G7G – B.C. is vulnerable to the kind of train wreck in Lac-Megantic, Que

Communities in B.C. could be vulnerable to the kind of train wreck that left Lac-Megantic, Que. in ruins Saturday

Train cars carrying crude oil burn after derailing in Lac Megantic, Quebec, July 2013.

By Jessica Barrett, Vancouver Sun, July 8, 2013

B.C. can expect more oil to be transported by rail, as production outpaces pipeline capacity, even if the Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan pipeline proposals are built.

That could leave communities in B.C. vulnerable to the kind of train wreck that left the town of Lac-Megantic, Que. in ruins.

The disaster raises serious questions about safety risks posed by rail transport and the adequacy of Canada’s regulatory framework, according to environmental and transportation experts.

“This is a huge risk to our communities, rail lines go through the heart of communities right across this country as well as along our major waterways,” said Keith Stewart, climate and energy campaigner with Greenpeace Canada.

Stewart said B.C. and other provinces can expect to see an increase in oil shipment by rail, a practice that has increased dramatically in the past two years.

According to Stewart, moving oil by rail was virtually unheard of just five years ago. But as Alberta’s oil production combined with shale oil production in North Dakota overtook capacity on pipelines, rail companies saw an opportunity to fill the void.

In 2012, two per cent of Canada’s oil was shipped by rail, Stewart said, citing National Energy Board figures. That amount is triple what was shipped by rail in 2011.

“It’s expected to double or triple again this year,” he said. “So the amount (of oil) being moved is increasing very very rapidly and the rail companies are moving into this as a new profit centre,” he said.

As many as 140,000 carloads of crude oil are expected to rattle over Canada’s tracks this year, up from only 500 carloads in 2009, according to the Railway Association of Canada.

Before and after pictures of Lac Megantic, Quebec.

Thousands of new tanker cars have been ordered by North American railways.

Compounding the risk, Stewart added, is the fact that many rail companies move oil in cars known as “DOT-111” tankers.

These cars, most commonly used to transport crude oil in Canada, have a history of puncturing during accidents. The federal Transportation Safety Board has said repeatedly that they are prone to spill their contents during derailments and other impacts, and a U.S. Transportation and Safety Board investigation into a 2009 CN derailment and fire concluded that the tankers should be fitted with head shields, tank jackets and other safety measures to mitigate against disaster. It’s unclear if any of those recommendations were implemented.

Right now, only a small amount of oil is moved through B.C. by rail, said Stewart, mostly through the Interior and down to California. He said correspondence between environmental groups and several rail companies has revealed many are considering taking oil to the B.C. coast.

A spokesman from Canadian National Railway said Sunday the company does not transport oil in B.C.

Canadian Pacific Railway spokesman Ed Greenberg said in an email Sunday he did not have specific details on whether CP transports crude oil through B.C. He added: “We are not making any formal comment today in light of the tragic incident in Quebec.”

Approximately 230,000 barrels (more than 20 million litres) of oil are moved by rail in North America every day, according to the railway association. The association estimates that 99.99 per cent all “dangerous goods” rail shipments reach their destination without any spills caused by accidents or derailments.

Meanwhile, a new rail company has its sights firmly set on B.C. for oil transport. A group of Canadian businessmen calling itself Generating for Seven Generations (G7G) has proposed a 2,400-kilometre rail line that could move up to five million barrels of oil a day from Fort McMurray, Alta., to the port of Valdez, Alaska by way of northern B.C. and the Yukon. The oil would then be shipped to Asia.

A feasibility study is underway for G7G’s proposed Unifying Nations Railway Company, or UNRailCo, said G7G CEO Matt Vickers, adding the project is poised to go ahead regardless of whether Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Pipeline is approved.

“It’s going to be viable and feasible regardless of any and all pipelines,” said Vickers, noting the project directors have been purposefully “flying under the radar” until feasibility studies have been completed and a route has been finalized.

Oil transfer by rail as a whole has largely been off the public’s radar until now, said Stewart. He said he hopes the Lac-Megantic crash will alert Canadians to the trend and encourage them to insist the federal government enforce existing regulations.

“I think what we have to do is make sure that this doesn’t happen again,” he said.

Rail-transport policy expert Avrom Shtern, who also serves as spokesman for the Montreal-based Green Coalition, echoed the sentiment.

“Every mode (of transportation) has its nightmare scenarios. This one is it for the railways,” he said. “This (accident) was absolutely the perfect storm.”

The federal regulations and standards governing rail operations in Canada are complex and numerous. Companies such as Montreal, Maine & Atlantic, the railway involved in the Lac-Magentic crash, are responsible for ensuring the safety of their rail lines, equipment and operations. This includes inspection, testing and maintenance programs in accordance with regulatory requirements. When a company is transporting dangerous goods such as crude oil, the rules — at least on paper — get even stricter.

Matt Vickers, CEO of G7G.

The brakes and safety system on a train carrying hazardous materials must be inspected before and during every trip, for example. Employees must be regularly certified by the federal government, and no conductor can work for more than 12 hours straight, no matter what the train is carrying.

Transport Canada’s oversight role requires it to monitor railway companies for compliance with these rules, in addition to conducting audits, inspections and investigations. If a company fails to comply or has an accident, the government is also responsible for imposing fines and other sanctions.

That’s where the problems begin, according to Shtern.

“I think the government, especially after austerity cuts, relies more and more on the industry to police itself. It’s unacceptable. You can’t just write rules and expect the (train companies) to police themselves.

“I think it’s high time the government came back into the game and reined them in. They’re not doing their job.”

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Train+tragedy+Could+happen+here/8627755/story.html

Background Info on G7G:

A Northern Gateway work around that could ship a lot more Alberta oil to the coast

Michael Allan McCrae, Mining.com, November 17, 2012

A rail proposal to get land-locked oil out of Alberta and to Asian markets is being headed up by Matt Vickers, CEO of  G Seven Generations Ltd. (G7G).

According to a news release the company filed on Thursday, the company wants to build a 2,400-kilometre rail line running from Fort McMurray, Alberta to Valdez, Alaska. The Financial Post notes that a single track would cost $8.4-billion and carry 1.5 million barrels per day. In comparison the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline has a capacity of 1/2 million barrels a day and will cost $5.5 billion.

According to Vickers aboriginal groups along the route have given preliminary approval.

“The greatest strength of our Alberta-Alaska railway concept is the support it has received from First Nations along the route,” said Vickers in a statement.

While the Northern Gateway is tied up in political wrangling, Vickers told Francis his group approached the problem of getting land-locked oil out of Alberta by building local support first and getting a social license.

“To ensure this could be a real project, we began to knock on the doors of all the First Nations and tribes in Alaska along the route,” said Vickers.

“I finished doing that in July, getting letters of support from all. Plus, in July, I got support from the National Assembly of First Nations in the form of a resolution representing all 603 chiefs in the Assembly.”

The route also has some other advantages, a tie in to existing oil transportation infrastructure that has already been built in Alaska and the shipping time to Asia from Alaska is considerably shorter than shipping from Kitimat.

New railway would provide market access, avoid B.C. oil tanker and pipeline conflicts

VANCOUVER, Nov. 14, 2012 /CNW/ – Leaders of the affected First Nations and Alaskan Tribes have expressed support for a new “purpose built” railway that would link Alaska, Yukon, northern British Columbia and northern Alberta to the rest of North America.

The railway, being proposed by G Seven Generations Ltd. (G7G), would provide access to Pacific tidewater for the import and export of commodities including oil sands products.

“The greatest strength of our Alberta-Alaska railway concept is the support it has received from First Nations along the route,” points out G7G Partner and CEO Matt Vickers.

“Studies have already demonstrated that a rail link to Alaska is a viable alternative to the oil pipelines currently being planned through British Columbia,” said Vickers. “This approach is timely because it promises significant economic benefits to First Nations communities and all of Canada while avoiding many of the environmental risks associated with current pipeline proposals and related supertanker traffic off B.C.’s West Coast.”

“British Columbians opposition to oil tanker traffic on B.C.’s coast is very strong and should not fall on deaf ears,” states Chief Marilyn Slett of the Heiltsuk Nation.

“Diversifying markets for Canadian oil is an important challenge, but we need to achieve this goal in the most environmentally and socially responsible way possible,” adds Grand Chief Roland Twinn of Treaty 8 Alberta.

A key advantage of G7G’s rail link is that it would utilize the existing marine terminal in Valdez, which is facing a declining supply of oil from Alaska’s North Slope. The estimated 2,400-kilometre-long railway would run northwest from Fort McMurray, Alberta to connect with the Alyeska Pipeline at Delta Junction, approximately 130 kilometres southeast of Fairbanks. The Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) currently carries oil from the North Slope to the Valdez marine super tanker terminal.

“Valdez has seen oil tanker traffic since the 1970s; this proposal would simply mean replacing the declining supply of Alaska crude with a new supply of Alberta crude. We believe this approach has a greater chance of obtaining social license from local communities than other competing scenarios,” said Chief Ronald Kreutzer of Fort McMurray First Nation.

“We began with outreach to First Nations and Tribal Leadership and are now moving forward with informing the membership through community meetings,” said Vickers, who holds traditional names from the Heiltsuk and Tsimshian Nations. “G7G is pleased that we have been able to offer First Nations from Alberta to Alaska a    50-percent stake in the railroad.”

“The First Nations fully support the concept because in reality, if we don’t take the initiative somebody else will,” said Chief Simon Mervyn, of the First Nation Na-cho Nyak Dun.

G7G will now complete the project’s feasibility study and community information meetings. The next phase is the approval process, which will include full community consultation and accommodation, and lead to the development of the business plan.

Current First Nations support for the rail-link concept is specific to exploring the feasibility of the project.

SOURCE: G Seven Generations Ltd.

For further information:

Matt Vickers:  778-239-1440; matt@mattvickers.com     www.unrailco.com

http://www.mining.com/the-northern-gateway-workaround-a-rail-line-connecting-alberta-and-alaska-43884/