AlienB Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) This should be in federal. This issue only highlights that the security of chemical transport by rail and pipe are seriously not up to snuff. 1. If a train catches fire, you would expect that there is a way to contact the person responsible for it, not someone unrelated to that train. If a Captain of a ship went to shore and his ship caught fire and was put out, you'd think they'd contact the captain of the oil tanker and be like, Captain your ship caught fire, we'd like you to come back and do an assessment of it and its cargo. With this train the engineer was in bed until the train blew up and they called in a track inspector to assess the situation? Huh? Does not compute. 2. This occurred pretty much the same day or within a couple days of the announcement of the conversion of part of the transcanada mainline to carry oil to the trains destination. None the less the safety compliance on pipelines is absolutely absent, this is disgusting as that mainline travels over a whole lot of wetland, any sort of leak will be devastating. If Canada were serious about security there would be hazmat trained military officers on every hazmat train, and pipelines would not only be patrolled daily, but they would have every foot of the line under sensor and video surveillance with response sites every 10 or so km of the thing with manned military staff. Most of all they would have shutdown systems that worked by default. Some pipe doesn't even have backup power for emergency shut down. This is just absurd. The safety standards are just plain irresponsible and this town and its watershed how now suffered and will continuing suffering for years to come as a result of the federal governments complete negligence in providing security to hazourdous, lethal, toxic and explosive substances being transported in bulk in Canada. It is absurd. Until I hear things like trained military security experts atached to hazmat cargos, daily water quality testing along all adjacent wetlands to pipeline or railline, surveillance redundant contact for person in charge of hazmat cargo, emergency shutdown, daily patrols etc.. these are just idiots who have been left in charge of materials that otherwise will kill and make sick people in WMD proportions. I don't understand how poisons that will kill the environment and humans like Crude oil arn't considered a hazourdous substance by the federal government, thus requiring safety measure to prevent environmental exposure and accident with that substance. It just ins't sane. Edited July 10, 2013 by AlienB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunrutz Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 This should be in federal. This issue only highlights that the security of chemical transport by rail and pipe are seriously not up to snuff. 1. If a train catches fire, you would expect that there is a way to contact the person responsible for it, not someone unrelated to that train. If a Captain of a ship went to shore and his ship caught fire and was put out, you'd think they'd contact the captain of the oil tanker and be like, Captain your ship caught fire, we'd like you to come back and do an assessment of it and its cargo. With this train the engineer was in bed until the train blew up and they called in a track inspector to assess the situation? Huh? Does not compute. 2. This occurred pretty much the same day or within a couple days of the announcement of the conversion of part of the transcanada mainline to carry oil to the trains destination. None the less the safety compliance on pipelines is absolutely absent, this is disgusting as that mainline travels over a whole lot of wetland, any sort of leak will be devastating. If Canada were serious about security there would be hazmat trained military officers on every hazmat train, and pipelines would not only be patrolled daily, but they would have every foot of the line under sensor and video surveillance with response sites every 10 or so km of the thing with manned military staff. Most of all they would have shutdown systems that worked by default. Some pipe doesn't even have backup power for emergency shut down. This is just absurd. The safety standards are just plain irresponsible and this town and its watershed how now suffered and will continuing suffering for years to come as a result of the federal governments complete negligence in providing security to hazourdous, lethal, toxic and explosive substances being transported in bulk in Canada. It is absurd. Until I hear things like trained military security experts atached to hazmat cargos, daily water quality testing along all adjacent wetlands to pipeline or railline, surveillance redundant contact for person in charge of hazmat cargo, emergency shutdown, daily patrols etc.. these are just idiots who have been left in charge of materials that otherwise will kill and make sick people in WMD proportions. I don't understand how poisons that will kill the environment and humans like Crude oil arn't considered a hazourdous substance by the federal government, thus requiring safety measure to prevent environmental exposure and accident with that substance. It just ins't sane. And yet despite your bleak view of the world people are living longer and easier then ever before, that doesn't seem to jive with your thoughts of a world full of poisons in proportion to wmd's, perhpas your entire outlook is simply wrong, or incredibly over blown, nah of course not. Btw, billions on tonnes of cargo of all kinds, hazardous and otherwise, has been moved by rail in this country, and as terrible as it is this incident is extremely small in the face of that. This is likely terrible set of circumstances that lined up to produce a terrible result, this is the case in most disasters of this type, to react as though moving dangerous goods by rail is destroying the planet and killing us all is incredibly irrational. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be some type of environmentalist extremist involved. Not really, you HOPE it is , fits the agenda you have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 I heard on the news today, that the Harper government was made aware of the trains cars that would carry crude, was not safe to do so and that it would be too expensive to change over to the ones that were safe and knowing this they gave permission anyway. The minister of transportation that would have ok, either Cannon (feb.2006-oct29 2008) or Baird (oct302008-aug 2010) Strahl(2010-20110) Lebel (2011) This could have happen anywhere in Canada and I think especially small municipalities should make their voices heard on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted July 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 I have no idea why Rae is criticizing Mulcair for getting on Harper's case over rail safety. To me,it appears that Mulcair is doing his job as leader of the opposition! Here's the link http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/07/08/lac-megantic-thomas-mulcair_n_3561321.html?ref=topbar WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted July 10, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 Apparently the police are launching a criminal investigation. I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be some type of environmentalist extremist involved. Just saw on the CBC that the railway has their own police force that will have jurisdiction over this. Not sure if that will be the case in the end? WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 Apparently the police are launching a criminal investigation. I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be some type of environmentalist extremist involved.It sounds as if the engineer is being blamed. http://news.yahoo.com/railway-ceo-blames-engineer-quebec-train-crash-212417593.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) I have no idea why Rae is criticizing Mulcair for getting on Harper's case over rail safety. To me,it appears that Mulcair is doing his job as leader of the opposition! Here's the link http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/07/08/lac-megantic-thomas-mulcair_n_3561321.html?ref=topbar WWWTT Rae was right and mulcair is a idiot for what he did. You do not go for political points over something like this and even when nobody has a idea what went on. Edited July 10, 2013 by PIK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlienB Posted July 10, 2013 Report Share Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) And yet despite your bleak view of the world people are living longer and easier then ever before, that doesn't seem to jive with your thoughts of a world full of poisons in proportion to wmd's, perhpas your entire outlook is simply wrong, or incredibly over blown, nah of course not. Btw, billions on tonnes of cargo of all kinds, hazardous and otherwise, has been moved by rail in this country, and as terrible as it is this incident is extremely small in the face of that. This is likely terrible set of circumstances that lined up to produce a terrible result, this is the case in most disasters of this type, to react as though moving dangerous goods by rail is destroying the planet and killing us all is incredibly irrational. 1. Some people are living longer. 2. Peoples quality of life may not be improved. Yeah living those extra 10 years fighting cancer is just a great experience. I'd rather die young than have 20 years of medical problems and being drugged to lethargy. The advances of medicine and medical technology do not mean that industrial activities have not reduced life span. People get sick but they are treated. Not everyone survives cancer, and yes oil causes cancer and other serious illnesses. You seem to be advocating for polluting watersheds in that instance you have no standing in this discussion because it is an ignoramus position. You seem to be down playing the fact a square km of a town blew up due to lax safety controls. Well you know what they are idiots because they aren't protecting people or their cargo. You saying its ok only 0.01% of hazourdous materials moved kill or injure anyone, so we don't need to make that safety record better. You know if I only pick up a gun and kill one person it matters, the same should apply to companies hauling hazourdous materials including oil. This includes pipelines. The stuff kills and makes people sick, there needs to be safety measure in place to prevent this, as ethically it is repulsive. It is negligence causing severe injury and death that any reasonable and sane person can see. It happened because it could happen. The government isn't being safe. As scary as it is to believe, the pipleines are worse than the trains in terms of safety.. Edited July 10, 2013 by AlienB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 (edited) Not really. Without knowing the cause it is just opportunism and he deserves the critcism. Too bad politicians aren't roasted for this more often because he is far from an isolated offender. Edited July 11, 2013 by Wilber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted July 11, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 Rae was right and mulcair is a idiot for what he did. You do not go for political points over something like this and even when nobody has a idea what went on. Mulcair is an idiot for doing his job???? WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 (edited) Mulcair is an idiot for doing his job???? WWWTT Mulcair is an idiot for putting political advantage before concern for the victims. There will be plenty of time for that. Edited July 11, 2013 by Wilber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 The feds have to take some of the blame for this for letting unsafe containers haul crude oil or any other inflammable substance. There's a very good chance that IF the company had the right containers hauling the crude oil, it wouldn't have done so much damage or deaths. IF not corrected and they are still allow to use those same kind of containers, it will happen again, but like always money over human lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 It sounds as if the engineer is being blamed. The train engineer should get some of the blame. If the train was running , why is there no way to lock the locomotive up to prevent someone getting on board? Seems quite risky to leave a unattended train running while parked on an incline. So many many questions. Multiple factors seemed to have contributed to the tragedy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 The train engineer should get some of the blame. If the train was running , why is there no way to lock the locomotive up to prevent someone getting on board? Seems quite risky to leave a unattended train running while parked on an incline. So many many questions. Multiple factors seemed to have contributed to the tragedy. The engineer is being blamed for improperly setting the brakes. Could be that he's been singled out to take the fall by the company. Sounds as if 'the blame game' is far from over, though. Quebec police have said they were pursuing a wide-ranging criminal investigation, extending to the possibilities of criminal negligence and some sort of tampering with the train before the crash. The heart of the town's central business district is being treated as a crime scene and remained cordoned off by police tape. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/07/11/quebec-police-treating-oil-train-derailment-site-as-crime-scene-death-toll/#ixzz2YlCD3mqG 20 dead, 30 presumed dead. It's a real tragedy, and I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of those bearing responsibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 The engineer is being blamed for improperly setting the brakes. Could be that he's been singled out to take the fall by the company. Sounds as if 'the blame game' is far from over, though. He should not be singled out, but I throw him in the suspect category simply because he was responsible for this locomotive. If it turns out he did everything he could to remain within safety standards, then the train company, rail operator AND the provincial/federal government share the blame. If the locomotive was tampered with ... the question is .. who? And then the more critical question 'why?' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 He should not be singled out, but I throw him in the suspect category simply because he was responsible for this locomotive. If it turns out he did everything he could to remain within safety standards, then the train company, rail operator AND the provincial/federal government share the blame. If the locomotive was tampered with ... the question is .. who? And then the more critical question 'why?' Can't argue with anything that you've said. I'm sure there are a few people sweating this out. Sometimes an accident is just an accident - but at this point it doesn't really sound as if that's the case here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 The engineer is being blamed for improperly setting the brakes.One of my co-workers husband is with CN and he said that if the engineer didnt set the brakes, the train would have rolled almost immediately, not hours later. Who knows what happened but it appears someone did something to that train after it was left. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 One of my co-workers husband is with CN and he said that if the engineer didnt set the brakes, the train would have rolled almost immediately, not hours later. Who knows what happened but it appears someone did something to that train after it was left. The accusation isn't that he didn't set the brakes, but that he didn't set them properly. Having said that, as I pointed out, the engineer may be the one taking the fall. I think it's a good thing that the police are launching what sounds like a 'no stones unturned' investigation. It's odd, IMO, that terrorism has been ruled out. If someone could have very well done something to the train after it was left, I would think that one cannot rule out the possibility of terrorism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 The accusation isn't that he didn't set the brakes, but that he didn't set them properly.I should have expanded. What was told to me was he couldnt have done it wrong since it is failsafe,and that if they held for a couple of hours (as they did) he set them right. Having said that, as I pointed out, the engineer may be the one taking the fall. I think it's a good thing that the police are launching what sounds like a 'no stones unturned' investigation. It's odd, IMO, that terrorism has been ruled out. If someone could have very well done something to the train after it was left, I would think that one cannot rule out the possibility of terrorism.I am pleased an investigation is being done. Not so much who will do it but thats another story. I would think the terrorism angle being ruled out is more to the int'l terrorism perpetrated by foreigners. It may well be domestic terrorism in the vein of eco warriors and the such. Could well be vandals out for jollies. We shall see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted July 11, 2013 Report Share Posted July 11, 2013 If it is anything other than negligence on the part of the conductor/company, it could be vandals who didn't realize what would happen. Terrorism? Eco-terrorists? Sounds extremely implausible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 Could well be vandals out for jollies. We shall see. If it is anything other than negligence on the part of the conductor/company, it could be vandals who didn't realize what would happen. Terrorism? Eco-terrorists? Sounds extremely implausible. I hadn't thought of the "vandals" aspect - either out for jollies, or didn't realize what would happen. Could very well be. So would they be dead now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I hadn't thought of the "vandals" aspect - either out for jollies, or didn't realize what would happen. Could very well be. So would they be dead now? The train traveled several kilometers before derailing and exploding in town. If it was vandals, they were probably a long ways away... Unless they chased it into town somehow.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 The accusation isn't that he didn't set the brakes, but that he didn't set them properly. Having said that, as I pointed out, the engineer may be the one taking the fall. I think it's a good thing that the police are launching what sounds like a 'no stones unturned' investigation. It's odd, IMO, that terrorism has been ruled out. If someone could have very well done something to the train after it was left, I would think that one cannot rule out the possibility of terrorism. Many factors contributed to accident, and I highly doubt terrorism plays into this at all. If that was the case we would have been hearing about TERRORISM right from the start. I'd rule terrorism out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted July 12, 2013 Report Share Posted July 12, 2013 I hadn't thought of the "vandals" aspect - either out for jollies, or didn't realize what would happen. Could very well be. So would they be dead now? No - the vandalism would have happened where the train was parked, and where the brake was released - at a distance from the town. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.