SAFETY ON THE RAILS
No fewer than four derailed trains transporting oil in North America in recent weeks have ended up as fiery wrecks. Two of them, operated by Canadian National, were on a 40-kilometre stretch of track near the Northern Ontario village of Gogama.
It’s a relief that no one was hurt in these mishaps, which sent plumes of smoke into the air and dumped crude into waterways. But these latest crashes should serve as loud warning bells, signalling that work still needs to be done to improve safety.
The Lac-Mégantic disaster — where 47 died and part of a town was incinerated in July, 2013 — opened the eyes of industry, regulators, government and the public to previously unimagined perils of shipping oil by rail. Much has changed in the two years since the tragedy: new protocols for setting handbrakes on parked trains have been implemented; emergency preparedness plans are required for shipments of dangerous goods; railways’ insurance obligations have been increased, more safety inspectors have been hired.
After Lac-Mégantic, Transport Canada ordered the phase-out of the DOT-111 tanker cars commonly used to ship crude. These were already known to be prone to rupture. But their interim replacements, the CPC-1232 models, still breached in the most recent incident in Gogama.
Transport Canada moved this week to introduce even tougher requirements for tankers transporting flammable products. By 2025, shippers will have to use TC-111s, which have shields on both ends, reinforced valves, thermal protection and thicker steel hulls. While this prompt action is welcome, it will still be a decade before the current fleet is fully replaced. And although Transport Minister Lisa Raitt said this week they are “very close,” Canadian and U.S. regulators are still hammering out harmonized standards for oil trains that criss-cross the border.
Tanker safety is only one piece of a larger puzzle. Shipments of oil by rail surged 40-fold between 2009 and 2013 in the absence of pipeline capacity. Much of this volatile load travels through dense suburbs and cities. Some want to force railways to reroute dangerous shipments around populated areas. Local first responders still don’t know in real time what hazardous products are coming through their territory. Unions warn many oil trains are too long, too heavy and go too fast. Many doubt that the addition of 10 new rail safety inspectors is enough.
Of course one alternative to shipping oil by rail is pipelines, but building social acceptance is a slow, uphill battle.
In the meantime, improving the safety of oil shipments by rail remains unfinished business. And there’s no time to lose.