Thursday, June 28, 2012

Crude-By-Railroad From the Canadian Oil Sands --

Updates

June 28, 2012: See first comment. I've correct the errors in the original posting. 

Original Post

Maybe it's just me, but I think this is a huge story. A huge "thank you" to "bc" for sending me the link.

CN has signed an agreement with Southern Pacific Resource Group to ship Canadian oil to the US gulf coast.
CN expects to begin moving the bitumen from Fort McMurray to Natchez beginning in the fourth quarter. Volumes will ramp up to more than 12,000 carloads per year as production increases, CN officials said.

The pact represents an important milestone in the Class I's growing business of shipping crude oil by rail, said James Cairns, CN’s vice president-petroleum and chemicals. The year, the railroad expects to move about 25,000 carloads of crude oil, up significantly from about 5,000 loads last year.
A unit train is 100 - 120 tank cars, so 12,000/100 --> 120 unit trains, or about one unit train every third day. But look at how huge that ramp up has been: from 5,000 loadings last year to around 25,000 loadings this year.

Canadian National (CN) route map is here.

The Keystone XL looks less and less critical.

6 comments:

  1. looks like the Chicago rail yard/track system will be MORE crowed then ever..with this oil on CN, and SP and the Bakken oil going East on BNSF. I appears like any one going on Amtrac thru chicago to the east coast better take a thick book with them, because the delays will befoore ever..
    Or Maybe this dirty evil oil shipments will require the railroads to invest in more/better tracks from Chicago to cleveland ohio..
    i rode amtrac thru this area twice, and you could watch paint dry faster then Amtrac went..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, whenever I travel Amtrak, I take half a dozen book plus the iPad with eBooks.

      Delete
  2. So does it makes sense that because Buffet owns BNSF that he might not want Keytsone XL to get done and that is the reason that the great state of Nebraska is holding this up?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This subject has been discussed fairly often on the blog. Search "buffett."

      I'm sure he is simply enjoying the ride.

      Delete
  3. It is not the Southern Pacific Railroad that will be involved in this. The Southern Pacific was merged into the Union Pacific back in the 1990's. It is Southern Pacific Resources, an energy company that is contracting with Canadian National to move the bitumen. The Canadian National will move the trains thru Chicago all the way to Mississippi on their own railroad before handing them off to a connecting shortline railroad to Natchez where the bitumen will be transferred onto barges on the Mississippi River. I am surprised this has been so slow to come about, because shipping the bitumen by rail and barge does not require the use of diluent (NGLs, mainly condensate) which is added to allow the bitumen to be shipped by pipeline. It has become a major effort to ship the diluent up to Alberta to mix into the bitumen. It would seem shipping by rail would be much easier than having to build the proposed pipelines to carry the diluent up there, mix it, then ship it back.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My bad. Thank you for correcting me without making me feel too much like an idiot. I learn something new every day.

      I don't often correct a blog posting but in this case, I will.

      Yes, the saying "necessity is the mother of invention." In this case, the delay with the Keystone necessitates some clever thinking -- and this is it: rail and barge.

      Thank you, again, for correcting me, taking time to comment.

      Delete