Per ton mile, rail freight transport is probably the safest mode of commodity shipment available in Canada.
This vast country has 48,000 kilometres of railway track, some of it laid through the most rugged terrain and subject to some of the most extreme weather conditions any railway, anywhere, might encounter.
Even so, there were 66 main track derailments of various sizes from January through September of this year, and another 330 non-main track derailments in the same period, according to Transportation Safety Board of Canada statistics.
In all of 2012, there were 63 derailments on main tracks and 499 on non-main tracks.
Read Also
Sask. ag group wants strychnine back
The Agricultural Producers Association of Saskatchewan has written to the federal government asking for emergency use of strychnine to control gophers
Though we cannot put these figures fully into context without knowing the number of cars moving freight and the distances they travelled without incident, the bald figures are nevertheless disturbing.
Last week, 13 cars carrying lumber and sulfur derailed near Peers, Alta., disrupting service.
A few weeks earlier, residents of Gainford, Alta., had to evacuate their town when a derailment led to explosions and fire. October also saw four cars derail near Sexsmith, Alta., with anhydrous ammonia aboard, and in late September, 17 cars left the track near Landis, Sask., carrying petroleum, ethanol and chemicals. A resulting grass fire added to worry over potential explosion or contamination.
These accidents over such a short time span would be worrisome even without the horror and tragedy of Lac-Megantic still fresh in the public consciousness.
Cumulatively, they raise legitimate questions about railway safety and how it can be improved as the giant prairie grain crop moves to port this year and increasing amounts of oil and bitumen do the same now and in years to come.
The railways respond to those questions with statistics showing an improving safety rate. The federal government, which regulates rail safety, says it has imposed tougher fines for safety violations.
Thank goodness for both those things, but as TSB chair Wendy Tadros recently wrote, “it is no longer enough for industry and government to cite previous safety records or a gradual 20-year decline in the number of main-track derailments. There has been an erosion of public trust and Canadians require reassurance that action is being taken … and that future movements will be safe.”
Our western Canadian cities, towns and villages were built along railway tracks for obvious reasons. It was, and is, a mutually beneficial arrangement; so much so that a tribute to the railway system adorns Canada’s new $10 bill.
However, the recent spate of accidents has eroded confidence in the integrity of the rail system and its safety in terms of people and the environment. It has been amply demonstrated that accidents can jeopardize lives, contaminate landscapes and delay transport of goods upon which many sectors, particularly farmers, rely.
It’s getting a lot of attention.
Former Saskatchewan premier Grant Devine recently criticized lack of track modernization and suggested the system is overloaded. Last week, the Alberta government launched an investigation into whether railways are meeting their safety obligations.
On the TSB’s part, Tadros advocates better safety management, installation of trackside detection systems, fail-safe methods of stopping trains and shipping dangerous goods only in the toughest tank cars.
Those recommendations, and particularly the last item, should give pause: why isn’t that already being done?
The overriding questions railways need to answer are these: are all needed rail safety measures being taken and is the current system up to the task of safely carrying all its burdens?
Doubtless they realize that when the modern manifestation of the national dream creates nightmares for those affected by accidents, it’s time to take stock.
