view counter

HazmatU.S. to impose stricter safety rules on crude oil rail shipment

Published 5 August 2014

The U.S. Department of Transportation(DOT) recently announced proposed rulesbetter to secure train cars and pipelines from oil spills that may lead to fire or accidents in communities across the country. The spills are byproducts of the increase in U.S. oil production and shipments coming from Canada or the Bakken oil fields of North Dakota. The proposed DOT rules would force railroads to upgrade railroad cars used for transporting crude oil, employ better braking systems, and enforce tighter speed controls.

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) recently announced proposed rules better to secure train cars and pipelines from oil spills that may lead to fire or accidents in communities across the country. The spills are byproducts of the increase in U.S. oil production and shipments coming from Canada or the Bakken oil fields of North Dakota.

In April, more than a dozen train cars carrying crude oil derailed in Lynchburg, Virginia, causing a fire that forced hundreds of people to evacuate. This time no one was injured, but gallons of crude oil did spill into the James River. Residents in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, suffered a more tragic loss when an unattended 74-car train derailed in July 2013. That accident killed forty-seven people after spilled crude oil caught fire and caused several cars to explode.

The Pew Charitable Trusts reports that the proposed DOT rules would force railroads to upgrade railroad cars used for transporting crude oil, employ better braking systems, and enforce tighter speed controls. Some states have already put in place safeguards to improve rail safety for shipments involving crude oil. Minnesota passed legislation in May to require more rail inspections and provide better emergency response training and preparedness for vulnerable communities. This year, the state expects to collect $6.4 million in fees from railroads and pipeline companies to pay for the new efforts.

Current oil pipeline capacity is unable entirely to support the transportation of crude oil to the nation’s 115 refineries, so railroads are picking up the slack, although it can cost up to $10 more a barrel to ship by rail, according to a May report by the Congressional Research Service. The dependence on railroads will continue to put communities at risk, but pipelines do spill.

The Manhattan Institute for Policy Research found that through 2009, pipelines released more oil per spill than rail, partly because not only do pipelines carry more oil, but they are often placed in isolated areas, which take longer to get to during a leak. Nevertheless, the proposed rules are largely targeted at railroads carrying the more flammable Bakken crude oil. The legislation will ban older rail tanker cars from shipping crude oil across the country within two years unless they are retrofitted with thicker skins and anti-rollover protection. Currently, of the industry’s 92,000 tank cars used to carry flammable liquids, only 18,000 are built to meet the proposed standards.

DOT is also considering reducing the speed limit to 40 mph in rural areas and 30 mph in urban areas for crude oil trains with twenty or more cars and include at least one older tank car. The Association of American Railroads insist that a 30 mph limit in urban areas could cost railroads 10 percent of their capacity to ship cargo, and will slow down freight and Amtrak passenger trains traveling across the country.

On their part, railroads are working with states to notify officials of potentially harmful shipments. “We take our responsibility for moving oil in a safe and efficient manner seriously,” the railroad association said. “That is why the rail industry is working with our customers, suppliers and (federal regulators) to find ways to make a safe network even safer.”

States do acknowledge the benefit of railroads and pipelines for shipping crude. “We need to move crude oil,” said Alexia Retallack with the California Office of Spill Prevention and Response. “But we need to do it in a way that doesn’t pose risks to citizens or the environment.”

view counter
view counter