posted
I couldn't agree more with the sentiment, expressed at other sites, that too many trains handling Bakken Crude have gone "boom" of late.
Once again, Bakken Crude is the "usual suspect". Since the days of when a station agent would personally inspect every originating car at his station to ensure what was represented on the Bill of Lading was actually what was loaded are long gone. There simply has to be trust between the shipper and the carrier, and that certainly includes measuring the properties that make Bakken quicker to go "boom" than other North American crudes.
The evidence is simply piling up; the stuff doesn't care if it is on a well managed, properly maintained road such as the BNSF or some "mud ballasted excuse of a railroad" such as was MM&A with a "management team" recruited from Clown Alley. It doesn't care what kind of Tank Car it is be it DOT-111 or however the so called reinforced cars are designated. It doesn't care if the outside temperature is frigid or torrid.
But handling crude represents such a lucrative new source of traffic for the roads to offset the reduction of coal (wasn't that nice; if it derails, you just sweep it up and be on your way) and the impending loss of high value traffic from PANAMAX, that the shippers and the industry must, repeat must, "make it safe". Otherwise, it won't just be Keystone XL; there will be East-West pipelines built as well from both Bakken and West Texas.
The industry could well be looking at a return to the 70's-80's "Dark Ages" .
Finally, one could have figured that "alternative media" would pick up on this "Barry and Warren buddies" theme resulting in the veto of XL:
Disclaimer: author holds long positions CSX KSU UNP; all are YTD15 S&P "underperform".
Posts: 9976 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
