|
|
Post by valenciajim on Mar 25, 2015 17:48:14 GMT -8
In our community, there has been quite a stir raised about trains running through the community carrying fracked oil. I can;t remember the last time I saw a train of tank cars on the local line, but others say it is a big issue.
Is anyone aware of whether UP (or any other railroad) carries fracked petroleum products over the Metrolink Antelope Valley route? Those are the only tracks that run through the Santa Clarita Valley. It is my understanding that virtually all of the fracked oil coming to southern California is carried over the Cajon Pass.
My second question is, "Which railroad has the largest market share of transporting fracked oil?" I think it is BNSF, but I can't find any market data. If so, what percentage of the fracked oil traffic is carried by BNSF?
Thanks everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Mar 25, 2015 18:15:02 GMT -8
What difference does it make? How is fracked oil different than oil pumped out from wells that weren't fracked. I'm a geologist and from what I've experienced, oil differs more by where it is extracted from. For example, in Texas, crude can be thicker and blacker and have more parafins in it, but when I was working in NW Pennsylvania, the oil came out of the ground very light and thin; in fact people used to use it right out of the ground to run the single cylinder power machines used to pump the wells with.
Anyway, oil is flammable and I am not sure how fracked oil would be more or less volatile than non fracked... like the oil from NW Pennsylvania, it was lighter and more volatile right out of the ground for example.
I think the bigger concern is the water and waste product used in the fracking process, some places pump that back into the ground and there is concern bout contaminating aquifers or triggering seismic activity.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesbrodie67281 on Mar 25, 2015 18:54:32 GMT -8
Jim, Is fracked oil any more volatile than say LDF ?................james
|
|
|
|
Post by valenciajim on Mar 25, 2015 19:06:21 GMT -8
According to the local paper, fracked oil contains a higher content of dissolved natural gas, which makes it more explosive than conventionally drilled oil. My understanding is that the oil that creates the greatest concern is oil that is obtained through fracking in North Dakota.
I understand the bigger concern about contamination. That is a huge issue in California.
The local paper had an op-ed piece about stopping the "bomb trains" from running through our city. I have not seen any tank trains running through our city and sort of thought that the article was a bit of hysteria. Anyway, there is now a lot of discussion about the "bomb trains" and the political fallout therefrom.
I am certainly no geologist or railroad professional, so I thought I would ask the guys on this forum if they had any thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Mar 25, 2015 20:14:12 GMT -8
Bakken crude does not currently have to be processed to have natural gas liquids removed from it before it is shipped (this changes to some degree in a week due to new legislation going in effect). The oil itself isn't very volatile; the volatility is the NGLs that aren't being removed. Those same NGLs - butane, pentane, hexane, etc. - are not shipped in DOT 111 tank cars by themselves. You'll see them in a different type of tank car instead. Until there is a concerted effort to require the oil to be treated, the car designs and operating speeds will be the scapegoats. They are easy targets since average speeds are already low and the majority of the existing DOT 111 tank car fleet truly isn't up to the task vis a vis crashworthiness, so there's not only a reason to replace the cars but a substantial amount of money to be made by the manufacturers.
I agree that all the talk about "bomb trains" is nothing more than uninformed hysteria. How many years have we been running unit ethanol trains in the exact same tank cars?
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Mar 25, 2015 20:20:04 GMT -8
Question? Are there refineries in SoCal?
To receive the crude oil?
|
|
|
|
Post by Great-Northern-Willmar Div on Mar 25, 2015 21:19:59 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Mar 25, 2015 21:43:04 GMT -8
Most of my experience is in environmental geology, and not the oil industry, but I had thought fracking was not a new practice, but just a practice that has increased greatly in the past few years as a technique to extract oil from more difficult formations. Any, it does seem there is a new hysteria around something that has been going on for years, or so I thought?
|
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Mar 26, 2015 5:12:21 GMT -8
Is anyone aware of whether UP (or any other railroad) carries fracked petroleum products over the Metrolink Antelope Valley route? Those are the only tracks that run through the Santa Clarita Valley. It is my understanding that virtually all of the fracked oil coming to southern California is carried over the Cajon Pass. Either via Soledad Canyon or Cajon Pass, its gonna share trackage between Palmdale and Lancaster with Metrolink... You must be south of there I am thinking. |
|
|
|
Post by Great-Northern-Willmar Div on Mar 26, 2015 7:42:31 GMT -8
In our community, there has been quite a stir raised about trains running through the community carrying fracked oil. I can;t remember the last time I saw a train of tank cars on the local line, but others say it is a big issue. Ah, the infamous NIMBY issue or Not In My Back Yard. If I remember correctly a train of fracked oil derailed on CSX in West Virginia recently and the resulting fire was quite spectacular. After some equally spectacular news coverage, folks are now scared and expect such an occurrence to someday happen in their "back yard", even though millions of gallons of this oil has successfully been transported so far. |
|
|
|
Post by valenciajim on Mar 26, 2015 9:52:01 GMT -8
gevo hogger--yes the trains would use the Metrolink track southbound to at least Palmdale. There is a junction in the Palmdale area where the tracks go east and south. They would then go east along the southern part of the desert until they reached the tracks to go over the Cajon Pass. Alternatively, the trains could go south past Palmdale through the Santa Clarita Valley (where I live) and then onto the San Fernando Valley, and metropolitan Los Angeles. I do not recall seeing any tank trains running through Santa Clarita, but the local newspaper says they do. It is my understanding that most of the traffic runs on BNSF over the Cajon Pass.
ATSF fan--we have a large number of refineries in southern California. In California the gasoline has to be refined to a different standard than in the other 49 states and the only refineries that do so are located in California. There was an explosion in one of the refineries last month and we saw an immediate twenty cents a gallon price increase at the pump.
|
|
|
|
Post by valenciajim on Mar 26, 2015 9:54:53 GMT -8
By the way today's Wall Street Journal has a full page ad by Greenbriar (who manufactures tank cars) to require upgrades to the existing tank car fleet and or the requirement that old tank cars be no longer certified for use.
|
|
|
|
Post by gevohogger on Mar 26, 2015 10:45:05 GMT -8
gevo hogger--yes the trains would use the Metrolink track southbound to at least Palmdale. There is a junction in the Palmdale area where the tracks go east and south. They would then go east along the southern part of the desert until they reached the tracks to go over the Cajon Pass. Alternatively, the trains could go south past Palmdale through the Santa Clarita Valley (where I live) and then onto the San Fernando Valley, and metropolitan Los Angeles. I do not recall seeing any tank trains running through Santa Clarita, but the local newspaper says they do. Correct. The bulk of the traffic on SP (now UP) shifted to the new route via Cajon following the opening of West Colton and the Palmdale Cutoff in the late 60s. The original route via Soledad Canyon was the filming site of the movie "Duel" with Dennis Weaver, by the way. Several SP trains featured in that movie. I wouldn't put too much faith in what's printed in the newspaper. Its just as likely they are referring to oil trains over by Cajon, San Berdoo, Riverside, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by valenciajim on Mar 26, 2015 13:17:38 GMT -8
Most of the UP trains we see in Santa Clarita are intermodal trains or hoppers carrying stone.
|
|
|
|
Post by atsfan on Mar 26, 2015 15:46:11 GMT -8
By the way today's Wall Street Journal has a full page ad by Greenbriar (who manufactures tank cars) to require upgrades to the existing tank car fleet and or the requirement that old tank cars be no longer certified for use. Hmmm In favor of rules forcing more sales of what they make? Stunner |
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on Mar 26, 2015 19:15:47 GMT -8
While there may be more dissolved gaseous liquids in fracked oil, that's not really an issue unless there's an accident.
The concern over fracking is that it's led to a bunch of new production and in some cases a reworking of old fields. Most of this production isn't served by existing pipelines or they are limited in capacity. So the oil ends up on the tracks, which leads to more trains, which bothers some people. Inadequate rolling stock is part of the issue. The other part is rail capacity issues. There's a reluctance to invest too much in new lines for traffic that may be gone in 5 years -- or less is oil prices stay low. Of course, the Saudis started a war today and prices are up 4%, so...
It's not really the oil's qualities here that eating people, it's the quantities.
|
|
|
|
Post by bnsf971 on Mar 27, 2015 3:03:29 GMT -8
There seems to be a lot of people that simply don't stop to consider anything past their own noses. They don't want trains or trucks delivering anything because of environmental issues, or noise, or something. They will be the first to complain when their favorite products are no longer available if it ever occurs.
Until they invent matter transporter technology, transportation of raw materials and finished products will always be needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian on Mar 27, 2015 3:13:03 GMT -8
I had thought fracking was not a new practice You must be remembering this:  Well, at least Spikre and I will!  Hero saves the well and wins the girl with nitroglycerine. Modern "fracking" uses non explosive means of fracturing the underlying rock. Post WWII. Good old Halliburton. Price of oil guides whether or not it is worth doing. |
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Mar 27, 2015 3:31:42 GMT -8
Well, with a date of 1942, I guess you'd have to be as old as my parents to have seen it when it came out! They are in their mid-80's! Ok, I guess they re-run the oldies on cable channels, I've seen the odd oldie but not that one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christian on Mar 27, 2015 3:43:24 GMT -8
(Replying to the pre-edited post.) Boom and bust cycles are part of the reason that tank car companies and railroads are reluctant to invest in tank cars to support the fracking industry. Indeed, right now the oil business is in one of those bust cycles as Mid East oil is bargain basement priced. And, yes, anything further I might type on oil economics gets into politics.  |
|
|
|
Post by riogrande on Mar 27, 2015 3:46:25 GMT -8
Sorry, sometimes I edit posts after the initial is saved!  Thanks for bringing it back to the topic! Bust cycles with apparently a new spike yesterday with the Saudi attack in Yemen, but hopefully thats just a blip. The lower oil/gas prices are a help right now, keeping my monthly expenses lower. |
|
jhuteman
New Member
Whut cho doin there Bo?
Posts: 46 
|
Post by jhuteman on Apr 24, 2016 4:29:10 GMT -8
Fracking is not new and but the hysteria over it is! Oil BAD is all they can think! Indoctrination/propiganda WORKS!
|
|
|
|
Post by Brakie on Apr 24, 2016 5:44:25 GMT -8
Funny thing people love the low gas prices at the pump but,thanks to the news media and their hype upped news stories people worry over nothing.
Mean while 18 wheelers hauling dangerous cargo goes unnoticed until one crashes and causes a big mess and melts the steel holding a overpass over the interstate. A short normal news story covering the wreck and no hyped up worries involved. Of course now those folks using that overpass has a long detour to/from work which wasn't news worthy.
One lady here in town wanted to know why trucks couldn't haul this oil and my reply was simple.. Ready for some more 18 wheeler tank trucks on the roads? You see each of those tank cars carries 2 1/2 trailer loads.
|
|
|
|
Post by kentuckysouthernrwy on Apr 24, 2016 13:02:52 GMT -8
Fracking has been going on here in Michigan for at least 60 years with no problem. All the new noise is a result of NIMBYs and the fact that journalism is dead. Propane, ethanol and tons of much more nasty methyl-ethyl-badsh*t pass through here on the CN daily. Just the other night CSX lost 500 pounds of high explosives between Chicago and Detroit. Mr Anonymous dropped a dime and all but one box were recovered. In Detroit.
|
|
jhuteman
New Member
Whut cho doin there Bo?
Posts: 46
|
Post by jhuteman on Apr 26, 2016 5:09:24 GMT -8
Fracking has been going on here in Michigan for at least 60 years with no problem. All the new noise is a result of NIMBYs and the fact that journalism is dead. Propane, ethanol and tons of much more nasty methyl-ethyl-badsh*t pass through here on the CN daily. Just the other night CSX lost 500 pounds of high explosives between Chicago and Detroit. Mr Anonymous dropped a dime and all but one box were recovered. In Detroit. That missing box scares me more than frikking frakking ever could. |
|
|
|
Post by fr8kar on Apr 26, 2016 6:00:05 GMT -8
The issue with fracking - around here, at least - is with contamination of groundwater. The groundwater lies below the surface of the earth but above an "impenetrable" layer of rock and the gas formation lies below that. The problems started when it turned out that the impenetrable layer of rock wasn't and gas and other pollutants appeared in people's well water. The amount of gas in the water is such that a running faucet can be ignited with a lighter and the water can cause health problems. This is a relatively new phenomenon so the long term effects aren't yet well understood.
Another prominent issue is related to fracking, and that is salt water disposal wells. The waste water from the fracking process is injected into disposal wells which can cause damage to groundwater systems/aquifers but is certainly causing eathquakes, especially in my area.
Nobody complained when they got their sign on bonus check or their royalty checks for the gas. But we were specifically assured these pollution problems were not an issue or a concern. Now you have people who cannot use their water wells at all, whose land value is severely diminished because it is no longer habitable. This is a real problem affecting many people in my area and a legitimate beef to cause NIMBY blowback.
I've already talked before about the difference between the Bakken crude loads and other oil or hazmat loads. It is not appropriate to compare these crude oil trains to other hazardous materials hauled safely on the rails everywhere. If you load a hazardous material in an appropriate car capable of handling the load, then yes it is safe to transport it. You wouldn't put a liquidified gas in a non-pressurized tank car or a corrosive substance in an unlined tank. If high concentrations of volatile natural gas liquids are going to be left in the crude oil, it needs to be transported in a vehicle capable of handling these materials. You can't get mad when you don't use a suitable vehicle and it fails at the slightest derailment or explodes violently and spectacularly in a major derailment. Either treat the crude before loading so the class of hazard matches the class of car or transport the untreated crude in a class of car capable of handling the hazardous material.
I've operated unit ethanol trains and other key trains many times and I've never felt the slightest worry, even with chlorine or anhydrous ammonia six cars back from the head end. But these crude oil trains are a different animal. You know you are using the wrong tool for the job and everything had better go right or else. I've caught these a few times with one engine on the head end and two DP motors. That sucks with any kind of train on my territory but it's super stressful keeping the slack under control with sloshing tanks loaded with this stuff. I'm actually glad to see fewer of these trains lately. I hope the current price slump offers some time to work out the treatment of the crude and/or increase the availability of the proper type of tank car to move this oil.
|
|
cvacr
Full Member
Posts: 123
|
Post by cvacr on May 5, 2016 11:18:07 GMT -8
While there may be more dissolved gaseous liquids in fracked oil, that's not really an issue unless there's an accident. Although to see what sort of accident they're all worried about, look up Lac-Megantic from a couple of years ago. The derailed tank cars were loaded with Bakken crude, which had a fairly high concentration of those aforementioned NGLs in the oil. The fire burned out almost the entire downtown and killed approximately 45 people. |
|
|
|
Post by mlehman on May 8, 2016 7:27:03 GMT -8
Chris,
Sure enough.
The bigger question is whether fracking actually contributes to the % of troublesome gases in crude or not. I suspect there's little of that. Fracking pressures the underground formations around a well, with the goal of forcing more crude out of it. How much of this makes it's way into the crude the comes to the surface is something I don't know and I've yet to see a study on (be happy to see some cites on that, just not sure they exist.)
There is a link in the minds of some environmentalists, because it wouldn't arrive on the surface and need transportation without fracking -- or would in much lower quantities from a non-fracked well. That not the same as the fracking actually contributing to the volatiles in crude. It's more of a political argument than a science-based argument, so don't really want to go there so much as to explain why we're hearing about a "linkage" that may or may not exist. In other words, some don't like the RR transporting a product they feel was produced in an environmentally questionable manner.
In my mind, fracking is one set of issues, the environmental dangers of railroading another. In terms of safety, our society already relies on RRs to handle much more dangerous stuff simply because it's a rather safe transportation mode. Yes, carrying all that crude incrementally increase the dangers inherent in railroading, but it's likely a statistically insignificant value.
What going on is that fracking is remote and with little image in most people's minds, making it hard to get people excited about doing something about it. Unless your well has been contaminated and you get blue flames when you turn on the faucet, it's pretty anonymous stuff unless you're right next to it.
Railroads are a far more pervasive presence in the lives of most Americans. Making them seem dangerous because of fracking is going to get the attention of those around them in far more widespread fashion.
I'm no fan of fracking, the issues for neighbors to these sort of methods are real and troublesome. But the linkage to its transportation by railroad is a bit of intellectual overreach. Stuff can crash and burn, but that can happen with a lot of things on the railroads, which are generally rather safe in transporting such troublesome loads. Makes sense politically to try to establish such a linkage, but there seems little objective data to show that fracked crude is any more dangerous than unfracked. Both can contain lots of volatiles. Sure, an accident can be bad - and has been - but I'm not sure fracking is making a direct contribution to this. As an environmental historian, these sorts of issues will sort out over time. Oftentimes perceptions are important in how policy sorts itself out versus politics, but facts may not actually be there to justify the associations made in the course of such struggles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary P on May 9, 2016 4:23:07 GMT -8
Regarding the burning water in Dimock PA.... it may or may not be a result of fracking, but one thing is certain, there were burning wells long before any fracking took place. Even here in upstate NY, it's well documented... linkMy brother in law and nephew were in Northern PA a few years ago working for a driller. One thing he told me was that some drilling companies he knows of have a less than stellar reputation, and doing the well casing improperly can lead to problems.  |
|
