One problem with proposing new regulations is that the Rs put in a law requiring a cost / benefit analysis for new regulations. By those calculations requiring the electronic braking system would cost more than the rail lines would benefit. Exactly how much would Norfolk would be liable if they had to pay for all the EPA testing, fire fighters, remediation of soils and rivers, long term health issues linked to the fumes, etc. A friend of mine worked for the EPA doing these kind of cost/ benefits and one sticking point was trying to determine how much was a human life worth. I think at the time going rate was 1 life = $5M. For some of these companies you could wipe out an entire village and the cost would be a minor write-off.
Woah woah woah, you can't bring physics into safety laws! If you go down that road you have to start regulating traffic based on mass times velocity, and that might lead to the almighty car (glory be upon its name) being very slightly restricted inside cities and other residential areas!
Not all railroads, the Dutch, Belgian, French, German, and Spanish railroads take safety very seriously. Especially the Spanish, they get as weird about safety for trains as for airplanes.
Probably many others but I haven't travelled all that much.Oh I forgot the English, they take it seriously too.
DOT's VSL (Value of Statistical Life) is currently more than $10M. Part of the difficulty, though, with assigning safety benefits to a particular rule is that we have to tease out the benefits due to all the other regulations, too. So the differential effect of a new regulation might mean we are only saving a handful of lives over the course of the next couple of decades, and the costs can frequently outstrip those benefits.
The loophole with respect to the requirement to to an economic analysis--if Congress tells us we must write a regulation, we can (kind of/sort of) ignore the regulatory costs.
I am not averse to ECP brakes, but I think there is some nuance that could be added to the discussion. Although it is true that Westinghouse invented the airbrake in the 19th century, there have been technological advances that have affected the ability to better control the propagation of the braking signal along the length of the train. Two that come to mind are the end of train device that allows for the air to drop both from the front of the train and the rear at the same time (reducing the buff forces described in the article above) and distributed power, which involves locomotives at additional locations in a train, from which braking signals can also be issued. Add to this the fact that in testing ECP brakes exhibited some technical difficulties, and I think we have a somewhat more complicated picture.
I am in no way saying the industry is right to ashcan the idea of ECP brakes, I just think that things are not quite as cut and dried as much of the coverage I have seen implies.
NTSB politicals are appointed for 5-year terms, and they don't have to resign at the end of an administration, so he would likely not have been able to replace all members. I did not pay enough attention to know whether he appointed any. As a former NTSBer, I have mixed feelings about the place, but I think it is fair to say that they are not beholden to any of the industries they are called upon to investigate.
I don't feel all that exciting, but I don't mind talking. I started in the Research and Engineering office as a statistician, and over the course of time wound up as a railroad accident investigator. I learned a lot from my colleagues there.
I wrote safety studies on the reliability of portions of the air traffic control system, the safety record of Robinson R-22 helicopters, and safety at passive highway/rail grade crossings (which is what got me interested in the railroad industry). I participated on numerous rail accident investigations, and wrote the report for the tragic accident in Bourbonnais, IL. published probably twenty years ago...
There is a lot of adrenaline and excitement at an accident scene, so we all want to launch--one of my mentors taught me to start working long before dawn in the summer, so all our field work would be complete before high noon. The NTSB includes representatives of relevant organizations as parties to the investigation, and I got to know some pretty great Labor representatives, built some relationships that helped me on projects even after I left the Safety Board. They were all older than I, though, and now I am no longer young, and they are gone. They were neat, and I miss them.
The place was full of characters (Aaron Magruder, the Boondocks cartoonist? I knew his father, who was one of the sweetest guys I ever met) as well as some supercharged egos. I remember the people and the processes they taught me, and have done my best to forget the fricking politics.
This is just maundering, though. Do you have specific questions?
'While containment measures have helped stabilize water quality levels, the Ohio EPA says roughly 3,500 fish from 12 difference species have died since the controlled explosion, . . .'
*** *** ***
But those dead fish AREN'T canaries, and we AREN'T in a coal mine, so there is no problem here.
*** *** ***
'It turns out, the Lever reports, that Norfolk Southern "helped kill a federal safety rule aimed at upgrading the rail industry’s Civil War-era braking systems," which of course it did. Regulations are bad for business, even if they increase safety.'
'. . .the Obama administration in 2014 proposed new safety regulations that would have applied to all trains carrying oil and hazardous materials. Thanks to rail industry lobbying, the final rule was whittled down so it only applied to trains carrying crude oil, excluding other hazardous stuff being shipped by rail.'
'Then in 2017, Donald Trump gutted the part of the rule that mandated advanced braking systems, and rail lobbyists rejoiced.'
*** *** ***
Before we start complaining about any risks to human life and health, let's just pause to be grateful for all the money we saved! And for the voters who were smart enough to replace a pay-as-you-go liberal with a kick-the-can-down-the-road conservative!
And before we start complaining about how most elected officials don't listen to the people who voted for them, let's just pause to be grateful that they DO listen -- to lobbyists, and with unconditional devotion!
Yes, "Thanks to rail industry lobbying..." indeed. All credit goes to those hard-working lobbyists. No blame should be directed toward elected officials who surrendered their consciences and their common sense to their campaign paymasters.
Nor should anybody propose making any changes to our perfect campaign-financing system, which saves us all loads of money every election cycle by allowing corporate lobbies to foot the bill. They get what they pay for! And so do the rest of us; we all get what THEY pay for. The best government money can buy!
We have the sacred right never to have to spend money to PREVENT disasters. After all, no disaster is ever real until it HAPPENS. We have the sacred right to wait until AFTER a disaster happens and THEN pay whatever it takes to clean it up.
Or not. I mean, if it's not in MY backyard, why should I care? YOU pay for it, East Palestine!
Freedom is always the freedom to put off paying for anything until you absolutely can't avoid it anymore. Freedom is always the freedom not to care about anything bad until it happens to you personally. Freedom is always the freedom to fiddle while other people's neighborhoods burn.
We have LOADS of time to dither, deny, delay, deflect, deceive, and distract before we need to react to something like this. There must be a bipartisan way to explain that poisonous spills like this are perfectly natural. They are simply the unavoidable price that we must pay to keep our noble oligarchs in their natural place of unchallenged authority. Let's not go all "partisan" and challenge some political party's toxic ideology as hazardous to human life and limb. After all, Rome wasn't burnt in a day!
One problem with proposing new regulations is that the Rs put in a law requiring a cost / benefit analysis for new regulations. By those calculations requiring the electronic braking system would cost more than the rail lines would benefit. Exactly how much would Norfolk would be liable if they had to pay for all the EPA testing, fire fighters, remediation of soils and rivers, long term health issues linked to the fumes, etc. A friend of mine worked for the EPA doing these kind of cost/ benefits and one sticking point was trying to determine how much was a human life worth. I think at the time going rate was 1 life = $5M. For some of these companies you could wipe out an entire village and the cost would be a minor write-off.
Woah woah woah, you can't bring physics into safety laws! If you go down that road you have to start regulating traffic based on mass times velocity, and that might lead to the almighty car (glory be upon its name) being very slightly restricted inside cities and other residential areas!
Not all railroads, the Dutch, Belgian, French, German, and Spanish railroads take safety very seriously. Especially the Spanish, they get as weird about safety for trains as for airplanes.
Probably many others but I haven't travelled all that much.Oh I forgot the English, they take it seriously too.
Forever chemicals can only be made safe in two ways: Storage and dilution. Of the two dilution is the safer option.
The temporary chemicals have more options: You can convert them into other stuff or let them degrade over time.
DOT's VSL (Value of Statistical Life) is currently more than $10M. Part of the difficulty, though, with assigning safety benefits to a particular rule is that we have to tease out the benefits due to all the other regulations, too. So the differential effect of a new regulation might mean we are only saving a handful of lives over the course of the next couple of decades, and the costs can frequently outstrip those benefits.
The loophole with respect to the requirement to to an economic analysis--if Congress tells us we must write a regulation, we can (kind of/sort of) ignore the regulatory costs.
I am not averse to ECP brakes, but I think there is some nuance that could be added to the discussion. Although it is true that Westinghouse invented the airbrake in the 19th century, there have been technological advances that have affected the ability to better control the propagation of the braking signal along the length of the train. Two that come to mind are the end of train device that allows for the air to drop both from the front of the train and the rear at the same time (reducing the buff forces described in the article above) and distributed power, which involves locomotives at additional locations in a train, from which braking signals can also be issued. Add to this the fact that in testing ECP brakes exhibited some technical difficulties, and I think we have a somewhat more complicated picture.
I am in no way saying the industry is right to ashcan the idea of ECP brakes, I just think that things are not quite as cut and dried as much of the coverage I have seen implies.
NTSB politicals are appointed for 5-year terms, and they don't have to resign at the end of an administration, so he would likely not have been able to replace all members. I did not pay enough attention to know whether he appointed any. As a former NTSBer, I have mixed feelings about the place, but I think it is fair to say that they are not beholden to any of the industries they are called upon to investigate.
You are an exciting person having been an NTSBer. I'd love to hear more about what you experienced if that's okay.
I don't feel all that exciting, but I don't mind talking. I started in the Research and Engineering office as a statistician, and over the course of time wound up as a railroad accident investigator. I learned a lot from my colleagues there.
Love. More, please.
I wrote safety studies on the reliability of portions of the air traffic control system, the safety record of Robinson R-22 helicopters, and safety at passive highway/rail grade crossings (which is what got me interested in the railroad industry). I participated on numerous rail accident investigations, and wrote the report for the tragic accident in Bourbonnais, IL. published probably twenty years ago...
There is a lot of adrenaline and excitement at an accident scene, so we all want to launch--one of my mentors taught me to start working long before dawn in the summer, so all our field work would be complete before high noon. The NTSB includes representatives of relevant organizations as parties to the investigation, and I got to know some pretty great Labor representatives, built some relationships that helped me on projects even after I left the Safety Board. They were all older than I, though, and now I am no longer young, and they are gone. They were neat, and I miss them.
The place was full of characters (Aaron Magruder, the Boondocks cartoonist? I knew his father, who was one of the sweetest guys I ever met) as well as some supercharged egos. I remember the people and the processes they taught me, and have done my best to forget the fricking politics.
This is just maundering, though. Do you have specific questions?
I imagine the Doppler shift wreaks havoc on musical horns moving towards or away from the listener.
“this may not be your fault but it is your responsibility.” would also work with the people hyperventilating over non-existent CRT in grade schools..
'While containment measures have helped stabilize water quality levels, the Ohio EPA says roughly 3,500 fish from 12 difference species have died since the controlled explosion, . . .'
*** *** ***
But those dead fish AREN'T canaries, and we AREN'T in a coal mine, so there is no problem here.
*** *** ***
'It turns out, the Lever reports, that Norfolk Southern "helped kill a federal safety rule aimed at upgrading the rail industry’s Civil War-era braking systems," which of course it did. Regulations are bad for business, even if they increase safety.'
'. . .the Obama administration in 2014 proposed new safety regulations that would have applied to all trains carrying oil and hazardous materials. Thanks to rail industry lobbying, the final rule was whittled down so it only applied to trains carrying crude oil, excluding other hazardous stuff being shipped by rail.'
'Then in 2017, Donald Trump gutted the part of the rule that mandated advanced braking systems, and rail lobbyists rejoiced.'
*** *** ***
Before we start complaining about any risks to human life and health, let's just pause to be grateful for all the money we saved! And for the voters who were smart enough to replace a pay-as-you-go liberal with a kick-the-can-down-the-road conservative!
And before we start complaining about how most elected officials don't listen to the people who voted for them, let's just pause to be grateful that they DO listen -- to lobbyists, and with unconditional devotion!
Yes, "Thanks to rail industry lobbying..." indeed. All credit goes to those hard-working lobbyists. No blame should be directed toward elected officials who surrendered their consciences and their common sense to their campaign paymasters.
Nor should anybody propose making any changes to our perfect campaign-financing system, which saves us all loads of money every election cycle by allowing corporate lobbies to foot the bill. They get what they pay for! And so do the rest of us; we all get what THEY pay for. The best government money can buy!
We have the sacred right never to have to spend money to PREVENT disasters. After all, no disaster is ever real until it HAPPENS. We have the sacred right to wait until AFTER a disaster happens and THEN pay whatever it takes to clean it up.
Or not. I mean, if it's not in MY backyard, why should I care? YOU pay for it, East Palestine!
Freedom is always the freedom to put off paying for anything until you absolutely can't avoid it anymore. Freedom is always the freedom not to care about anything bad until it happens to you personally. Freedom is always the freedom to fiddle while other people's neighborhoods burn.
We have LOADS of time to dither, deny, delay, deflect, deceive, and distract before we need to react to something like this. There must be a bipartisan way to explain that poisonous spills like this are perfectly natural. They are simply the unavoidable price that we must pay to keep our noble oligarchs in their natural place of unchallenged authority. Let's not go all "partisan" and challenge some political party's toxic ideology as hazardous to human life and limb. After all, Rome wasn't burnt in a day!
Having rail freight be completely privatized and subject to the whims of the stock market was always a bad idea
There are a whole class of "forever chemicals" that I wouldn't count on dilution to make safe in the event of a spill.