Trump’s “Bomb Trains” coming to a neighborhood near you!

[Billy_Bob]

A new Trump administration rule relaxing guidelines that govern the transport of liquefied natural gas could create “bomb trains” with enough explosive power to level whole cities, environmental groups say. A coalition of organizations led by the nonprofit Earthjustice has sued the administration, challenging the rule, which is scheduled to go into effect on Monday.

Separately, fourteen states and the District of Columbia are also suing the Trump administration to review the rule and declare it unlawful. The National Transportation Safety Board and the National Association of State Fire Marshals oppose it as well.

Under the new rule, trains would be allowed to transport up to 30,000 gallons of liquified natural gas (LNG) per tank, significantly more than has ever been allowed in the U.S., and there will be no restrictions on the number of LNG tanker cars in a particular train, nor on the routes these trains may travel, so they will be free to pass through dense population centers.

.....

......But shifting LNG transport to the railways could be a catastrophe, the lawsuits assert. “There’s a very good reason liquefied natural gas has never been shipped by rail in this country, and that’s because it’s wildly unsafe,” said Joseph Otis Minott, executive director of the Clean Air Council, which joined the lawsuit with Earthjustice. “I don’t want these dangerous trains going through my neighborhood, and trust me, you don’t either.”

New Trump Rule Could Create 'Bomb Trains,' Environmentalists Say

Two lawsuits have been filed over the Trump administration's 'wildly unsafe' plan to transport liquified natural gas on railroads.

www.rollingstone.com

You think this can only happen in Beirut:



Not if the Orange Idiot has his way.

Pure "what if" and speculation.

That is all they have... Fearmongering and hate all in the name of gaining control over the populace..

 

[Billy_Bob]

A new Trump administration rule relaxing guidelines that govern the transport of liquefied natural gas could create “bomb trains” with enough explosive power to level whole cities, environmental groups say. A coalition of organizations led by the nonprofit Earthjustice has sued the administration, challenging the rule, which is scheduled to go into effect on Monday.

Separately, fourteen states and the District of Columbia are also suing the Trump administration to review the rule and declare it unlawful. The National Transportation Safety Board and the National Association of State Fire Marshals oppose it as well.

Under the new rule, trains would be allowed to transport up to 30,000 gallons of liquified natural gas (LNG) per tank, significantly more than has ever been allowed in the U.S., and there will be no restrictions on the number of LNG tanker cars in a particular train, nor on the routes these trains may travel, so they will be free to pass through dense population centers.

.....

......But shifting LNG transport to the railways could be a catastrophe, the lawsuits assert. “There’s a very good reason liquefied natural gas has never been shipped by rail in this country, and that’s because it’s wildly unsafe,” said Joseph Otis Minott, executive director of the Clean Air Council, which joined the lawsuit with Earthjustice. “I don’t want these dangerous trains going through my neighborhood, and trust me, you don’t either.”

New Trump Rule Could Create 'Bomb Trains,' Environmentalists Say

Two lawsuits have been filed over the Trump administration's 'wildly unsafe' plan to transport liquified natural gas on railroads.

www.rollingstone.com

You think this can only happen in Beirut:



Not if the Orange Idiot has his way.

Just wow.. the level of bull shit is massive from you...

1. The explosion in your post was a compressed Ammonium Nitrate explosion. It has the explosive capabilities of 10 times that of natural gas that has been liquefied.

2. We have millions of tank cars that carry Liquid Petrolatum Gas with very few issues because of thier venting systems and their build. An LPG tank car can be dropped from 120 feet and it will not burst.

We use there systems for very explosive materials to include rocket fuel. Your hyperbole and lie about the explosive nature of NG is pathetic and a lie.

What a dishonest POS this OP post is...

Lol...coming From a hack whose science is all colored by his ideology. Run on, little boy.

I base my opinions on the findings of real scientists.

You wouldnt know science even if it slapped you up the side of the damn head. You ideology and dishonesty is very evident... Why did you lie about the explosion? Why do you lie about Tank Car design andd the safety record since 1980? its all bull shit all the time from you liberal fools...

Please....there are plenty of sources I have linked to; plenty of sources others have linked to, that show the danger of transporting LNG by rail. Nah, I have I judged the credibility of my sources and your ”science” and you just don’t cut it.

According to the Maryland Attorney General, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) itself predicts that the LNG by Rail rule will introduce unit trains comprised of 80-100 tank cars, with each tank car carrying over 30,000 gallons of LNG, to our nationwide rail network.

https://www.marylandattorneygeneral.gov/press/2020/081820.pdf

Yeah..nothing to worry about there.

I have a physics degree and your full of shit. Enjoy your ignorance...Trumps relaxed rules allow only updated tank designs to carry NG..

LNG transport under special permits has been operational in Florida and Alaska since 2016 and included some safety measures like transport in special United Nations portable tanks, 40 mph maximum speeds, special training for personnel in loading and unloading LNG, 10 car limits per train, and one trip per day. But the results of these pilot programs are not published. Even after going through a Freedom of Information Act request, members of the public were given almost entirely redacted records of the program’s risk assessment.


PHMSA points to a safe record of the pilot program in support nationwide LNG trains, without transparent data to back it up. And the new rule sets up a whole new playing field: it looks nothing like the test run. None of the safety measures listed made it into the new rule, and it uses untested model DOT-113 tank cars, rather than tested the UN portable tanks.

View attachment 377638

A UN tank above.

https://www.pennfuture.org/Blog-Item-LNG-in-PA-Blog-2-Bomb-Trains-Through-Pennsylvania

You didnt learn a damn thing.. Those tanks can be dropped from 120' and not be damaged or breach. The left is so predictable.

 

[theHawk]

Some of what I am finding disagree‘s with Marty’s assessment:

”......This proposed rule is rushed and ill-advised, and, if finalized, will pose a serious risk to public health and safety — not just in my state but nationwide,” Inslee said.

Others noted the health risks from a leak or fire, especially in densely populated urban areas. They accused PHMSA of rushing approval to benefit the domestic fracking industry.

“We must not be used as guinea pigs by this untested and high-consequence rush to grease the rails for special interests,” wrote Tamar Dick of Bethlehem, Pa.

Dick noted that LNG volume expands significantly when released in the air and is “capable of a far-reaching catastrophe, including a fire too hot to extinguish.”‘
.........


Train transportation, the agency maintained, is less risky than shipping by highway. LNG is similar to other flammable, cryogenic liquids currently transported by rail. The rule requires the use of an existing class of tank cars, called DOT-113, that is refrigerated and protected with a double-pressure vessel design.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), however, has refuted some of PHMSA’s claims, saying a thorough safety assessment of the DOT-113 tank cars is needed because the colorless, odorless gas is easily ignitable and hard to detect.

“Specifically, an analysis should address fireballs, flash fire, and explosions from ground-level vapor clouds that may expand far beyond the point of release to an ignition source,” according to a letter signed by Robert L. Sumwalt III, chairman of the NTSB.

......

We believe the risks of catastrophic LNG releases in accidents is too great not to have operational controls in place before large blocks of tank cars and unit trains proliferate,” Sumwalt said.

Sumwalt noted that derailments of DOT-113 tank cars, although rare, can release larger quantities of hazardous material than a truck accident, and that federal regulators have a poor track record of responding to “fiery flammable-liquids accidents.”

Feds Green Light Use of Trains to Transport LNG - ecoRI News

President Trump has followed through on his pledge to allow trains to transport liquefied natural gas, a decision opposed by environmental groups and 15 states, including Rhode Island and Massachusetts.

www.ecori.org

Nothing but opinions from people opposed to the use of Natural Gas in general. You idiots fought against pipelines, the easiest and safest way to get the gas to distribution ports, and now you are bitching when they try to find another way.

This is on you.

These lefties are moronic shitbags that don’t know anything about science.

LNG is one fo the safest fuels to transport.
In its liquid form, it cannot catch fire or detonate. If it is spilled, it is completely non toxic. It can evaporate, and the vapors are flammable, but only if the ignition source of 1000 degrees F. You can literally extinguish a cigarette in it and it won’t catch fire, much less explode.



I’m not saying there can’t be explosions with it, but to claim these are “bombs” waiting to go off is just fear mongering.

Yet another knee jerk reaction from the leftards because of their TDS.

 

[theHawk]

Bomb trains? Wishful thinking or threats from radical tree huggers? Would lefties rather see the stuff transported by truck on the interstate?

Read the link. 14 states oppose the change in the rules. LNG has been prohibited from the rails for a reason. Seriously, what kind of idiot wants 30,000 gallons and perhaps hundreds of thousands of gallons of LNG going through their city?

How is LNG transported?
LNG is transported in double-hulled ships specifically designed to handle the low temperature of LNG. These carriers are insulated to limit the amount of LNG that boils off or evaporates. This boils off gas is sometimes used to supplement fuel for the carriers. LNG carriers are up to 1000 feet long, and require a minimum water depth of 40 feet when fully loaded. As of 2012, there were 360 ships transporting more than 220 million metric tons of LNG every year. (Source: Bureau of Economic Geology, University of Texas at Austin, Introduction to LNG.)

Our community fought and prevented an LNG terminal from being built on the Oxnard coastline. Read the following article. It mentions Bill Terry. I grew up with the Terry farming family in Montalvo.

One moment, please...

What a bunch of idiots, spreading disinformation. LNG is completely non-toxic and cannot catch fire easily.

 

[elektra]

more great energy news, Trump finds a solution for every obstacle the Democrats cripple our wallets with.

Sign me up for cheap Natural Gas

 

[ReinyDays]

What a bunch of idiots, spreading disinformation. LNG is completely non-toxic and cannot catch fire easily.

Methane can't catch fire easily? ... and we're the idiots spreading disinformation? ...

That deserves repeating: "LNG is completely non-toxic and cannot catch fire easily."

The sad part is I think you honestly believe that ... just ... sad ...

 

[theHawk]

What a bunch of idiots, spreading disinformation. LNG is completely non-toxic and cannot catch fire easily.

Methane can't catch fire easily? ... and we're the idiots spreading disinformation? ...

That deserves repeating: "LNG is completely non-toxic and cannot catch fire easily."

The sad part is I think you honestly believe that ... just ... sad ...

Not in its liquid form.

 

[okfine]

What a bunch of idiots, spreading disinformation. LNG is completely non-toxic and cannot catch fire easily.

Methane can't catch fire easily? ... and we're the idiots spreading disinformation? ...

That deserves repeating: "LNG is completely non-toxic and cannot catch fire easily."

The sad part is I think you honestly believe that ... just ... sad ...

Anything to protect their dear leader. Amazing.


Reactivity Alerts

• Highly Flammable

Air & Water Reactions
Highly flammable.
Fire Hazard
Excerpt from ERG Guide 115 [Gases - Flammable (Including Refrigerated Liquids)]:

EXTREMELY FLAMMABLE. Will be easily ignited by heat, sparks or flames. Will form explosive mixtures with air. Vapors from liquefied gas are initially heavier than air and spread along ground. CAUTION: Hydrogen (UN1049), Deuterium (UN1957), Hydrogen, refrigerated liquid (UN1966) and Methane (UN1971) are lighter than air and will rise. Hydrogen and Deuterium fires are difficult to detect since they burn with an invisible flame. Use an alternate method of detection (thermal camera, broom handle, etc.) Vapors may travel to source of ignition and flash back. Cylinders exposed to fire may vent and release flammable gas through pressure relief devices. Containers may explode when heated. Ruptured cylinders may rocket. (ERG, 2016)
Health Hazard
If concentration of gas is high enough, may cause asphyxiation. No detectable systemic effects, even at 5% concentration in air. (USCG, 1999)
Reactivity Profile
Contact of very cold liquefied gas with water may result in vigorous or violent boiling of the product and extremely rapid vaporization due to the large temperature differences involved. If the water is hot, there is the possibility that a liquid "superheat" explosion may occur. Pressures may build to dangerous levels if liquid gas contacts water in a closed container [Handling Chemicals Safely 1980].

LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (CRYOGENIC LIQUID) | CAMEO Chemicals | NOAA

cameochemicals.noaa.gov

 

[ReinyDays]

Methane can't catch fire easily? ... and we're the idiots spreading disinformation? ...

Not in its liquid form.

BLEVE = Boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion ... extremely dangerous ... toss an LNG cylinder into a bonfire and take cover ...

Natural gas is ... well ... a gas ... I thought you'd have known that ... so, obviously, there's no point in explaining this to you ... The Donald says gases are liquids and you're going to believe him no matter what ...

For the rest of you ... the typical danger associated with LNG transport is if a leak develops ... and doesn't catch fire right away ... methane gas will spread through a community until it finds an ignition source ... someone lighting a cigarette, someone flipping a light switch, someone touching a house cat ... now I do agree that the OP is overplaying the explosive nature of methane ... there is some explosiveness to the stuff, but the real danger is fire ... the air folks breathe will be burning ... all the wood frame houses would start burning ... gas tanks in autos would start burning ... 40 city blocks all burning at once ...

Not a question of `IF` ... but of `WHEN` ...

Lac-Mégantic rail disaster - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org