Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Starver]

An article from last year might be indicative.

(1,704 derailments per year, it states. Of any severity. It is comparing the "four deaths a year" against the comparatively huge number of road-traffic deaths to say how passenger trains aren't anywhere near as bad. Though could really have gone into "deaths per vehicle-miles", or somesuch, if it had cared to. That'd be an interesting comparison.)

[Grim Portent]

There was a second derailment in Enoree South Carolina Monday morning. Not as serious but still a second one so soon? I wouldn't have paid any attention if not for the earlier one. Makes you wonder how many of these things slip past unnoticed.

What is the statistic, how many derailments occur in the USA per year?

A casual look says 1704 derailments per year on average between 1990-2021.

On average just 4 people died per year in train derailments in that same time, but to my knowledge US trains are more for cargo than people so that's not surprising.

So it's a fairly routine occurrence provided the cardo isn't dangerous.

[King Zultan]

That's a lot of derailments a year, you'd think they'd do something to decrease that number over time.

[jipehog]

I suspect that include incident of any severity and cause (involving crossroad collusions with cars) still roughly 4 derailments a day give us a little perspective.

[Starver]

I suspect that include incident of any severity and cause (involving crossroad collusions with cars) still roughly 4 derailments a day give us a little perspective.

It explicitly says as such, in the article that it looks like both of us quoted.

I tried to find equivalent figures for, say, UK railways (to then adjust by relative track-milage). But the closest I got was something on fatalities from rail (I think it was something like "0.2 per year", and generally decreasing in the last few decades[1], and only that high due to various multi-fatality single incidents in some years). I couldn't find any "any severity/any cause" incident figures, but non-fatal yet significant events do make the news because it has affected passengers, often as not, even if only as knock-on effects.

[1] Not even covering the obvious recent anti-blip there'll have been.

Spoiler: I've been in one near-derailment myself... (click to show/hide)

..., a number of years ago. A crew of track-side tree-clearers had accidentally had a small tree (or part of one) fall across the track just as my train approached. Horn, urgent horn and severe braking ensued, then the front bogie clearly rode over/sliced through (we never found out[2]) the branches concerned. And then after the driver did the immediately necessary (initially worried the track-side crew had been at the other end of the 'tree'), the being informed of and then the waiting... It shut down both directions of a route, even after inspectors had inspected and engineers had sufficiently engineered so that we could move on to the next station. Which was in sight[3], and await a replacement bus while the train awaited its replacement driver[4].

That hit the (localish) news. Definitely the local radio, temporarily, for travel-bulletin purposes. For the disruption, but also with the relatively unusual nature of its cause, rather than just being a mechanical fault or crew being unable to take over as scheduled or signalling failures forcing a reduced line operation. (That the clump of small trees were being felled, track-side, to safeguard future trains was yet another irony!)


[2] And, at the time, it was just like the track-end "rumble strip", for grip/warning purposes as a train pulls up to platform buffers, but much more so.

[3] Multiple ironies. It was the station closest to where I'd set off from, that day, but I'd travelled 'backwards' over to the major town nearby, by bus to catch a 'fast' train that wouldn't have stopped at the local halt, then ended up waiting (within sight of it) for ages and then having to disembark there and wait for a bus (admitedly, a special bus/coach) to do the rest of the journey. Or most of it, anyway.

[4] Both of which took ages. While engineers and track inspectors had gotten there quickly enough, the both the replacement transport and the train's replacement driver (after an 'incident', the driver isn't allowed to continue beyond making the train safe, for various reasons) were apparently stuck in rush-hour traffic trying to get out of the destination city that we were all headed to (at least some of us thinking we were avoiding the rush-hour by taking the train!)... What a day... And I gathered much about the what had happened/would happen by chatting with the driver, who I hope I did the right thing for[5] in engaging him in conversation whilst we were all in limbo, at various points in the episode.

[5] He seemed a little dazed, but then I don't know how he sounded beforehand! And maybe he, like me, could be perfectly happy just isolated in his cab and, but he certainly didn't retreat there and merely tannoy us passengers, when he had the opportunity to do so. So I put on my best empathetic face and made encouraging noises (having been seated almost by the door through which he came out of, to then hop down onto the track and back/etc), where it seemed appropriate.

[Dostoevsky]

So the reporter that was arrested for being too loud at a press conference and refusing to leave... was a bit different than advertised.

“My office has reviewed the relevant video and documentary evidence and is dismissing the charges against Evan Lambert as unsupported by sufficient evidence,” Yost said in a press release. “While journalists could conceivably be subject to criminal charges for trespassing in some situations, this incident is not one of them. The reporter was lawfully present at a press conference called by the Governor of the state. His conduct was consistent with the purpose of the event and his role as a reporter.”

And some new footage here.

[EuchreJack]

Watch the video, don't click the spoiler till you do

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

He was BLACK.

[KittyTac]

The chemical decomposes rapidly and will, in its post-burn quantities, will remove itself within 2 weeks. Wildlife will die off during this time but it's not a permanent poisoning.

[EuchreJack]

The chemical decomposes rapidly and will, in its post-burn quantities, will remove itself within 2 weeks. Wildlife will die off during this time but it's not a permanent poisoning.

What about the surviving wildlife that eats the dead wildlife?
Or the dead wildlife that decomposes?

[KittyTac]

The chemical decomposes rapidly and will, in its post-burn quantities, will remove itself within 2 weeks. Wildlife will die off during this time but it's not a permanent poisoning.

What about the surviving wildlife that eats the dead wildlife?
Or the dead wildlife that decomposes?

The chemical will decompose within the bodies too-- yes there will be dieoffs from those things too but it won't stay forever.

[King Zultan]

A chemical so deadly that it kills everything even itself, what a strange world we find ourselves in.

[Max™]

The chemical decomposes rapidly and will, in its post-burn quantities, will remove itself within 2 weeks. Wildlife will die off during this time but it's not a permanent poisoning.

Hmmm... ^{[citation needed]}

[bloop_bleep]

The chemical decomposes rapidly and will, in its post-burn quantities, will remove itself within 2 weeks. Wildlife will die off during this time but it's not a permanent poisoning.

Hmmm... ^{[citation needed]}

Have the EPA. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://semspub.epa.gov/work/05/437069.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwj90IuthKD9AhVmJkQIHeI-D0IQFnoECB8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw1mEWCjk6kPzM3YUTRIAE2h

It is very volatile in water, evaporates with a half-life of up to 0.5 days. Once in air it decomposes with a half-life of about 1.5 days.

All the justifiable concerns about poor regulations  seems to have precipitated some fearmongering about this particular incident. I've heard people saying vinyl chloride is one of the most dangerous chemicals known to man (not even close). Same with the armchair detectives saying how the balloon reporting is about distracting from this when literally everyone is talking about this and it's everywhere.

I will say I'm not an environmental scientist. Also I'm not sure how the fact it was burnt changes the calculus, burning chlorinated stuff can make nasty stuff sometimes. It is true burning vinyl chloride is likely to make acidic HCl gas accounting for the feelings of burning in eyes & mucous membranes that have been reported but that is not a persistent pollutant. The most concerning thing that can result from the burning seems to be phosgene gas. It is unclear how much was made but it is very plausible that it is not significant as environmental air monitors have been reported to placate concerns.

EDIT: Did some more digging. Phosgene is a minor combustion product of vinyl chloride: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0002889718506429 . Phosgene and carbon monoxide products are acutely highly toxic but are also gaseous, dispersing in the atmosphere.