5 ms·

Legislation passed under President Obama required trains carrying hazardous flammable materials to have ECP brakes. The law was rescinded in 2017 by the Trump

by nabla9 4y ago

Legislation passed under President Obama required trains carrying hazardous flammable materials to have ECP brakes. The law was rescinded in 2017 by the Trump administration.

e40 4y ago
Agreed. 1. Let's not pretend that this was a "crazy" Trump move. Any Republican would have done this. 2. Let's stop pretending both parties are the same. Yes, there are places where they overlap, but there are important places where there is NO overlap. Environmental action is the big area where there is little to no overlap.
- gowings97 4y ago
  [flagged]
- kneebonian 4y ago
  And yet despite having a majority of the house and senate under Biden they've been unable to deliver almost anything except an unfair railroad contract. So maybe, just maybe, the 2 sides are willing to shout about different things but at the end of the day are in fact the same.
  - e40 4y ago
    Razor thin margin in the Senate and at least 2 of the "Democrats" are not really going to vote on anything controversial. They have been shills, so far, for business interests.
    - junofan 4y ago
      Are you saying there was no possible way to get railroad safety through?
      - knewter 4y ago
        But it was the Republicans' fault
        katbyte 4y ago
        well it seems Dems put the rule in place, Republicans removed it, and then the Dems didn't act fast enough to re-instate it. if i where to point at who has the most fault it here would be the Republicans.
        CyberDildonics 4y ago
        If someone puts up a tent and someone else purposely burns it down, is the first person partially at fault for not rebuilding it when everyone gets rained on?
        katbyte 4y ago
        no? its the 2nd person for burning it down. full stop.
      - e40 4y ago
        I'm saying the situation Biden has been in since he took office is very tenuous. There was a virtual tie on paper, with the VP breaking the tie, but 2 of the people on the Dem side were not at all cooperative with the agenda that Biden wanted. To say "the Dems could have done it if they wanted it" is not at all true.
        pseudo0 4y ago
        Both parties primarily serve the interests of the 0.1%, hence the reduction in safety protections under Trump and the imposition of an unfair contract and the removal of the right to strike under Biden. Got to squeeze out every last fraction of a percent of profit to keep Berkshire Hathaway's stock price up.
        btilly 4y ago
    - swearwolf 4y ago
      Have you ever considered that maybe the reason there’s always a Democrat or two willing to block progressive legislation is that the Democratic Party wants it that way? That way they can have their cake, by promising progressive reform, and eat it, by not delivering that reform and thus, not pissing off their donors. I’ve been hearing about these one or two non-compliant Democrats my whole voting life (remember Joe Lieberman?), and yet the party never invests resources in primarying them. Just a thought.
      - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
        It’s always a popular conspiracy theory that either side has certain “renegade” members that are there mostly to prevent popular with people but not with big money laws from getting through.
avidphantasm 4y ago
And Biden and Buttigieg didn’t make it a priority to re-implement the law while they had control of both houses, and instead shoved an unfair contract down railroad workers throats.
gowings97 4y ago
Fair point, but from what I've read the preliminary cause identified pertains to an axle (not braking) issue?
- TylerE 4y ago
  The idea is that you stop quicker, before the axle actually fails.
  - gowings97 4y ago
    So the train initiated a stop, the axle broke, and they did not stop in time? Why did they initiate the stop? First I've heard of this. *Update - NTSB is saying it was bearing failure - https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.as... ctrl+f for 'axle' or 'brake' from the NTSB statement - zero results
    - TylerE 4y ago
      What do you think the bearing is containing?
      - MrOwnPut 4y ago
        That doesn't mean it was the brake. The bearing contains the brake. The axle contains the bearing. The train contains the axle. Not enough information to determine what caused the bearing to fail, bearing failures account for 5.9% of all train derailments[1]. Though we can look at common train bearing failures to get a likelihood... Most likely it was a simple lack of maintenance. It's possible to prevent this with more sensors[2] and tighter maintenance checks. [1] https://www.wisnerbaum.com/blog/2016/september/the-most-common-train-accident-causes/ https://www.wisnerbaum.com/blog/2016/september/the-most-comm... [2] https://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/research/projects/investigating-rail-axle-bearing-damage.page https://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/research/projects/...
        4y ago
stolenmerch 4y ago
Sure, but it's a little more complicated than that. A 2015 act of Congress mandated that the Department of Transportation repeal the braking requirement if an analysis showed more costs than benefits. The act was mostly to address high profile oil tanker derailments, shipments which peaked around 2014. The Trump administration concluded, probably mistakenly, that an cost-benefit analysis justified it revocation. Of course there was much lobbying by the railroad and oil industries. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg’s department has no plans to reinstate an Obama-era rail safety rule aimed at expanding the use of better braking technology, even though a former federal safety official recently warned Congress that without the better brakes. The Biden administration has had every opportunity to reinstate the safety rule in the past two years. https://www.sltrib.com/news/nation-world/2018/12/20/trump-administration/ https://www.sltrib.com/news/nation-world/2018/12/20/trump-ad... https://jacobin.com/2023/02/department-of-transportation-train-brake-regulation-ohio-derailment https://jacobin.com/2023/02/department-of-transportation-tra...
Maursault 4y ago
To be fair, besides the primary initiative of keeping all the wealth in the hands of a few, the secondary purpose of a Republican administration is to undo anything done by a Democratic administration. There was no way for Trump to know whether the legislation was good or bad. It could have gone either way, really.
- mgkimsal 4y ago
  It's felt like any republican 'rolling back' dem-initiated legislation tends to have more negative consequences for more people than positive benefits for others. I don't have any specifics in mind - if I think of any I'll edit/add here. But perhaps others have counter examples to correct my gut feeling?
  - throwaway-blaze 4y ago
    So republicans are just guilty until proven innocent?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
celdon25 4y ago
You posted two duplicate comments in this thread only to claim that it was Trump's fault?
onetimeusename 4y ago
Would ECP brakes have stopped this, a serious question? I don't know if the severity of this warrants blame on a lack of ECP braking. There is a study done[1] that compared different pneumatic vs electronic signal brakes and ECP brakes could have potentially reduced the number of cars in a derailment but I don't know if it's a significant decrease in cars that are derailed, 50 cars derailed. It does not seem that way to me. But I could be wrong. [1]: https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2017_casselton_BMG_6_Casselton-Brake_Study.pdf https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2017_casselton_BM...
- MrOwnPut 4y ago
  No it would not have, as another posted, the NTSB has reported this was a bearing failure[1]. Bearing failures account for 5.9% of all train derailments[2]. It's possible to help prevent this (not fully as many things derail trains) with more sensors[3] and tighter maintenance checks. This was most likely due to a lack of maintenance. [1] https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.as... [2] https://www.wisnerbaum.com/blog/2016/september/the-most-common-train-accident-causes/ https://www.wisnerbaum.com/blog/2016/september/the-most-comm... [3] https://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/research/projects/investigating-rail-axle-bearing-damage.page https://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/research/projects/...
  - georgeg23 4y ago
    In another universe, ECP brakes would have saved the day. It sounds like the Trump administration still deserves criticism for decaying train safety.
    - MrOwnPut 4y ago
      > ECP brakes would have saved the day Citation needed. It sounds like all administrations (especially those currently in charge) deserve criticism for not focusing on the correct regulations for train safety. Requiring something that isn't needed doesn't help... It can hurt as it takes resources away from actual necessities, like sensors, and tighter maintenance inspections.

by nabla9 4y ago

Legislation passed under President Obama required trains carrying hazardous flammable materials to have ECP brakes. The law was rescinded in 2017 by the Trump administration.

e40 4y ago

Agreed. 1. Let's not pretend that this was a "crazy" Trump move. Any Republican would have done this. 2. Let's stop pretending both parties are the same. Yes, there are places where they overlap, but there are important places where there is NO overlap. Environmental action is the big area where there is little to no overlap.

gowings97 4y ago
[flagged]
kneebonian 4y ago
And yet despite having a majority of the house and senate under Biden they've been unable to deliver almost anything except an unfair railroad contract. So maybe, just maybe, the 2 sides are willing to shout about different things but at the end of the day are in fact the same.
- e40 4y ago
  Razor thin margin in the Senate and at least 2 of the "Democrats" are not really going to vote on anything controversial. They have been shills, so far, for business interests.
  - junofan 4y ago
    Are you saying there was no possible way to get railroad safety through?
    - knewter 4y ago
      But it was the Republicans' fault
      - katbyte 4y ago
        well it seems Dems put the rule in place, Republicans removed it, and then the Dems didn't act fast enough to re-instate it. if i where to point at who has the most fault it here would be the Republicans.
        CyberDildonics 4y ago
        If someone puts up a tent and someone else purposely burns it down, is the first person partially at fault for not rebuilding it when everyone gets rained on?
        katbyte 4y ago
        no? its the 2nd person for burning it down. full stop.
    - e40 4y ago
      I'm saying the situation Biden has been in since he took office is very tenuous. There was a virtual tie on paper, with the VP breaking the tie, but 2 of the people on the Dem side were not at all cooperative with the agenda that Biden wanted. To say "the Dems could have done it if they wanted it" is not at all true.
      - pseudo0 4y ago
        Both parties primarily serve the interests of the 0.1%, hence the reduction in safety protections under Trump and the imposition of an unfair contract and the removal of the right to strike under Biden. Got to squeeze out every last fraction of a percent of profit to keep Berkshire Hathaway's stock price up.
      - btilly 4y ago
  - swearwolf 4y ago
    Have you ever considered that maybe the reason there’s always a Democrat or two willing to block progressive legislation is that the Democratic Party wants it that way? That way they can have their cake, by promising progressive reform, and eat it, by not delivering that reform and thus, not pissing off their donors. I’ve been hearing about these one or two non-compliant Democrats my whole voting life (remember Joe Lieberman?), and yet the party never invests resources in primarying them. Just a thought.
    - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
      It’s always a popular conspiracy theory that either side has certain “renegade” members that are there mostly to prevent popular with people but not with big money laws from getting through.

avidphantasm 4y ago

And Biden and Buttigieg didn’t make it a priority to re-implement the law while they had control of both houses, and instead shoved an unfair contract down railroad workers throats.

gowings97 4y ago

Fair point, but from what I've read the preliminary cause identified pertains to an axle (not braking) issue?

TylerE 4y ago
The idea is that you stop quicker, before the axle actually fails.
- gowings97 4y ago
  So the train initiated a stop, the axle broke, and they did not stop in time? Why did they initiate the stop? First I've heard of this. *Update - NTSB is saying it was bearing failure - https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.as... ctrl+f for 'axle' or 'brake' from the NTSB statement - zero results
  - TylerE 4y ago
    What do you think the bearing is containing?
    - MrOwnPut 4y ago
      That doesn't mean it was the brake. The bearing contains the brake. The axle contains the bearing. The train contains the axle. Not enough information to determine what caused the bearing to fail, bearing failures account for 5.9% of all train derailments[1]. Though we can look at common train bearing failures to get a likelihood... Most likely it was a simple lack of maintenance. It's possible to prevent this with more sensors[2] and tighter maintenance checks. [1] https://www.wisnerbaum.com/blog/2016/september/the-most-common-train-accident-causes/ https://www.wisnerbaum.com/blog/2016/september/the-most-comm... [2] https://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/research/projects/investigating-rail-axle-bearing-damage.page https://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/research/projects/...
      - 4y ago

stolenmerch 4y ago

Sure, but it's a little more complicated than that. A 2015 act of Congress mandated that the Department of Transportation repeal the braking requirement if an analysis showed more costs than benefits. The act was mostly to address high profile oil tanker derailments, shipments which peaked around 2014. The Trump administration concluded, probably mistakenly, that an cost-benefit analysis justified it revocation. Of course there was much lobbying by the railroad and oil industries. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg’s department has no plans to reinstate an Obama-era rail safety rule aimed at expanding the use of better braking technology, even though a former federal safety official recently warned Congress that without the better brakes. The Biden administration has had every opportunity to reinstate the safety rule in the past two years. https://www.sltrib.com/news/nation-world/2018/12/20/trump-administration/ https://www.sltrib.com/news/nation-world/2018/12/20/trump-ad... https://jacobin.com/2023/02/department-of-transportation-train-brake-regulation-ohio-derailment https://jacobin.com/2023/02/department-of-transportation-tra...

Maursault 4y ago

To be fair, besides the primary initiative of keeping all the wealth in the hands of a few, the secondary purpose of a Republican administration is to undo anything done by a Democratic administration. There was no way for Trump to know whether the legislation was good or bad. It could have gone either way, really.

mgkimsal 4y ago
It's felt like any republican 'rolling back' dem-initiated legislation tends to have more negative consequences for more people than positive benefits for others. I don't have any specifics in mind - if I think of any I'll edit/add here. But perhaps others have counter examples to correct my gut feeling?
- throwaway-blaze 4y ago
  So republicans are just guilty until proven innocent?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

celdon25 4y ago

You posted two duplicate comments in this thread only to claim that it was Trump's fault?

onetimeusename 4y ago

Would ECP brakes have stopped this, a serious question? I don't know if the severity of this warrants blame on a lack of ECP braking. There is a study done[1] that compared different pneumatic vs electronic signal brakes and ECP brakes could have potentially reduced the number of cars in a derailment but I don't know if it's a significant decrease in cars that are derailed, 50 cars derailed. It does not seem that way to me. But I could be wrong. [1]: https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2017_casselton_BMG_6_Casselton-Brake_Study.pdf https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2017_casselton_BM...

MrOwnPut 4y ago
No it would not have, as another posted, the NTSB has reported this was a bearing failure[1]. Bearing failures account for 5.9% of all train derailments[2]. It's possible to help prevent this (not fully as many things derail trains) with more sensors[3] and tighter maintenance checks. This was most likely due to a lack of maintenance. [1] https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20230214.as... [2] https://www.wisnerbaum.com/blog/2016/september/the-most-common-train-accident-causes/ https://www.wisnerbaum.com/blog/2016/september/the-most-comm... [3] https://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/research/projects/investigating-rail-axle-bearing-damage.page https://www.southampton.ac.uk/engineering/research/projects/...
- georgeg23 4y ago
  In another universe, ECP brakes would have saved the day. It sounds like the Trump administration still deserves criticism for decaying train safety.
  - MrOwnPut 4y ago
    > ECP brakes would have saved the day Citation needed. It sounds like all administrations (especially those currently in charge) deserve criticism for not focusing on the correct regulations for train safety. Requiring something that isn't needed doesn't help... It can hurt as it takes resources away from actual necessities, like sensors, and tighter maintenance inspections.