Lets not even attempt to beat around the bush here. I know plenty of people on the inside of this industry and the problem is share holders and CEO's cutting back on safety to put money into their own pockets. When this happens, the end result is what you see here.....
@@gregjeffcoat4258 Yes. Shareholders want fast money and don't have the understanding of long time economy. Severe accidents have sent companies into bankruptcy many times in the past. Why aren't there brains that can lay out the future for those charks?
Lac-Megantic was a very unfortunate set of circumstances that caused that disaster. These are incidents caused by track issues have nothing in common with LM. CP and CN could spend billions of dollars across the system to do capital improvement projects to the track but these types of derailments will still happen. Rails are under an enormous stress when trains go over them, add that with wild temperature swings, the rail naturally expands and contracts, and unfortunately, breaks or kinks under a moving train. Rail transport is one of the most efficient ways to move freight and still is one of the safest. When a hazmat truck spills it cargo on a highway no one goes on a crusade to make the highway system safer
The anti-pipeline crowd is accidentally anti-environment. Moving our oil and gas products by train or truck is more dangerous for Canadians and worse for our environment.
@Andrew the Celt : Maybe crazy, but definitely dumb. Better is to just do away with use of this oil, or certainly with the quantities that these trains transport, for a LOT of it is destined for what, if not for making fuel for ... what ? As a source of energy, of course. There evidently are far better ways of developing or getting safer energy. Some oil may very well need to be continued for uses like for lubricating engines and some motor parts, and maybe for making grease, which is need for some motor vehicle components, but the amount of oil for these things or uses surely is a tiny portion compared to what's used for making fuel. Am not an expert about the latter idea, so it's a guess, but I'll also guess that it likely is a valid guess.
@@mikecorbeil Where do you think plastic comes from? How about steel? All industries use petroleum. You should do some research about what we use petroleum products for. It's way more than you are aware of obviously. The people who complain about this sort of stuff are the ones who have no idea what kinds of sacrifices they are signing up for. Start by finding out what you personally use that relies on petroleum and eliminate that from your life before you decide to ruin other peoples lives. Basically, clean up your own backyard before you go looking over your neighbour's fence.
@@googleuser6738 As if we need more plastics in the world. Phase out petroleum and people will find alternatives for everything derived from this filthy, destructive product. Transportation, heating, materials, you name it.
@@adrianpickel1482 I'm shocked.....I thought everything in O Canada was a government run enterprise. I stand corrected on that point. However, maintaining the equipment argument is still valid. And now even less excusable.
@@99hockeynhl The US has quite a few very large private rail companies and this doesn't seem to be a problem. Government takeover shouldn't be necessary.
@@saleendriver While there's no doubt cut backs have contributed, the issue often overlooked is how much of a role metal fatigue can play in these situations. The massive temperature variations in Canada create a lot of stress on rails and a fracture can often go unseen until it lets go. More money going into maintenance of way would help, but in some cases, blaming the railroad for negligence is like blaming a car driver for getting a puncture.
Replace the ties with concrete! They break down substantially slower (slow enough to likely or "perhaps" offset the initial cost) than wood ties and could allow for the use of high speed rail trains. 7 times is simply criminal. Yes, I am aware that it's an enormous amount of work to do, but it already has to be done, so why not in a manner which benefits the entire country in measurable likelyhood? The ground below is showing signs of reduced rigidity and may be the largest issue, but more likely is only so in perhaps smaller sections of the lines. Going concrete is perhaps a quality option for these lines.
As soon as that little piece of rubber in between the ties and rails wears out that concrete tie is useless and creates extremely fast wear in the concrete tie. Unlike wood ties that have a steel plate between the rail and tie.
Do you know what you are looking at? Corporate "cost cutting", irresponsibility, and shifting risks to those who cannot defend themselves. Classic capitalism.
i watch a tv programme in Scotland ON CANADIAN TRAINS , TAIL END OF LAST YEAR CREWS WERE GETTING WORRIED ABOUT LAYOFFS, SAW 1 HAPPENING TO FOREMAN OF TRACK MAINTENANCE , said they weren,t earning enough to keep them , didn,t think much of the guy getting promoted and taking it . if there trains don't pay carrying all that equipment ,maybe better shut down.
maintain the tracks better keep trains like this well below a certain speed so derailments are minor design tank car to withstand derailments, problem solved.
I grew up in Lévis and there were 2 tracks a mere 6 feet from my house right on the edge of the St.Lawrence River there, with two freights with DOT 111's a day and a daily Via Rail (except Tuesdays). When the train station closed in 1998 i was sorry to see the trains go, but come to think of it, maybe it's better that way, we maybe dodged a catastrophy slash environmental disaster. Still a train travel enthusiast though.
What's the problem the shareholders have been making buckets of money isn't that what it's all about, track maintenance would just cut into the profits
Due to PSR (precision scheduled railroading) tank trains have gotten longer heavyer. I remember seeing one tank train a couple of days ago with 3 locos up front two DPU in the middle and 2 DPU in the back with around 340 tanks I think
Maybe the federal government should implement a new law that prohibits freight trains from going beyond 120 cars. Everybody knows that trains these days are at a bare minimum of 160 cars. Usually they're 180 to 210 cars with DPU's in between.
@smokelesschoice165 I would say yeah 50 to 120 is reasonable, for coal trains idk because they mostly run one for the whole period of time but yeah 120 is reasonable
appears, like track upgrading is in order....what else, would cause ' broken tracks ' =heavy traffic= thermal expansion, contraction etc. 'metal fatique' steel in rails is 1084......perhaps not the proper steel, IN THE WINTER, WHERE IT IS VERY COLD, alotta the times.. ..old taxi crew driver...
Maybe we need more derailments in Quebec? Perhaps they would change their minds on building pipelines then...oui? This is how propane is hauled too. The fact that liberal government officials did not report deficiencies in rail lines, actually comes as no surprise. Our Ministers don't want to work...so why should anyone else?
Most CN tanker trains are about 7000-9000 feet long, they send up to 40 trains a day down any one track route, if it's set up to accommodate. They don't inspect frequent enough. They don't care to inspect more frequent. They care to send more trains into the US or across Canada.
In 1995 the Government of Canada cut back federal railroad safety inspectors and abolished the office saying that railroads were responsible enough to look after their own safety. Hence speeds shot up to 50mph from 30 for all tank cars and all freight. No limits on the length of them neither. Drop in maintenance across the board.
@@an0maly5k27 Car accidents are also preventable. But effectively impossible to prevent every time. Moving oil by rail is bad for the environment, and unsafe for Canadians. Pipelines are safer and more environmentally friendly than any other realistic method for moving bulk oil and gas products. Otherwise we'll continue to have preventable accidents where we drop thirty train cars worth of oil into a river, or preventable and accidentally blow up a town in Quebec. Until we can rid ourselves of oil we need to make the most environmentally responsible bad decisions. Oil is inherently bad, pipelines are the least bad option currently available.
@@DAndyLord How is moving oil by rail bad for the environment? its the most effective and safest form of transportation. Special regulations here are put in place when moving dangerous goods by rail in highly populated areas. Like do you understand that refineries use pipelines to make the product then ship it out by rail? You can't just build pipelines all over the place. Dangerous goods are moved 24/7 by rail and because of a few derailments (for what ever reason) its just completely unsafe? Canadians and Americans rely on such goods as propane being shipped by rail.
Or just actually maintaining the tracks properly. Good maintenance and safety procedures are what keeps things safe, not just putting stuff underground! Oil pipelines can cause spills just as large or bigger if not maintained as well.
One might think that a Nation that has the worlds most valuable commodities, might understand risk mitigation and economic opportunities by now, and have the worlds most advanced emergency response protocols, technology, equipment and trained manpower to address these disasters when they occur...
If the train were to derail explode and spill it would require a hard hit including:broken tracks,a track out of place,or the tracks were just poorly inspected and built
I am. Interesting. I live in Edmonds really close to the tracks. Line is really well-maintained, but one never knows. Bakken crude is flammable material, not combustible like regular crude. Big problem.
I know some people who work for the railroad and they have to go through intense protocols when transporting crude oil. They even have classes and emergency drills in case something like this happens.
Remote sensors to detect ground movement causing track heave + shorter rail lengths with breather-joints to cater for the seasonal temperature range + proving circuits to detect broken rails + resilient track components (ie concrete sleepers, panlock clips to resist rail turnover) would vastly reduce the risk to all rail traffic. But you’ll never see that as the cost will cause the directors to baulk. Cheaper to cross your fingers and hope it doesn’t happen.
Stop whining about crude oil trains. Railways ship thousands of dangerous chemicals besides crude and they won’t go by pipeline. Would you rather all of those products on the roads? Propane, benzene, butane, caustic soda, ammonia. Tens of thousands of cars shipped yearly even if you ban oil trains. Besides, rail safety has consistently improved every year for over a century.
Look at those long lines of tank cars pictured! Of course it's the crude trains causing the excessive rail wear problem! Overland rail petroleum transport to large refineries is cheaper than constructing and operating hundreds of miles of pipelines for many different reasons...
Daniel Ryslink you are right but now society has revolved around the ability to travel long distance in short times, without cars and buses operational , people wouldn’t be able to get to work as effectively , trucks wouldn’t be able to deliver the good of the world we know today, fires would be harder to fight without the machines we use, most of our commodities will no longer be easily acquired nor produced
Robin pipelines today are properly monitored and break way way less often, pipelines also have sensors that can detect loss of pressure and can shut off to prevent a larger spill
...old crew taxi driver= i was. one engineer said, after i asked about the length of his longest train. he stated, 3 miles long......wow......like a snake slithering along the prairies, goin to red deer....
The problem isn't the train or the length of the trains. It's a lack of maintenance. especially with harsh weather as well. With the steel being freezing cold then SUPER SUPER hot when a train goes over can warp the steel when you have rapid temperature changes
oh, by the way. The steel in those rails, as of last known, is 1084. Between 0.69 to 0.82 percent carbon 0.7 to 1 percent manganese 0.1 to 0.23 percent silicon maximum phosphorus concentration of 0.04 percent So, as Buff Tammy says. Perhaps, they should slow trains down IN THE WINTER, and perhaps go back to half inch openings, between rails; thereby allowing thermal expansion to be released.
Alberta has its own route to the USA - let them use it! Build a pipeline through your own land, destroy your ecosystems! BC Coastline is CRITICAL to the health of the entire interior ecosystem. We’ve already seen how Alberta Oil manages its supply routes with the Railway.
Don't let CPR investergate itself. As their police force answer's to the railroad, not the police commissioner. And by the looks of it, they only care about money not town's large and small, plus where's the care and diligence to it's worker's.
My guess that the problem was with the railway having defects for some reason or another, so am glad to learn from this CBC report that this is indeed the problem, and of course it's obviously due to gross corporate negligence; and that's saying the least that can likely be justly said about what the corporation is guilty of or for with this damn negligence. Should the govt take over the cie? After all, and based again on this CBC report, the cie lied in claiming to properly maintain the railways the cie uses. That lie isn't just a matter of negligence, alone!
I swear if one more person suggests a damn pipeline. Many Indigenous groups have said no, and we are supposed to be decreasing our oil usage anyway. What we really need is track upgrades. Pipelines can only carry one thing. Trains serve small communities and bring many necessities, much more than just oil.
pipelines would prevent all of this. cn and cp rail infrastructure is crumbling and is in nowhere near safe enough condition to transporting dangerous goods across.
At the end the guy mentions what would happen if it happened in a large city, it doesn't matter if it is a large city or a small. Seems everyone shifts the blame from one committee to another , at the end of the day the tracks aren't " fit for purpose "
The problem is these derailments are being tied to Lac-Mégantic which wasn't a derailment. Track speeds through cities and towns are slower so the chance of a catastrophic derailment is much less than out in the open country, which is also where tracks are less likely to be properly maintained. These "what if" scenarios are generally more alarmist than accurate.
Sorry about all the deaths from these accidents and our oil wars and the effects of climate change your kids will have to deal with but I have a God-given right right to keep my Escalade filled with 93 octane!
You are completely delusional! Think!!! Manufacturing of electric automobiles and storage batteries is even more environmentally damaging to the planet.
Lets not even attempt to beat around the bush here. I know plenty of people on the inside of this industry and the problem is share holders and CEO's cutting back on safety to put money into their own pockets. When this happens, the end result is what you see here.....
that is correct. Hunter Harrison for cn, previously. removes sidings in bc....doofus....
Isn't there a board that gives orders to CEO? They ought to react and realize things are not acceptable.
@Train 2noplace A bit differently organized than here.
Maintenance costs money which leaves less for shareholders and senior management.
@@gregjeffcoat4258 Yes. Shareholders want fast money and don't have the understanding of long time economy. Severe accidents have sent companies into bankruptcy many times in the past. Why aren't there brains that can lay out the future for those charks?
1:33 Hey that engine was used in the movie Unstoppable! You can see from the plow. It was either AWVR 777 or 767.
Lac-Megantic was a very unfortunate set of circumstances that caused that disaster. These are incidents caused by track issues have nothing in common with LM. CP and CN could spend billions of dollars across the system to do capital improvement projects to the track but these types of derailments will still happen. Rails are under an enormous stress when trains go over them, add that with wild temperature swings, the rail naturally expands and contracts, and unfortunately, breaks or kinks under a moving train. Rail transport is one of the most efficient ways to move freight and still is one of the safest.
When a hazmat truck spills it cargo on a highway no one goes on a crusade to make the highway system safer
Maybe we could transport oil some other way? What if we built a line of tubes or pipes? Some sort of pipeline?
Crazy, I know, right?
The anti-pipeline crowd is accidentally anti-environment. Moving our oil and gas products by train or truck is more dangerous for Canadians and worse for our environment.
@@DAndyLord More likely they caused the derailment.
@Andrew the Celt : Maybe crazy, but definitely dumb. Better is to just do away with use of this oil, or certainly with the quantities that these trains transport, for a LOT of it is destined for what, if not for making fuel for ... what ? As a source of energy, of course. There evidently are far better ways of developing or getting safer energy. Some oil may very well need to be continued for uses like for lubricating engines and some motor parts, and maybe for making grease, which is need for some motor vehicle components, but the amount of oil for these things or uses surely is a tiny portion compared to what's used for making fuel. Am not an expert about the latter idea, so it's a guess, but I'll also guess that it likely is a valid guess.
@@mikecorbeil Where do you think plastic comes from? How about steel? All industries use petroleum. You should do some research about what we use petroleum products for. It's way more than you are aware of obviously. The people who complain about this sort of stuff are the ones who have no idea what kinds of sacrifices they are signing up for. Start by finding out what you personally use that relies on petroleum and eliminate that from your life before you decide to ruin other peoples lives. Basically, clean up your own backyard before you go looking over your neighbour's fence.
@@googleuser6738 As if we need more plastics in the world. Phase out petroleum and people will find alternatives for everything derived from this filthy, destructive product. Transportation, heating, materials, you name it.
Here's an idea guys: MAINTAIN YOUR EQUIPMENT. I realize this might be a revelation to a government run operation, but maybe consider it.
Neither CN or CP is a government run operation...
@@adrianpickel1482 I'm shocked.....I thought everything in O Canada was a government run enterprise. I stand corrected on that point. However, maintaining the equipment argument is still valid. And now even less excusable.
@@saleendriver There is a big push to nationalize CN, CP and Canada post for these very reasons, along with security
@@99hockeynhl The US has quite a few very large private rail companies and this doesn't seem to be a problem. Government takeover shouldn't be necessary.
@@saleendriver While there's no doubt cut backs have contributed, the issue often overlooked is how much of a role metal fatigue can play in these situations. The massive temperature variations in Canada create a lot of stress on rails and a fracture can often go unseen until it lets go. More money going into maintenance of way would help, but in some cases, blaming the railroad for negligence is like blaming a car driver for getting a puncture.
this is why they wanted the keystone pipeline to avoid this...
Replace the ties with concrete! They break down substantially slower (slow enough to likely or "perhaps" offset the initial cost) than wood ties and could allow for the use of high speed rail trains. 7 times is simply criminal.
Yes, I am aware that it's an enormous amount of work to do, but it already has to be done, so why not in a manner which benefits the entire country in measurable likelyhood? The ground below is showing signs of reduced rigidity and may be the largest issue, but more likely is only so in perhaps smaller sections of the lines.
Going concrete is perhaps a quality option for these lines.
Agreed. Concrete ties can last up to 40 years longer, I think.
or - prebuilt sections, one rail long. installed by train, onsite, like in europe and elsewhere....
Concrete ties would not be as durable with such heavy temperature swings in these areas
As soon as that little piece of rubber in between the ties and rails wears out that concrete tie is useless and creates extremely fast wear in the concrete tie. Unlike wood ties that have a steel plate between the rail and tie.
Do you know what you are looking at? Corporate "cost cutting", irresponsibility, and shifting risks to those who cannot defend themselves. Classic capitalism.
My co-worker is a former Canadian locomotive engineer, the stories she has are aweful
Could you go into details of what her experience was like?
Man that looked like a dam of oil broke loose. Where you even get this much oil?
Jeez that's strange this being the first I have heard of this?!?
Why we need pipelines instead
i watch a tv programme in Scotland ON CANADIAN TRAINS , TAIL END OF LAST YEAR CREWS WERE GETTING WORRIED ABOUT LAYOFFS, SAW 1 HAPPENING TO FOREMAN OF TRACK MAINTENANCE , said they weren,t earning enough to keep them , didn,t think much of the guy getting promoted and taking it . if there trains don't pay carrying all that equipment ,maybe better shut down.
maintain the tracks better keep trains like this well below a certain speed so derailments are minor design tank car to withstand derailments, problem solved.
Now here’s an interesting fact, the engine at 1:33 was in a runaway train movie about a train carrying explosive chemicals
I don't know jack about train derailment but if this is an ongoing thing, seems like it's intentional or a lack of maintenance
You act like car crashes aren’t a thing.
@@MyBiggerProblems if you wanna talk car crash go find a car crash video cough cough
I grew up in Lévis and there were 2 tracks a mere 6 feet from my house right on the edge of the St.Lawrence River there, with two freights with DOT 111's a day and a daily Via Rail (except Tuesdays). When the train station closed in 1998 i was sorry to see the trains go, but come to think of it, maybe it's better that way, we maybe dodged a catastrophy slash environmental disaster. Still a train travel enthusiast though.
Not a mention of improving the tanker cars so that they don’t leak as easily in a derailment...
So more cost to the railroads which in turn will be passed on to the oil companies and we know where that particular buck stops next don't we?
Ofc! Multiple train crashes happen only if these happen:Criminals targeting every oil train,poorly built tracks,and broken tracks!
What's the problem the shareholders have been making buckets of money isn't that what it's all about, track maintenance would just cut into the profits
The shareholders? The shareholders don’t really decide if you keep the geometry units.
You should never get that close to film an accident. It could have blown up in her face.
Does anyone know in 1:33 CP 9758 was AWVR 767 in Unstoppable movie that came out in 2010?
9758 was 1 of 2 avwr 777’s
@@kogo21 its was 767
Due to PSR (precision scheduled railroading) tank trains have gotten longer heavyer. I remember seeing one tank train a couple of days ago with 3 locos up front two DPU in the middle and 2 DPU in the back with around 340 tanks I think
Maybe the federal government should implement a new law that prohibits freight trains from going beyond 120 cars. Everybody knows that trains these days are at a bare minimum of 160 cars. Usually they're 180 to 210 cars with DPU's in between.
@smokelesschoice165 I would say yeah 50 to 120 is reasonable, for coal trains idk because they mostly run one for the whole period of time but yeah 120 is reasonable
appears, like track upgrading is in order....what else, would cause ' broken tracks ' =heavy traffic= thermal expansion, contraction etc. 'metal fatique' steel in rails is 1084......perhaps not the proper steel, IN THE WINTER, WHERE IT IS VERY COLD, alotta the times.. ..old taxi crew driver...
Maybe we need more derailments in Quebec? Perhaps they would change their minds on building pipelines then...oui? This is how propane is hauled too. The fact that liberal government officials did not report deficiencies in rail lines, actually comes as no surprise. Our Ministers don't want to work...so why should anyone else?
@Sam Lose what? We don't actually need to go through Quebec with a pipeline. We just need to get to Cornwall.
Most CN tanker trains are about 7000-9000 feet long, they send up to 40 trains a day down any one track route, if it's set up to accommodate. They don't inspect frequent enough. They don't care to inspect more frequent. They care to send more trains into the US or across Canada.
Wooden sleepers are a relic. In Europe, we have concrete sleepers under the tracks with springs holding the rails.
Those accidents could have been prevented with proper track maintenance. Somebody definitely dropped the ball on this.
Liquid is hard to move even driving semi truck the stuff slashes its hard to get it under controle
In 1995 the Government of Canada cut back federal railroad safety inspectors and abolished the office saying that railroads were responsible enough to look after their own safety. Hence speeds shot up to 50mph from 30 for all tank cars and all freight. No limits on the length of them neither. Drop in maintenance across the board.
PSR BABY! We ain't got no time or money for maintinance!!
interesting considering PSR does generate more revenue... so any lack of maintenance has to be attributed to no time for it
This is what happens when we block pipelines.
This is what happens when we rely on fossil fuels
@@an0maly5k27 Car accidents are also preventable. But effectively impossible to prevent every time.
Moving oil by rail is bad for the environment, and unsafe for Canadians.
Pipelines are safer and more environmentally friendly than any other realistic method for moving bulk oil and gas products.
Otherwise we'll continue to have preventable accidents where we drop thirty train cars worth of oil into a river, or preventable and accidentally blow up a town in Quebec.
Until we can rid ourselves of oil we need to make the most environmentally responsible bad decisions.
Oil is inherently bad, pipelines are the least bad option currently available.
@@DAndyLord Dude you have no clue what you're talking about
@@benjlar1902 Please, elucidate then. Where have I lost the plot?
@@DAndyLord How is moving oil by rail bad for the environment? its the most effective and safest form of transportation. Special regulations here are put in place when moving dangerous goods by rail in highly populated areas. Like do you understand that refineries use pipelines to make the product then ship it out by rail? You can't just build pipelines all over the place. Dangerous goods are moved 24/7 by rail and because of a few derailments (for what ever reason) its just completely unsafe? Canadians and Americans rely on such goods as propane being shipped by rail.
This was in Canada because CP stands for Canadian national
Man what are you talking about? It stands for the Alaskan Railroad obviously
@@cloudatlas_ nope it stands for Canadian Pacifc
Really I could have sworn it stood for the Baltimore and Ohio
I live in Newcastle NSW Australia and doesn't CP stand for Canadian Pacific? That makes sense to me, what about you?
My bad its not the B&O its the C&O
This is why oil pipelines are the way to go
Or just actually maintaining the tracks properly. Good maintenance and safety procedures are what keeps things safe, not just putting stuff underground! Oil pipelines can cause spills just as large or bigger if not maintained as well.
One might think that a Nation that has the worlds most valuable commodities, might understand risk mitigation and economic opportunities by now, and have the worlds most advanced emergency response protocols, technology, equipment and trained manpower to address these disasters when they occur...
But yet CBN opposes building pipelines
Why do they not use concrete sleepers???
If the train were to derail explode and spill it would require a hard hit including:broken tracks,a track out of place,or the tracks were just poorly inspected and built
Pipelines are the answer
Who’s here after the BNSF train derailment in Washington?
I am. Interesting. I live in Edmonds really close to the tracks. Line is really well-maintained, but one never knows. Bakken crude is flammable material, not combustible like regular crude. Big problem.
BNSF multipole times during 2020 had practice drills for this scenario in and around the border and refinery, does that seem odd or raise suspicion?
I know some people who work for the railroad and they have to go through intense protocols when transporting crude oil. They even have classes and emergency drills in case something like this happens.
Remote sensors to detect ground movement causing track heave + shorter rail lengths with breather-joints to cater for the seasonal temperature range + proving circuits to detect broken rails + resilient track components (ie concrete sleepers, panlock clips to resist rail turnover) would vastly reduce the risk to all rail traffic. But you’ll never see that as the cost will cause the directors to baulk. Cheaper to cross your fingers and hope it doesn’t happen.
Too many derailments
Car crashes are more deadly *cough cough*
Keystone wouldn't be cost effective and least impactful on the environment. You can only carry oil. Trains can haul grain, shipping containers.
This is why we need to build the pipelines
I took machines to the Emo site, it was very close to the community and peoples homes. It could have been much worse (I don't think it burned)
Stop whining about crude oil trains. Railways ship thousands of dangerous chemicals besides crude and they won’t go by pipeline. Would you rather all of those products on the roads? Propane, benzene, butane, caustic soda, ammonia. Tens of thousands of cars shipped yearly even if you ban oil trains. Besides, rail safety has consistently improved every year for over a century.
Put the Oil in a PIPE?
I can't believe the US had such a bad loss, poor oil
Technically, Canada.
Look at those long lines of tank cars pictured! Of course it's the crude trains causing the excessive rail wear problem! Overland rail petroleum transport to large refineries is cheaper than constructing and operating hundreds of miles of pipelines for many different reasons...
Glad we don't have those dangerous pipelines!
Good thing the world doesn't need oil for heat, electricity, transportation etc.
For vast majority of human existence, oil was not required for survival. Today, it endangers all life on the Earth due to the climate change.
Daniel Ryslink you are right but now society has revolved around the ability to travel long distance in short times, without cars and buses operational , people wouldn’t be able to get to work as effectively , trucks wouldn’t be able to deliver the good of the world we know today, fires would be harder to fight without the machines we use, most of our commodities will no longer be easily acquired nor produced
Yeah.... We could strap solar panels to our a$$ and wear a wind powered propeller beanie.
You need good track and train maintenance if your going to haul oil alot safer to pipeline it
Wow, this story is sad and scary 😢😭😬
More scary is a break in a pipeline. Unlimited spill compared to a few cars.
Robin pipelines today are properly monitored and break way way less often, pipelines also have sensors that can detect loss of pressure and can shut off to prevent a larger spill
The trains are too damn long.
...old crew taxi driver= i was. one engineer said, after i asked about the length of his longest train. he stated, 3 miles long......wow......like a snake slithering along the prairies, goin to red deer....
The problem isn't the train or the length of the trains. It's a lack of maintenance. especially with harsh weather as well. With the steel being freezing cold then SUPER SUPER hot when a train goes over can warp the steel when you have rapid temperature changes
oh, by the way. The steel in those rails, as of last known, is 1084.
Between 0.69 to 0.82 percent carbon
0.7 to 1 percent manganese
0.1 to 0.23 percent silicon
maximum phosphorus concentration of 0.04 percent
So, as Buff Tammy says. Perhaps, they should slow trains down IN THE WINTER, and perhaps go back to half inch openings, between rails; thereby allowing thermal expansion to be released.
Get that pipe line done
🌿⚖️🧠🌿Thanks for Reporting🌿Will share🌿Been watching the Ohio Trainwreak since February 3rd 2023🌿🌿👑🌿GOD BLESS🌿
Alberta has its own route to the USA - let them use it!
Build a pipeline through your own land, destroy your ecosystems!
BC Coastline is CRITICAL to the health of the entire interior ecosystem. We’ve already seen how Alberta Oil manages its supply routes with the Railway.
Crystal M we are land locked, USA is not a viable trade parter for oil and gas anymore , we must get it to better trade partners
Pipeline could of fixed it
Don't let CPR investergate itself. As their police force answer's to the railroad, not the police commissioner. And by the looks of it, they only care about money not town's large and small, plus where's the care and diligence to it's worker's.
My guess that the problem was with the railway having defects for some reason or another, so am glad to learn from this CBC report that this is indeed the problem, and of course it's obviously due to gross corporate negligence; and that's saying the least that can likely be justly said about what the corporation is guilty of or for with this damn negligence. Should the govt take over the cie? After all, and based again on this CBC report, the cie lied in claiming to properly maintain the railways the cie uses. That lie isn't just a matter of negligence, alone!
Safer solution? Pipelines.
why don't use underground pipeline?
it much safer.
Good lawd above!!! 🥶🥶
Northwestern Ontario??? You mean southwestern Ontario. It's difficult to take someone as factual when they don't match the image with the dialog.
Pipelines? Or nah.....
Case closed!
I swear if one more person suggests a damn pipeline. Many Indigenous groups have said no, and we are supposed to be decreasing our oil usage anyway. What we really need is track upgrades. Pipelines can only carry one thing. Trains serve small communities and bring many necessities, much more than just oil.
Cowards live in fear.
pipelines would prevent all of this. cn and cp rail infrastructure is crumbling and is in nowhere near safe enough condition to transporting dangerous goods across.
Oh really? did you build all the railways and inspect them?
At the end the guy mentions what would happen if it happened in a large city, it doesn't matter if it is a large city or a small. Seems everyone shifts the blame from one committee to another , at the end of the day the tracks aren't " fit for purpose "
The problem is these derailments are being tied to Lac-Mégantic which wasn't a derailment. Track speeds through cities and towns are slower so the chance of a catastrophic derailment is much less than out in the open country, which is also where tracks are less likely to be properly maintained. These "what if" scenarios are generally more alarmist than accurate.
@@ajo3085 Indeed, look at any tv program where they increase the drama by the commentary.
Pipelines are better
Again
0:01 SMOREEESSSS
Carbon Tax??????
Get out your check book, I'll opt out, you pay double to cover me.
Sorry about all the deaths from these accidents and our oil wars and the effects of climate change your kids will have to deal with but I have a God-given right right to keep my Escalade filled with 93 octane!
TWO WORDS
ELECTRIC CARS!
No Oil and gas ANYMORE!
NO MORE MANUFACTURING
GAS CARS.
The NEW GREEN DEAL
IS CRITICAL !!!
You are completely delusional! Think!!! Manufacturing of electric automobiles and storage batteries is even more environmentally damaging to the planet.
Not to mention the uselessness of electric vehicles in places like northern Alberta, -50c or muskag roads
Where do you get your electricity from , most popular coal,gas.oil