Blog

This past Saturday, it happened again. A train carrying highly volatile crude oil, in this case tar sands crude from Alberta, derailed in Ontario and caught fire, destroying a bridge in the blaze. This is the fourth time in as many weeks an oil train has derailed and caught fire or exploded.

The Canadian press and politicians are waking up to the fact that transporting tar sands by rail is as dangerous as Bakken.

There is growing evidence that transporting tar sands oil maybe as inherently dangerous as carrying the volatile Bakken shale oil.

IHS published today a predictable and hollow attempt to rebut much of our work on Keystone XL’s links to markets beyond North America and the ability of rail to replace the pipeline.

A state of emergency was declared late yesterday in two counties in the south of West Virginia after a crude by rail train oil derailed and exploded, in what is the latest in a long string of accidents in North America.

Southern Pacific Resources was the first tar sands producer to commit all of its production to crude-by-rail. Today, the company is on the brink of disaster.

Tar sands-by-rail is a major issue in the debate on Keystone XL. In this first of a series of blogs on the issue, we look at the ongoing failures of the first tar sands unit train terminal.

Our latest report presents new analysis that confirms that shipping tar sands bitumen by rail cannot possibly meet the tar sands industry’s reckless production growth plans. The report’s conclusions demonstrate that the U.S. Department of State’s analysis of rail’s ability to replace the Keystone XL pipeline failed to consider key data and evidence and drew conclusions that are both misleading and dangerous for the American public.

The oil industry’s public relations arm, the American Petroleum Institute (API), has reached new lows in its attempts to twist the on-going debate about the safety of crude-by-rail trains in the US.