniences with no risks and no pollution of any kind. I'm not saying things can't be made safer, but the goal advertised to the public by those with their own agendas (and everyone on every side of any issue has their own agenda) often are unrealistic and unachievable. That is unless everyone is willing to give up much of their modern lifestyles. That last part is never told to the public. Probably because those pushing the agendas know the public wouldn't be as willing to follow then.
No new design of construction or upgrade for existing tank cars will be ever be good enough for some. They will say they are still dangerous and liable to leak or burn or whatever. And because nothing that man builds can be made perfect, eventually a new safer tank car will be involved in a derailment and something bad will happen. But then I think the real goal for many isn't so much a safer way to transport petroleum products, but the abandonment of petroleum and all other fossil fuels. They just use the excuse of the former to try to sell the latter.
Jeff
schlimm I believe the public is tired of excuses and stalling, because it is pretty clear that has been happening for many years already.
I believe the public is tired of excuses and stalling, because it is pretty clear that has been happening for many years already.
Other than the Lac Megantic accident I don't believe there has been any major outcry from the general public regarding this. Sure the sensationalism media is playing it up, but I've not heard a single soul in my neighborhood even raise the matter.
Norm
schlimm I will answer as i wish, not as you rudely demand. I am not a technical expert. So I do not have a solution and neither do you, since you are not a technical expert either. One thing seems clear. There is a danger which has been known about the DOT 111 cars for 30 years. There has been a lot of buck-passing (RRs, leasing companies, handling shippers, oil companies, AAR, NTSB, FRA, PHMSA) and there is a lot of money involved since Bakken took off four years ago. Too bad the various industries didn't do something earlier, but that would have cut short the 40 year life of the tank cars in question. Some have said it will take 5-10 years to replace the DOT 111's, which coincidentally (?) would correspond with their normal retirement time. All the regulatory agencies, rails and oil-related companies need to sit down quickly in the DOT and arrive at a series of measures to address the problem Dave Klepper (a retired industrial engineer) offered a suggestion based on Fred Frailey's column. Both he and Frailey were dismissed as outsiders. At least one rail CEO sees this as a crisis. But it is apparent that many on this forum to see this is a tempest in a teapot and hope it just goes away in the short news cycles. Maybe it will. Maybe not. I believe the public is tired of excuses and stalling, because it is pretty clear that has been happening for many years already.
I will answer as i wish, not as you rudely demand. I am not a technical expert. So I do not have a solution and neither do you, since you are not a technical expert either. One thing seems clear. There is a danger which has been known about the DOT 111 cars for 30 years. There has been a lot of buck-passing (RRs, leasing companies, handling shippers, oil companies, AAR, NTSB, FRA, PHMSA) and there is a lot of money involved since Bakken took off four years ago. Too bad the various industries didn't do something earlier, but that would have cut short the 40 year life of the tank cars in question. Some have said it will take 5-10 years to replace the DOT 111's, which coincidentally (?) would correspond with their normal retirement time. All the regulatory agencies, rails and oil-related companies need to sit down quickly in the DOT and arrive at a series of measures to address the problem
Dave Klepper (a retired industrial engineer) offered a suggestion based on Fred Frailey's column. Both he and Frailey were dismissed as outsiders. At least one rail CEO sees this as a crisis. But it is apparent that many on this forum to see this is a tempest in a teapot and hope it just goes away in the short news cycles. Maybe it will. Maybe not. I believe the public is tired of excuses and stalling, because it is pretty clear that has been happening for many years already.
So basically, you don't have even the slightest suggestion?
Interesting.
Sorry if I came off as rude.
Nah... I'm not really sorry, to be honest.
But my opinion or yours isn't worth donkey spit because we aren't technical engineers, but yet Frailey's is, even though he isn't a technical engineer either? Did I miss something?
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Schlimm,
I want your opinion.
What do you ( a member of the public) think should be done (since you are well-read in the subject, judging from your posts).
Yet another oil train thread by Schlimm.
Sigh.
schlimm http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/05/20343288-danger-on-the-tracks-unsafe-rail-cars-carry-oil-through-us-towns?lite Lots of excuses, but little action in the 30 years since the DOT 111 cars were first identified as dangerous. The PHMSA has to rule, but it has stalled for several years. And the rail industry resists retrofits.
http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/09/05/20343288-danger-on-the-tracks-unsafe-rail-cars-carry-oil-through-us-towns?lite
Lots of excuses, but little action in the 30 years since the DOT 111 cars were first identified as dangerous. The PHMSA has to rule, but it has stalled for several years. And the rail industry resists retrofits.
The rail industry is not resisting retrofits!
The car owners (who are really financial types - not railroaders) are the ones resisting retrofitting the cars.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
With few exceptions, the rail industry does not own the cars. And they have shown a lot of concern about carrying hazmat. I don't see how you can say that they resist retrofits. If anyone is to blame, it is the petroleum and chemical industry and, perhaps, the leasing companies.
John Timm
So obviously the answer is cars that would be more secure. That ain't gonna happen overnight and the cost of retrofitting cars may not be practical as many of them may be nearing the end of their service life.
Direct link to the FRA Report for which the article is based:
James
GP-9_Man11786 I wonder if all this negative publicity will end up getting the Keystone XL pipeline approved.
I wonder if all this negative publicity will end up getting the Keystone XL pipeline approved.
Which makes one wonder if maybe there isn't someone behind this report, pushing an agenda.
Larry 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...
Modeling the Pennsylvania Railroad in N Scale.
www.prr-nscale.blogspot.com
http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/16/22255104-regulators-knew-about-risky-transport-of-oil-before-train-crashes-documents-show
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.