From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   dpeltier@my-deja.com wrote:   
   >"Adam H. Kerman"  wrote:   
      
   >>>http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/213079-administr   
   tion-to-unveil-stricter-crude-by-rail-standards   
      
   >>>Administration to unveil stricter rules for carrying crude   
   >>>by rail   
   >>>By Laura Barron-Lopez - 07/23/14 08:48 AM EDT   
      
   >>>The Obama administration will unveil new rules Wednesday   
   >>>proposing more stringent safety standards on trains carrying   
   >>>crude oil and other flammable fuels.   
      
   >>>Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx is expected to   
   >>>announce the new rules, which will include standards for   
   >>>tank cars, speed limits for trains carrying crude oil, brake   
   >>>standards and testing for oil and other flammable liquids,   
   >>>according to a Wall Street Journal report.   
      
   >>Foxx was the guest Tuesday at one of the journalists' clubs on Tuesday.   
   >>The stupid shit was totally wishy-washy. One of the reporters asked him   
   >>if they're getting any better information about the chemical contents   
   >>of Bakken crude and he said they were getting whatever the oil industry   
   >>decided to give them.   
      
   >>Well, send your own investigators to the damn oil fields and prevent   
   >>those tank cars from being loaded if the crude's volatility is being   
   >>misrepresented! You've got the power to do that!   
      
   >>It's been six years, and the Obama administration STILL doesn't have   
   >>a handle on this issue.   
      
   >>We don't need new tank car standards. We need to stop loading Bakken crude   
   >>in tank cars not designed for Bakken crude under CURRENT standards.   
      
   >The DOT-111 car, according to the federal government, is currently spec'ed   
   >to handle all types of crude oil, as well as ethanol and other explosive   
   >liquids. So if you think maybe we shouldn't be loading explosive liquids   
   >into such cars, then yes, we need new tank car standards.   
      
   Don't say "explosive liquid" when the issue is volatility. Also, I forgot   
   about corrosion.   
      
   >My understanding is that the new standards will apply to liquids that have   
   >a certain flash point, regardless of the underlying chemistry, which is   
   >exactly as it should be. (But I haven't read the prosper rules myself.)   
      
   The existing tank car standards were based on a particular flash point, too.   
   Again, it's about tank cars are designed for X; don't put Y in them.   
      
   >It's not like there haven't been massive explosions resulting from ethanol,   
   >see   
   >http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/ohio-train-explosion-caught-tape-16758671   
   >for a good video Tells you something about the relative power of Big Oil   
   >compared to the Ag industry, I guess...   
      
   Are tank cars for ethanol not spec'ed to known characteristics of ethanol?   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)