Eastern Railroad Discussion > [NJ] "Highly Explosive" Bakken crude (part 2)

The Bergen Record newspaper has another article on the reaction of residents to the flow of crude oil trains through this densely populated area of northern NJ. In the past, the Record's award winning investigators have uncovered malfeasance in financial institutions, extravagant spending by heads of charitable and non-profit organizations, and have provided some balance on the shrill accusations of "bridgegate".

The immediate matter is the steady flow of loaded railroad tank cars, mostly to Philadelphia, over the CSX River Line (formerly New York Central) through densely populated and affluent areas of northeastern NJ. Adjacent county agencies and the public in NY have detailed information, but under NJ policy, that info has been restricted in NJ. There's some question about whether local responders have that info, as some may have it, and others don't.


>>As it did with every state it operates in, CSX sent a non-disclosure contract to New Jersey officials to keep the information secret, but a records custodian for the State Police said there was “no executed agreement at this time.”

State Senator Loretta Weinberg, whose district includes some towns the oil trains go through, said the information should be made public.

New York “agencies have recognized the importance of providing affected communities with information important to their welfare,” the Democrat wrote in a letter last week to Acting Attorney General John Jay Hoffman. “We would hope New Jersey would do no less.”

The New Jersey Deputy Fire Chiefs Association has also called for the information to be made public.

- See more at: http://www.northjersey.com/news/n-j-officials-won-t-say-how-many-oil-trains-go-through-bergen-county-1.1069747#sthash.WrWyng4i.dpuf



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/14 06:17 by Lackawanna484.

At Lac-Megantic, it took something like 18 hours to get a supply of foam for fighting petroleum fires to the site and begin using it (a fact from the TSB report). This is something fire officials in New Jersey might like to consider.

Ray

Maybe the buffer cars should carry the foam, but would it be enough and in a derailment they may not be accessible. And foam is light, they put sand in the buffer cars to weigh them down because a single empty car ahead of a loaded train is not good. Read the revised LD LMT and LT WT numbers on the BNSF airslides and grain cars. Now NS is adding some too. Fire Departments near railroads, Interstates and refineries should equip themselves to fight large Hazmat accidents. I know Delaware has at least one Hazmat Response team.

Someone needs to ask the question as to why trains from North Dakota are routed via Buffalo, Albany, and North Bergen (NJ) to get to Philadelphia? Is increased CSXT business the only reason? Train-watching through my home town of Haworth, NJ, must not be as boring as I was in 1961-62 when you might see one or two trains during daylight hours.

John

The foam is stored and shipped as a concentrate, so it's probably at least as dense as water.

Ray

Hard to believe that fire extinguishing foam would be in short supply in New Jersey. There's a reason they call that secondary line a little farther south the "Chemical Coast." Those should be some of the best equipped fire departments in the country.

Does anybody know just what the information is that supposedly isn't being shared? Is it detailed, day by day progress of individual trains, or just info on what routes they take? The routing info can be obtained by anybody with a brain and a map.

As for storing the foam concentrate in the idler cars, if something happens, do you really want the local FD to have to send a guy to the head end of a burning, derailed train? I don't think I'd volunteer for that duty. Let's keep it on a truck somewhere and respond with it as needed.

DocJohn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Someone needs to ask the question as to why trains
> from North Dakota are routed via Buffalo, Albany,
> and North Bergen (NJ) to get to Philadelphia? Is
> increased CSXT business the only reason?
> Train-watching through my home town of Haworth,
> NJ, must not be as boring as I was in 1961-62 when
> you might see one or two trains during daylight
> hours.
>
> John

How else is it supposed to get there?

Fire fighting foam is expensive even for large fire departments. The foam we used at a plant for _ _ _ _ (The Chemical Company)that I worked at was derived from horse blood and was very expensive, they found this out the hard way when the fire water system froze and drained the foam concentrate tank. A semi trailer load in each state in a central location would be a start.

DocJohn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Someone needs to ask the question as to why trains
> from North Dakota are routed via Buffalo, Albany,
> and North Bergen (NJ) to get to Philadelphia? Is
> increased CSXT business the only reason?
> Train-watching through my home town of Haworth,
> NJ, must not be as boring as I was in 1961-62 when
> you might see one or two trains during daylight
> hours.
>
> John


6-8 loaded crude trains a day plus return empties over Sand Patch might be more than CSX wants to put on that route

Ray_Murphy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The foam is stored and shipped as a concentrate,
> so it's probably at least as dense as water.
>
> Ray

I wonder what the ratio is for the water/foam concentrate mixture?

If you had a tank car that was split between water and concentrate compartments with a nozzle on top I wonder how long the foam would last and how far away you could spray it? Now make the nozzle swiveling with sensors to direct the spray only toward heat sources.

That is the kind of buffer car I'd like to have. Maybe you could even spread a few throughout the train.

Out_Of_Service Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DocJohn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Someone needs to ask the question as to why
> trains
> > from North Dakota are routed via Buffalo,
> Albany,
> > and North Bergen (NJ) to get to Philadelphia?
> Is
> > increased CSXT business the only reason?
> > Train-watching through my home town of Haworth,
> > NJ, must not be as boring as I was in 1961-62
> when
> > you might see one or two trains during daylight
> > hours.
> >
> > John
>
>
> 6-8 loaded crude trains a day plus return empties
> over Sand Patch might be more than CSX wants to
> put on that route

In CSX's case, there's really no way to avoid big cities. They're going to nail some combination of Chicago, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Albany, Jersey City, Philadelphia, etc regardless of which route they use.

Add in crew issues and track squeezes on the River Line, Mohawk Line etc and it becomes a crap shoot. Oil to Yorktown and barges to Philly might continue to be an answer.

DocJohn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Someone needs to ask the question as to why trains
> from North Dakota are routed via Buffalo, Albany,
> and North Bergen (NJ) to get to Philadelphia? Is
> increased CSXT business the only reason?
> Train-watching through my home town of Haworth,
> NJ, must not be as boring as I was in 1961-62 when
> you might see one or two trains during daylight
> hours.
>
> John

That's called the CSXT Water Level Route. It was once part of the NYC and Conrail, as I am sure you know. CSX still likes the name, and actually uses it in their employee's equipment and train handling rule books and work orders. The Water Level Route has an official definition and description on CSXT.

Loaded crude oil goes that way because it is far less hilly, thereby saving fuel and time in spite of its extra northern mileage. Empties can go back west via the old B&O or C&O, then up through Ohio, as the hills aren't so bad for an empty train.

The NS uses the old PRR Route around Horseshoe Curve. It is more direct, but has stiff grades, and may require helpers.

Well, here is my two cents worth on why CSX routes via Selkirk, and I think it is wise, even tho it is appx 150 miles longer than via Pittsburgh & Baltimore. CSX, once out of Chicago, is very straight, low grades, the few curves are easy, and it passes thru no major population. At Cleveland, their mainline skirts the downtown areas, they use a line that in the old days was a NYC bypass line to get to Collinwood yard. From Cleveland to Buffalo CSX is virtually straight and level. The route thru Buffalo is mostly industrial set back from neighborhoods a bit. They can use a bypass around Rochester if they choose to, and the route thru Syracuse was re-located out of downtown about 80 years ago. Remember, from Cleveland east this was once a four track right of way, now mostly two. There is access to trains. At Hoffmans the main thru Selkirk is far removed from downtown Albany. Thru freight trains have not gone via Albany for so long no one is alive that could remember it. Again Selkirk south to New Jersey the line is essentially remote but there are a few tunnels and it is not that fast. I have ridden it twice, on freight trains. Two units can handle the 14000 ton trains throughout.

North Jersey is a concern as mentioned in Lackawanna484 posts. But either route thru the terminal is relatively low speed, down to 10mph in places. Remember, Lac Megantic's physical cause (ignoring the human elements) was 63mph on a curve not designed for that speed. Casselton, ND was a grain train derailed into the oil train, not vice versa. Both were 30-45 mph. Even PTC cannot prevent that. CSX bypasses Trenton to the west. Into Philly speeds are generally slow, Park Jct down 20mph and trains are in the right direction to enter the refinery unloading tracks.

Conversely,if your route via Baltimore at Greenwich, OH, you have a not too bad route to Pittsburgh, but do pass close to downtown Akron and Youngstown. At Pittsburgh you are right opposite downtown, on the old PLE. The ex-B&O Keystone sub is in good shape, but is almost constant curves with some tunnels. Oil trains would probably have to be pushed up Sand Patch. Downgrade on Sand Patch is remote but no operational picnic. Especially in winter, look at that coal train wreck a few years back that derailed almost the whole train. Trains go slow thru Cumberland, no problem and east of there is very remote, and CSX has added capacity. I just rode it and CSX track is very good. East of Millers they may have to push these trains on the low grade, and east of Brunswick on the Old Main Line. If you route via DC then you would be in very high population areas, mostly rich, and the politicians would bitch.

But I think the REAL reason CSX does not want loaded crude moving via Baltimore is Howard Street tunnel. Remember, about 10 years ago a regular, not big carload freight train derailed in the tunnel going about 20 mph. The resulting mess closed the railroad and some businesses for a week. I've never heard the real cause. Trains entering that tunnel eastbound go thru two reverse curves right past the two big Baltimore stadiums. Then drop below sea level to enter the tunnel, which leaks all the time. The tunnel is surrounded by sewer, water and gas lines many a hundred years old. It's top is only within a few feet of the light rail line above. The grade in the tunnel is not bad, but increase a lot after exiting the tunnel. Crude trains might have to be pushed. Do you really want to do that? And finally, when you get to Philly, the loaded train has to be pulled back to the refinery. It is much easier to do that with empties, practice for the last few months to go the Philly sub.

You can look here for info on foams. The Navy developed AFFF for fuel fires aboard ships in the 60's. Now there are also alcohol resistant AFFF's. So it might be a good idea for fire departments to know whats up.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_fighting_foam#Protein_foams
Roger Beckett

up833 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can look here for info on foams. The Navy developed AFFF for fuel fires aboard ships in the 60's. Now there are also alcohol resistant AFFF's. So it might be a good idea for fire departments to know whats up.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_fighting_foam#Protein_foams
> Roger Beckett

Roger are you saying U.S. fire departments don't know how to fight oil fires?

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ray_Murphy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The foam is stored and shipped as a
> concentrate,
> > so it's probably at least as dense as water.
> >
> > Ray
>
> I wonder what the ratio is for the water/foam
> concentrate mixture?
>
> If you had a tank car that was split between water
> and concentrate compartments with a nozzle on top
> I wonder how long the foam would last and how far
> away you could spray it? Now make the nozzle
> swiveling with sensors to direct the spray only
> toward heat sources.
>
> That is the kind of buffer car I'd like to have.
> Maybe you could even spread a few throughout the
> train.

The eductors that we have for foam application at the power plant I work at, are designed to produce a 3% foam, 97% water mixture when fighting fires. From what I understand through all of the fire brigade training I've been through, that seems to be pretty standard.

Specialized foam truck cannons, relocated and more accessible fire hydrants etc are on the list of services that Cuomo, Emmanuel, Nutter etc seek for their bailiwicks. Paid for by fees from railroads and pipelines.

Several NY counties have already begun to develop proposals to contain rail tanker oil or ethanol which might flood into the Hudson or Mohawk Rivers, identify areas where better hydrant access is needed, or better equipment forward positioned. It was hours before the tiny Casselton ND fire department had foam and expert help to fight their fire. And had very minimal hydrant support.

It's not just the foam. It's the foam cannons, the training to operate the cannons, access to adequate hydrant pressure, maybe even dedicated "air tanker choppers" to direct huge amounts of foam. Refineries have them, the loading terminals have them, and the railroads are believed to have them.

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune had a long article about how even big departments like St Paul lack capability to fight large oil train fires. Small places like Casselton are on their own...

http://www.startribune.com/local/245087941.html

Class B Aqueous Film Forming Foam (AFFF) and Film Forming Fluoroprotein Foam (FFFP) can be applied at several concentrations but commonly, it will be delivered at either 3% or 6%. Some in-line or nozzle eductors will go down to 1/4% as well. A fire department master stream (say a deck gun) can flow 500 gallons per minute (gpm) while a handheld line might flow up to 200 gpm. Our engines ( I am an officer in one of the larger volunteer fire departments in the mid-west) carry 15 or 20 gallons in 5-gal buckets. At 500 gpm, this is ONE minute at 3% concentration! Most fire departments will not have that much AFFF or FFFP foam easily accessible. Some fire departments have dedicated foam trucks that may have carry the equivalent of many 5-gal buckets but then they need to have water supplied via hose lines or water tankers (referred to as tenders in the western states). The same can be said for the aircraft crash rescue fire trucks -- they have a fair amount of foam and water but will need re-supplied pretty quickly. And neither the foam or the engines/tankers/etc are cheap! We just got a new water tanker and it was over $200K. Ladder trucks can cost up to $1 million (we don't have any of those!!) If you have a rural department that is supported by bake sales or bingo or..., you will need a lot of help -- financially and manpower and equipment. Even if you are in a large metro area, you will need help aka mutual aid.

Bruce

BCutter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
{snip}
If you
> have a rural department that is supported by bake
> sales or bingo or..., you will need a lot of help
> -- financially and manpower and equipment. Even
> if you are in a large metro area, you will need
> help aka mutual aid.
>
> Bruce

I was a volunteer Firefighter for over 32 years before retiring. We were a rural department and we kept a limited supply of AFFF and class A on hand. We didn't keep any protein based foam on hand as it had a limited shelf life, and was not good for the equipment either. To keep an amount on hand for a large fire was just not possible. The odds of needing a large quantity was extremely low. Unlike an airport where you have a dedicated fire department on hand at all times and a response time measured in seconds by the time we got there, it would likely be best to let it burn itself out.
This is true even for municipal departments. Until you know what you have, you don't just start applying extinguishing agent. Many times it's more dangerous to try to extinguish one of these fires than to let it burn.

Having grown up in a New York central family along the River Division, I am well aware of the Water Level Route and pros and cons versus other routings. However, if I were a public safety official, I would be looking at minimizing risk. Is risk proportional to miles travelled assuming no difference in "quality" of rail lines used? Would CSX use its routing if it could make equal profit by running its trains on the NS across Pennsylvania?

John