Crude Oil Accident in New Brunswick, Canada - Case Study Example

Crude Oil Accident in New Brunswick, Canada Name: Lecturer: Course: Date: Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Overview 3 Impact 4 Environmental 4 Lessons Learned 6 Recommendations 7 Inspection 7 Standard Operating Procedures 7 Technology 8 Training 8 Regulations 8 Design Standards 9 International recommendations 9 Conclusion 9 References 10 Overview On January 7, 2014 at around 7 p.m., a train owned by Canadian National Railway that carried crude oil and propane derailed at a remote region in New Brunswick, Canada before catching fire. The train, which had four locomotives and 122 cars, was headed to Moncton in New Brunswick from Toronto, some 186 miles away from the accident site (Kennedy 2014). 17 of the cars derailed. Five of the cars carried crude oil while four had liquefied petroleum gas. No casualty was reported as a result of the accident. Some 45 homes were evacuated, affecting about 150 residents. The derailment sparked fireballs and huge cloud of smoke, forcing the residents to evacuate their homes due to effects of intense heat and smoke. Despite a delay in fire rescue service from New Brunswick due to inaccessibility of the area and poor communication, volunteer firefighters reported to the site in time to contain the spread of fire. The fire went on burning until the next day (Taber & Mackrael2014). The cars with the propane vented while the crude cars were burnt. The fire was contained before it could spread to the nearby forest. Preliminary investigations by the Transportation Safety Board established that an interruption of the air brake line caused automatic emergency brakes activation. As a result, the thirteenth car, which experienced axle problem, derailed followed by 16 other cars (Tomesco 2014). Impact Environmental Gipson and Yeigh (2006) explains that train accidents can cause rolling stock in the share market, rail service disruption, damage to infrastructure and damage to the environment. Indeed, the four areas signify the implications of the Brunswick train fire explosion. A major impact of the accident was the potential release of carbon emissions to the environment due to the fire explosion resulting from the LPG and crude oil and after the long duration of high temperature fire (Taber & Mackrael2014). Additionally, 155 residents were evacuated and were not able to return to their homes for two days. Those with houses that were most contaminated were declared inhabitable until reconstructed. Although the environmental officials warned that there would be no ill effects in using the water, residents were warned not to drink underground water from well and rivers. The officials expressed the possibilities that the spill from the oil could have contaminated the groundwater (Tomesco 2014). Cleanup of the derailment and subsequent reconstruction affected the operation of the railroad and the local landscape. The site of the accident and neighbouring villages were affected by noise from heavy machinery, such as bulldozers and tracks used in cleanup (Taber & Mackrael2014). Political Various community leaders and the local government have complained that railways are being exempted from local regulation, since they are under federal jurisdiction. Information on the content of inflammable goods carried in the train was systematically and deliberately withheld by the Transportation Safety Board from municipal leaders, whose concerns range from emergency response to disaster planning. This has raised concern on why the industry and federal regulations should accommodate the rail safety concerns of municipalities (Taber & Mackrael2014). Economics Regulators have contemplated forcing rail companies to invest in sturdier cargo cars that would take longer to catch fire as well as incorporate larger pressure-relief valves to reduce the risk of breach. This is estimated to cost energy companies some $1 billion (Dawson 2014). The U.S. and Canadian regulators have considered the boom in the North American oil production and share market, leading to prevalence of railroad fire explosions. This is after a similar accident happened in July 2013 in Quebec killing 47. The regulators have rethought the decision to increase pipelines to reduce railroad accidents. Engineering Issues Fire engineering is based on fundamentals of combustion science, material science, human behaviour science and fluid mechanics (Zhao 2001). In respect to Escapes, Safety equipment and transport Issues, fire engineering ensures improved architectural appearance, better layout of a structure, technological innovation and fire safety. In respect to transport issues, studies have showed that fire on a stationary train is less disastrous than on a running train. This is since fanning winds in moving trains spread fire to other cars (Liu et al. 2012). Therefore, although the emergency breaking system can help reduce fire impact, the train designs should be able to detect a breach in the system to alert the train operators. In the Brunswick train fire accident, preliminary researches established that the train had experienced undesired emergency-brake activation after one of the wheels or axles experienced a problem (Dawson, C 2014). Concerning escape and safety equipment, Gipson and Yeigh (2006) explain that improving safety should be the priority of the government and the rail industry. A survey by the researchers revealed that frequency of train accidents depend on the factors that cause them. Liu et al. (2012) established that train derailments are the predominant types of train accidents globally and preventing them should be the concern of the government and rail industry. Dawson (2014) commented that rail companies should shift to sturdier tank cars that would take longer to catch fire as well as incorporate larger pressure-relief valves to reduce the risk of breach. This can allow evacuation and salvage or property. While the significance of fire engineering approach in preventing fire accidents in trains is well documented, using such approach has not been standardised (Liu et al. 2012). Additionally, there are no regulations that promote the use of such approaches in designing trains. In most cases, it is wholly the discretion of the train manufacturers on whether they wish to use the approaches. Developing performance codes can however serve to solve this problem as it will provide unified regulatory structure (Gipson & Yeigh 2006). Lessons Learned Proper training and instruction as well as awareness of fire hazards for the operations staff and design can reduce the extent of damages and loss from fire accidents. Further, trains should be designed in a way that makes it easy to detect a problem with the system or where a wrong assembly or mechanical problem can be detected. Detailed inspection of trains that carry combustible or hazardous materials should be inspected regularly in compliance with goof engineering practice. Preliminary results show that the accident may have been caused by a problem with the wheels or axle. In addition, fire fighters take long to respond to fire incidences in the outskirts, prompting volunteer firefighters and the public to manage the fire. This is particularly when firefighters face problems in locating the accident site. Hence, slow response time and communication barriers may result to severe extent of damage (Donahue & Tuohy 2006). A key lesson is that quick response and evacuation during firefighting can save lives, prevent fire spread and protect significant amount of property. Recommendations Inspection All trains that carry combustible or hazardous materials should be inspected and tested after all trips or a major turnaround. The Brunswick train accident is believed to have been caused by a mechanical problem, due to lack of inspection, leading to emergency braking that caused derailment. This relates to another train fire explosion in July 2013 in Quebec, Canada after a train carrying combustible material derailed killing 47 due to a mechanical hitch (McDonald et al. 2013). Standard Operating Procedures The fire rescue personnel should take numerous levels of revision on how to rapidly locate and respond to fire incidences in the outskirts of city centres. Emphasis on training will improve firefighter safety, particularly volunteer firefighters. In such scenarios, firefighters tend to rely on crew helicopters (FEMA 2008). Technology Trains carrying combustible and hazardous materials should install firefighter locating and tracking devices. Downlink antenna should be installed to the firefighter vehicle to allow the IC to receive video from news crew helicopters overhead (Teja & Angadi 2013). Other recommended technologies include self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) or thermal imaging cameras to improve monitoring of the accident scene by the firefighters. Similar to the Brunswick accident, the deadly explosion in Quebec highlighted the risks or transporting crude oil and how firefighters face a problem in communication (McDonald et al. 2013). Training The personnel operating the trains need significant task-level training on procedure to detect and react to problems within the system. New training modules need to be developed in Canada to address the areas of foreground communication, survival of the crew, search and rescue and air management. This is particularly to enable firefighters learn how to manage their air supply under varying situations as well as improve their critical behaviour and thinking (FEMA 2008). Regulations Federation government should review rail safety regulations. Some of the key concerns include equipping and supporting municipal first responders as well as keeping them informed of the dangerous goods transported by rail, that pass through communities to help in emergency planning (FEMA 2008). This relates to a massive explosion in Nova Scotia in 1917, when 3,000 tonnes of mixed explosives detonated causing 4,000 deaths leading to change in rules on maritime laws that implemented stricter requirements in shipping combustible goods. Design Standards Rail companies should invest in sturdier cargo cars that would take longer to catch fire as well as incorporate larger pressure-relief valves to reduce the risk of breach (Teja & Angadi 2013). The case is similar to earlier train accident in South Carolina in 2005, when a toxic train spilled liquefied chorine after collision with parked locomotive, prompting a change in designs for new cargo cars with stronger steel, crumple zones and double walls (Mechanics 2009). International recommendations International regulations should require that rail carriers more detailed safety and security analysis of the trains before they are cleared to carry oil and other flammable products across borders. Alternative routes should be designated (rerouted) for carriage of highly explosive goods from foreign countries to avoid densely populated areas (Mouwad & Austen 2014). International rail carriers should also come up with spill-response plans that are similar to those used by pipeline operators. Hazardous cargo that originates from other countries should be classified properly to avoid cases of mislabelling. Any individual importing or offering to transport hazardous and explosive materials should conduct classification testing. Conclusion Fire explosion is the most immediate dangerous implication of any accident when hazardous or inflammable material is being transported. In the event of a fire explosion, response and evacuation by firefighters can save lives, prevent fire spread and protect significant amount of property. This however depends on the level of communication among the firefighters and accessibility of the accident site. Therefore, eliminating the period between the time of accident occurrence and when the first responders arrive reduces the extent of damage. An approach that can be used in eliminating the extent of damage due to delays is through training citizens and volunteer firefighters on firefighting, as they are always the first respondent. This was the case with the Brunswick accident, where although the accident happened in a remote region, 186 miles away from New Brunswick, the fire was largely contained by volunteer firefighters. References Dawson, C 2014, Canadian Railway CEO Apologizes After Train Derailment, The Wall Street Journal, viewed 6 March 2014, http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303933104579307540268270078 Donahue, A & Tuohy, R 2006, "Lessons We Don't Learn: A Study of the Lessons of Disasters, Why We Repeat Them, and How We Can Learn Them," Homeland Security Affairs, Vol. 2 No. 2, FEMA 2008, Special Report: The After-Action Critique: Training Through Lessons Learned, U.S. Fire Administration/Technical Report Series USFA-TR-159/April 2008 Gipson, G & Yeigh, B 2006, "Scaling Issues Related to Modeling of Railroad Car Damage II Explosions, Fires, and Safety,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling, Vol. 42, p.483-488 Kennedy, C 2014, Canadian Oil and Gas Train Derails, Catches Fire, viewed 6 March 2014, http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Canadian-Oil-and-Gas-Train-Derails-Catches-Fire.html Liu, X, Saat, R & Barkan, P 2012, "Analysis of Causes of Major Train Derailment and Their Effect on Accident Rates," Journal of the Transportation Research Board, Vol, 1, p.154-163 Mechanics, P 2009, Ten Lessons Learned From Past Rail Accidents, Fox News, viewed 6 Feb 2014, http://www.foxnews.com/story/2009/06/25/ten-lessons-learned-from-past-rail-accidents/ McDonald, A, Fowler, T & Newman, J 2013, Runaway Quebec Train's Owner Battled Safety Issues, The Wall Street Journal, viewed 6 March 2014, http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324507404578593860896712862 Mouwad, J & Austen, I 2014, U.S. and Canada Urge New Safety Rules for Crude Oil Rail Shipments, New York Times, viewed 11 March 2014, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/24/business/us-and-canada-urge-new-safety-rules-for-crude-oil-rail-shipments.html?_r=0 Taber, J & Mackrael, K 2014, Train derailment and fire involving crude oil tankers likely caused by brake malfunction, The Globe and Mail, viewed 6 March 2014, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/train-carrying-oil-and-gas-derails-blaze-prompts-evacuation-of-new-brunswick-town/article16240968/ Teja, K & Angadi, S 2013, "Fire Detection and Notification System in Trains," International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 2, Issue 4, p.1149-1152 Tomesco, F 2014, Canadian Freight Train Catches Fire After Jumping Rails, Bloomberg, viewed 6 March 2014, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-08/train-with-dangerous-cargo-derails-in-eastern-canada.html Zhao, L 2001, "A Few Issues On Developing Performance Based Fire Safety Code," International Journal on Engineering Performance-Based Fire Codes, Volume 3, Number 4, p.141-150, 2001 Read More