Train collision in North Dakota sets oil rail cars ablaze

Comments (14)
RMA1200 wrote:

Surprised we made it this long…

Dec 30, 2013 5:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JIMMYLIMO wrote:

The solution… a HELLUVA lot more wind turbines, solar panels and ELECTRIC CARS !

Dec 30, 2013 5:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
stevenmccain wrote:

Pipeline spill in Mayflower, Arkansas: 200,000 barrels of tar sands flood the town. Turns the town into an EPA Superfund cleanup site. Cost to taxpayers millions of dollars. In contrast, the Western Minnesota derailment: only 357 barrels spilled completely contained on railroad property. Trains running again after only eight days. Cost to taxpayers negligible.

Rail or pipeline?

Dec 30, 2013 6:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
stevenmccain wrote:

Pipeline spill in Mayflower, Arkansas: 200,000 barrels of tar sands flood the town. Turns the town into an EPA Superfund cleanup site. Cost to taxpayers millions of dollars. In contrast, the Western Minnesota derailment: only 357 barrels spilled completely contained on railroad property. Trains running again after only eight days. Cost to taxpayers negligible.

Rail or pipeline?

Dec 30, 2013 6:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Anyone else notice the mysterious and sudden steep rise in oil-tanker-train-screw-ups in North America in the past two years? The same 2 years that the oil companies have been pushing the XL pipeline?

“We need this pipeline. Hauling oil by train is dangerous. See? More dangerous now than ever. XL Pipeline saves lives! Do your part!”

Listen all y’all, it’s sabotage (Or else a very odd coincidence) :)

Dec 30, 2013 6:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
WhyMeLord wrote:

One train carrying oil, the other carrying whatever; who wanted to go to North Dakota anyhow? Since the only good thing to come out of North Dakota has been an empty Greyhound bus, it doesn’t matter much what happens (or doesn’t) there. Thankfully, the prevailing winds are from the southwest and the smoke and pollution won’t bother us.
It baffles me why they don’t go right ahead with the KXL pipeline.
Then a major spill could completely wipe North Dakota off the map.

Dec 30, 2013 6:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fred5407 wrote:

Yah Know, I can understand some things, but thinking these accidents are deliberate is about as warped thinking as the current administration. Hey Alkaline and WhyMeLord are you as disconnected as your comments. North Dakota is a well run state, and they supply the oil that hauls you around on your senseless journies. Please explain the logic in your comments.

Dec 30, 2013 6:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Fred, rather, please explain how it is that these major oil train accidents in North America have gone up 7-fold since the fate of the XL pipeline came into doubt….. if not sabotage from oil companies or their allies. We went years without hearing of ANY. Now a string of 7 in two years? Is it just a coincidence? Perhaps. But knowing what we know about the ethics of oil companies and the behavior of BP and Exxon after their spills…… okay :)

Dec 30, 2013 6:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Mary420Jane wrote:

Oil Pipelines break and spill all the time. It’s in the news for a day and gets buried. This story will disappear before tomorrow, I bet its not even in the 11PM news tonight. Big oil is guilty of many crimes, when they get caught and pay a fine thats just the cost of doing business. They slow walk any settlements and appeal each one for decades. Politicians are in the pocket of big oil and the rich folks who pull the strings also own the media. Electric cars are not the future, they are the present. Big rigs can easily run on natural gas.

Dec 30, 2013 6:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kengprice wrote:

Fred, if Alkaline and WhyMeLord, had logic, they would not have made the comments that they posted.
At least that is my opinion, after reading their posting.

Dec 30, 2013 7:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
WhyMeLord wrote:

@fred5407,
This is America, and last time I heard, before the Judges get ahold of it, majority rules. Therefore, since there are two of us and only one of you, you lose. Besides, by the time you frack all the resources you have, what’s left in North Dakota besides some dirt?
Get real, you live in a geological wasteland, nothing more or less.

Dec 30, 2013 7:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Nate05 wrote:

@AlkalineState: Obama began his assault on the XL pipeline right about the same time that Warren Buffet started the whole tax issue with his statement ‘My secretary pays more in taxes than me’. That is when he began supporting Obama’s re-election campaign. Makes sense to me: Buffet funnels money towards Obama’s re-election and Obama puts a halt to the XL pipeline, allowing Buffet’s company to ship the oil via rail. And that isn’t suspicious?

Dec 30, 2013 7:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

I’m not anti-North Dakota. I kind of like the place for its weird mad max qualities now. Really, I’m just a news tracker who has seen a spike in oil train explosions in North America over the exact 2-year period (perhaps coincidentally) in which we see oil companies pressuring for authorization of the XL pipeline. And each time, we see comments and opinions emerge from oil company boosters which contend: “Build this pipeline and the problems go away.”

That’s all, just observing.

Dec 30, 2013 7:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MikeBarnett wrote:

@AlkalineState

You can add another point to the coincidence. Buffett supports Obama. Obama opposes Keystone. Both BNSF trains, owned by Buffett, derailled. The first train carried soybeans, and the second had oil. Keystone supporters will claim that oil trains are dangerous by themselves, and they are in danger from collision with other trains whereas pipelines don’t collide. Note that this is what the Keystone supporters will claim whether it required sabotage or not.

Jan 02, 2014 3:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.