Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear declared a state of emergency in Rockcastle County following a multi-car train derailment on Wednesday that his office said resulted in a chemical spill.

Around 16 train cars were involved in the incident, including two carrying molten sulfur that ended up on fire, according to CSX, which operates the train.

“At approximately 2:23pm today, a CSX train derailed north of Livingston, KY. Preliminary information indicates that at least 16 cars were involved, including two molten sulphur cars that have been breached and have lost some of their contents which is on fire,” a statement from the company to ABC News read.

  • @Mirshe
    link
    541 year ago

    Not entirely. Derailments like this were pretty much expected to increase at…right about this point after Reagan deregulated the entire rail industry. Take away any expectations of the railways to maintain their rails, cars, or engines, and couple that with an industry that believes in cutting everything to the bone in order to maximize profits in a way that’s almost unrivaled, and you get this happening more and more. Already before this, railways in the US were averaging 1000+ freight derailments per year over the last decade - to put this in perspective, the entire EU averages half that in a year for their freight network.

    • Blackout
      link
      fedilink
      141 year ago

      There is an oil pipeline runs under the Mackinac Bridge in the great lakes. The pipeline is 70 years old, 20 years past its end-of-life. Majority of Michiganders are against replacing it and want it shut down before the inevitable happens. The oil company and the nation of Canada oppose this because $$$. Now that it looks like it will be shut down the oil company is finally suggesting replacing it (they could have 20 years ago and probably got a 50yr extension too). The fact that it wasn’t automatically shut down 20 years ago and the previous governments decided to roll the dice is unbelievable. We can live without the oil but if it ruptures then it will devastate our environment. I wish the US govt took this and these train derailments with the seriousness they deserve.

    • @schmidtster
      link
      9
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Is that not expected when you have 224k miles of rail vs 94k? Doesn’t the US also move vastly more in their network?

      The only way to legitimately compare them would be for incidence per travelled mile. Saying they have double the incidences with over twice the rail is almost bordering on propaganda without the right metrics.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        This is not a safe standard, because it allows more total incidents if there is more mileage. The goal should be as few incidents as possible regardless of the amount of rail. You are doing what your insurance company does to you and your family.

        • @schmidtster
          link
          11 year ago

          If a place has 10x the population and only 5x the rate, it’s half the incident rate. That is safer no how you try and twist it.

          500 incidences with 1 million people is far safer than 500 incidences with 500k.

          You say I’m doing what the insurance companies are doing, yet you’re the one actually perpetuating biased information. I’m pointing out that people are being lied to, and you claiming I’m wrong is what’s wrong with the world. You believe this propaganda lmfao.

      • @frunch
        link
        -31 year ago

        Can you provide us with updated stats using those metrics?

        • @schmidtster
          link
          41 year ago

          Based of the amount of miles and incidences the us has a lower rate per installed mile. That doesn’t tell much and I’m not gonna go and do a bunch of math to prove someone else’s point wrong.

          Just glancing at the numbers should be enough for people to question it, it’s like looking at a murder rate of a population of 1k vs 1 million. Would it be surprising for the million to have more murders? No it would be concerning if the lower one had more.

          • @frunch
            link
            -21 year ago

            I asked because i was having trouble finding the proper figures to make a comparison. You appeared to have a handle on that data, so i asked. No worries though, i wouldn’t want to do math for strangers on the Internet to prove or disprove a point that isn’t that important either.

            • @schmidtster
              link
              3
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You won’t find them since they don’t exist, you can build a narrative with misleading statistics.

              So I ask, why hasn’t someone done these calculations? It’s done for every other mode of transportion, it’s the only reasonable way to compare traffic accidents.

              It’s an important point really, but I don’t like people perpetuating misleading information. Having double the incidences with double the track and double the mileage is hardly anything to be concerned about. So why are we concerned? To paint a negative picture. Why don’t we have the right statistics? Well someone would figure out that they are being misled.

              How is misleading someone putting anything into perspective? Cant have perspective with misleading and incorrect stats.