Is Train Cargo Confidentiality Agreements Necessary?

[Michael Hardner]

Yes but you seem to be of two minds on what constitutes private and public business and somehow always manage to sound exasperated when people can't find it within themselves to simply trust the government.

I don't think I have even expressed my opinion other than to say people can make a change to the law if they want to.

[cybercoma]

I still think it's weird for somebody to want to keep the government out of private business in some cases but not others - even as the rationale (security and safety) is exactly the same.

I don't for a minute believe that you actually think that. You know exactly why this is qualitatively different.

[cybercoma]

First of all I think this attempt to compare the trunk of someones car to a train car is mot even worth discussing.

For starters, there's a plethora of materials that are strictly regulated or prohibited from mass public distribution. So there's that.

[WestCoastRunner]

This statement is false. All transport carrying hazardous goods must be clearly labeled on the container/vehicle and on the shipping documents. Here is a reference to the required labels:

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType272/Production/safetymarks.pdf

If a train is transporting goods that are not classified as a hazardous materials then no one has any need to know what is in it.

This entire story is nothing but a local politician grandstanding about something he knows nothing about.

That may be so, however, communities will not get advance notice of dangerous cargo moving through their communities:

"Two measures that the federal government is refusing to take, responding to railway insistence, is advance notification by the railways to municipalities of the movement of dangerous cargos through their jurisdictions, and more extensive ‘route planning’ that would direct trains carrying dangerous cargos around populated areas. The latter measure would be costly for the railways and not logistically possible in many cases."

Can you back up the fact that this mayor knows nothing about what he is talking about?

[WestCoastRunner]

In British Columbia, rail cars transporting crude oil and other petroleum products has increased 200 percent from last year. There were 3,400 oil and petroleum rail-car shipments in BC last year compared to 1,200 in 2012 and only 50 in 2011.

Not only that, train derailments jumped 20 percent to 110 incidents, highest in 5 years.

These stats should make Canadians pause and reflect on this secrecy issue with rail cars.

[Smallc]

Then you should be 100% supportive I the two pipeline proposals.

[WestCoastRunner]

Then you should be 100% supportive I the two pipeline proposals.

The issue is the secrecy of railcars moving dangerous cargo through communities without notification. This has nothing to do with pipelines so don't try and bring that into this issue.

[TimG]

That may be so, however, communities will not get advance notice of dangerous cargo moving through their communities:

So? What possible purpose would it serve other than to cost the railways money. It is not as if the town can/should do anything different just because a train with hazardous goods rolls through town.

As for the idea that goods be directed around populated areas is completely ridiculous given the fact that rails corridors are few and far between and hazardous goods roll though populated areas all of the time on trucks.

This is just more evidence of a clueless local politicians grandstanding.

[WestCoastRunner]

So? What possible purpose would it serve other than to cost the railways money. It is not as if the town can/should do anything different just because a train with hazardous goods rolls through town.

As for the idea that goods be directed around populated areas is completely ridiculous given the fact that rails corridors are few and far between and hazardous goods roll though populated areas all of the time on trucks.

This is just more evidence of a clueless local politicians grandstanding.

First of all, why keep citizens of their communities in the dark about what hazardous material is being transported through their town. Perhaps they are being transported near schools, hospitals, high density neighbourhoods. With this knowledge, city planners/local politicians (if they have any balls) can do much to pressure the federal gov't for high safety standards, planning of future development etc. Knowledge is power, or haven't you heard.

[TimG]

First of all, why keep citizens of their communities in the dark about what hazardous material is being transported through their town.

Because it serves no public purpose. It does not increase safety because it does not help people plan or prepare. all it does is allow unethical enviro-parasites to whip up public fears.

With this knowledge, city planners/local politicians (if they have any balls) can do much to pressure the federal gov't for high safety standards, planning of future development etc. Knowledge is power, or haven't you heard.

Nonsense. I got a simple solution: pipelines. If people are worried about rail then support safer alternatives. This would reduce the pressure on rails.

But you know this has nothing to do with public safety - this is just another tactic by the enviro-parasites to shut down any industry which they disapprove of. If it was really about public safety they would be talking about measures that actually improve the safety of shipments instead of wasting resources notifying people that can't do anything with the information anyways.

Edited May 8, 2014 by TimG

[WestCoastRunner]

Because it serves no public purpose. It does not increase safety because it does not help people plan or prepare. all it does is allow unethical enviro-activist parasites to whip up public fears.

But you know this has nothing to do with public safety - this is just another tactic by the enviro-activist parasites to shut down any industry which they disapprove of.

Again, why should citizens of a community be kept in the dark of hazardous materials passing through 'their' towns. How does it not help people plan or prepare?

Enviro-activists? I don't think the mayors of communities across Canada are enviro-activists, and there are plenty of mayors rising up against the rail companies after the Quebec incident.

This has nothing to do with pipelines. Stay focused on the secrecy issue regarding rail transportation.

[TimG]

Again, why should citizens of a community be kept in the dark of hazardous materials passing through 'their' towns. How does it not help people plan or prepare?

Spare me your crocodile tears. If you have a rail line or a highway you have to assume that from time to time there will hazardous goods travelling down the corridor. Given that knowledge the local first responders need training in how to deal with spills. Beyond that no one needs to know that at 1 AM on Jul 5th a train with hazardous goods is rolling through town.

If the mayors are looking for is a list of the possible hazardous goods that might be transported without any specific times then that could be accommodated. But that is not what people appear to be asking for.

Edited May 8, 2014 by TimG

[WestCoastRunner]

If you have a rail line or a highway you have to assume that from time to time there will hazardous goods travelling down the corridor.

From time to time?

In British Columbia, rail cars transporting crude oil and other petroleum products has increased 200 percent from last year. There were 3,400 oil and petroleum rail-car shipments in BC last year compared to 1,200 in 2012 and only 50 in 2011.

Not only that, train derailments jumped 20 percent to 110 incidents, highest in 5 years.

[TimG]

In British Columbia, rail cars transporting crude oil and other petroleum products has increased 200 percent from last year. There were 3,400 oil and petroleum rail-car shipments in BC last year compared to 1,200 in 2012 and only 50 in 2011.

So? That does not mean any useful purpose is accomplished by 'advance notification'.

People need to assume that hazardous goods will be shipped by these corridors that such shipments are essential for the economy. That is all the knowledge they need.

Not only that, train derailments jumped 20 percent to 110 incidents, highest in 5 years.

That is an argument for stricter rail safety requirements (which I do not oppose) - not "advanced notification". Edited May 8, 2014 by TimG

[Smallc]

That's because of a lack of pipelines. That's why I brought it up.

[WestCoastRunner]

That is an argument for stricter rail safety requirements (which I do not oppose) - not "advanced notification".

You have not presented a good argument for not notifying the communities with 'advance notice'. Check with the mayors across Canada. They would disagree with your stance.

[WestCoastRunner]

That's because of a lack of pipelines. That's why I brought it up.

Again, this thread is not about pipelines. It's about rail cars. You are going to turn this into a major thread drift.

[TimG]

You have not presented a good argument for not notifying the communities with 'advance notice'.

The onus is on you to provide a good argument for why notification would serve a useful purpose. And you have provided no argument for why it would serve any useful purpose. "Because they want it" is not good enough because it costs money to get.

Do you really want to live in a society where regulations are dictated by the whims of politicians as opposed to a rational discussion of the objectives vs costs?

I am also curious about your opinion on the elections act: do you argue that the 'government must prove that fraud exists before demanding ID or do you argue that no proof is necessary'?

Edited May 8, 2014 by TimG

[WestCoastRunner]

The onus is on you to provide a good argument for why notification would serve a useful purpose. And you have provided no argument for why it would serve any useful purpose. "Because they want it" is not good enough because it costs money to get.

Do you really want to live in a society where regulations are dictated by the whims of politicians as opposed to a rational discussion of the objectives vs costs?

As I have said earlier:

First of all, why keep citizens of their communities in the dark about what hazardous material is being transported through their town. Perhaps they are being transported near schools, hospitals, high density neighbourhoods. With this knowledge, city planners/local politicians (if they have any balls) can do much to pressure the federal gov't for high safety standards, planning of future development etc. Knowledge is power, or haven't you heard.

The whims of mayors of our communities are there to protect the citizens that elected them.

I don't understand why think it is ok to keep communities in the dark about hazardous material that is being transported through their communities. Why the secrecy?

[Shady]

Again, why should citizens of a community be kept in the dark of hazardous materials passing through 'their' towns.

Again, what about harzardous materials that already exist in businesses, or warehouses, or storage facilities located INSIDE towns and cities?

[TimG]

As I have said earlier:

That is not an argument. It is a bunch of BS invented to rationalize a position. All planners need to know is if there is a rail line that their could be hazardous goods. They gain nothing by knowing the exact timing.

The whims of mayors of our communities are there to protect the citizens that elected them.

More BS. They are not "protecting" their communities. They are grandstanding and exploiting fears of people in order to get votes. It is contemptible.

I don't understand why think it is ok to keep communities in the dark about hazardous material that is being transported through their communities. Why the secrecy?

There is no secret. If you have a rail line you have hazardous goods. The exact timing of shipments provides no useful information. This last argument is perhaps the most dishonest one you use because it implies that rail companies are shipping hazardous goods without labelling them. This is simply not true - anyone watching a train should be able to see the hazardous labels. Edited May 8, 2014 by TimG

[WestCoastRunner]

More BS. They are not "protecting" their communities. They are grandstanding and exploiting fears of people in order to get votes. It is contemptible.

There is no secret. If you have a rail line you have hazardous goods. The exact timing of shipments provides no useful information. This last argument is perhaps the most dishonest one you use because it implies that rail companies are shipping hazardous goods without labelling them.

Well, I tend to have more faith in mayors of communities than you do.

Timing of shipments provides valuable information. Knowledge is power. Why you continue to deny this is totally baffling to me.

[TimG]

Well, I tend to have more faith in mayors of communities than you do.

No you don't. You are just using them in this case because they are saying things that are useful in your anti-fossil fuel jihad. If they said things that undermined your position you would be full of arguments of why they should be ignored.

Timing of shipments provides valuable information. Knowledge is power.

More trite BS which I assume you repeat because you know you have no rational argument to favour your position.

As I said: the onus is on you to provide _concrete_ reasons why such information is useful. i.e. explain exactly what could be done with the exact timings that cannot be done with the general information they have already.

Edited May 8, 2014 by TimG

[Smallc]

Again, this thread is not about pipelines. It's about rail cars. You are going to turn this into a major thread drift.

You keep talking about the danger of all the crude oil being shipped by rail car, yet you oppose the solution...I consider it to be an important part of the topic of rail safety - that is, getting the crude oil off of the train cars.

[WestCoastRunner]

No you don't. You are just using them in this case because they are saying things that are useful in your anti-fossil fuel jihad. If they said things that undermined your position you would be full of arguments of why they should be ignored.

More trite BS which I assume you repeat because you know you have no rational argument to favour your position.

As I said: the onus is on you to provide _concrete_ reasons why such information is useful. i.e. explain exactly what could be done with the exact timings that cannot be done with the general information they have already.

Do you honestly expect me to answer this with the same expertise as a mayor/city planner/emergency preparedness staff of any municipality across Canada. Let's great real Tim.

Providing information about when and how much hazardous material is being transported through someone's town will benefit any community across Canada. Let's drop the secrecy and lets be transparent.

As far as my anti-fossil jihad. You are a paranoid dude!