Bomb Trains: What Can We Learn From Shipping Ethanol to Improve Oil-By-Rail Safety?

mikulka color
on

This article is the first in a seriesย by DeSmogย on the safety of shipping ethanol and oil by rail.ย 

From 2010 to 2015, the total number of tank cars moving ethanolย by rail was more than 1.98 million.ย That’s about 18 percentย greaterย than the more than 1.68 millionย tank cars of crude oil shipped over the same time period.ย ย 

With more ethanolย than crude oilย moved by railย in recent years, why isn’t anyone calling ethanol trains โ€œbomb trainsโ€ย too?

Graph showing barrels of crude oil vs. ethanol shipped by rail between 2010 and 2015.

Ethanol is significantly less volatile than crude oil or gasoline. However, when an unpunctured rail car full of ethanol is engulfed in flames for long enough, it too will explode with the signature โ€œbomb train mushroom cloudโ€ย typical ofย those carrying Bakken crude oil.ย For example, after a BNSF train derailed in Montana in August 2012,ย eight of the 14 cars carrying ethanol caught fire in what was described by a BNSF spokespersonย as a โ€œchain reaction,โ€ which included a mushroom cloudโ€“shaped ball ofย fire.

Yet perhaps the main reason no one is referring toย ethanol trains as โ€œbomb trainsโ€ is that these trains have been involved in fewer accidents โ€” which is by far the best way to avoid large fires andย explosions.

According to information provided to DeSmog by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), from 2010 to 2015 there were seven accidents involving ethanol train derailments; half as many as theย 14 accidents with oil trains. This lower number of accidents for ethanol trains is despite the fact that more ethanol was moved by rail during the same six year period. So far, 2016 has seen oneย oil train accident but none involvingย ethanol.ย 

Cynthia Quarterman used to be in charge of the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, the federal agency that regulates oil and ethanol trains. After leaving that position, she made the following statement about oil trainย safety:ย 

โ€œAny hazmat regulator or investigator worth his salt would gather as much data asย possible.โ€

However, to date, DeSmog is notย aware ofย anyย discussion of the reason why oil trains derail more frequently than ethanol trains. Let’s take Quarterman’s advice and follow the data to determine possibleย explanations.

Despite Industry Claims, Oil Trains Derail Moreย Often

As previously cited, the data on derailments certainly suggests oil trains are different โ€” and more likely to derail โ€” than ethanolย trains.ย 

Despite this, Dr. Christopher Barkan, an expert testifying in July 2016 for the rail industry on a proposed oil train facility in Vancouver, Washington, argued in his pre-trial testimony that this was not the case. [Prior to his current position as a professor at the University of Illinoisย at Urbana-Champaign, Dr. Barkan worked for the Association of American Railroads (AAR), the railย industry’s biggest lobbyingย group.]

โ€œResearch on this topic is continuing, but the increased incidence of crude oil unit train derailments in recent years was more likely the result of the enormous (more than 40-fold) increase in petroleum crude oil traffic since 2009. The substantial growth in this traffic meant that these trains were exposed to greater potential involvement in accidents. There is no evidence that these trains were themselves inherently less safe than other types of trains, just that there were many more of them operating.โ€ย ย 

However, this statement fails to acknowledge that while crude oil traffic has seenย an โ€œenormous increaseโ€ since 2009, more ethanol actually was transported by rail over that same period. When you further examine the data, evidence begins to appearย that something about oil trains is making themย โ€œinherently less safeโ€ than ethanolย trains.ย 

To improve safety, we need to answerย the following question: Why arenโ€™t ethanol trains derailing at the same rate as oilย trains?

Longer Trains Are More Profitable โ€” Andย Risky

One potential risk factor that stands out from rail crash data is that the oil trains that are derailingย are long trains. Amongย the 15 oil train derailments since 2010, 10 were over 100 cars long and four were over 90 cars long. This fact by itself isnโ€™t surprising; unit trains โ€” those consisting solely of oil tank cars โ€” are often longer than 100ย cars.ย 

On July 13, 2016, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) held a roundtable on the issue of tank car safety with regard toย moving oil and ethanol by rail. During that event, Robert Fronczak of the Association of American Railroads (AAR) noted that crude oil is transported in unit trains โ€œto a large degreeโ€ while, in contrast, โ€œethanol is generally not shipped in unitย trains.โ€ย 

At the same roundtable, Richard Kloster of rail consulting firm Alltranstek cited numbers showing unit trains of ethanol over 100 cars are extremely rare, with only 1 percentย of ethanol moving thisย way.ย 

He noted that 46 percent of ethanol was transportedย viaย trains of 75-99 cars.ย The rest โ€” constituting moreย than half of all ethanol shipped by railย โ€” traveled on trains of 74 or fewer cars. Furthermore, 32% of these ethanol shipments were actually single cars of ethanol transported as part of a mixed freightย train.

Yet, of the seven ethanol train accidents between 2010 and 2015, three involved trains longer than 100 cars and two others included trainsย 98 cars long (althoughย not all of them were unit trains carrying only ethanol). This means five of the seven recent ethanol trainย accidents occurred with the type ofย long trainsย typical ofย the more accident-prone oilย trains.ย 

Looking at this data, it is hard to argue with the fact that trains carrying oilย are generally longer and derail with greater frequencyย than those carrying ethanol, which tend to be shorter. Most oil shipped by rail moves in these long unit trains. Most ethanol shipped by rail does not. When ethanol trains haveย derailed, however, mostย of them have been around 100 cars or moreย long.ย ย 

Based on this information, DeSmog submitted the following question during the 2016ย NTSBย roundtable:ย 

โ€œEarlier it was noted only 1 percent of ethanol is shipped in unit trains of 100 cars. Most crude oil trains that have been involved in accidents are over 100 cars. Can the panel comment on train length as a potential risk factor? Could requiring shorter trains improve safety and keep more trains on theย tracks?โ€

In response, the room sat in silence for a full 12 seconds. After no one from the rail industry volunteered to comment, Karl Alexy from FRA made a statement in which he changed the subject without directly answering theย question.ย 

At that point, Robert Fronczak from AAR made the classic industry argumentย that byย making the trains shorter,ย more trains will be requiredย to move the same amount of oil, therefore,ย potentially increasing theย risk ofย derailment.ย 

ExxonMobil and the oil industry use the same argument againstย improving railย safety by makingย tank car shells thicker: because that would meanย more trains on the tracks. ExxonMobil presented the following slide to regulators, whichย argues against requiring safer, thicker tankย cars.ย 

What would be better, more safe trains or fewer unsafe trains? Seems like a question worth exploring, and it is clear that Fronczak is โ€œnot sureโ€ about which actually produces safer results.ย Based on the response to DeSmog’sย question (as visibleย in the above video), no oneย at eitherย AAR or FRA appearsย interested in examinig theย issue.ย 

Judging by the long, awkward silenceย in a room full of the nation’s top rail experts,ย train length appears to be the proverbial โ€œthird railโ€ of train regulation. It’s the untouchableย issue.ย 

This โ€œignoranceโ€ approach is the other way bomb trains keep rolling. As long as industry representatives and regulators say they are never quite sure about the cause of or solution to an issue, they are forcedย to do nothing in the face of this uncertainty.ย ย 

For example, regulatorsย have not required theย stabilization ofย Bakken crude oil to reduce itsย volatility prior to transportย because they sayย โ€œthe science is still outโ€ย about how to do so most effectively.ย However, as explained in this DeSmog video,ย that is not the case.ย Still, the Department of Energy is now studying this issue and wonโ€™t have results until late 2017. Any regulations based on those findings would take several more years toย complete.ย 

And modern braking systems for trainsย are claimed to be an โ€œunprovenโ€ technology, even though they been studied and proven to be safer than the current air braking systems on trains. The AAR even ran ads saying safety data didnโ€™t support the use of modern braking systems. Congress has now mandated that trainย braking systems be studied further, again delaying any action.ย ย 

Questioning known facts โ€” or outright dismissing what is actually unknown, in the case ofย train length as a risk factor in derailments โ€”ย is a very effective method for delayingย action.

Ifย longer trains do derail more often, perhaps they shouldnโ€™t be allowed. As previously reportedย on DeSmog,ย no regulations exist for train length, and none areย proposed.ย 

As noted earlier, Dr. Barkan testified on behalf of the rail industry in support of the proposed Vancouver, Washington,ย oil-by-rail facility. Barkan is a professor of civil engineering at the University of Illinois with a focus on rail transportation and runs a researchย group that receives funding directly from the railย industry.ย 

On theย university website, Dr. Barkan notes the close relationship between the industry and his department: โ€œOur strong relationship with the rail industry means our research has an impact and our graduates have great jobย opportunities.โ€

Robert Anderson, a studentย at the University of Illinois,ย completed his masterโ€™s thesisย on theย โ€œQuantitative Analysisย of Factorsย Affecting Railroad Accident Probabilityย andย Severity.โ€ย In the thesis he concludes theย following:ย 

โ€œThus, it follows that longer trains have an increased likelihood of having an accident due to a larger number of car-miles ofย exposure.

In 2001, the average number of cars per freight train of Class I freight railroads was 68.5 cars (AAR, 2003b). In the same year, the average length of derailed Class I freight trains was 78.6 cars (FRA, 2003a). These two statistics are consistent with the hypothesis that longer trains have a higher likelihood of derailment.ย ย 

In light of the trade-off between car-mile and train-mile-caused derailments, there may be an optimal train length to minimize derailmentย occurrence.โ€ย 

This research came from a university closely aligned with and funded by the rail industry and concludes that trains may have an optimal length to reduce their risk of derailment. Yet, regulators and industry have not acknowledged these results, andย nothing is being done to address thisย issue.ย 

According to the Association of American Railroads, in 2015 the average freight train length was 72.5 cars. In his testimony for the Vancouver oil-by-rail project, Dr. Barkan estimated the average train length for oil trains atย that facility would be 118 cars, considerably longer than the average and in the range expected to derail more often than shorterย trains.

Ethanol Expected to Start Using More Unitย Trains

While the rail industry appears to have no interest in analyzing data to address the question of optimal train length,ย the ethanol and oil industry don’t seem against making data-driven decisions โ€” at least when it comes to higher efficiency and higherย profits. This point was made at the NTSB roundtable by Kelly Davis, director of regulatory affairs for the Renewable Fuels Association, an ethanol industry lobbyingย group:ย 

โ€œUnit trains has [sic] been an increasing transportation efficiency that we have been using โ€ฆ we are encouraged to do more unitย trains.โ€ย 

In late 2015, energy giant Kinder Morgan announced plans to build a new ethanol unit train facility in Northย Carolina.

Based on the ethanol industry’s interest in using more unit trains for โ€œefficiency,โ€ and the fact that it is allowed to transport ethanol in the unsafe DOT-111 tank cars until 2023, perhaps it won’t be long beforeย ethanol trains are known as bomb trains too.ย ย 

Make the Elephantย Dance

Talking to the people who operate these trains makes clear that it is no easy task. Mile-long trains, ever-changing cargo, various braking systems, slack in the train, hills, curves, and fatigue are all part of the mix for train operators. They have to make a lot of judgment callsย about how best to navigate the tracks with any givenย train.

Bill Keppen is a former locomotive engineer and comes from a railroad family. Keppen told DeSmog about his experience learning to operate long, heavyย trains.ย 

โ€œBeing the son of a respected engineer, I learned on the job from other good engineers,โ€ Keppen said. โ€œAfter a few years of experience, I felt like I could make the elephant dance.โ€ Keppen was referring to the skills it take to successfully operate a big, heavyย train.ย 

Keppen also was clear that the longer the train, the harder it was toย operate.ย 

โ€œIt’s a matter of math and physics, the more cars you have, the more slack youโ€™re going to have (between the cars in the train), more product movement youโ€™re going to have โ€ฆ it’s just the way itย is.โ€

Or, as he said, โ€œItโ€™s always easier to make the elephant dance if you have fewer cars than moreย cars.โ€ย 

All of the evidence supports the idea that longer trains, which are more difficult to operate,ย are also more likely to derail. Yet instead of seeing research and regulations to identify the optimal train length for preventingย derailments, what we get is the ethanol industry making the potentially dangerousย moveย towardย the use of more unitย trains.ย 

By examining data onย ethanol trains, the oil-by-rail industry could learn a lot about how to shipย this volatile product moreย safely. Yetย the reality appears to beย that the ethanol industryย wants to emulate the oil-by-rail industry, not the other way around. And that is bad news for the 25 million people living in bomb train blastย zones.ย 

Mainย image credit: Ethanol unit train. By Justinย Mikulka

mikulka color
Justin Mikulka is a research fellow at New Consensus. Prior to joining New Consensus in October 2021, Justin reported for DeSmog, where he began in 2014. Justin has a degree in Civil and Environmental Engineering from Cornell University.

Related Posts

on

Illinois watchdog warns natural gas utilityโ€™s plan to prevent methane leaks might be a bait-and-switch for unneeded gas pipeline upgrades that will shoot up consumer costs.

Illinois watchdog warns natural gas utilityโ€™s plan to prevent methane leaks might be a bait-and-switch for unneeded gas pipeline upgrades that will shoot up consumer costs.
Analysis
on

Taxpayers are on the hook as the bitumen extraction industry continues to play by its own rules.

Taxpayers are on the hook as the bitumen extraction industry continues to play by its own rules.
on

The utility is laundering strategic messaging about the energy transition through a partnership with The Atlantic's marketing team.

The utility is laundering strategic messaging about the energy transition through a partnership with The Atlantic's marketing team.
on

The influential newspaper has repeatedly attacked the governmentโ€™s net zero chief Ed Miliband.

The influential newspaper has repeatedly attacked the governmentโ€™s net zero chief Ed Miliband.