The potential for catastrophic explosions from transporting volatile liquefied natural gas (LNG) in vulnerable tank cars through populated areas is immense. While the Trump administration enacted a rule allowing for this dangerous practice, President Biden later revoked the related executive order. However, the rule itself remains, leaving communities at risk. This article delves into the dangers of transporting LNG by rail and why a train car filled with this substance is comparable to a bomb.
The Explosive Power of LNG in a Rail Car
The sheer volume of LNG carried in a single rail tanker car poses an unprecedented threat. The energy contained within just 22 tank cars is equivalent to the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. A standard train consisting of 110 tank cars would carry five times that destructive power.
Should a containment breach occur, LNG rapidly expands to 600 times its liquid volume, transforming into a highly flammable gas cloud. This rapid expansion, coupled with the flammable nature of the gas, creates a “bomb train” scenario with devastating potential. Furthermore, the pressurized and temperature-controlled storage required for LNG can lead to a Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion (BLEVE). A BLEVE involves the simultaneous vaporization and combustion of the liquid, resulting in:
- A powerful blast wave: Capable of leveling structures and causing widespread damage.
- Deadly shrapnel: Fragments of the ruptured container become high-velocity projectiles.
- A massive fireball: Intense heat and flames engulfing a vast area.
Current Regulations and the Shift in LNG Transport
Historically, federal law deemed LNG too hazardous for transport in tank cars. Prior regulations limited LNG transport to ships, trucks, and, with special Federal Railroad Administration approval, UN portable tanks on railcars. UN portable tanks are significantly smaller than tanker rail cars, which hold approximately three times the volume.
The Trump-era rule marked a dramatic departure from this precedent, allowing the use of larger, untested tanker cars for LNG transport. While initial approvals focused on specific routes, the rule expanded this practice nationwide.
Historical LNG Disasters Underscore the Risk
The devastating consequences of LNG accidents are well-documented. In 1944, a massive LNG leak in Cleveland, Ohio, resulted in an explosion that killed 131 people, injured countless others, and obliterated a square mile of the city. The ensuing explosions generated temperatures reaching 3,000°F, leaving behind a crater 25 feet deep, 30 feet wide, and 60 feet long. This tragic event highlights the inherent dangers of LNG and the potential for widespread devastation.
The Vulnerability of Rail Tanker Cars
The Lac-Mégantic disaster of 2013 serves as a stark reminder of the vulnerability of rail tanker cars. A train carrying crude oil, a substance less volatile than LNG, derailed, resulting in multiple BLEVEs that leveled the town center and claimed 47 lives. A BLEVE involving an LNG tanker car is projected to produce a fireball up to a mile wide, significantly surpassing the devastation witnessed in Lac-Mégantic.
The Push for LNG Rail Shipments and Associated Concerns
The Trump administration’s executive order and subsequent rule aimed to facilitate LNG transport by rail. However, the proposed tanker car design, based on the DOT-113 model with a marginally thicker outer shell, raised serious safety concerns. Even with the modification, experts questioned its ability to withstand impacts at moderate speeds.
Furthermore, the rule lacked restrictions on the number of LNG tankers in a train, their distribution within the train, and the routes they could travel. Relying on a voluntary 50 mph speed limit, even in densely populated areas, further amplified concerns given the known vulnerability of tank cars at even lower speeds.
Opposition from Federal Agencies and Safety Experts
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and the National Association of State Fire Marshals vehemently opposed the rule, citing significant safety risks. The NTSB deemed the transport of LNG in rail tank cars “detrimental to public safety” due to the use of unvalidated tank cars and inadequate operational controls. The Fire Marshals expressed alarm over the lack of additional safety requirements for LNG rail cars and the increased risk to the public and first responders.
A General Accounting Office report highlighted the potential for catastrophe if large quantities of flammable gas escape into urban infrastructure, mirroring the 1944 Cleveland disaster.
Legal Challenges and the Current Status
Earthjustice, representing several environmental organizations, filed a legal challenge to the rule. While President Biden’s revocation of the executive order offers a temporary reprieve, the underlying rule remains in effect. A thorough review and rescission of the rule are crucial to ensuring public safety. The current suspension of the rule, starting in late October 2023, offers a window of opportunity for permanent action.
Conclusion: The Need for Action
Transporting LNG by rail presents an unacceptable risk to communities across the nation. The comparison of a train car carrying LNG to a bomb is not hyperbole; it’s a stark reality underscored by the immense explosive power of this substance and the vulnerability of rail tankers. The existing rule, despite being temporarily suspended, must be permanently rescinded to prevent a potential catastrophe. The safety of our communities demands a return to more stringent regulations that prioritize the well-being of people over the profits of the industry.
