Posted on 01/15/2014 3:09:22 AM PST by thackney
Regulations that could force oil companies to use stronger rail cars to move crude likely will be ready in 2015, according to a schedule released Tuesday by the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Oil companies have increasingly used rail cars to move crude, but recent disasters, including a derailment and massive explosions in North Dakota last month, have drawn attention to the cars’ vulnerabilities. New regulations that could force older tank cars to be upgraded or phased out are under development, but will not be proposed until Nov. 12 and will be subject to a public comment period until Jan. 12, 2015, according to the Department of Transportation.
However, that initial timeline could shift as the process continues, said Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration spokesman Gordon Delacambre.
Recent derailments and explosions, including one in Quebec that killed 47, have involved tank cars widely thought to be weak.
The National Transportation Safety Board on Monday drew more concern about the tank cars, reporting that 18 of the 20 tank cars that derailed in the North Dakota incident were punctured. The NTSB also confirmed that the tank cars involved in the incident were an aging model that has drawn scrutiny for being especially vulnerable to punctures.
Weak shells
The board has for years said the widely used DOT-111 rail tank cars are weak and should be retrofitted or phased out because they experience more serious damage in accidents than other models, such as pressure tank cars. The difference “can be attributed to the fact that pressure tank cars have thicker shells and heads,” the agency’s chairwoman, Deborah Hersman, wrote in a letter to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration in 2009.
The Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration sets regulations for the rail cars.
About 85 percent of the 92,000 tank cars used to transport flammable liquids in the United States are DOT-111s or other car types that need to be phased out or upgraded, according to the American Association of Railroads.
Comments and proposals
Regulators have solicited comments about the potential regulations and have begun analyzing proposals that would address concerns about the DOT-111 tank cars, Delacambre said.
Despite increased calls for updated regulations following the Dec. 30 derailment in North Dakota, the regulations will take months to develop. Railway workers and companies have been among those calling for new regulations.
Railways typically do not own the rail cars used to hold oil. The cars typically are owned or leased by the companies shipping products by rail.
wasn’t Warren buying railroad stock as soon as Obama was elected?
what a coinky dink
While not all are owned that way, keep in mind these oil trains are often replacing pipeline. The same cars are dedicated to the same pickup and delivery and run non-stop.
Also dry freight doesn’t worry about contamination from the previous load. They need to be sure what they load in and out.
Sorry, I forgot one more piece.
From the following article:
Rail customers, like oil companies, buy or lease the tank cars that they use to ship their products.
Remember the Keystone Pipeline? Don’t you get a feeling there is an effort by the Carbon Nuts to pinch off our distribution of domestic oil production? Michael Whatley thinks so:
Michael Whatley, executive vice president of Consumer Energy Alliance, an industry-backed group that supports Keystone, said more rail accidents can be expected with the increased use of trains to carry oil to market.
“Trains need to be a supplement, not a replacement” for pipelines, Whatley said. While both forms of transportation are safe, “we need expanded pipeline infrastructure,” he said.
Here is an article that gives a picture of what’s going on in the pipeline vs rail debate:
We would have the Keystone Pipeline if it were not for the “regulatory tyranny” going on in this country. In my opinion, the pipeline is safer because they go though less populated areas, unlike trains.
You can make the train only so safe. The Casselton, North Dakota incident may have happened because of a broken axle. How do we prevent against those types of failures? Making the tank cars more resistant to punctures will be expensive and there is no guarantee such efforts will prevent all explosions. There is always the possibility of terrorist activity too. We can only be so safe and then we try to live with the things that happen out of our control. Those who play on our fears are doing so because of an agenda. The agenda is to limit our use of fossil fuels. The Regime is doing everything it can through “regulatory tyranny” to do so.
One more reason for rail companies to improve their equipment: if they don’t, their insurance costs will go up. And, insurance companies will demand that the rail companies make their equipment more reliable, or they will lose their insurance coverage. You wouldn’t want to risk a huge lawsuit without insurance coverage. When the Obama Regime gets their regularity hands into the problem, I would suspect their agenda to limit fossil fuel production. Don’t you?
While the Keystone XL would carry some domestic production, the large majority of it would be Canadian imported oil/bitumen. Of course I would rather import more from Canada and less from OPEC.
“or they perceive it will lessen their exposure to lawsuits”
We have a consensus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.