ForestEthics: West Coast of U.S. Faces Onslaught of New Proposals to Transport Toxic and Dangerous Oil By Rail

Environmental Advocates, ForestEthics Successfully Petition To Extend U.S. Dept. of Transportation's Comment Period On Dangerous Tank Cars

BELLINGHAM, Wash., Nov. 12, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Friday's derailment and explosion of yet another oil train, this time in Alabama, highlights the extreme and all-but-unknown risks associated with shipping crude oil by rail, warn environmental advocates with ForestEthics, who are campaigning around the issue. The safety standards for railcars filled with oil are outdated, and the type of new and unconventional crude oil that they're carrying is prone to volatility, along with being difficult, if not impossible, to clean up. Until recently, shipping crude oil by rail was relatively uncommon; now, it is growing exponentially with more than 30 new oil-by-rail plans proposed across the country.

Washington, California, Texas, and the Northeast face an exponential increase in the number of proposals to ship oil by railcar, including the type of oil that exploded in July of this year killing 47 people during a derailment in Lac-Megantic, Canada. Washington State, which currently has two oil-by-rail terminals, has seen eight new proposals over the last year, with San Francisco and Los Angeles seeing another seven combined. The Washington proposals for new oil-by-rail terminals would have a total capacity roughly equal to the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. Nationally, over 30 new proposals are in the works.

"With declining domestic demand for oil, Canadian and US oil companies are desperate to get the land-locked oil and tar sands in the middle of our continent out to new markets in Asia and beyond," said Todd Paglia, Executive Director of ForestEthics. "The pipelines, tankers, and oil-by-rail proposals resulting from this new oil boom could forever change the face of rail communities around the country, yet the public knows little to nothing about them. We need time to understand these issues and have our voices heard before any plans are approved."

The boom of crude by rail proposals coincides with a long-overdue update of federal rules on rail car construction, with the US Department of Transportation inviting public comment on safety standards for railroad tank cars used to transport oil, tar sands, and other volatile substances. Railcars carrying oil today are often outdated and prone to punctures and explosions during accidents.

Based on a petition from ForestEthics, Sierra Club, and allies, the US Department of Transportation granted a 30 day extension until December 5th of that comment period on rules for railcar construction, which will give communities along rail lines more time to learn about the risk coming their way.

"This comment period extension is a victory for community safety," said Matt Krogh, Campaign Director at ForestEthics. "With more than thirty new proposals to receive crude by rail around the country, it's critical that communities slated for a massive increase in dangerous substances by rail be informed about the risks being imposed on them."

Trains carrying oil are often more than 100 railcars in length, which means a massive concentration of danger in the best of circumstances — made far more serious when carrying volatile and toxic oil in outdated rail cars.

"Most people have never heard about these terminal proposals and don't know the kinds of rail risk that are coming their way," said Paglia. "Federal notification process for regulations and local notification processes for terminal construction mean that the millions of people who live along rail lines from the oil fields and tar sands mines to the terminals have never heard about either the terminal proposals or the railroad tank car comment period that could be critical to their safety."

ForestEthics' work to stop these oil-by-rail proposals is part of its ongoing campaign to protect the West Coast from a massive increase in new crude oil development projects and the attendant catastrophic risk of oil spills, including tar sands oil, a type of unconventional crude that is highly corrosive and laced with known carcinogens like benzene. The oil industry itself reports that even with a spill of conventional oil "containment and recovery at sea [of an oil spill is]… at best only 10 - 15% and often considerably less." (1) The Washington Department of Ecology estimates a single major oil spill in the Salish Sea would cost Washington's economy $10.8 billion and negatively impact 165,000 jobs (2).

"We believe this extension is a step in the right direction," said Paglia, "but it's up to all of us to hold the Department of Transportation accountable for standards that actually protect communities."

The Department of Transportation's rail car safety comment period has been extended until December 5th.  The public can comment using ForestEthics' comment form at www.forestethics.org/rail.

ForestEthics is a non-profit organization devoted to public engagement, outreach and environmental advocacy. We secure large-scale protection of endangered forests and wild places and transform environmentally destructive resource-extraction industries. For more information, visit www.forestethics.org.

1. International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation Limited. Limitations of Containment and Recovery. 2013. Online: http://www.itopf.com/spill-response/clean-up-and-response/containment-and-recovery/

2. Washington Department of Ecology. Improving Spill Prevention and Response in Washington. 2011. Online: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/spills/studies_reports/ecypspreview-dwhcommissionreport.html

SOURCE ForestEthics