Oil train derailment near Mosier

Use this forum to post links to news stories from other websites - ones that other hikers might find interesting. This is not intended for original material or anecdotal information. You can reply to any news stories posted, but do not start a new thread without a link to a specific news story.
User avatar
adamschneider
Posts: 2995
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:02 pm
Location: SE Portland
Contact:

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by adamschneider » June 3rd, 2016, 2:20 pm

retired jerry wrote:maybe enough land between it and the river so there won't be oil in the river
That was my thought, unless it gets into Rock Creek (which may or may not have water in it right now).

User avatar
Waffle Stomper
Posts: 3577
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by Waffle Stomper » June 3rd, 2016, 3:45 pm

pdxgene wrote: I think it matters what the final destination of the oil is. Everything I've heard says our oil comes from Alaska, which if true would mean this oil was for export in which case the risk we're taking isn't even for ourselves. Maybe it's hypocritical to look at it that way but I think there's a difference in taking risk at least a bit for your own interest or instead for some multinational corporate profits.
Tend to agree with you on this one.
"When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe." - John Muir

User avatar
-Q-
Posts: 1433
Joined: July 5th, 2008, 10:42 pm

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by -Q- » June 3rd, 2016, 5:20 pm

Just saw some footage on the news. Bad stuff. Quite a few cars on fire.
What a mess :x

Aimless
Posts: 1479
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:02 pm
Location: Lake Oswego

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by Aimless » June 3rd, 2016, 5:58 pm

the government assured everyone it would be ok...

Um, as I recall it, the companies who stood to profit from these oil trains (oil companies, railroads and construction companies) were the primary purveyors of optimism about their inherent safety, whereas several agencies of government have expressed either strong doubts or obvious ambivalence about the wisdom of running these oil trains through the gorge.

User avatar
romann
Posts: 2383
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Vancouver, WA

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by romann » June 3rd, 2016, 6:05 pm

-Q- wrote:Just saw some footage on the news. Bad stuff. Quite a few cars on fire.
Yes from the video looks like at least 3 cars on fire. As bad as it is, the accident couldn't have happened at a better time (of course, assuming no oil spilled into the river). Oil trains through the Gorge are easier to ban now, when largest oil terminal is still in the plans and 100's of jobs not at stake. Oil prices still comparatively low, this can make companies more willing to abandon the plans.
Last edited by romann on June 3rd, 2016, 6:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Dave Rappoccio
Posts: 34
Joined: March 9th, 2015, 9:58 am
Location: Portland
Contact:

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by Dave Rappoccio » June 3rd, 2016, 6:07 pm

Did Dog Mountain this morning, saw the huge plume of smoke crossing the Hood River bridge around 12:30. Was able to tell that it was from a single small source but man, I didn't realize it was a train derailment. Traffic around I-84 and Hood River was an absolute mess.

User avatar
Charley
Posts: 1423
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Southeast Portland

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by Charley » June 3rd, 2016, 6:20 pm

LEAVE IT IN THE GROUND.

I love my truck, but we'll never get really good alternatives until the market is forced to innovate those alternatives (and I love my bike, too, but riding to Lakeview for a week-long vacation would end up taking the whole week or more). Carbon-neutral vehicles, useful train service, useful bus service and bicycles could provide much of our transportation needs. None of that's likely if we keep risking our most precious natural resources in order to frack this dirty oil out of the ground and transport it all over the world.

greenjello85
Posts: 503
Joined: July 31st, 2014, 1:31 pm

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by greenjello85 » June 3rd, 2016, 7:55 pm

Aimless wrote: the government assured everyone it would be ok...

Um, as I recall it, the companies who stood to profit from these oil trains (oil companies, railroads and construction companies) were the primary purveyors of optimism about their inherent safety, whereas several agencies of government have expressed either strong doubts or obvious ambivalence about the wisdom of running these oil trains through the gorge.
"Concern is too strong a word,” said Hal Gard, ODOT’s rail and public transit administrator, who oversees the department’s rail safety office. “I’m not worried about oil trains in the state of Oregon. We do a good job of oversight. There is an increase, we’re aware of that, we’re doing the best we can.

“Am I specifically concerned about it? I’m not""

From the people charged with overseeing train safety. The oregonian did a whole series last year.
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/i ... ow_ab.html

I have no doubt it is the companies profiting that pushed oil trains through and reassured officials they were ok, but it's up to the regulators to do their jobs.

pdxgene
Posts: 5073
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by pdxgene » June 3rd, 2016, 8:59 pm

Charley wrote:LEAVE IT IN THE GROUND.

I love my truck, but we'll never get really good alternatives until the market is forced to innovate those alternatives (and I love my bike, too, but riding to Lakeview for a week-long vacation would end up taking the whole week or more). Carbon-neutral vehicles, useful train service, useful bus service and bicycles could provide much of our transportation needs. None of that's likely if we keep risking our most precious natural resources in order to frack this dirty oil out of the ground and transport it all over the world.
Why can't vehicles get gas mileage multiple times of what they currently get? I drive a 1991 Civic and get 35mpg or so on the freeways. In 25 years think of the technological advances we've made. Yet gas mileage isn't one of them? That's probably not a coincidence..

User avatar
Charley
Posts: 1423
Joined: May 28th, 2008, 10:03 pm
Location: Southeast Portland

Re: Oil train derailment near Mosier

Post by Charley » June 3rd, 2016, 10:09 pm

pdxgene wrote:
Charley wrote:LEAVE IT IN THE GROUND.

I love my truck, but we'll never get really good alternatives until the market is forced to innovate those alternatives (and I love my bike, too, but riding to Lakeview for a week-long vacation would end up taking the whole week or more). Carbon-neutral vehicles, useful train service, useful bus service and bicycles could provide much of our transportation needs. None of that's likely if we keep risking our most precious natural resources in order to frack this dirty oil out of the ground and transport it all over the world.
Why can't vehicles get gas mileage multiple times of what they currently get? I drive a 1991 Civic and get 35mpg or so on the freeways. In 25 years think of the technological advances we've made. Yet gas mileage isn't one of them? That's probably not a coincidence..
You're absolutely right! My wife's 2004 Honda Civic gets 35 mpg at the most. My '99 got 45 at the most. How did cars get that much less efficient in five years? My 2001 Tacoma gets 24-26mpg highway at the most. The Tacos from the '90's supposedly get 5mpg better than that. I get so ticked off when I think about all the bad directions we've gone in the last 20 years since we've learned of climate change. I mean, electronic photo frames? Now you have to plug in photos????? Ugh. Consumerism has gone too far for us to survive on this planet.

Post Reply