Trains.com

CSX oil train derailment

14724 views
185 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, February 16, 2015 8:03 PM

Probably another example of issue-focused hyperbole...Thanks, Jay!

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    May 2013
  • 3,231 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Monday, February 16, 2015 7:24 PM

This happened during a really cold spell-broken rail?

  • Member since
    May 2002
  • 318 posts
Posted by JayPotter on Monday, February 16, 2015 5:02 PM
As a resident of Charleston, I'm aware of concern about the adequacy of governmental regulation of chemical storage tanks. However I'm not aware of continued complaints about water taste; and until now, I had never heard any reports of tap water igniting.
  • Member since
    June 2001
  • From: Lombard (west of Chicago), Illinois
  • 13,681 posts
Posted by CShaveRR on Monday, February 16, 2015 4:28 PM

This would be a bit upstream from the one you're (accurately) remembering, Paul.  That was one that started on a tributary of the Kanawha River (and reporters and newscasters are having fun with that spelling and pronunciation!) just above Charleston.

This one was at least immediately noticeable, and precautions could be taken in time.  The other one, with non-cooperatve owners, not so much.  It wasn't that long ago that I read that the water there still tastes strange and can ignite at the tap, though it's allegedly safe to drink.  I'll pass this year, thanks! 

Carl

Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)

CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Monday, February 16, 2015 3:50 PM

"+1" to Euclid's post above.  This one gets an "OMG" from me.

Grumpy Thanks a lot, CSX. Devil [heavy sarcasm]

Was it Bakken crude ?  Seems to have been very 'light' and volatile to burn that fiercely.

Only mitigating circumstances are that the fire will 'burn off' some of it, lessening the spill/ pollution of the river and drinking water sources; and the very cold temperatures may congeal the stuff at least a little bit to reduce how fast and far it spreads.

Didn't this same area have the massive leak/ spill of the 'coal treatment fluid' of some kind that also contaminated water sources about a year ago ?  If so, that'll leave all the local residents and officilas at various levels of government not too kindly disposed towards another one like that and hence CSX, to say the least.    

- Paul North.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Monday, February 16, 2015 2:28 PM
Those are some dramatic pictures in the second link.  They seems to drive home the point that oil-by-rail detractors have been making.  That video of the fire and then an explosion looks just like the Lac Megantic fire.  I would say that this event will get a lot of coverage and play a big role in the debate.
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
CSX oil train derailment
Posted by blue streak 1 on Monday, February 16, 2015 2:11 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