Trains.com

Vinyl Chloride “Controlled Burn” East Palestine Derailment Surprising News

9517 views
80 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 5:06 PM

daveklepper

Euclid, I agree there was panic forcing unwise decisions, but who is to say that you or I, even with the best  training, would not have made the same very-rash decisions.

And pointing the finger at whose panic  it was, does not seem to me to be particularly useful

Important to learn the lessons for the future, get to the manufacturer FAST.  And Hazmat Transportationb must always have that ability.

And what is the situation with the people of East Palestine now?

 

Dave,
 
 
Regarding your comment that this scenario teaches the lesson that the chemical manufacturer must be gotten to the wreck site FAST; thus implying that was not the case:  From the news articles, I conclude that the manufacture was on-site and provided a full evaluation of the situation well prior to the decision to conduct the burn-off was being made.  From the articles, I conclude that the manufacturer advised that the chemical was not in danger of exploding and thus there was no reason to do a burn-off.  But their advice was ignored.   
 
 
  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 3:40 PM

Chemical plant employees generally don't die while at work.  They usually make it to retirement and then die of some weird cancer.  Their family members might also have elevated rates of health problems. 

There's a reason that the Chemtrec name and phone numbers are written on the side of pretty much every tank car assigned to dangerous goods service, just like the placards with the UN number of whatever's in there.  Some cars even have the chemical's common name painted on the side.

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 3:14 PM

charlie hebdo
 
Overmod
I presume the cars were placarded, and that first responders understood how to look up and read the reference in the Orange Book [and, as Tree reminded me, call CHEMTREC].

Presumptions of correct actions are not necessarily correct, as you know full well, especially in urgent situations with conflicting needs and actors.

They had hours to assess this situation, including the time between their press release describing the effects of the burn and the actual breach and burn.  To claim that this didn't leave time to pull up the Orange Book and then dial the CHEMTREC number if the Book didn't give satisfaction is at best ingenuous.

Remember that the official pravda is now that nobody would have advised, authorized, or condoned the 'controlled burn'.  So there had to be a great deal of protracted running in circles, screaming and shouting for hours, leaving enough attention free to threaten NS personnel with arrest, without anyone actually finding the (now supposedly self-evident) references that established hazmat response procedure would have located within minutes... asynchronously with any on-site proceedings requiring foreground attention.

I'm all for giving emergency responders the benefit of a doubt... but the cumulative research and actions taken here only involve excuses, and demonstrably poor ones.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 12:51 PM

blue streak 1
Why should we trust this manufacturer of Vinal Cloride?  ...

Presumably they know how to spell it.  In as much as the manufacturer is handling it daily in their manufacturing processes - they either know how to handle it or their employees are dying in droves.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,020 posts
Posted by tree68 on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 12:41 PM

charlie hebdo
Presumptions of correct actions are not necessarily correct, as you know full well, especially in urgent situations with conflucting needs and actors.

As the old saying goes, "when you're up to your a** in alligators, it's hard to remember that your mission is to drain the swamp."

That's not a reference to the current usage of the term "drain the swamp."

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
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 12:39 PM

Why should we trust this manufacturer of Vinyl Chloride?  IMO it is in their best interest to make these claims.  They may be true or not.  Only a very independent labatory can study a precise reaction of the VC under labatory conditions.  My orange book is not up to date.  Is VC only under one plackard or is it divided into sections depending on how each load's chemistry is in the load.  

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 12:07 PM

Overmod
I presume the cars were placarded, and that first responders understood how to look up and read the reference in the Orange Book [and, as Tree reminded me, call CHEMTREC].

Presumptions of correct actions are not necessarily correct, as you know full well, especially in urgent situations with conflucting needs and actors.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,020 posts
Posted by tree68 on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 10:48 AM

The number for CHEMTREC ((800) 262-8200) is in the orange book, and on every MSDS.  

They have at their fingertips virtually all the information responders need when dealing with a hazmat incident.  Including the manufacturer, particularly in the case of car loads - which is one reason the car number is also painted on the top of tank cars.

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
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 10:27 AM

daveklepper
And what is the situation with the people of East Palestine now?

That's really the criterion for assessing the accident response and aftermath.  By extension, that applies to everyone else (in Ohio or elsewhere) subjected to the atmospheric or hydrological plume.

Of course East Palestine now has to wait for the "next" NS incident on the rebuilt line.  With all the pile-on sources eager to point out how incompetent/heartless/mercenary/etc. Norfolk Southern and its doxxable management are.  If, as I suspect, there is political expediency or CYA involved, this ill-serves the victim communities.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 8:40 AM

daveklepper
Important to learn the lessons for the future, get to the manufacturer FAST.  And Hazmat Transportationb must always have that ability.

That's not the takeaway lesson here.  Any more than it was for Lac Megantic, where a five-minute call to Randy or anyone else in the shops would have definitively plugged many of the necessary holes in the cheese.

We already have mandatory placarding, and recording of the placard information in the train consist, and a published reference to quickly consult how to handle the associated hazardous material.  What is 'necessary' is to ensure first that the Orange Book reference corresponding to a load is clear, concise, and up-to-date regarding how to react in what may be different circumstances, and second that if there is any uncertainty about how to proceed on the information given, THEN clear and 24/7 access to manufacturer, shipper, or appropriate clearinghouse be provided in the Book itself (if not, indeed, in the consist information being tracked by the railroad(s) involved).

Three lines covering stabilizers and initiators would likely have prevented the issue here.  Even if the specific materials are trade secrets, that has never been a 'bar' to compiling very precise technical information on how to dose and use proprietary chemicals with coded names.  (Technical formularies are infuriatingly full of that sort of thing...)

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 8:30 AM

Euclid
If you read/listen to the two links I posted at the start of this thread, it is not hard to conclude that there is another explanation for the rush to do an open burn-off.

But... it wasn't a "rush" to plan the burnoff; it was advertised to the community long before the actual event.  Part of what I expect to be documented in the report is where that "13 minutes" came from, what the actual methodology of determining temperature rise was, and who was involved in the decision-making at that point.

My opinion at this point, based only on the information provided up to this point, is that someone 'other than Norfolk Southern employees' was responsible for the planning, for taking all five cars of vinyl chloride simultaneously, and for the choice of inducing what was basically a BLEVE not only in the overpressured car, but the other four presumably cold ones -- accounting for the comparatively great amount of unreacted vinyl chloride that showed up in the streams.

And that a great deal of manipulation is beginning to take place to shuck responsibility for that, and to pass it onto Norfolk Southern for... reasons other than objective fact.

It may transpire that Norfolk Southern originally requested that prompt action be taken to facilitate opening the line to traffic at the earliest possible time.  It seems to me that exploding multiple cars of vinyl-chloride monomer in 20-degree weather would not possibly facilitate that, and even a cursory reference to publically-accessible industry information would surely back that up.  In any case we shouldn't overlook that Norfolk Southern was taken out of the chain of incident command, under duress, hours before the decision was taken to do the burn.  I presume the cars were placarded, and that first responders understood how to look up and read the reference in the Orange Book [and, as Tree reminded me, call CHEMTREC].  It will be interesting to read the interviews in the docket and see who actuallly checked what, or what their stories are at the time their interview was conducted.

Meanwhile, consult the timeline again, and tell me no one had time to consult the manufacturer or shipper on how to proceed...

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 4:51 AM

Euclid, I agree there was panic forcing unwise decisions, but who is to say that you or I, even with the best  training, would not have made the same very-rash decisions.

And pointing the finger at whose panic  it was, does not seem to me to be particularly useful

Important to learn the lessons for the future, get to the manufacturer FAST.  And Hazmat Transportationb must always have that ability.

And what is the situation with the people of East Palestine now?

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Monday, July 10, 2023 6:17 PM

MidlandMike

 

 
Euclid
The core issue in East Palestine and the greater region of Ohio and Pennsylvania is the degree and effect of residents’ exposure to vinyl chloride due to the open burn of five tank car loads of the chemical for the purpose of disposing of it. ...

 

The purpose of the burn was so that people wouldn't be exposed to vinyl chloride.  In addition to reducing the chance of explosion, burning it would convert it into other products (HCl, phosgene) while also bad, but at least combustion heats the products causing them to rise into the atmosphere and disperse to a lower concentration.  Vinyl chloride is a heaver-than-air gas that could have been a disaster if it escaped unburned.

 

That is definitely the consensus view of the group of officials that decided on the burn-off.  But the manufacturer of the vinyl chloride and the EPA disagree with that consensus conclusion.  
 
The manufacturer of the vinyl chloride disagreed and told them there was no chance of polymerization and no indication of a pressure rise trend.  The NTSB provided the temperature logs that showed no rising trend. 
 
Was there any consultation with a contractor who could come on site and offer to off-load the product and remove it from the site in an orderly and safe manner?  If not, why not?  And why was the advice of the vinyl chloride manufacturer rejected by the consensus?  
 
 
  • Member since
    September 2011
  • 6,449 posts
Posted by MidlandMike on Sunday, July 9, 2023 10:08 PM

Euclid
The core issue in East Palestine and the greater region of Ohio and Pennsylvania is the degree and effect of residents’ exposure to vinyl chloride due to the open burn of five tank car loads of the chemical for the purpose of disposing of it. ...

The purpose of the burn was so that people wouldn't be exposed to vinyl chloride.  In addition to reducing the chance of explosion, burning it would convert it into other products (HCl, phosgene) while also bad, but at least combustion heats the products causing them to rise into the atmosphere and disperse to a lower concentration.  Vinyl chloride is a heaver-than-air gas that could have been a disaster if it escaped unburned.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Sunday, July 9, 2023 4:33 PM

Here are some things to ponder that I couldn't post last night.

Keep in mind that 'stabilizers' for vinyl chloride monomer are different chemicals, I won't say 'radically' different because you'll complain, from stabilizers for polyvinyl chloride plastic.  The former is what is concerned here, and what the patent covered.  Until a report describes precisely what was used in the five cars, and what its concentration may have been, it would be premature at best to try claiming that "the vinyl chloride wouldn't polymerize".  You may note in the patent that part of the stabilization that would apply -- effectively, if the times given were accurate -- to normal transit conditions does not impair subsequent polymerization to much more degree than for untreated vinyl chloride; it does not require either distillation or washing with caustic to allow controlled and intended polymerization.

You will also note the reaction conditions given.  They are in degrees K, which means you subtract ~273 to get degrees C.  Note the critical pressure required to 'keep the vinyl chloride liquid' at this range of temperature.

Now go back to the problem with the one tank car that was said to be suffering a pressure excursion in part because its relief valving had been damaged.  The pressure would have eventually broken out a rupture disk in the tank-car structure -- again, the report will contain the location of the likeliest overpressure protection, its orientation after the wreck, and the dimensions of the opening that would have been opened (quickly and irrevocably) should the disk separate.

The temperature of the vinyl chloride corresponding to that rupture pressure would be easily determined by anyone with access to chemical references on vinyl chloride.  The stabilizer would do little if anything to affect the relationship of pressure and temperature in the monomer.

However, with runaway pressure the reaction kinetics leading to polymerization may outweigh the chain-terminating action of the quantity of phenolic present.  Since there is no other mechanism that would have produced autogenous heating in the still-sealed tank car, whether or not it was supposed to be "impossible" to induce polymerization would have to be discussed only after the actual cause of the temperature rise observed, other than polymerization, was determined and to the extent possible counteracted.  (In this case, at low ambient temperature, in my opinion water spraying would have been effective...)

Now, it was a considerable time between the initial recognition that the car couldn't be vented, and the temperature inside it was observed to be rising, and the time the decision to conduct the 'controlled burn' was announced.  As I recall, and it could be easily fact-checked both here and in the docket, that announcement was made by public responders (the 'bright' and 'loud' notice) some hours after the accident had settled.  And it was then some time longer before the actual 'action' was taken.  That does not jibe, at all, with someone's claim that the situation 'would be critical in another 13 minutes' and immediate serious action needed to be taken.  To me there's also a cognitive dissonance between the claim now made that the observed temperature was fluctuating up and down and the claim the pressure, as detemined by the temperature, would reach dangerous critical runaway in under 15 minutes.

I suspect there has been some creative generation of alternative fact in here somewhere, perhaps with the sort of long-term political goals or advantage we have discussed previously.  Now that claims of objective science are being interjected, it is much more important to correlate what early reports and timing of events were reported as being.

Likewise, it bothers me that the supposed "chemical required to initiate polymerization in stabilized vinyl chloride' doesn't have a name.  It is unlikely to be a trade secret; the usual chemical is an organic peroxide like methyl ethyl ketone peroxide or the benzoyl peroxide beloved of acne-suffering teens.  

 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,020 posts
Posted by tree68 on Sunday, July 9, 2023 12:15 PM

Euclid
Inquiring minds want to know.

Hindsight is always 20-20.

At the time, to someone, burning it off seemed to be the right answer.  That the collective memory no longer recalls the why does seem to indicate that maybe those same folks now realize it wasn't the answer.

Kinda like people who throw water on burning oil on their stove.

There are landfills and bodies of water all over the country where "out of sight, out of mind" was the once word of the day.  And all over the country, there are Superfund sites and brownfields as a result.

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 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Sunday, July 9, 2023 10:51 AM

daveklepper

News on the current condirion of the East Palestine Population, whtNS has done folr them, and the  current nature of the relationship?

 

The core issue in East Palestine and the greater region of Ohio and Pennsylvania is the degree and effect of residents’ exposure to vinyl chloride due to the open burn of five tank car loads of the chemical for the purpose of disposing of it.  As I understand the safety data for this chemical, there is no safe threshold of human exposure to this chemical.  However, the situation is hard to diagnose because most of the dangerous health effects develop over time, so we don’t have a clear answer to what effects will develop.  This uncertainty hangs over the town and its residents.
 
I understand that the chemical has an odor, and if one detects that odor, it means that they are inhaling the chemical.  Any degree of inhaling the chemical is officially forbidden during the handling and use of this chemical.  Not one molecule of Vinyl Chloride may be safely ingested.   And the known health effects include several life threatening diseases, which is well documented and warned about in the safety literature for this chemical.  So any skin contact or inhalation of this chemical is not allowed to happen during the handling and use of the chemical.   
 
And yet, in the town, at the wreck site, there were five tank car loads of this chemical released into open pits and set ablaze for the purpose of disposing of it.  Before and after the fire, many residents complained of chemical odors that were irritating and causing various negative health symptoms.  I don’t see how they could have detected these odors without inhaling the chemicals that were causing them.
 
The fire produced copious black smoke rising in a spectacular solid black mushroom cloud rising hundreds of feet high.  Then the cloud dispersed horizontally in an airborne layer that later fell back down over a wide range within both Ohio and Pennsylvania.  So the question is whether any residents inhaled vinyl chloride either before or after the fire.
 
 
As far as I know, the EPA did not take a position against the burn-off prior to its execution, but since then, they have said the burn-off was not legal, and they would not have approved it.  Those advocating the burn-off had labeled it as being a “controlled burn,” which might have been legal if approved ahead of time.  But now, the EPA has said that the fire was not a “controlled burn,” but was an “open burn” which is not legal and would not have been approved by the EPA.  However, there is some confusion over this matter because apparently one local office of the EPA either approved the burn-off or knew about the plan but took no position. 
 
So that is where this was left a few months ago in the immediate aftermath of the burn-off.  At that time, when the impending disaster was predicted, it was claimed that the temperature was rising in one of the five tank cars, and this was said to mean that the chemical was beginning to undergo a reaction called "polymerization."  It was claimed that this polymerization would lead to an explosion of the tank car, and cause widespread destruction and fire throughout the town.  The fact is that now we will never know if that prediction was true. 
 
The latest news is in my first post above based on testimony of the manufacturer of the vinyl chloride, and also from testimony of one member of the EPA.  The manufacture said the following:
 
There was no polymerization occurring.
 
There was no overheating occurring.
 
Even if overheating had been  occurring, no polymerization was possible
 
Therefore, there was no reason or justification for the burn-off.
 
The remaining question is: “Why was the burn-off done?”
 
Inquiring minds want to know.
  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Sunday, July 9, 2023 4:55 AM

News on the current condirion of the East Palestine Population, whtNS has done folr them, and the  current nature of the relationship?

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Saturday, July 8, 2023 10:02 PM

See this patent's discussion for some of the preferred stabilization methods and assumptions for vinyl chloride monomer:

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/bd/60/04/3f3e2a4710a07a/US3225108.pdf

Note the very small effective concentration of phenolic and the extended stabilization time even in the presence of some atmospheric oxygen and moisture.  But also note the point about not impeding polymerization in process without removing the stabilizer (e.g. via caustic reaction and/or distillation).  

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Saturday, July 8, 2023 8:33 PM

Overmod

Someone is not only lacking in knowledge or organic chemistry, but is too lazy to look up basic industry references.

Vinyl chloride will suffer 'runaway' polymerization if excessively heated under pressure -- the polymerization is exothermic; how do they explain the autogenous temperature rise in a sealed car otherwise?

We have noted the seeming idiocy of breaching the other four cars simultaneously, especially since it did not seem all five cars were close enough together that an overpressure breach of the 'runaway' car would breach or damage all four others.  I continue to await definitive reporting on the locations of the cars and their 'surroundings'.  I am also still awaiting the name(s) of whoever directly ordered the breach and controlled ignition -- you will recall that the official description of what was going to happen ('bright' and 'loud', etc.) came several hours after the wreck, and as I recall after the NS wreck master was threatened with arrest when he attempted to act as incident commander.

 

 

 

I am only paraphrasing to report the claims being made in the two links.  In those news reports, there are further claims that I have not mentioned.   One of those states why there was a last minute change of plans to burn all five cars rather than just the one that was thought to be overheating due to polymerization.
 
Apparently all or part of this new information comes from a recent NTSB hearing on the derailment.  In my opinion, the second news link could have been a lot clearer as to who was saying what.  But I gather that the manufacturer of the vinyl chloride consulted with NS and others involved in decision making, and the manufacturer stated that they concluded there was no over overheating of the product.  The manufacturer also stated that polymerization was impossible due to the lack of a specific organic chemical. 
 
The manufacturer referred to the product in the tank cars as Stabilized Vinyl Chloride.  They stress in the subsequent hearing that they explained this point to those planning the burn—apparently to explain why polymerization was not possible. 
 
Reading between the lines, I speculate that the word, “Stabilized” in the product called Stabilized Vinyl Chloride means that the product is chemically stabilized to prevent polymerization.  It would prevent the very explosion problem that was believed to be arising due to the tank cars being wrecked and exposed to fire.  Then once the load would have arrived at the receiving plant, the abovementioned “organic chemical” would be added to, in effect, “unlock” the vinyl chloride and thus make it usable for its intended manufacturing purpose.  Although then it would also become “unstable” and therefore subject to polymerization under certain conditions.  Therefore, the stabilization is a safety feature that makes the product safer to transport.
 
It was also stated that the ones who had to decide whether to approve the burn felt they were out of options by the way the problem was framed.  They claim they only had 13 minutes to make the decision. 
 
According to the first link I posted:
 
William Carroll, a chemistry professor at Indiana University, told the hearing that a chemical reaction can’t happen in the presence of heat alone.  He said it also needs an organic chemical, which wasn’t present, to be activated by the heat.
 
NTSB investigators also showed a temperature graph that showed that, based on the available data, tank car temperatures were fluctuating but not warming enough to indicate the chemical reaction was happening.
  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Friday, July 7, 2023 9:13 PM

Someone is not only lacking in knowledge or organic chemistry, but is too lazy to look up basic industry references.

Vinyl chloride will suffer 'runaway' polymerization if excessively heated under pressure -- the polymerization is exothermic; how do they explain the autogenous temperature rise in a sealed car otherwise?

We have noted the seeming idiocy of breaching the other four cars simultaneously, especially since it did not seem all five cars were close enough together that an overpressure breach of the 'runaway' car would breach or damage all four others.  I continue to await definitive reporting on the locations of the cars and their 'surroundings'.  I am also still awaiting the name(s) of whoever directly ordered the breach and controlled ignition -- you will recall that the official description of what was going to happen ('bright' and 'loud', etc.) came several hours after the wreck, and as I recall after the NS wreck master was threatened with arrest when he attempted to act as incident commander.

 

 

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Vinyl Chloride “Controlled Burn” East Palestine Derailment Surprising News
Posted by Euclid on Friday, July 7, 2023 7:49 PM
Here are some new claims that have emerged in the wake of the so-called “controlled burn” of five tank car loads of vinyl chloride involved in the Norfolk Southern wreck in East Palestine earlier this year.  This information is based on two news reports which I have included here as links.  I make no claims as to its truthfulness or accuracy of this information:
 

1)   There was some temperature increase of one of the carloads that was measured, but there never was any “polymerization” occurring in that load.

 

 

 

2)   There never was any risk of polymerization in any of the five carloads because polymerization required the addition of another organic chemical needed to activate a polymerization process.  Without that key chemical, no amount of heating of the vinyl chloride would have resulted in polymerization.  So there never was a reason for the so-called controlled burn. 

 

 

 

3)   There never was a “controlled burn” because the burn-off was actually an “open burn” which is prohibited by the EPA.

 

 

 

4)   The local approval of the burn was only for one tank car load.  There was no approval for the additional 4 carloads that were included in the burn.

 

 

 
LINKS TO THE REPORTS:
 
 

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