The derailment of two trains in less than a week has reignited the debate around rail safety in Jasper National Park.
“Multiple derailments in the same area is always a real concern because it points to systemic problems rather than just a one-off accidental occurrence,” said David Jeanes, spokesperson for Transport Action Canada, a non-profit advocacy group concerned with public transportation, including rail safety.
“If a grain train can derail it can just as easily happen to an oil train,” he said referring to the 12 grain cars that spilled into the Athabasca River following a derailment, Dec. 10.
Earlier in the week, on Dec. 6, there was another derailment in the same spot, west of the Bedson Ridge tunnel, which delineates the eastern boundary of Jasper National Park. According to Canadian National Railway, the car in that accident managed to stay upright despite one set of wheels jumping off the track.
The second, more serious derailment, occurred five days later when 12 CN grain cars left the track spilling their contents into the Athabasca River. No injuries were reported or hazardous material involved, however, six of the cars were left partially submerged in the river.
“There’s always the possibility that if you get multiple derailments in the same spot in a short space of time the issue is likely the track rather than the trains,” said Jeanes.
Despite reassurances from experts that derailments are rare occurrences, this isn’t the first derailment to occur in Jasper this year.
Last February, several railway cars derailed in Jasper’s train yard.
At the time, CN did not return several calls from the Fitzhugh seeking information about the accident, including what the cars were transporting or if there were any injuries.
Instead a train was moved in front of the derailed cars, obstructing view of the accident from the Jasper townsite. That same night, a crane was seen in the yard helping put the derailed cars back on the tracks. Several days later CN employees were seen doing work on the section of track where the derailment happened.
“Occasionally the industry has derailments, but the fact is the North American freight train accident rates are extremely low,” said Michael Bourque, CEO of the Railway Association of Canada, which represents more than 50 freight and passenger railway companies.
“Canada has an excellent record. We have less than two accidents per million train miles and I think if you were to compare that with trucking, for example—if you could get the data—you would find that we’re extraordinarily safe and getting safer over time.”
Bourque said there have been a lot of changes to improve safety standards since the 2013 Lac-Mégantic rail disaster in Quebec, which killed 47 people and destroyed most of the town’s downtown core.
According to Transport Canada, some of those changes include improving standards for tank cars carrying dangerous goods, providing municipal governments and first responders with information on the dangerous goods being transported through their communities and new guidelines for leaving trains unattended.
“There’s been a range of approaches to make sure we’re ready in the event that there is an accident, but more importantly to make sure that these don’t happen,” said Bourque.
Fire Chief Greg Van Tighem acknowledged the risks posed by the railway and said those risks are a top priority when the municipality conducts its annual risk assessment.
“Obviously it’s always a concern when you have chemicals and hazardous material going through any community. That’s why we have a plan and that’s why we practice,” said Van Tighem.
“I think the saving grace in our community is the fact that it’s not a through yard and it’s a slow track.”
In 2013, following the Lac-Mégantic accident, the federal government issued a “protective direction” requiring freight train companies to disclose aggregate information about the nature and volume of dangerous goods travelling through municipalities. The annual reports are broken down quarterly and provided to a designated emergency-planning official in each municipality.
The quarterly reports are designed to provide first responders with information about trends in shipping and seasonal variations to improve municipalities’ emergency plans.
“It’s highly confidential,” said Van Tighem of the reports. “When we signed on we had to sign a contract saying we wouldn’t disclose any information.”
In addition to the disclosure agreement, the railway industry has also created a smartphone app called AskRail.
The app provides first responders immediate access to accurate and timely information about what type of hazardous materials a railcar is carrying so they can make informed decisions about how to respond during an emergency. The app is intended to be used as a backup resource if information from the train conductor is not available.
In the event of an emergency, first responders with the app simply have to type in the train car’s number to find out its contents.
“The advantage of the [disclosure agreement] is that we know ahead of time what’s coming through and the other advantage is if there is an incident we can log on to the app and find out exactly what trains are in the area and what the potential is,” said Van Tighem.
According to Van Tighem, CN Rail has also assigned a hazardous material officer to the area and provided spill containment supplies and equipment.
“The understanding is that we can use the [spill containment supplies] at any incident, not just a rail incident,” said Van Tighem, adding CN has also paid for several firefighters from Jasper to partake in emergency response training in Colorado.
Parks Canada said it is pleased with CN Rail’s response to the Dec. 10 derailment near the east gate.
“We are aware that incidents involving derailments can occur in national parks as they can in any community with rail infrastructure. It is important to note that these incidents are rare and we remain committed to working with Canadian National and other partners like the Town of Jasper, the RCMP and the Province of Alberta so that we can quickly respond,” said Steve Young, a communications officer for Jasper National Park, in an emailed statement.
When it comes to whether transporting oil by rail is safer than pipelines it depends on who you ask.
According to a recent study by the Fraser Institute, a public policy think-tank, moving oil and gas by pipeline is 4.5 times safer than moving the same volume the same distance by rail.
Ken Green, the lead author of the report, used data from government sources from 2003 to 2013, to determine whether pipelines or rail were safer for transporting oil and gas. The study focused on the number of occurrences or accidents per million barrels of oil and gas that were transported.
“The result was clear. Both rail and pipelines are quite safe, but pipelines are without a doubt the safest way to transport oil and gas,” the report stated.
In a story Green wrote in June for the National Post, he reiterated his findings.
“Real-world data and experience show that pipelines are one of the safest ways to transport oil. It’s not perfect, but it’s the best of the available options. On an apples-to-apples comparison, that takes into account the volume of oil transported, pipelines are associated with fewer accidents, injuries and fatalities when compared to rail and truck, which is how oil will move if pipelines are not built.”
When reached by phone, he said people who oppose pipelines are ignoring the facts that pipelines are indeed the safest option.
“They’re willing to accept more accidents rather than having pipelines because they think they will somehow diminish the volume of oil that is moved.”
For Bourque and the Railway Association of Canada, the issue between what mode of transportation is safer is mute.
“We both have essentially the same record in pipelines and rail, which is that we both deliver our products safely to their destination,” said Bourque, adding both pipelines and trains deliver their products safely 99.999 per cent of the time.
“There’s been a lot of talk about comparing that .001 per cent between pipe and rail and we’ve looked at it in Canada and we think we’re very, very similar to pipelines in terms of moving things safely.”
He acknowledged that train accidents may be more frequent, but said the spill rates are lower than pipelines because trains operate above ground and the hazardous materials are contained in specific containers, limiting the amount of hazardous material that could potentially spill out.
“I think what’s important to keep in mind is pipelines are operating very safely, very much the same way we are.”
Paul Clarke
[email protected]
