[HN Gopher] Health concerns grow in East Palestine, Ohio, after ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Health concerns grow in East Palestine, Ohio, after train
       derailment
        
       Author : Jimmc414
       Score  : 515 points
       Date   : 2023-02-14 14:24 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.npr.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.npr.org)
        
       | lynguist wrote:
       | When I hear Ohio and trains I immediately think of the huge
       | federal grants for building a higher speed rail line from
       | Cleveland over Columbus to Cincinnati that were already granted.
       | 
       | The same was granted for Wisconsin and Florida.
       | 
       | And one by one their governors refused to use these grants to
       | build the infrastructure, and one by one the federal grants were
       | reassigned, until in the end Florida got 2.3 billion dollars for
       | building a high-speed rail line Miami-Orlando-Tampa. That was
       | also sabotaged by its governor.
       | 
       | But because such a rail line is so incredibly economically
       | effective a private company started to build it anyhow, just at
       | lower speeds.
       | 
       | I'm still flabbergasted about this.
        
         | enriquec wrote:
         | so... the grants were unnecessary? Also, how can someone see
         | this catastrophe and still want to go with trains -- 200+ year
         | old tech that is clearly environmentally destructive, doesn't
         | solve last-mile, and can't be parallelized or re-routed, or
         | even rescheduled easily
        
           | manuelabeledo wrote:
           | > Also, how can someone see this catastrophe and still want
           | to go with trains
           | 
           | Perhaps because most of the industrialised world run tens of
           | thousands of freight and passenger trains every day.
           | 
           | What happened in Ohio is not an inherent issue with trains.
        
       | schainks wrote:
       | If you're in the Ohio river basin, I recommend you install
       | reverse osmosis and carbon filters on your tap water, which will
       | effectively filter nearly all vinyl chloride. Ventilate rooms
       | where you shower before / afterwords to ensure contaminated vapor
       | doesn't stick around.
        
         | aftbit wrote:
         | Cincinnati Water Works uses granular activated carbon
         | filtration already, and plans to shut the Ohio River water
         | intakes during the period of maximum contamination (anticipated
         | some time next week). Given that water demand is below peak in
         | the winter (nobody watering yards or washing cars etc), the
         | water in towers and reservoirs will likely be enough to last
         | through the worst part of the plume. I believe they have 3 days
         | of water during peak times, so likely more like 5.
         | 
         | Source: chatting with a waterworks engineer after a tour of
         | antique steam engine water pumps. They ran into the 60s!
         | https://cincinnatitriplesteam.org/
        
       | u8080 wrote:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dioxins_and_dioxin-like_compou...
       | 
       | >PCDD/F-compounds were never synthesized for any purpose, except
       | for small quantities for scientific research.[12] Small amounts
       | of PCDD/Fs are formed whenever organics, oxygen and chlorine are
       | available at suitable temperatures.[1] This is augmented by metal
       | catalysts such as copper. The optimal temperature range is 400
       | degC (752 degF) to 700 degC (1,292 degF). This means that
       | formation is highest when organic material is burned in less-
       | than-optimal conditions such as open fires, building fires,
       | domestic fireplaces, and poorly operated and/or designed solid
       | waste incinerators.[3] Historically, municipal and medical waste
       | incineration was the most important source of PCDD/Fs.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | perihelions wrote:
       | - _" On Sunday, the EPA released a list, written by Norfolk
       | Southern, of the toxic chemicals that were in the derailed cars.
       | In addition to vinyl chloride and butyl acrylate, it mentions
       | ethylhexyl acrylate, which can cause headaches, nausea, and
       | respiratory problems in people exposed to it; as well as
       | isobutylene, which can make people dizzy and drowsy."_
       | 
       | This is anodyne phrasing that omits the lede, which is that this
       | information was not previously disclosed. This expanded "list of
       | toxic chemicals" was not public prior to Sunday.
       | 
       | Here's ABC's reporting by way of comparison: _" There were more
       | toxic chemicals on train that derailed in Ohio than originally
       | reported, data shows"_
       | 
       | https://abcnews.go.com/US/toxic-chemicals-train-derailed-ohi...
       | 
       | (Another notable diff is that ABC describes ethylhexyl acrylate
       | as a "carcinogen", linking to a CDC page as a cite. NPR's
       | exposition reads differently: "ethylhexyl acrylate, which can
       | cause headaches, nausea, and respiratory problems in people
       | exposed to it;").
        
         | qikInNdOutReply wrote:
         | Finally, what can these chemicals react into when in a blaze.
        
           | shadowgovt wrote:
           | That's extremely well known, which is why the remediation
           | strategy was to intentionally set them on fire.
        
           | kurthr wrote:
           | There's a small amount of phosgene, but mostly nothing worse
           | than when they started (which are fairly nasty). Lot's of CO
           | and CO2, but it's the liquid runoff that's more concerning.
           | It'll be a haz-waste site for decades.
        
             | mcguire wrote:
             | And hydrogen chloride.
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | >Another notable diff is that ABC describes ethylhexyl acrylate
         | as a "carcinogen", linking to a CDC page as a cite
         | 
         | The linked CDC source doesn't really definitively say it's a
         | carcinogen. The exact quote is "potential occupational
         | carcinogen as defined by the OSHA carcinogen policy [29 CFR
         | 1990]". Also, it's worth noting that the page is for "Ethyl
         | acrylate", not "ethylhexyl acrylate". A google search for
         | "ethylhexyl acrylate" turns up results for 2-ETHYLHEXYL
         | ACRYLATE, which has a different CAS number, so it's unknown
         | whether ABC is even referring to the correct chemical.
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://www.chempoint.com/products/download?grade=2716&docty...
        
           | perihelions wrote:
           | That's an egregious error. Good catch!
           | 
           | At any rate, 2-ethylhexyl acrylate is *also* a "Group 2B:
           | possibly carcinogenic". (I'd assume it's just the functional
           | group that's interesting here, and the whole class is
           | carcinogenic).
           | 
           | - _" Methyl acrylate, ethyl acrylate,_ 2-ethylhexyl acrylate,
           | _technical-grade TMPTA, and isobutyl nitrite were classified
           | as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" (Group 2B), based on
           | "sufficient evidence" of carcinogenicity in experimental
           | animals and no data or inadequate evidence in humans. "_
           | 
           | https://sci-hub.ru/10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30491-1 ( _"
           | Carcinogenicity of isobutyl nitrite, b-picoline, and some
           | acrylates." The Lancet Oncology 19.8 (2018): 1020-1022."_)
        
           | irrational wrote:
           | Presumably we will have positive data on whether it is
           | carcinogenic or not in a few years/decades as we watch what
           | happens to the people In Ohio.
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | It's listed as a "possible carcinogen". Which would put it in
         | the same category as caffeine.
         | 
         | Although it's worth noting that while caffeine would obviously
         | not be that dangerous of a chemical, a giant spill of it would
         | still be an environmental issue.
        
         | grecy wrote:
         | > _which can cause headaches, nausea, and respiratory
         | problems.... can make people dizzy and drowsy_
         | 
         | I also love this phrasing that talks about the immediate
         | uncomfortable reactions, but makes no mention on the extremely
         | serious long-term implications of exposure.
         | 
         | These chemicals won't just make you feel unpleasant in the
         | moment, they'll kill you in the long run.
        
           | throwaway894345 wrote:
           | I mean, I guess "lung cancer" is _technically_ a
           | "respiratory problem" but damn...
        
           | atoav wrote:
           | This. That's like saying a radiation exposure can make you
           | "see funny lights" -- while being technically true, _this_ is
           | _not_ the important thing to underline given a situation
           | where such a danger is out there in the environment.
           | 
           | Makes you wonder.
        
           | Root_Denied wrote:
           | I'm a bit torn on this one because the immediate symptoms are
           | the ones that might indicate exposure and prompt someone to
           | get medical treatment. If you're reading a newspaper or
           | watching mainstream reporting then that's easily the most
           | critical information to have communicated to you.
           | 
           | Once you've got a medical record of exposure that also makes
           | it possible to go after these companies for the long term
           | effects, which should be communicated to you by medical
           | professionals based on your exposure time and estimated
           | dosage. I don't like that that's the requirement for our
           | legal system, but it's the reality.
        
           | chriscappuccio wrote:
           | The dose makes the poison
        
             | kalimanzaro wrote:
             | I hear that often from apologists for the chemical
             | industry. For vinyl chloride 250ppm for 4 hours is enough
             | to give you tumors. It's less than ambient CO2 in the air.
             | Some threshold doses are basically negligible.
        
               | xadhominemx wrote:
               | > For vinyl chloride 250ppm for 4 hours is enough to give
               | you tumors.
               | 
               | No it's not! You've completely made that up.
        
             | whamlastxmas wrote:
             | Unfortunately a single rail car can carry in excess of
             | 30,000 gallons of dosing, and a single train can have
             | several millions of gallons all together.
        
               | Filligree wrote:
               | How many ppm is that?
               | 
               | Tongue in cheek, but assume it all got spread out over
               | the city, I suppose.
        
               | whamlastxmas wrote:
               | This looks very difficult to calculate unless you're
               | already familiar with the dynamics at play. Here's an
               | extremely relevant paper from 2019 on the topic:
               | 
               | https://www.consiltant.com/wp-
               | content/uploads/2019/09/201909...
               | 
               | > the speed [of evaporation] is determined by, among
               | other things, the pressure in the system, temperature of
               | the substance, substance properties such as boiling
               | point, vapor pressure, molecular weight and density and
               | of course the size of the hole.
               | 
               | Trying to do napkin math of dividing 30,000 gallons into
               | the volume of air over a city under a certain altitude
               | seems like a pointless exercise given the very long list
               | of parameters that would highly influence its dispersion.
        
           | nimbius wrote:
           | > can make people dizzy and drowsy
           | 
           | LMFAO vinyl chloride is a multi-organ carcinogen...its
           | literally one of the quickest ways to stage 4 right up there
           | with Benzene exposure.
           | 
           | phosgene was also part of the release when Ohio decided a
           | "controlled burn" of the vinyl chloride was somehow a good
           | idea. the plume could be seen from commercial flights.
           | 
           | honest to god the damage control media outlets are attempting
           | in the midst of what by every definition is just under a
           | massive environmental disaster is just ridiculous. If this
           | happened in China it would be front page news.
        
             | gowings97 wrote:
             | Our fearless US press is too scared to have on-site staff
             | to cover the largest ecological land-based disaster since
             | Three Mile Island. Or they've been told by the regime it's
             | a non-issue? Not sure which is worse, but the outcome is
             | what you see before you; back page coverage a week after
             | the incident. Barely a blurb.
             | 
             | Yes, these things take time to fully investigate. Where are
             | the daily updates from the EPA though? Why aren't the major
             | news outlets syndicating these daily EPA updates?
             | 
             | This is relevant to more Americans than the war in Ukraine,
             | which many news outlets have a dedicated section for in the
             | header section (Business, World, Sports, etc.)
             | 
             | I just checked US News & World Report and CNN front pages -
             | not even listed.
        
               | anigbrowl wrote:
               | Before you mock the press maybe take a look at how they
               | are being treated in Ohio. This is from a press
               | conference given by the governor last week.
               | 
               | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQMLxBpiSu8
        
               | ClumsyPilot wrote:
               | If true, thia should be even bigger news - instead front
               | pages are covered with chinese baloons
        
               | gowings97 wrote:
               | I would like to see Ohio law enforcement try that against
               | ABC News, CNN, etc. (they won't)
               | 
               | That's what makes this scary - the few independent
               | journalists that are trying to cover this are being
               | locked out, and the national journalists are nowhere to
               | be found.
        
               | gruez wrote:
               | >Our fearless US press is too scared to have on-site
               | staff to cover the largest ecological land-based disaster
               | since Three Mile Island
               | 
               | According to whom? Looking at this list: https://en.wikip
               | edia.org/wiki/Category:Environmental_disaste..., it's not
               | hard to find incidents that were arguably worse, eg. http
               | s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Dan_River_coal_ash_spill
               | or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Gold_King_Mine_wast
               | e_wate...
        
               | gowings97 wrote:
               | "...the outcome is what you see before you; back
               | page/hardly any coverage a week after the incident.
               | Nothing on the front pages a week after the incident.
               | Barely a blurb."
               | 
               | If they're there, whatever work they're doing is not
               | making it onto front pages. The alternative explanation
               | (subtext from the description above) is more likely -
               | most major news outlets have not sent a journalist to
               | cover this, neither are they covering EPA updates. If
               | they were, why is their work not receiving daily updates
               | on the news outlet front pages?
        
             | gwright wrote:
             | > honest to god the damage control media outlets are
             | attempting in the midst of what by every definition is just
             | under a massive environmental disaster is just ridiculous.
             | If this happened in China it would be front page news.
             | 
             | Is it damage control or just some strange calculation that
             | it isn't a story that will attract page views?
             | 
             | Both rationales are concerning, but they suggest different
             | pathologies in our media ecosystem.
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | It's honestly that there's not much story because it
               | looks worse than it is.
               | 
               | Chemicals are counter-intuitive. People don't have a good
               | match for looks-scary to is-scary.
               | 
               | I watch the Checmical Safety Board incident report videos
               | from time-to-time. The most common killer in chemical
               | plants? Carbon monoxide: odorless, colorless, tasteless,
               | and simply displaces oxygen. You climb into an enclosed
               | space, have just enough time to realize something's wrong
               | (maybe) before you pass out, and never wake up. The
               | methyl isocyanate that killed in Bhopal rolled along the
               | ground creating a silent blanket of death.
               | 
               | A giant black plume climbing into the cloud layer is
               | scary looking but in no way correlated, one way or
               | another, with the actual risk to public safety. Made for
               | great 6 o'clock news footage, but the followup story
               | really is just "Clean the soot off your house and maybe
               | check your basement for any chemical that rolled away
               | before it burned."
        
               | qikInNdOutReply wrote:
               | We have a volunteer! Make way, somebody volunteers, its
               | harmless.
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | You say that like I don't live in sight of the plume,
               | friend. I've _been_ volunteered. ;)
               | 
               | I have more concern living in this part of the country
               | about the lead in my pipes than the contents of that
               | cloud.
        
               | LarryMullins wrote:
               | Exactly this. Nobody claiming this shit is safe will put
               | their lives where their mouths are. Nobody in this thread
               | moaning about people not trusting the experts will
               | consider moving their families into this town to show the
               | rest of us how trustworthy they _really_ think the
               | government is.
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | Does me not moving out of town count? ;)
        
             | sct202 wrote:
             | No need for a conspiracy when the spy balloons (Jan 28th)
             | and Turkish earthquake (Jan 6) happened concurrently (Feb 3
             | initial derailment, Feb 6 for giant black smoke from
             | controlled release).
        
             | xadhominemx wrote:
             | > LMFAO vinyl chloride is a multi-organ carcinogen...its
             | literally one of the quickest ways to stage 4 right up
             | there with Benzene exposure.
             | 
             | No it's not
        
               | yebyen wrote:
               | https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-
               | prevention/risk/s...
               | 
               | > Vinyl chloride exposure is associated with an increased
               | risk of a rare form of liver cancer (hepatic
               | angiosarcoma), as well as primary liver cancer
               | (hepatocellular carcinoma), brain and lung cancers,
               | lymphoma, and leukemia.
               | 
               | If there's some fact in the parent comment which is in
               | dispute could you please be a bit more clear about what
               | it is? This is a very unhelpful comment from you.
        
               | xadhominemx wrote:
               | Don't chide me. Parent comment is ridiculous and harmful
               | fearmongering and hyperbole. Read your own link - there
               | is no mention of carcinogenicity* from acute exposure and
               | environmental a biological persistence is very low. I
               | would be more concerned if I spent a career in a vinyl
               | chloride production facility without proper ppe.
        
               | cycomanic wrote:
               | > Don't chide me. Parent comment is ridiculous and
               | harmful fearmongering and hyperbole. Read your own link -
               | there is no mention of harm from acute exposure and
               | environmental an biological persistence is very low.
               | 
               | Reading the Wikipedia link it's not so clear if only
               | continuous exposure elevates cancer risk. However it also
               | lists significant acute effects:
               | 
               | > Prior to 1974, workers were commonly exposed to 1,000
               | ppm vinyl chloride, causing "vinyl chloride illness" such
               | as acroosteolysis and Raynaud's Phenomenon. The symptoms
               | of vinyl chloride exposure are classified by ppm levels
               | in ambient air with 4,000 ppm having a threshold
               | effect.[17] The intensity of symptoms varies from acute
               | (1,000-8,000 ppm), including dizziness, nausea, visual
               | disturbances, headache, and ataxia, to chronic (above
               | 12,000 ppm), including narcotic effect, cardiac
               | arrhythmias, and fatal respiratory failure.[18] RADS
               | (Reactive Airway Dysfunction Syndrome) may be caused by
               | acute exposure to vinyl chloride.[19]
               | 
               | So I'm not sure if the previous post was harmful
               | fearmongering.
        
               | xadhominemx wrote:
               | There were no severe acute effects - there were no
               | hospitalizations, the vast majority of the vinyl chloride
               | was intentionally burned, and the little that remains has
               | very low environmental or biological persistence.
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | As is so often the case, people who fearmonger about what
               | could happen fail to notice that the medical
               | establishment keeps quite good records on what _is_
               | happening.
               | 
               | We'd know about the acute effects by now from
               | hospitalization, and we generally know about the chronic
               | effects in the environment because this isn't even the
               | first vinyl chloride spill.
               | 
               | Is Paulsboro, NJ currently a cancer hotbed?
               | 
               | https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a851
               | 9/n...
        
               | xadhominemx wrote:
               | Exactly! Vinyl Chloride is an extremely common and high
               | volume industrial use chemical. If acute exposure could
               | give you cancer, we'd have known decades ago.
        
               | yebyen wrote:
               | I wasn't chiding you, I am a layman and I genuinely had
               | no idea what issue you saw in the parent comment. Read
               | your own comment that I responded to again.
               | 
               | The parent comment had multiple assertions in it, so
               | there's literally no way for me to know what you meant by
               | "no it's not" until you told me.
        
               | shkkmo wrote:
               | There is no language in that link that limits the risks
               | to long term exposure. If you follow the OSHA link on
               | that page, you'll see that the ERPG-3 is 20000 ppm;
               | that's the level at which some people will start facing
               | lethal complications after an hour of exposure.
               | 
               | If you're gonna argue that there are no consequences to
               | acute exposure, you gonna have to provide some sources.
        
               | xadhominemx wrote:
               | 20,000 ppm! Do you understand how high that is??
        
               | shkkmo wrote:
               | "The levels required for acute exposure risk ate very
               | high" is factually quite different from "there is no risk
               | from acute exposure."
               | 
               | Additionally, an hour is also several orders of magnitude
               | shorter than a week.
               | 
               | I'm not saying that the residents are facing concerning
               | exposure levels, however your attempts to dismiss that
               | concern have been either incorrect or factually lacking.
               | If you are trying to correct misinformation, you need to
               | raise the bar.
        
               | xadhominemx wrote:
               | Parent comment referred to carcinogenicity.
        
               | shkkmo wrote:
               | Yes, it is classified as a carncinogen.
               | 
               | > Carcinogenic classifications: EPA-K;A, IARC-1, NIOSH-
               | Ca, NTP-K, OSHA-Ca, TLV-A1
        
               | xadhominemx wrote:
               | Not from acute exposure!
        
               | burnished wrote:
               | High enough you could start using percentages!
        
             | JKCalhoun wrote:
             | > the damage control media outlets are attempting
             | 
             | That suggests intent. While I am as cynical as the next
             | person I wouldn't make a claim like that without also
             | citing evidence to back it up.
        
               | yunwal wrote:
               | Time and time again, even media sources that we're told
               | are trustworthy and rigorous show that they'll shill for
               | corporate interests if given enough financial incentive
               | and a promising enough narrative[0][1][2][3][4]. At what
               | point do we just assume that financial conflict of
               | interest is inherent in how media reports on issues?
               | 
               | [0] - https://www.coindesk.com/layer2/2022/11/15/lets-
               | talk-about-t...
               | 
               | [1] - https://theintercept.com/2022/08/17/new-york-times-
               | dan-goldm...
               | 
               | [2] - https://theintercept.com/2016/01/29/nyt-outside-
               | spending/
               | 
               | [3] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/05/16/
               | democrats...
               | 
               | [4] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/tax-bezos-
               | help-worke...
        
         | shadowgovt wrote:
         | In general, there's no particular need to make the list of
         | chemicals public. In the event of emergency, every container is
         | stamped with one or two standard labels indicating the nature
         | of the chemical threat and what firefighters need to do to
         | address it; otherwise, it's as important to people as what's in
         | the tractor-trailer in front of them on the highway.
         | 
         | It might be worth having a discussion about the fact that the
         | way train right-of-ways came into being give municipalities
         | little recourse if they feel the trains shouldn't be cutting
         | through their towns in _general,_ but given that they do, they
         | 're basically privately-owned highways and it's up to the owner
         | what's on them.
        
           | ClumsyPilot wrote:
           | > it's up to the owner what's on them
           | 
           | Does the owner accept full liability for, potentially, giving
           | thousands of people cancer?
           | 
           | Even if they pay modest compensation of a million dollars to
           | each victim, thats already in billions.
        
           | LarryMullins wrote:
           | > _In general, there 's no particular need to make the list
           | of chemicals public_
           | 
           | Fitting username, I didn't realize you were a novelty
           | account.
        
             | shadowgovt wrote:
             | The username actually refers to an old They Might Be Giants
             | song.
             | 
             | They lyrics of the song tell the tale of a man who goes
             | through life being paranoid about a massive, organized
             | government operation spying on him personally.
             | 
             | In the end, he's murdered and disappeared by his town's
             | local mayor because he's inconvenient, the mayor's just a
             | thug, and there _is_ no shadowy overarching organization
             | watching over him.
             | 
             | People believe in conspiracies because they feel the
             | alternative (disorder, ad-hoc metastability, and a world
             | full of people with short-term views making short-term
             | moves to benefit their short-term ends impacting other
             | folks with no particular plan, just simple, stupid apathy)
             | is scarier. But most evil (and good) in the world is done
             | by regular folks with partial knowledge doing their
             | damnedest to survive, and we perceive patterns because
             | we're pattern-perceiving creatures.
        
               | LarryMullins wrote:
               | It's certainty a fitting username for somebody who thinks
               | the government should keep people in the dark.
               | 
               | > _" In general, there's no particular need to make the
               | list of chemicals public."_
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | The government doesn't generally know the list of
               | chemicals, so it's not keeping people in the dark because
               | it has no information to divulge.
               | 
               | We could certainly make it a rule that chemical manifests
               | be lodged with such-and-such organization (the FRA, I'd
               | assume), but we don't because that's not the history of
               | how rail happened in this country. And in general, the US
               | government tends to operate under a rule of "Ain't no
               | problem, ain't no problem" regarding data collection,
               | with rare exception (Americans get very jumpy about over-
               | collection of data by the government, after all; "Why do
               | you _need_ to know how many firearms I own? It 's my
               | right to own them", etc.).
               | 
               | ... I could certainly see an argument for changing this
               | rule, but I can also see an argument for not; much as
               | Americans are, broadly speaking, comfortable living in
               | homes where lines of toxic volatile chemicals are plumbed
               | directly into those homes (50,000 hospitalizations and
               | 430 deaths due to CO poisoning annually; in 2020, 10
               | natural gas explosions and 0 train chemical spills) and
               | comfortable operating private individual vehicles on
               | roadways (38,000+ deaths in crashes in 2020) and
               | comfortable with non-licensed ownership of firearms (
               | _carrying_ requires a license, ownership does not;
               | 24,000+ suicides by gun in 2020), most people are most of
               | the time comfortable with train loads of God-knows-what
               | rattling down the old main street. And they 're
               | comfortable with it because accidents like this, while
               | not nearly as rare as they should be, are _far_ rarer
               | than other risks Americans tolerate every single day.
               | Risk-tolerance for convenience is just kind of an
               | American tradition.
               | 
               | ... like I said else-thread, I 'm likelier to suffer from
               | the lead in my pipes living in this part of the country
               | than the train fire.
        
           | rcme wrote:
           | > In general, there's no particular need to make the list of
           | chemicals public. In the event of emergency, every container
           | is stamped with one or two standard labels indicating the
           | nature of the chemical threat and what firefighters need to
           | do to address it
           | 
           | What part of the hazard warning indicates what's required for
           | environmental remediation? In order to properly remediate,
           | you need to know what you're dealing with.
        
             | shadowgovt wrote:
             | In general, no environmental remediation is necessary
             | because the chemical doesn't spill. If it spills, of course
             | there should be disclosure. Parent appeared to be
             | expressing surprise there was no disclosure until an
             | incident occurred; of course there wasn't.
             | 
             | (Disclosure takes more time than we assume it should
             | because freight is actually kinda disorganized relative to
             | what most of us would expect given our information-
             | saturated jobs; when a shipment leaves the depot and
             | arrives, you can just check the contents of the train, but
             | when it fails to arrive, you have to piece together the
             | contents from multiple manifest sources and cross-check to
             | make sure there weren't errors in that data).
        
               | rcme wrote:
               | That's not how I read the original comment:
               | 
               | > This is anodyne phrasing that omits the lede, which is
               | that this information was not previously disclosed. This
               | expanded "list of toxic chemicals" was not public prior
               | to Sunday.
               | 
               | The accident happened on February 3rd. And the chemicals
               | started being released on the 6th. Sunday was the 12th.
               | That's a long time to wait to disclose the types of
               | chemicals you're releasing in a town.
        
       | jsonne wrote:
       | I've been seeing content on Tiktok where even 100 miles away
       | they're seeing small dead fish which is apparently according to
       | the folks making the videos a massive red flag.
       | 
       | In general I grow super weary of companies and the government
       | downplaying these sorts of things. It seems to constantly follow
       | the pattern of people saying "It's not that bad" and then only
       | years later do we actually see the horrific health and
       | environmental effects of these sorts of things play out when it's
       | too late for the folks that have been impacted. I feel so
       | helpless like I wish there was a way to prevent this or create
       | enough real accountability that people actually work to minimize
       | these sorts of things but it never seems to pan out that way. My
       | hunch is that the behind the scenes culprit of "why" this happens
       | is rather banal, insurance covers it so people don't have to
       | change, and it seems like those policies create a ton of moral
       | hazard but I don't know the alternatives. I have no answers here
       | it just feels like yet another weight on the side of the scale
       | that the average person has very little control over their lives
       | even for simple things like not being hurt by toxic chemicals in
       | soil / drinking water. Feels easy to lose even more faith in the
       | institutions that are supposed to protect us all.
        
         | kritiko wrote:
         | Moral Mazes has many good examples of how this happens.
         | 
         | Aaron Swartz quoted one excerpt about an industrial accident
         | towards the bottom of this blog:
         | http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/bizethics
         | 
         | Management deferred replacement of a $6M battery and the cost
         | of its failure was 100-150M.
         | 
         | >People are always calculating how others will see the
         | decisions they make. ... They know that they have to gauge not
         | just the external ... market consequences of a decision, but
         | the internal political consequences. And sometimes you can make
         | the right market decision, but it can be the wrong political
         | decision.
        
         | laurentbh wrote:
         | yeah, it's not that bad when you are in DC or on Wall Street
        
         | mbostleman wrote:
         | I'm finding it extremely hard to separate signal from noise in
         | the social and legacy media spheres right now. I'm waiting for
         | things to settle.
        
           | seafoam wrote:
           | Yeah, I used to do that.
           | 
           | Then I realized that it is always a conspiracy theory until
           | it is too late.
           | 
           | If you are potentially impacted, you have to do your own
           | homework, and learn from your mistakes.
        
             | ibejoeb wrote:
             | For real. This looks really bad. Authorities in the area
             | seem to be playing it like "it's safe until we have
             | evidence that it's not," but who wants to volunteer to
             | become the evidence?
             | 
             | If you're in that area, it'd be prudent to get out if
             | you're able. It's systemic contamination. You don't get to
             | go back in time for a mulligan if it turns out to be bad.
             | 
             | It's always played down. Nobody ever says "we really fucked
             | up this time so you ought to fend for yourself." It's been,
             | what, 10 days? There's barely coverage, and there's no
             | transparency.
             | 
             | There's still lead in the water in Michigan...
        
             | s1artibartfast wrote:
             | I think it is still a good heuristic that most people
             | should follow.
             | 
             | Step 1: do I need to have an informed opinion
             | 
             | Step 2: Do I need that opinion NOW
             | 
             | Step 3: WHAT do I need to know NOW
             | 
             | There is a vast amount of conspiracy theorizing that people
             | could avoid by following this approach.
        
               | ncr100 wrote:
               | Step 4: Always carry a towel
               | 
               | /s
        
               | pathartl wrote:
               | Absolutely. I live in a completely different state and
               | I'm pretty unaffected by this whole tragedy/negligence. I
               | could sit and speculate about what actually happened, but
               | what does that do other than spend energy on something
               | that I'm not actually involved with?
        
               | s1artibartfast wrote:
               | Yeah, There is something to be said about genuine
               | curiosity, but in the face of a emotionally changed
               | misinformation blizzard the best option is to take a step
               | back.
               | 
               | If you decide you are curious and _actually_ want to care
               | about railroad safety, dont react to the current crisis,
               | "hit the books" and read some actually informative
               | material about past events.
        
               | pathartl wrote:
               | 100%. It's important to note that doing so also doesn't
               | make you complicit. I have a general disdain for the "do
               | your own research" type of people because often they're
               | not trying to seek out actual education, they're just
               | trying to bolster some sort of preconception they have.
        
               | r00fus wrote:
               | Well, first off, trains run everywhere. So if it happens
               | in Ohio, it can happen near where you live too.
               | 
               | Workers have been pushing to get a _single_ day of paid
               | leave per month and threatening a strike - but rail
               | bosses have greedily ignored them to give more money to
               | their stockholders (ie, themselves too). Then Congress
               | voted to force a bad deal.
               | 
               | What you could do is to get informed and see the results
               | of this blatant corruption.
        
               | [deleted]
        
         | kevin_nisbet wrote:
         | > In general I grow super weary of companies and the government
         | downplaying these sorts of things. It seems to constantly
         | follow the pattern of people saying "It's not that bad" and
         | then only years later do we actually see the horrific health
         | and environmental effects of these sorts of things play out
         | when it's too late for the folks that have been impacted. This
         | isn't really the same, but I've been thinking in similar areas
         | a lot lately in the context of climate change, and the debate
         | around climate change, although debating any topic doesn't
         | change many minds.
         | 
         | If you bet on the scientific majority around climate change
         | being wrong / non-existent / something we can't control, and
         | end up being wrong, then the worst case scenario we make the
         | planet uninhabitable (I'm going to the extreme here).
         | 
         | If you bet that climate change exists and is man-made and end
         | up wrong, we've unnecessarily invested a huge amount of money
         | into reducing pollution, more efficient buildings /
         | manufacturing / transport, and reduce the dependence on a
         | limited set of oil producers to be able to hold supply of oil
         | over nations.
         | 
         | For something more immediate like health concerns with this
         | derailment, is should the officials be more willing to be
         | wrong? And message as such?
        
           | peyton wrote:
           | You're betting other people's money in the second case, and
           | they have a say.
        
             | webnrrd2k wrote:
             | In a civilized, democratic society that's always true. But
             | it doesn't disqualify the original point.
             | 
             | And it works both ways... Other people have spent trillions
             | of US dollars on, for e.g., the war in the middle east.
             | Some of my tax money went to that. I didn't have the
             | ability to veto it.
             | 
             | There should be a reasonable public debate and then people
             | vote. Very often it involves spending other peoples money.
             | That's just how it works.
        
             | bakuninsbart wrote:
             | That money was granted to them as a reward for contributing
             | to society. Society has a say in how it can be spent.
        
               | artificialLimbs wrote:
               | They were either granted it or they weren't.
        
               | webnrrd2k wrote:
               | Getting money from society doesn't come with a grant of
               | immunity to it's rules. Are you saying that it should?
               | 
               | If you use your money to start a business involving a
               | giant tire fire in your back yard then society will,
               | rightfully so, have something to say about it.
        
           | danaris wrote:
           | Unfortunately, the problem here is that _for the individual
           | politicians_ , if you bet that climate change exists, the
           | worst case scenario is that the big money turns against you
           | and you lose office.
           | 
           | If you bet that climate change doesn't exist or can't be
           | fixed, so we might as well go on with the status quo, the
           | worst case is that you get voted out by environmentally-
           | conscious voters...after getting scads of campaign
           | contributions from the big money, and with a good chance of
           | getting a cushy lobbying post from them afterwards.
           | 
           | These are the incentives we need to change.
        
         | EGreg wrote:
         | Many peopl say that capitalism should be laidsez-faire and
         | government should leave us alone. But actually, government is
         | on the SIDE of capital and corporations, and they constantly
         | work together to keep the public distracted and divided enough
         | to actually force these corporations to change:
         | 
         | https://magarshak.com/blog/?p=362
        
         | RajT88 wrote:
         | > It seems to constantly follow the pattern of people saying
         | "It's not that bad" and then only years later do we actually
         | see the horrific health and environmental effects of these
         | sorts of things play out when it's too late for the folks that
         | have been impacted.
         | 
         | I recently learned that smaller versions of this even happen in
         | the Lasalle/Peru area in Illinois with some regularity. It
         | makes the local news, and maybe some Chicago news, but hardly a
         | blip on national news.
         | 
         | And this is people telling me they live miles away from the
         | incident, and are experiencing fuzzy orange snow. It's curious,
         | because this is getting more press coverage, and at the same
         | time the conspiracy wingnuts are claiming the press is covering
         | it up.
        
           | iso1631 wrote:
           | Imagine a world where journalists have enough time in the day
           | to participate in a coverup
        
             | samstave wrote:
             | > _" journalists"_
             | 
             | You keep using that word. I do not think that word means
             | what you think it means.
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_hGKT5FI78
        
               | RajT88 wrote:
               | There's a lot of self-styled "Citizen Journalists" these
               | days of wildly variable quality.
               | 
               | See: Jessica Reed Krause
        
           | 12345hn6789 wrote:
           | The cancer rates in that area are wack. I know a teacher at a
           | local school and the amount of children who are lost to
           | cancer is outrageous. Every year at least. The town is 10,000
           | people.
           | 
           | Also, something similar happened just recently. <fortunately>
           | the carus chemical plant explosion is but a tiny blip
           | compared to the Ohio disaster. https://abc7chicago.com/carus-
           | chemical-explosion-potassium-p...
           | 
           | But it is terrible nonetheless.
        
           | TurkishPoptart wrote:
           | Better to be a labelled conspiracy wingnut, as someone who
           | maintains justified suspicion of those who hold power in our
           | society (media, corporate barons, politicians), than to be
           | too trusting and assuming all is well.
        
             | rootusrootus wrote:
             | > labelled conspiracy wingnut, as someone who maintains
             | justified suspicion
             | 
             | If your suspicions were justified then by definition you
             | wouldn't be a conspiracy wingnut. But most of the wingnuts
             | think _everything_ is a conspiracy, which makes them no
             | more useful than a broken clock.
        
               | TurkishPoptart wrote:
               | was I a conspiracy wingnut for thinking the war in Iraq
               | was fought on dubious grounds? Don't have time to go down
               | the rabbit hole. Let's just apply Mark Twain's quote and
               | replace "read the newspaper" with "watch/read corporate
               | news". He's still right.
               | 
               | "If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If
               | you do, you're misinformed."
        
               | XorNot wrote:
               | Was the clock broken when it told me it 6.30 the other
               | day?
        
         | m000 wrote:
         | A number of rescued foxes and other wild animals were also
         | affected in the nearby area [1].
         | 
         | [1] https://www.newsweek.com/fox-dies-owners-arms-after-ohio-
         | tra...
        
           | ASalazarMX wrote:
           | Yeah... but have you heard of the UFOs? They could be aliens!
        
             | adammichaelc wrote:
             | I don't think the downvoters get the joke.
             | 
             | That's all I came to say.
             | 
             | Carry on.
             | 
             | Enjoyed the joke, btw.
        
               | katbyte wrote:
               | jokes are discouraged here.
        
               | joseph_grobbles wrote:
               | The "joke" is the tired "the other thing is clearly a
               | distraction from the thing I think is most important".
               | Yeah, everyone "gets" it, they just think it's incredibly
               | lame.
        
               | frereubu wrote:
               | https://samf.substack.com/p/its-not-a-dead-cat
        
         | anotherman554 wrote:
         | "I've been seeing content on Tiktok where even 100 miles away
         | they're seeing small dead fish which is apparently according to
         | the folks making the videos a massive red flag."
         | 
         | I wouldn't bother watching a Tiktok video unless the video
         | maker is an environmental professional. Otherwise this is just
         | the blind leading the blind.
         | 
         | Here's a legal definition of environmental professional used by
         | developers when they do a environmental assessment, from
         | Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_I_environmental_s
         | ite_ass...:
         | 
         | Someone with:
         | 
         | a current Professional Engineer's or Professional Geologist's
         | license or registration from a state or U.S. territory with 3
         | years equivalent full-time experience;
         | 
         | or
         | 
         | a Baccalaureate or higher degree from an accredited institution
         | of higher education in a discipline of engineering or science
         | and 5 years equivalent full-time experience;
         | 
         | or
         | 
         | have the equivalent of 10 years full-time experience.
        
           | vkou wrote:
           | You are correct about that, but it's also worth noting that
           | there's also no point listening to a corporate press release
           | that's telling you everything is fine, either, because we
           | don't put press officers in prison for lying.
        
             | mauvehaus wrote:
             | We _also_ usually don 't have environmental professionals
             | also working as press officers. If the press person even
             | consulted with an environmental professional, the content
             | has been filtered by both their lack of domain knowledge
             | and their desire to put a good spin on things.
        
               | vkou wrote:
               | I will say the same thing about an environmental
               | professional on the company payroll.
               | 
               | The problem I'm concerned about isn't ignorance, it is
               | cynical CYA-ism and a giant conflict of interest.
               | 
               | You need a culturally-trusted institution to handle this
               | sort of thing. I am not sure Ohio currently has one that
               | can handle this, so I expect to not know anything until
               | the lawsuits settle over the next decade.
        
           | WheatMillington wrote:
           | "hey look, here's a bunch of dead fish that weren't here
           | yesterday"
           | 
           | "show me your degree"
        
             | rootusrootus wrote:
             | "Prove it." would be my first respones. Followed by "Why
             | are they dead?" and "Did you kill them yourself?" and "How
             | often have you found dead fish anywhere?" and "How often do
             | you look?" and "What killed these fish specifically?" etc
             | 
             | I guess falling back to "show me your degree" might be an
             | easy way to answer all those questions at once.
        
             | steve76 wrote:
             | [dead]
        
             | op00to wrote:
             | How do we know they're dead from something specific? An
             | expert could tell us the evidence for that. Some dipshit
             | who posts a picture of some dead fish on TikTok can't.
        
             | meltyness wrote:
             | tears up your degree for your comments being against
             | "professional ethics"
        
           | scarecrowbob wrote:
           | What are your qualifications for making that statement?
        
           | dendrite9 wrote:
           | There are plenty of other people who you might expect to give
           | a reasonable update on how nature (in general) is dealing
           | with something like a chemical spill. Gardeners, birders,
           | fishers, even some walkers or runners are outside regularly
           | and tend to have a feel for what is going on in the
           | environment around them. There are people I trust when they
           | say the fish are hiding in the afternoon because the river is
           | too hot and they stop fishing to avoid causing too much
           | stress. If one of them told me they were seeing dead fish
           | more often after an event I would file that away as a mostly
           | trustworthy source of information.
        
             | XorNot wrote:
             | Tiktok is unverified with no reputation attached to it.
             | People can and _do_ fake things happening on Tiktok for
             | views _all the time_. The parent comment claims  "people
             | have been showing" without linking any of the video
             | evidence, which if it exists which makes this 3rd hand
             | rumor already.
        
         | smcl wrote:
         | Are you:
         | 
         | - weary of these getting downplayed (pron. _wee-ree_ = you are
         | tired of it)
         | 
         | - wary of these getting downplayed (pron. _way-ray_ = you are
         | suspicious of it)
        
           | stronglikedan wrote:
           | Both are valid phrases, and both can be true, even at the
           | same time.
        
             | smcl wrote:
             | They are! That's why I asked which it was.
        
           | OJFord wrote:
           | Those pronunciation guides confused me a lot before I scanned
           | back, and read the words themselves (trying to ignore the
           | pronunciations I'd already seen!) - so let me proffer:
           | 
           | - weary 'weir[in a river]-ee'
           | 
           | - wary 'wear[clothes]-ee'
           | 
           | Which just goes to demonstrate how weird and multi-sourced
           | English is, doesn't it. And also maybe we just pronounce
           | these very differently (I'm British) - 'way-ray' is _way_ off
           | to me.
        
           | BalinKing wrote:
           | Isn't "grow weary" a common phrase, though?
        
             | ska wrote:
             | so is "grow wary", which is the potential problem.
        
               | snozolli wrote:
               | "Grow wary" isn't a thing.
               | 
               | https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=grow+weary%
               | 2Cg...
        
               | danaris wrote:
               | Even if that's the case, it's very easy to hear "grow
               | weary" and _conflate_ it with the similar word  "wary",
               | coming up with "grow wary" as a malapropism.
        
               | mkr-hn wrote:
               | Always remember to mind the y-axis and scale when looking
               | at and thinking about graphs. They can be deceptive even
               | without meaning to.
               | 
               | https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=grow+wary&y
               | ear...
        
               | snozolli wrote:
               | I'm not sure what your point is, since you looked at the
               | vanishingly uncommon phrase alone, giving the false
               | impression of popularity.
        
               | mkr-hn wrote:
               | You said it's not a thing. It is, in fact, a thing. I've
               | heard it and said it often enough to be sure it's _not_
               | so uncommon that it 's reasonable to say it's not a
               | thing.
               | 
               | You also need to keep in mind what Google Ngram _is_.
               | 
               | https://books.google.com/ngrams/info
               | 
               | >> _" When you enter phrases into the Google Books Ngram
               | Viewer, it displays a graph showing how those phrases
               | have occurred in a corpus of books (e.g., "British
               | English", "English Fiction", "French") over the selected
               | years."_
               | 
               | It's a collection of books. Books remain relevant, but it
               | tells you nothing of usage outside that. You only have to
               | run a search on Google to see that it's used in a wide
               | range of unrelated contexts. It's not some obscure
               | anachronism or regionalism.
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | Much like how irregardless is now considered a thing. One
               | of these days "mute point" will be a thing too :). I
               | better not look that up, maybe it already is. I often
               | wonder what people _think_ they 're saying when they
               | misuse phrases like that.
        
               | mkr-hn wrote:
               | Grow weary (tired of) and grow wary (suspicious
               | of/concerned about) are different things though.
               | Irregardless is a modification of the already useful
               | regardless. I'm not sure how they're comparable.
        
               | snozolli wrote:
               | _It is, in fact, a thing_
               | 
               | It isn't. "Grow weary of" is a common phrase. "Grow wary
               | of" are words you can put together, but it's not a common
               | phrase.
               | 
               | I've already posted all the evidence needed, and I grow
               | weary of this misguided argument.
        
               | mkr-hn wrote:
               | Your lack of familiarity with the phrase and
               | misunderstanding your own source does not actually prove
               | anything.
               | 
               | Here, I'll give you a head start on doing what I
               | suggested.
               | 
               | https://www.google.com/search?q=%22grow+wary%22
               | 
               | That sure looks like a phrase used across a wide range of
               | contexts and unconnected fields, too wide to support any
               | notion that it's obscure. There's even a non-English news
               | outlet using it in its English coverage.
        
           | madaxe_again wrote:
           | Where do they pronounce wary way-ray? I've always said it
           | "where-y".
        
             | smcl wrote:
             | Scotland - and the emphasis is on the first syllable
             | ("wea-" is about 1.5-2x longer than "ry", with the "r"
             | short and rolled). But remember mapping pronunciation of
             | spoken-English to Latin characters is a little bit
             | ambiguous due to accents. For example you use the word
             | "where" to help describe how you pronounce "wary", but for
             | me that "wh" in "where" is slightly aspirated.
        
           | missedthecue wrote:
           | I think people combine leery and wary in their mind and end
           | up with weary, which they don't intend. I see it a lot.
           | 
           | In the case of the parent comment however, weary does work.
        
             | whamlastxmas wrote:
             | The rare occasion that it does work both ways
        
             | nerdponx wrote:
             | And/or they've seen the word "weary" and assume it's
             | pronounced like "wary", so they spell the word "wary" as
             | "weary".
        
               | smcl wrote:
               | This is it - if you _hear_ the word  "wary" and know the
               | verb "to wear" before encountering the written word
               | "weary" it's totally understandable to assume that is how
               | "wary" is written and to mix them up.
               | 
               | What I wanted to do with my comment is show this without
               | coming across as a mean or pedantic - especially since in
               | the context both work ok. I've no idea if I accomplished
               | that, I probably come across as a dick but I _hope_ I don
               | 't.
        
         | ly3xqhl8g9 wrote:
         | A tad of _Yes, Minister_ wisdom [1]:                 "The Four
         | Stage Strategy:       Stage 1. Nothing is going to happen.
         | Stage 2. Something may happen, but we should do nothing about
         | it.       Stage 3. Maybe we should do something about it, but
         | there's nothing we can do.       Stage 4. Maybe there was
         | something we could have done, but it's too late now."
         | 
         | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSXIetP5iak
        
           | nabla9 wrote:
           | 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.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | selimnairb wrote:
             | 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 wrote:
             | Fair point, but from what I've read the preliminary cause
             | identified pertains to an axle (not braking) issue?
        
               | TylerE wrote:
               | The idea is that you stop quicker, before the axle
               | actually fails.
        
               | gowings97 wrote:
               | 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.as...
               | 
               | ctrl+f for 'axle' or 'brake' from the NTSB statement -
               | zero results
        
               | TylerE wrote:
               | What do you think the bearing is containing?
        
             | stolenmerch wrote:
             | 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-
             | ad...
             | 
             | https://jacobin.com/2023/02/department-of-transportation-
             | tra...
        
             | e40 wrote:
             | 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.
        
               | kneebonian wrote:
               | 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 wrote:
               | 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.
        
               | peyton wrote:
               | Are you saying there was no possible way to get railroad
               | safety through?
        
               | e40 wrote:
               | 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 wrote:
               | 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.
        
               | knewter wrote:
               | But it was the Republicans' fault
        
               | katbyte wrote:
               | 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 wrote:
               | 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?
        
               | gowings97 wrote:
               | [flagged]
        
             | Nuzzerino wrote:
             | You posted two duplicate comments in this thread only to
             | claim that it was Trump's fault?
        
             | Maursault wrote:
             | 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 wrote:
               | 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?
        
             | onetimeusename wrote:
             | 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_cassel
             | ton_BM...
        
           | r00fus wrote:
           | Why does this sound really familiar? Because it's very close
           | to the Narcissist's Prayer [1]
           | 
           | That didn't happen.
           | 
           | And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
           | 
           | And if it was, that's not a big deal.
           | 
           | And if it is, that's not my fault.
           | 
           | And if it was, I didn't mean it.
           | 
           | And if I did, you deserved it.
           | 
           | https://www.thelifedoctor.org/the-narcissist-s-prayer
        
           | AutumnCurtain wrote:
           | Familiar arc vis a vis climate change discussions with
           | American conservatives
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | gnulinux wrote:
             | Anything involving government really. This is the decades
             | old "starve the beast" [1] mindset. Let's make sure
             | government is absolutely ineffective at every step of the
             | way, and then later point out how ineffective the
             | government is and propose an even more ineffective, under-
             | resourced government. It's a vicious cycle, and a self-
             | fulfilled prophecy.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | olivermarks wrote:
               | The argument against hyper capitalism causing more and
               | more derailments is credible if you look into 'precision
               | scheduled railroading' practices, aka shaving expense by
               | eliminating unnecessary costs and 'optimizing Assets'.
               | 
               | Sadly this has little to do with 'conservatives' or 'the
               | left' and a lot more to do with our apolitical global
               | oligarchy who own the politicians in power and many
               | lobbying groups including 'climate change' and
               | environmentalists who are strangely silent on this major
               | disaster as they were when the Nord Stream pipeline was
               | destroyed.
        
               | ly3xqhl8g9 wrote:
               | One thing on the ontology of capital: once enough capital
               | (billions, trillions) is gathered in one single control
               | point there is a phase transition: from a means towards
               | an end (build X, destroy Y) it becomes a manner of
               | escaping reality: with enough (crony or not) capital you
               | can keep afloat a business no matter how bad it is, how
               | badly run, how useless or how dangerous the products. Not
               | that 'there is no skin in the game', but there is no
               | skin, there is no game anymore.
        
               | eastbound wrote:
               | Whereas with government, you can keep afloat a government
               | no matter how bad it is, how badly run, how useless or
               | how dangerous it is. Except, as opposed to a company, it
               | can't crash like Enron or be threatened by competition.
               | It doesn't even need to fight to stay afloat.
        
               | ly3xqhl8g9 wrote:
               | By _control point_ you can understand a corporation or a
               | government, no need for false dichotomies: in the age of
               | capital there is no beyond.
               | 
               | Enron was a weak company, nowhere near the escape reality
               | velocity: at peak, in 2000, they had a market
               | capitalization of $60 billion, at the same time Microsoft
               | was at $600 billion [1].
               | 
               | Also, any company worth their capital knows very well
               | that "competition is for losers" [2] and dreams of the
               | ultimate consolidation [3].
               | 
               | [1] The Largest Public Companies by Market Cap
               | (2000-2022), https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/largest-
               | companies-from-2...
               | 
               | [2] Competition Is for Losers,
               | https://www.wsj.com/articles/peter-thiel-competition-is-
               | for-..., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fx5Q8xGU8k
               | 
               | [3] The Consolidation Curve, https://hbr.org/2002/12/the-
               | consolidation-curve
        
               | kelseyfrog wrote:
               | You can't. At some point disaster and dumb leadership
               | conspire to push the people and elite to revolution.
               | We're no where near that now, but don't be fooled that
               | governments are untoppable. They aren't. Every former
               | regime had its peak.
               | 
               | You can see how structural faults in US government could
               | produce the tinder. The threefold and interdependent
               | issue of the US Senate and subsequently Electoral College
               | resulting in Presidential and Legislative and ultimately
               | Judicial representation by a smaller and smaller group of
               | constituents. The reason we have legitimacy narratives
               | today stems from this very structural fault.
               | 
               | But tinder alone does not produce a fire. An unforeseen
               | event poised to exploit the flaws of the fault and
               | uniquely incompetent leadership conspire to make regime
               | ancien.
        
               | briantakita wrote:
               | Climate Change & the war on CO2 has sucked the oxygen out
               | of the room wrt pollution with dangerous chemicals. Many
               | in the environmental community are optimizing a single
               | metric, CO2 emissions, & not focusing on the myriad of
               | chemicals that cause widespread ecological damage. That
               | coupled with the ongoing doomsday hysteria over CO2, it
               | is easy to lose focus on pressing issues & the
               | complexities in dealing with these other environmental
               | issues. The core tension here is should we narrow focus
               | on a single metric or widen focus on the entire system?
               | Also, Que bono for the different approaches?
               | 
               | Instead of focusing so much on CO2, it would benefit
               | humanity to adopt a more well rounded approach that
               | addresses all pollutants, prioritizing the safe handling
               | of extremely toxic chemicals & reducing the amount of
               | toxic waste emitted by industry. Also, it would be
               | helpful to take the approach that novel substances should
               | be proven safe instead of assuming these substances are
               | safe until proven unsafe.
        
               | bakuninsbart wrote:
               | I'd be really interested in why climate change is a
               | hysteria and not well-founded fear. Well founded studies
               | say we are currently on track to reach 4degC higher
               | average temperature by 2100, and a plausible rise in sea
               | levels of that would be around 40 meters. Completely
               | ignoring _all_ other effects, this would be a catastrophe
               | on a level we can hardly achieve otherwise. And 2100 isn
               | 't an end date, it would be kind of nice if the planet
               | was usable a fair bit after that as well.
        
               | olivermarks wrote:
               | 'Climate change' is a hysteria because there is so much
               | money involved in green tech. anyone with an ounce of
               | common sense is an environmentalist, but there have been
               | so many predictions of impending doom (which is your
               | fault, repent and atone for your sins) that the genuinely
               | important issues tend to get buried in the tsunamai of
               | doomy junk science that is drip fed to Guardian readers
               | and anyone else who will listen.
               | 
               | There is a real danger of the $$ cult of climate change
               | $$ undermining important environmental issues.
        
               | MrMan wrote:
               | this is vile bullshit - we need to invest trillions to
               | possibly arrest climate change, so yes there will be a
               | lot of money in it for someone.
        
               | olivermarks wrote:
               | Apologies for offending your religious beliefs but there
               | are an awful lot of now very rich snake oil salesmen out
               | there who are doing a lot more for their cronies wallets
               | than for the planet.
               | 
               | Be more mindful of where trillions of tax payer money is
               | 'invested' would be my advice and try to see both sides
               | of the religious divide.
               | 
               | https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11653723/How-Al-
               | Gor...
        
               | danaris wrote:
               | You really don't see there being a very distinct
               | difference between the beliefs of the left and right
               | wings of American politics on this?
               | 
               | You think "global oligarchy" is "apolitical", at a time
               | when the right wing is pushing harder and harder for the
               | very wealthy to, essentially, be able to do anything they
               | want, while the left wing (such as it is in this country)
               | is pushing to restrict their power and tax their wealthy?
        
               | olivermarks wrote:
               | Two wings of the same party. At this point because the
               | DNC are currently so powerful they are parochially
               | dominant (and extremely corrupt), the pendulum will swing
               | soon and the power will shift to the RNC (who will no
               | doubt also be extremely corrupt).
               | 
               | The unelected bureaucrats actually run everything in the
               | US and at a state level. In California where I live we
               | currently have a supermajority Dem state government, but
               | regardless of this a handful of unelected bureaucrats
               | from the Gray Davis era run everything in Sacramento
               | behind the scenes.
               | 
               | The idea the DNC 'left wing' is pushing to restrict the
               | local elite's power and tax them is laughable. They just
               | have a few noisy straw men to placate voters and fill
               | their air waves. (I'm a registered Dem FWIW. I loathe the
               | party these days).
               | 
               | We need a big parochial political shake up!
        
               | danaris wrote:
               | > Two wings of the same party.
               | 
               | It is so hopelessly obvious that this is not the case at
               | this point that I think it is fair to treat it as
               | malicious.
               | 
               | One party is actively tolerating and promoting neo-Nazis.
               | It has made its _explicit_ goal the defeat of the other
               | party _at the expense of governing the country_. It
               | supported an _armed coup attempt_ in order to try to
               | overturn the legitimate election results.
               | 
               | The other is still often frustratingly bogged down in
               | process and captured, in some ways by industry, but is
               | clearly at least _trying_ to govern the country and make
               | things better for people.
        
               | olivermarks wrote:
               | [flagged]
        
               | rodgerd wrote:
               | While I agree that there are, in general, significant
               | differences in positions on these things, this seems like
               | a bad example to choose: after all, US rail workers went
               | on strike over the safety, long hours, and being expected
               | to work injured or sick, and President Biden signed off
               | on laws making their strikes illegal.
               | 
               | Unfortunately, at least in the English-speaking world,
               | many nominal workers' parties have largely bought into
               | worker-hostile policies under Blair, Starmer, Clinton,
               | Albanese, and so on.
        
               | olivermarks wrote:
               | Exactly.
        
               | danaris wrote:
               | Honestly, I agree with you on this; however, the
               | grandparent didn't say "Democratic or Republican
               | politicians," which is very much the source of the
               | problem you describe. Their wording was "conservatives or
               | the left", which I think it is fair to say includes the
               | _people_ who identify with those political orientations--
               | and I think you 'd have a hard time seriously arguing
               | that "the left" in America, to the extent that it even
               | _exists_ , is not strongly in favor of labour unions and
               | worker protections.
        
               | olivermarks wrote:
               | I think the grandparent was really referring to
               | extremities at the tips of the two wings - the cargo
               | culting 'democratic socialist' movement the DNC pays lip
               | service to, and the extremes of nationalist'USA first'
               | 'patriots' the RNC pays lip service to and the DNC's
               | coastal media corp friends love to endlessly frightened
               | their viewers about.
        
               | WalterBright wrote:
               | With an all-powerful government running things, you get
               | Chernobyl.
        
               | pmezard wrote:
               | With an all-powerful company running things, you get
               | Bhopal.
        
         | panick21_ wrote:
         | > It seems to constantly follow the pattern of people saying
         | "It's not that bad" and then only years later do we actually
         | see the horrific health and environmental effects
         | 
         | Yeah but most of the time the panic spread on social media
         | actually does get it wrong.
         | 
         | I am familiar with nuclear matter and the amount of insane
         | social media post about any little nuclear thing is pretty
         | crazy and have no scientific bases.
        
       | 0x008 wrote:
       | This is basically the plot of "white noise" with Adam driver (on
       | netflix).
        
         | newZWhoDis wrote:
         | Which oddly enough was filmed in the town this happened in...
         | the universe is weird.
        
           | 0x008 wrote:
           | Oh wow. Well that probably means it happened before?
        
             | yabones wrote:
             | Lots of people saw this coming. This isn't a surprise, but
             | it is horrifying. The safety concerns were a large part of
             | the railroad workers union's complaints a few months ago,
             | which was squashed by the US gov. All the corners have been
             | cut to extract more value for shareholders, and there's
             | nothing left to squeeze out.
        
               | gazpachotron wrote:
               | [dead]
        
               | penneyd wrote:
               | I take it that nobody is thinking sabotage?
        
               | saul_goodman wrote:
               | Yea, oddly this has not yet bubbled to the surface of
               | this story. Your government at work!
        
           | micromacrofoot wrote:
           | I thought that there were just some people from the town that
           | were extras and it was filmed elsewhere in Ohio?
        
         | time_to_smile wrote:
         | Which is based on the famous Don Delillo novel. This reads a
         | bit like describing LotR as "that movie with Viggo Mortensen".
        
           | 0x008 wrote:
           | Yes that is right. Forgive me, but don delillo is not so
           | famous outside of the English speaking world so I did not
           | think of mentioning it, although I have seen his name in the
           | end credits.
        
         | 1970-01-01 wrote:
         | White Noise had several plots over chapters. The plume scenes
         | were a fantastic balance of hilarious and scary:
         | Summary: Chapter 21          Jack finds Heinrich on the roof,
         | looking through a pair of binoculars at a distant black cloud
         | of smoke. Heinrich informs Jack that a train car has been
         | derailed. Later, they both return to watch the cloud. Heinrich
         | says that the burning chemical in the air is Nyodene
         | Derivative, or Nyodene D., a toxic substance that causes lumps
         | in rats. The radio has already listed nausea, skin irritation,
         | and sweaty palms as potential symptoms of exposure. Jack tries
         | to reassure Heinrich that the smoke won't come toward them and
         | continues to act comfortable and indifferent. He sits down to
         | pay the bills, even as rumors of increasing danger come in over
         | the radio and phone. Sirens begin to blare through the
         | neighborhood, but Jack declares that such things can't happen
         | in a town like theirs. New symptoms are reported on the radio,
         | and the cloud is given a new name: the airborne toxic event.
         | Heinrich tries to get his father to acknowledge the danger, but
         | Jack declares that he is a college professor, not to mention
         | the chair of a department, and can't imagine someone like him
         | fleeing something like an airborne toxic event. The family
         | anxiously gathers for dinner as the air raid warnings grow
         | closer.
         | 
         | https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/whitenoise/section7/
         | 
         | https://www.wlwt.com/article/ohio-train-derailment-white-noi...
         | 
         | https://twitter.com/Marfoogle/status/1625323668397256704
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | nabla9 wrote:
       | 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.
        
         | fragmede wrote:
         | > Electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brakes are a type
         | of modern railway braking system which offer improved
         | performance compared to traditional railway air brakes.
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronically_controlled_pneu...
        
         | Nuzzerino wrote:
         | You posted two duplicate comments in this thread only to claim
         | that it was Trump's fault? Anything else to contribute?
        
       | petesergeant wrote:
       | In case you're wondering why this story is getting pushed quite
       | hard:
       | 
       | > At the same time, [Chinese] state media has begun focusing on a
       | different narrative - a derailed train carrying hazardous
       | material in Ohio.
       | 
       | > Though the incident happened in early February, Chinese news
       | outlets are now devoting significant coverage on the topic,
       | citing US media reports. US officials have performed a controlled
       | release of toxic chemicals from the train to prevent
       | contamination.
       | 
       | > It has since become a significant talking point on social
       | media. On Weibo, China's equivalent to Twitter, the main Ohio
       | train hashtag has been viewed more than 690 million times since
       | the weekend, with more than 40 hashtags created on the topic.
       | 
       | > Many Chinese netizens have expressed worry that the incident
       | would turn into a global environmental crisis, and anger over the
       | relatively sparser coverage of the train incident in US media
       | compared to the balloons.
       | 
       | > "Turns out the Wandering Balloon was being used to take the
       | heat for Ohio," a post liked nearly 3,000 times reads.
       | 
       | https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-64633990
        
         | iscrewyou wrote:
         | Early February? We are barely halfway through February now.
         | Phrasing early February makes it seem like it wasn't in the
         | last two weeks!
        
         | realce wrote:
         | So you're saying that being concerned with the massive
         | corporate attack on the health of innocent people is actually
         | Chinese propaganda?
         | 
         | And one of your "sources" is a post liked 3k times in a nation
         | of over 1 billion people?
        
           | pessimizer wrote:
           | And the fact that it was "liked" by Chinese people silently
           | used to imply that it's obviously evil. It may be that
           | Chinese people are not stupid, and that the Chinese
           | government has no desire to censor the smart things that
           | Chinese people say that are also supportive of China.
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | Keeping in mind this story is almost 3 weeks old now and only
         | got traction starting on Friday when it mysteriously went viral
         | on TikTok.
        
         | ren_engineer wrote:
         | >Though the incident happened in early February
         | 
         | AKA last week? Bizarre way to try and make it seem like it
         | happened longer ago than it actually did
        
         | whamlastxmas wrote:
         | Are you also going to try to tell us the alleged Chinese
         | balloon caused the derailment?
         | 
         | There is so much "blame China" posting happening recently. It
         | makes me wonder if it's authentic posts or a coordinated
         | effort.
        
           | commandlinefan wrote:
           | I don't think that's what he's saying - but rather that
           | Chinese-controlled media is blowing this out of proportion to
           | distract you from the chinese spy balloon story (reserving
           | judgment whether this is actually the case - it's plausible,
           | but would still be surprising - I just think that's what OP
           | is trying to say, not that the balloon itself had anything to
           | do with the derailment).
        
             | whamlastxmas wrote:
             | I understand his intended message, I was just being snarky,
             | which I accept is crappy of me and against the guidelines.
             | Just tired of the mindless xenophobia and American
             | exceptionalism despite the US being objectively one of the
             | most, if the _the_ most, problematic countries on the
             | planet.
        
               | petesergeant wrote:
               | > Just tired of the mindless xenophobia and American
               | exceptionalism
               | 
               | The BBC is not American, though?
        
               | whamlastxmas wrote:
               | The UK and the BBC have a long history of being lackeys
               | for the American war machine [0], there's been ongoing
               | tension between the UK/BBC and China for years [1], and
               | American and UK intelligence agencies work very closely
               | together and have made joint anti-China remarks
               | increasingly often.[2]
               | 
               | Lastly, despite the exact link being BBC, it's also
               | pushed plenty by American media outlets.
               | 
               | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutton_Inquiry
               | 
               | [1] https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/14/media/bbc-china-
               | battle/index....
               | 
               | [2] https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/06/politics/fbi-mi5-wray-
               | china/i...
        
               | kvathupo wrote:
               | > which I accept is crappy of me and against the
               | guidelines
               | 
               | Just wanted to say I appreciate online commenters
               | admitting when they were wrong/off-color. A welcome sight
               | anywhere on the Internet!
        
             | mbauman wrote:
             | It's rather amusing that there are other comments here
             | talking about how the balloon coverage is American media
             | distracting you from the derailment.
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | The idea that China has the power to flip a "whataboutism"
         | switch that impacts Western media is actually pretty impactful,
         | if true.
        
         | aftbit wrote:
         | I've seen a ton of people acting like one of these events was
         | intended to cover up the other. Usually people saying that the
         | balloon shoot-downs were entirely manufactured and/or overblown
         | to distract from the train derailment. I don't think that's
         | likely... I think they're just both interesting stories
         | happening at the same time, but the media can only have one
         | "top story". The balloon stuff is fantastical and geopolitical,
         | the toxic release is fantastical and environmental.
        
         | shock-value wrote:
         | I don't know or care what Chinese internal media is reporting
         | -- this is a significant story in the U.S. that is getting less
         | play than it should. It's an ecological disaster with
         | potentially significant health concerns, and likely involves
         | corporate negligence as well as a failure of governance by both
         | political parties who recently forced rail workers back to work
         | despite complaints related to possible causes of this
         | derailment (and others).
         | 
         | The spy/balloon thing is way less significant and has been
         | ongoing by both sides for years or even decades if my
         | understanding is correct.
        
           | manmal wrote:
           | Another comment here brought up that this topic is big on
           | Tiktok, which is indeed affiliated with the Chinese
           | government.
        
             | shock-value wrote:
             | As far as I am concerned, if the Chinese state is pushing a
             | grassroots recognition of this event that could lead to
             | accountability and improved safety practices, then they are
             | doing us a public service.
        
           | legitster wrote:
           | > It's an ecological disaster with potentially significant
           | health concerns
           | 
           | Counterpoint, we deal with hazardous chemical spills all the
           | time, especially when you factor in all of the semi crashes
           | that don't make headlines. There is a very robust set of
           | clean up procedures set aside for these chemicals ahead of
           | time, and they are being followed. What we are watching now
           | are the automatic precautions of our system kicking in as
           | intended - like taking soil and water samples and testing air
           | quality.
           | 
           | The system is working as intended - we only think it's a
           | disaster because we are being told it is on social media. And
           | often the evidence of the system working is being used to
           | argue it's not.
           | 
           | Outsider efforts that seek to undermine these efforts or make
           | big deals of the mundane should be taken with a grain of salt
           | for the same reason ballot recounts shouldn't be proof that
           | our election process is broken.
        
             | notthemessiah wrote:
             | You must live on another planet if you think we have a good
             | record on cleaning up hazardous spills, in an era where oil
             | wells that can't be plugged continue to bleed into our
             | oceans. Most cleanup operations are matters of triage, we
             | almost never are able to undo the damage, in the best case
             | scenarios, ecosystems are able to recover over time, but in
             | many places, ecological damage might as well be permanent.
             | Entropy is not to be trifled with.
             | 
             | https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taylor-energy-oil-spill-gulf-
             | of...
        
               | legitster wrote:
               | I mean, I live near the Hanford nuclear site. Despite the
               | unseen horrors this patch of land has seen, people
               | continue to grow food in the area and live to ripe old
               | ages.
               | 
               | For sure, I don't really know how much continued damage
               | the gulf spill might have caused. But I have been
               | swimming in the Caribbean since the spill and didn't
               | particularly worry about it anymore at the time.
        
         | localplume wrote:
         | I mean thats being pushed onto the Chinese domestic population,
         | probably to drown out any coverage of the balloons for them.
         | Maybe its bleeding over to US media but I suspect its more
         | propaganda for them than a concerted propaganda effort for
         | foreign audiences.
        
           | xadhominemx wrote:
           | It went viral on TikTok
        
         | GAN_Game wrote:
         | [flagged]
        
       | sam0x17 wrote:
       | This is a really glaring example of mismanagement on the federal
       | government's part. Apparently the number of staff who maintain
       | the rails was cut some time before the incident, and this is the
       | main reason the rails were not properly maintained and this
       | accident was allowed to happen.
       | 
       | Meanwhile the transportation department is still celebrating
       | their accomplishments and acting like we don't have a huge
       | disaster on our hands https://www.newsweek.com/pete-buttigieg-
       | ignores-ohio-train-d...
        
         | ClumsyPilot wrote:
         | Why is Federal government at fault, and not, you know, the rail
         | company that owns the railroads and collects the revenues?
        
           | shawn-butler wrote:
           | In my mind because Biden/Buttigieg had Congress impose a
           | labor contract to prevent a strike a few months ago and rail
           | safety due to labor cuts by these same rail companies was one
           | of the issues workers were concerned about?
        
             | sam0x17 wrote:
             | Yeah anything short of meeting the strikers demands is
             | insane. I still can't believe that's not what went down.
             | These are possibly some of the most important workers in
             | the country, and they can't even get sick days.
        
               | LarryMullins wrote:
               | It sure does seem weird that something as fundamentally
               | efficient as trains are supposedly so hard to run
               | economically that _treating workers properly_ just isn 't
               | economically feasible.
               | 
               | Of course it is feasible, but the transit corps are only
               | interested in maximizing profit and the government backs
               | them up. They could run these trains with 10x the crew,
               | with full top-tier benefits, and still turn a sustainable
               | profit. But right now these companies are being run as
               | paperclip maximizers and _merely sustainable_ profit isn
               | 't good enough for them.
        
               | sam0x17 wrote:
               | Capital always behaves this way, it isn't really
               | surprising. What's embarrasing is the federal government
               | and the news coverage making it seem like the strike was
               | a huge risk and the only way to deal with it was to
               | forcibly silence them when the obvious solution is to
               | meet their demands. It's like such a thing never crossed
               | their minds, and it's nuts.
        
           | LarryMullins wrote:
           | Both are.
           | 
           | Are you really a pilot? You should know better than to treat
           | blame as finite and indivisible.
        
       | davesque wrote:
       | This might be an unpopular opinion, but the speed at which this
       | story has overtaken social media has made me skeptical. That
       | coupled with the fact that the story practically doesn't exist in
       | mainstream media. And in this case I just don't buy the whole
       | "lamestream" media narrative. The mainstream media was all over
       | the water crisis in Flint, Michigan. There's no reason they
       | wouldn't be interested in giving more coverage to this story if
       | it were worth covering.
       | 
       | Something about this story's rise to fame has seemed really
       | inorganic to me.
        
         | yunwal wrote:
         | Flint is a great example because it only gained attention
         | because residents started complaining on social media and in
         | public forums[0][1]. Despite widespread protest and refusal to
         | drink the water, and mass sickness, official sources maintained
         | that the water was safe to drink[2]. National news media picked
         | up the story almost 2 years after the switch in water treatment
         | systems[3]. Even _still_ EPA officials refused to acknowledge
         | issues with Flint water, with Obama drinking Flint water at a
         | press conference to convince people it was safe[4]. It wasn 't
         | until _2017_ , 2 and a half years after the switch, that media
         | and official consensus was that Flint constituted an emergency.
         | 
         | So yeah, keep your pitchforks out people!
         | 
         | [0] - https://midmichigannow.com/news/local/flint-residents-
         | avoidi...
         | 
         | [1] -
         | https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2015...
         | 
         | [2] -
         | https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/01/22/w...
         | 
         | [3] - https://www.nrdc.org/onearth/watered-down
         | 
         | [4] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2ZynkD3N_k
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | It's not a conspiracy. The amplified version of the story
         | originated from Chinese state media as a direct response to the
         | balloon story: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-
         | china-64633990
         | 
         | > At the same time, state media has begun focusing on a
         | different narrative - a derailed train carrying hazardous
         | material in Ohio.
         | 
         | > Though the incident happened in early February, Chinese news
         | outlets are now devoting significant coverage on the topic,
         | citing US media reports. US officials have performed a
         | controlled release of toxic chemicals from the train to prevent
         | contamination.
         | 
         | > It has since become a significant talking point on social
         | media. On Weibo, China's equivalent to Twitter, the main Ohio
         | train hashtag has been viewed more than 690 million times since
         | the weekend, with more than 40 hashtags created on the topic.
         | 
         | > Many Chinese netizens have expressed worry that the incident
         | would turn into a global environmental crisis, and anger over
         | the relatively sparser coverage of the train incident in US
         | media compared to the balloons.
         | 
         | > "Turns out the Wandering Balloon was being used to take the
         | heat for Ohio," a post liked nearly 3,000 times reads.
        
         | vuln wrote:
         | > The mainstream media was all over the water crisis in Flint,
         | Michigan.
         | 
         | Different victims and different
         | person/people/organizations/administrations to blame.
        
         | xadhominemx wrote:
         | It went viral on TikTok. Was that entirely organic? Or did the
         | Chinese government throw some tinder on the fire? It's pretty
         | bad that they have the capability.
        
           | davesque wrote:
           | Not sure if you misread it but I said it was _in_ organic.
        
             | xadhominemx wrote:
             | Yes I was agreeing with you. It's very possible it was
             | inorganic.
        
       | bingo00 wrote:
       | Maybe I missed it but does anyone know where these things were
       | going/delivered to? What's the use for chemicals like this? I
       | can't seem to find any info.
        
         | fragmede wrote:
         | Vinyl chloride (VC) is used to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC),
         | an inert plastic material used in all sorts of things, but is
         | well known as the PVC in PVC pipes which are used everywhere.
        
       | whyage wrote:
       | Health concerns also grow in East Palestine
        
       | ck2 wrote:
       | This happens every day around every fracking site on a smaller
       | scale but add them all up and it's even bigger than the train.
       | 
       | Oddly no-one seems to care about that.
       | 
       | If the train was carrying gasoline would people say "oh well what
       | can you do, we need gas"
        
       | mcguire wrote:
       | Also,
       | 
       | https://www.wkbn.com/news/local-news/east-palestine-train-de...
       | 
       | https://www.wkbn.com/news/local-news/east-palestine-train-de...
        
       | logn wrote:
       | I've had a hard time finding any information about the geography
       | of impacted areas (air and water) other than sporadic reports on
       | water testing.
        
       | Kyragem wrote:
       | Ohio voted for Trump yet Trump removed many of Obama's train
       | safety regulations including better braking systems.
        
         | TallGuyShort wrote:
         | I mean I'm no Trump fan, but Ohio is also notoriously a swing
         | state. Not sure it's remotely fair or relevant to talk about a
         | fluctuating margin of voters as characterizing a state.
        
           | cachecrab wrote:
           | Unfortunately it hasn't been much of a swing state since the
           | orange man came on the scene. Not to say that Ohio deserved
           | this though.
        
             | TallGuyShort wrote:
             | It would take a lot more calls to random.randint(0, 1) than
             | that for me to think something was wrong. Especially since
             | we're actually talking about values that rarely go outside
             | 0.4 and 0.6.
        
           | thekingshorses wrote:
           | Ohio is not a swing state.
           | 
           | Year 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
           | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
           | 
           | Governor R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R D D D D R R R R R R R
           | R R R R R R
           | 
           | Senate R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R
           | R R R R R
           | 
           | House D D D R R R R R R R R R R R R R R D D R R R R R R R R R
           | R R R R
           | 
           | https://ballotpedia.org/Party_control_of_Ohio_state_governme.
           | ..
        
         | passwordoops wrote:
         | So Biden, through the Department of Transport and Pete
         | Buttigieg couldn't put those regulations back in place? Or were
         | right in forcing striking rail workers back to work instead of,
         | oh I don't know, supported them on basic issues like safety?
         | 
         | Yes Republicans are bad. But so are Dems, and their voters
         | refusing to hold the party accountable for obvious failures.
         | It's why the country is going to shift. R's pass bad policy,
         | and D's cry about R's instead of governing
        
           | themitigating wrote:
           | How do you know the crash was the result of missing
           | regulations?
           | 
           | Republicans are against government regulations,you know "big
           | government" and all that, so why would they do a better job?
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | Democrats are against government regulation, they worship
             | B. Clinton and he deregulated everything.
             | 
             | Both US parties, as usual, support regulation that damages
             | the other party's prospects or damages the competitors of
             | their own donors.
        
               | themitigating wrote:
               | False equivalence
               | 
               | Clinton was president in the 90s, prove he removed more
               | regulations than Republicans, finally Republicans are the
               | only ones who compalin about regulations
        
             | slantedview wrote:
             | > How do you know the crash was the result of missing
             | regulations?
             | 
             | ""Would ECP brakes have reduced the severity of this
             | accident? Yes," Steven Ditmeyer, a former senior official
             | at the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), told The
             | Lever."
             | 
             | https://www.levernews.com/rail-companies-blocked-safety-
             | rule...
        
               | themitigating wrote:
               | This regulation was put into place during the Obama
               | administration ( I don't know if it was implemented) then
               | the Trump administration removed it.
        
             | MarkMarine wrote:
             | Unfortunately this issue has multiple factors that
             | contributed, and weakening the legislation and regulations
             | that were put in place to avoid issues like this by the
             | Obama administration:
             | 
             | "The sequence of events began a decade ago in the wake of a
             | major uptick in derailments of trains carrying crude oil
             | and hazardous chemicals, including a New Jersey train crash
             | that leaked the same toxic chemical as in Ohio.
             | 
             | In response, the Obama administration in 2014 proposed
             | improving safety regulations for trains carrying petroleum
             | and other hazardous materials. However, after industry
             | pressure, the final measure ended up narrowly focused on
             | the transport of crude oil and exempting trains carrying
             | many other combustible materials, including the chemical
             | involved in this weekend's disaster." [0]
             | 
             | Subsequently by the Trump Administration:
             | 
             | "The AAR lobbying group concurred that "the costs of the
             | ECP rule substantially outweigh its benefits," and claimed
             | the mandate would cost them about $3 billion -- or roughly
             | 2 weeks of their operating revenue in a typical year. The
             | FRA estimated the brake requirement would cost about half a
             | billion.
             | 
             | Trump's Transportation Department ultimately rescinded the
             | brake rule in late 2017." [0]
             | 
             | According to federal investigators, there was a mechanical
             | issue with a car's axle, which basically ends with a
             | derailment. The ECP brakes may have lessened hazard by
             | braking all the cars immediately, classifying the train as
             | HHFT may have meant the train would be going slower than it
             | was, I couldn't find any data about the speed the train was
             | moving at.
             | 
             | This seems to be an area of bipartisan consensus, putting
             | the interests of big business above those of the people.
             | 
             | [0] - https://www.levernews.com/rail-companies-blocked-
             | safety-rule...
        
         | Pegasus930 wrote:
         | [flagged]
        
           | Sakos wrote:
           | No.
           | 
           | The problem is how they treat the elections like a popularity
           | contest without regard to how it affects them or their
           | quality of life. It sucks how this will affect them. It
           | really does. However, these are the consequences for voting
           | in people who don't give a shit about you in the slightest.
        
             | Pegasus930 wrote:
             | [flagged]
        
             | whamlastxmas wrote:
             | It is beyond parody to try to blame Trump for this after
             | Biden's recent rail worker action and the fact that he
             | hasn't been president for two years now. Biden has had
             | plenty of time to correct any alleged awful thing Trump did
             | in regards to this industry.
        
         | unethical_ban wrote:
         | Even if there were a discussion to be had about how the elected
         | officials supported by Ohioans let them down, the phrasing here
         | doesn't inspire useful conversation.
        
         | spyda wrote:
         | How can you possibly blame the victims of this catastrophe?
         | These are real people who lost their town to criminal levels of
         | corporate negligence.
         | 
         | Your take is gutless.
        
         | yieldcrv wrote:
         | Aside from the irony, the democrat party will make _way more_
         | friends if they or their campaign strategy acknowledged that
         | people vote on _way more causes_ than whatever the party is
         | saying makes you a better person.
         | 
         | The senate is 50-50, there's never a wave. Time to try
         | something else.
        
           | thekingshorses wrote:
           | The senate is 50-50 because each state gets 2 seats. Votes
           | are not 50-50.
        
             | yieldcrv wrote:
             | not sure what you interpreted to write that, its a
             | reflection of the same reality either way
             | 
             | people in the areas where people would need to be swayed,
             | are not.
        
         | takoid wrote:
         | Here is the USDOT press release from 2017 on this:
         | https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/news/usdot-announces-intent-repeal...
         | 
         | Can anyone speak to whether these electronically controlled
         | pneumatic brakes would have prevented or lessened the severity
         | of this derailment in Ohio?
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | falcolas wrote:
           | The cause was an overheated wheel bearing melting and
           | dislodging the axle, causing a derailment.
           | 
           | The overheating was detected, and ignored. The quote is, as I
           | recall, "The next sensor will detect it if it's a problem."
           | 
           | Could the electric brakes have helped? Not sure in this
           | specific case. In other cases? Probably. Air brakes are
           | remarkably cool technology (how the valves work still boggles
           | me from time to time) but they are still, in the end, civil
           | war era technology that's probably due for an upgrade.
        
             | aednichols wrote:
             | I am amused by how much remixing of facts is happening. On
             | Reddit, I learned that the railroad was negligent for not
             | replacing the rails since the Civil War.
        
               | wil421 wrote:
               | That's because the Anti-American bots and click farms are
               | much more prevalent on Reddit. Not to mention I have a
               | feeling a huge amount of active users are teens and
               | repeat the same BS without checking.
        
             | slantedview wrote:
             | There were more factors to this derailment than the ones
             | you mention. In recent years train companies have forced
             | longer trains than ever to be driven by a single worker,
             | the sort of thing that would make it hard to notice a train
             | car is on fire. They've also forced train car inspections,
             | the sort of thing that might catch a faulty bearing, to be
             | done faster than ever, in the push for endlessly increasing
             | profits.
             | 
             | The workers were raising these and other complaints last
             | year, and our national leaders told them to take a hike,
             | preventing them from striking.
        
               | falcolas wrote:
               | Yes, these definitely helped contribute to the derailment
               | (and every derailment that occurs these days).
               | 
               | But, IMO, ignoring the hot-axle warning they _did_ get
               | was unconscionable (and as I understand it, it wasn 't
               | the engineers who ignored it, it was dispatch).
        
               | aednichols wrote:
               | Noticing defects while underway has been automated by
               | trackside detectors for decades, ever since the removal
               | of the caboose and associated crewman. In this case, we
               | know the detector went off as designed, and what happened
               | - or did not happen - next was the problem.
        
           | downvotetruth wrote:
           | The concerning concept is that dragging an axle is going to
           | cause a significant additional load on the engine given it
           | was not on a slope (no load shift) that should have made the
           | engineer to stop and ask what is being dragged regardless of
           | other technical aids rather than "let's try to drag it for a
           | few more miles and see if it gets knocked loose to make
           | rate".
        
             | lstodd wrote:
             | A single axle in a train of several hundred, over
             | continuously changing slope, rail and weather conditions?
             | It most certainly won't be detected until it derails.
        
           | aednichols wrote:
           | We do know that the crew was notified of the hot axle by an
           | automatic defect detector. I don't think we know yet what
           | their reaction was.
           | 
           | If they didn't brake... then the brake technology had no
           | effect. If they did brake, more sophisticated brake control
           | systems could definitely stop it faster, and would reduce
           | internal stresses that can could contribute to derailment.
           | 
           | My personal speculation is that the crew tried to gamble and
           | get the train to a more convenient stopping location, either
           | of their own volition or as directed by dispatch.
        
         | r85804306610 wrote:
         | <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_States_railroad_la..
         | .>
         | 
         | "The rise of precision scheduled railroading has resulted in
         | resource and staffing cuts; to compensate railroad companies
         | have enacted strict attendance policies for employees. These
         | policies eliminate any free time which workers have, requiring
         | them to be effectively on-call for weeks at a time. Workers
         | have complained of increased levels of stress and fatigue."
         | 
         | "Unions representing about 17,000 workers threatened to strike
         | over the points system, but BNSF Railway sued and won a
         | restraining order to prevent the unions from striking. The
         | Railway Labor Act grants Congress the authority to intervene in
         | any railway or airline strike. Under this authority, the
         | National Mediation Board has mediated negotiations between
         | multiple freight railroads and unions starting in June 2021."
         | 
         | "Early on September 15, Biden announced a deal had been reached
         | to prevent a strike, including an immediate 14% wage increase,
         | but only one day of paid leave per year rather than the 15 days
         | of paid sick leave unions wanted." "In late November, after
         | some unions had rejected the agreement, Biden asked Congress to
         | pass the agreement into law."
         | 
         | "Writing for Jacobin, Barry Eidlin, associate professor of
         | sociology at McGill University, said the message sent to the
         | rail workers by the president and Congress was "shut up and get
         | back to work." The Biden administration's intervention in the
         | dispute was condemned by over 500 labor historians in an open
         | letter to Joe Biden and Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh."
        
           | themitigating wrote:
           | How do you know Biden forcing them back to work has anything
           | to do with the crash?
        
             | r85804306610 wrote:
             | i'm responding to op's callous and partisan take.
             | 
             | also the comment originally read "What does it have to do
             | with the crash", which was immediately edited to "How do
             | you know Biden forcing them back to work has anything to do
             | with the crash?"
             | 
             | i will respond to the last one i saw: i don't. i'm pointing
             | out that the wikipedia article about the 2022 union strike
             | makes an argument that the strike was explicitly about
             | safety. here's a vice article that goes into awful and
             | terrifying details
             | <https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkp9m8/what-choice-do-i-
             | have...>. biden's forced solution did not address the
             | original safety concerns beyond "1 day of sick leave".
             | 
             | (edit: 2 minutes after posting this i got downvoted. the
             | level of political discourse...)
        
           | dls2016 wrote:
           | > "The rise of precision scheduled railroading has resulted
           | in resource and staffing cuts; to compensate railroad
           | companies have enacted strict attendance policies for
           | employees. These policies eliminate any free time which
           | workers have, requiring them to be effectively on-call for
           | weeks at a time. Workers have complained of increased levels
           | of stress and fatigue."
           | 
           | My brother went to a recruiting drive last year for railroad
           | engineer job openings (coincidentally along the Pittsburgh-
           | Harrisburg corridor). He said they started the meeting by
           | kicking out anyone who was even ten seconds late. The job
           | description only got worse from there. I could see how the
           | pay and benefits would be worth it for some small slice of
           | the population... but you have _zero_ outside life.
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | Working on the railroads is one of those professions in the
             | US traditionally done by slaves or near-slaves. Just like
             | agricultural work, food service, cleaning, and household
             | help.
        
       | olivermarks wrote:
       | Where are the environmentalists? This is a huge catastrophe that
       | will have long term repercussions across a wide area.
       | 
       | Are all the climate change organizations/lobbyists actually
       | corporate sponsored and don't want to rock the boat?
       | 
       | There is little information on why so many trains with hazardous
       | cargos are derailing in north America. This could be sabotage by
       | malevolent actors.
        
         | xadhominemx wrote:
         | > This is a huge catastrophe that will have long term
         | repercussions across a wide area.
         | 
         | No it's not, and no it won't.
        
           | manuelabeledo wrote:
           | Care to share why you think that way?
        
       | neogodless wrote:
       | Related:
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34783940
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34772687
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34759611
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34676114
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34762965
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34770772
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34783940
        
       | legohead wrote:
       | Saw an interesting video about Precision Scheduled Railroading[1]
       | saying it is related to this accident. Not sure how accurate it
       | is, but definitely worth checking out. I'd never heard of it.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2-fdkGsnf4
        
       | cs702 wrote:
       | More and more, this is starting to look like a major f#ck-up by
       | Norfolk Southern.
       | 
       | Given the geographical extent of the derailment's impact (well
       | over 100+ miles, encompassing Pittsburgh and surrounding areas),
       | it's not hard to imagine how it will lead to the kind of class-
       | action lawsuit that can hobble or even bankrupt the entire
       | company.
       | 
       | Ugly, ugly, ugly.
        
       | panick21_ wrote:
       | I'm not one that usually advocates for nationalization, but with
       | these rail companies, this should be done.
       | 
       | For multiple reason:
       | 
       | - These companies make absurdly huge profit that could be
       | reinvested into the network to improve the network for everybody
       | (electrification, passenger transport). And these are not some
       | complex tech companies that the government couldn't operate.
       | 
       | - These companies are blocking passenger travel and don't care
       | that they are doing it, all other approaches to prevent this have
       | failed. With the current structure there is no change for the US
       | ever to develop a serious passenger rail infrastructure, either
       | inter-city, regional or S-Bahn style. Many local government and
       | states might want to do more train stuff but currently don't feel
       | empowered to do so any trying is often not even worth it.
       | 
       | - They are removing anything not absurdly profitable, shifting
       | things from rail to trucks. And then trucks use government funded
       | road and highway infrastructure instead. Its just bad intensives.
       | 
       | - Current companies have a bad track record and there are way to
       | many derailments, and this is serious strategic concern for
       | logistics that the government should really take better care off.
       | 
       | Just for reference, with the current profit of these companies,
       | the US could easily executed a systematic program of
       | electrification, track and signaling upgrades. Vastly improving
       | both the amount of cargo that can be transported and the
       | passenger that can be transported, and doing so in a much more
       | substantial way.
       | 
       | While trains are energy efficient, and its better then trucks,
       | currently they use very dirty locos with no plan of changing it
       | (some mild greenwashing but nothing real). Some of these train
       | companies are literally some of the largest individual users of
       | fossil fuels (behind things like DoD) and no plan for change
       | anytime soon.
       | 
       | It would also make transporting cargo from city-to-city easier if
       | these cities are currently in the domain of one of the competitor
       | companies. This is a real problem for shipping.
       | 
       | If the US wants to seriously drive modal share of cargo and
       | passenger transport to green energy efficient trains, its the
       | only way I can see it gone work.
        
       | InCityDreams wrote:
       | Prediction: nobody gets any resolution except the lawyers.
        
         | mc32 wrote:
         | Vultures gotta vulture, be they lawyers or the politicians who
         | will swoop in to sympathize with the people once enough concern
         | is registered and magically becomes a touchstone issue.
        
       | vorpalhex wrote:
       | NBC suit and mask is starting to go from "crazy prepper
       | territory" to sane supply keeping.
        
         | colpabar wrote:
         | We live in a country where everything important is owned and
         | controlled by billionaires or hedge funds who also control the
         | government via bribery. Events like this make me think that
         | it's much, much crazier to trust the government to keep us
         | safe.
        
           | vorpalhex wrote:
           | That would be great if it were true, unfortunately railway
           | accidents are merely a reality of transporting dangerous
           | chemicals hundreds of times per day.
           | 
           | If we want to blame the railroad union not getting any time
           | off or sick leave, there are no secret cabals of the rich -
           | that is purely the white house.
        
             | colpabar wrote:
             | > If we want to blame the railroad union not getting any
             | time off or sick leave
             | 
             | A huge part of what they were striking over were safety
             | concerns. Maximum train lengths, minimum crew sizes (did
             | you know trains can be run by a single person and the
             | government has no issue with that?), and required
             | maintenance were all things the union was fighting for, and
             | were all totally ignored by good old union joe.
             | 
             | > there are no secret cabals of the rich
             | 
             | lol. lmao even.
        
               | jasonlotito wrote:
               | > did you know trains can be run by a single person and
               | the government has no issue with that?
               | 
               | So, let's add additional regulation and oversight. Let's
               | just make sure we vote in people who want to add
               | additional regulation and oversight. I'm sure American's
               | vote this way... next time.
        
               | colpabar wrote:
               | The "most union friendly president in history" just
               | signed a law making it illegal for the union workers to
               | strike, and forced them to accept the terms they had
               | already rejected. Who the fuck are we supposed to vote
               | for if this is what we get with the people who are
               | supposed to care about regulation?
        
             | mindslight wrote:
             | > _If we want to blame the railroad union not getting any
             | time off or sick leave, there are no secret cabals of the
             | rich - that is purely the white house._
             | 
             | The cognitive dissonance required to write these two bits
             | right next to one another... Some blame surely does land on
             | the White House for the union busting. But there would have
             | been no union busting without those cabals of the rich
             | turning the screws to begin with.
             | 
             | This divide and ignore half the problem is at the very root
             | of our political decay.
        
           | dfxm12 wrote:
           | The make up of the federal government changes greatly every
           | two years. Our states probably have a similar turnover. This
           | is why it's important to vote, not only in general elections,
           | but also primary elections. Seats shouldn't be safe for
           | incumbents who let this happen or anyone who takes huge
           | donations from the billionaires or hedge funds you're talking
           | about.
           | 
           | Edit: I mean: the makeup of our government _may_ change
           | greatly every two years - this is why it is important to
           | vote!
        
             | agency wrote:
             | If the makeup of the federal government changes every two
             | years, and yet nothing ever meaningfully changes, what does
             | that say about the importance of voting?
        
               | kortilla wrote:
               | It was legal to have a gay marriage 20 years ago. Is that
               | not a meaningful change?
        
               | kibwen wrote:
               | If oligarchs spend tens of billions of dollars buying
               | media companies in order to influence how people vote,
               | what does that say about the importance of voting?
        
               | mindslight wrote:
               | That the outcome of the voting is very important to those
               | oligarchs.
               | 
               | If football teams spend hundreds of millions of dollars
               | on their players, what does that say about the importance
               | of football?
        
               | pessimizer wrote:
               | That applying your program after it has been voted
               | against is a lot more expensive than applying your
               | program after it has been voted for?
        
               | kevviiinn wrote:
               | These are both the same statement, and I agree
               | 
               | Also note the influence of oligarchs on the politicians
               | themselves
        
             | cmmeur01 wrote:
             | The class of people in the government doesn't change.
        
               | dfxm12 wrote:
               | Maybe in your district this is true (and some districts
               | are more homogenous than others, for sure), but I'll
               | challenge you to really take a look at the candidates of
               | your next primary election. You'll probably find find
               | meaningful differences between their political
               | philosophies, even if class isn't among them. As an
               | example, though, AOC and Joe Crowley are different in
               | many meaningful ways. As are Connor Lamb and John
               | Fetterman. These are cases where I think people of the
               | political insider class were defeated by challengers that
               | people didn't think fit the proper mold.
        
             | usefulcat wrote:
             | Also: if you live in a non-swing state, consider voting in
             | the primary of whichever party is most likely to win the
             | election, even if that isn't the party you'll likely vote
             | for. AIUI although you can't vote in more than primary you
             | can still vote for whomever you want in the regular
             | election regardless of which primary you voted in.
             | 
             | The idea being that in such states (mostly red or mostly
             | blue), the primary effectively _is_ the election, since the
             | minority party has such little chance of winning the final
             | election.
        
               | colpabar wrote:
               | I agree. I don't know if this is true in every state, but
               | in some this requires you to update your voter
               | registration.
        
               | dfxm12 wrote:
               | Some states have open primaries.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_primaries_in_the_Unite
               | d_S...
        
           | TechBro8615 wrote:
           | A lot of people living in a small town in Ohio felt the same.
           | Just stay away from the urbanization and cities and the
           | government won't bother you... until a quasi-national freight
           | train comes rolling through your town with a literal chemical
           | dumpster fire in tow.
        
         | passwordoops wrote:
         | That a "Doomsday Preppers: Where are they now?" follow-up
         | sequel has not yet been produced is highly disappointing
        
           | aftbit wrote:
           | I thought about the one who was worried about a flu pandemic
           | all through 2020. I wonder if she stayed as paranoid, and how
           | long she managed to avoid getting COVID.
        
       | TurkishPoptart wrote:
       | They call it a derailment, but isn't "explosion" a better word
       | choice? Seems like downplaying.
        
         | legitster wrote:
         | The "explosion" was part of an intentional burn as part of the
         | prescribed cleanup plan:
         | https://www.npr.org/2023/02/06/1154760911/ohio-train-derailm...
        
       | Workaccount2 wrote:
       | Before everyone loses there mind, because this story has oddly
       | been on blast 2 weeks after the incident:
       | 
       | VC is a gas a room temperature. None of the VC cars were ruptured
       | in the crash. They were vented and ignited by workers to avoid
       | explosion. Burning VC produces carbon oxides, HCl, phosgene, and
       | formaldehyde. HCl, Phosgene become hydrochloric acid in the
       | atmosphere. The total amount of hydrochloric acid this could
       | possibly produce would hardly register in the water table.
       | Formaldehyde would be trace too, similar to fruits and
       | vegetables.
       | 
       | EPA site details without the hysteria:
       | 
       | https://response.epa.gov/site/site_profile.aspx?site_id=1593...
       | 
       | List of cars in the accident:
       | 
       | https://response.epa.gov/sites/15933/files/TRAIN%2032N%20-%2...
        
         | akira2501 wrote:
         | Is there any reason to assume the burn, under these conditions,
         | would be complete enough to fully consume the product such that
         | there would be zero danger to the environment?
         | 
         | These are guys on a side of a track ostensibly just winging it.
         | I think it's reasonable to assume the "under laboratory
         | conditions" assessment might not completely apply to this
         | scenario.
        
         | perihelions wrote:
         | You didn't read the article, in the particular the new list of
         | chemicals they released that were previously undisclosed. (It's
         | not just the same story on repeat). I don't think organic
         | acrylates conveniently break down in water; I suspect they'd be
         | persistent environmental pollutants, in addition to being
         | carcinogens.
        
           | Workaccount2 wrote:
           | The list in the article is the same one I linked to.
        
             | perihelions wrote:
             | I'm responding to the substance of your comment: _" The
             | total amount of hydrochloric acid this could possibly
             | produce would hardly register in the water table."_ The
             | other stuff will certainly register, and if you didn't
             | mention it, then it can read to imply a negative.
        
         | ajross wrote:
         | This take needs more coverage. In fact the current freakout is
         | almost entirely due to the deliberate burn and the big plume it
         | caused, with almost no one taking the time to explain that the
         | combustion products are simply much safer than the products
         | that were leaking.
         | 
         | But everyone wants to cover how it smells in East Palestine and
         | not what the options were.
         | 
         | (And to everyone replying with "But it's ACTUALLY about the
         | train safety issue": no it isn't. This train was sitting in a
         | pile for more than a week and no one cared. People only cared
         | once they could see the plume.)
        
           | lm28469 wrote:
           | > This train was sitting in a pile for more than a week and
           | no one cared.
           | 
           | No one cared because it wasn't reported in the media, even
           | today it barely is. I've seen locals talk about it since day
           | 1 on reddit and twitter. The fact that it didn't make much
           | noise in the media until now is a good indicator of
           | authorities trying to minimise the issue.
        
           | mindslight wrote:
           | The ultimate problem is the breakdown in trust of our
           | institutions to get this right - the overriding incentives
           | are wrong at every level. Burning a product because it would
           | have otherwise needed to be recovered and transported under
           | pressure seems like exactly the kind of amoral tradeoff a
           | company would take, not particularly caring about the
           | combustion products apart from what they can legally get away
           | with.
           | 
           | As far as the actual technicals, your assertion that " _the
           | combustion products are simply much safer than the products
           | that were leaking_ " would seem to just be the opposing take
           | in a fact-free debate. First, combustion products have been
           | dispersed in the air. And second, with large quantities of
           | anything, trace amounts of impurities or other combustion
           | products become significant.
        
             | ajross wrote:
             | > Burning a product because it would have otherwise needed
             | to be recovered and transported under pressure
             | 
             | I don't think that's correct. It was leaking. No recovery
             | was feasible. The options at hand were "let it leak" or
             | "burn it", and burning it was the right choice.
             | 
             | Now, maybe you don't believe that. And of course I believe
             | it on faith. But real chemical engineers are making these
             | decisions, not yahoos on HN. And the fact that you perceive
             | a "breakdown in trust" of those engineers doesn't make them
             | wrong. If you want them to be wrong you need to provide
             | evidence yourself.
        
               | mindslight wrote:
               | > _It was leaking. No recovery was feasible_
               | 
               | I do not see how leaking would preclude recovery. It's
               | likely "feasible" is shorthand for _economically_
               | feasible. And from the manifest linked elsewhere in the
               | thread, all but one vinyl chloride cars are listed as
               | "car did not leak".
               | 
               | > _the fact that you perceive a "breakdown in trust" of
               | those engineers doesn't make them wrong_
               | 
               | No, what would make them wrong (as in, not doing
               | everything they can to minimize harm) is the
               | orders/incentives coming down from management. Boss says
               | to do the cheapest option possible, they look at the top-
               | line combustion products and regulations regarding
               | releasing them, and sign off on the cheaper burn plan. We
               | get the same thing in software with the zeitgeist of user
               | surveillance. It's an overwhelming ethical violation, but
               | everyone's gotta eat and if you rock the boat it costs
               | you personally.
               | 
               | > _If you want them to be wrong you need to provide
               | evidence yourself_
               | 
               | I'm not responsible for releasing chemicals into
               | residential areas, nor for lighting them on fire. It's
               | incumbent upon the railway and responders to prove that
               | their actions were justified and correct in minimizing
               | the damage to bystanders.
        
               | snozolli wrote:
               | _But real chemical engineers are making these decisions_
               | 
               | Are they? What proof do you have?
               | 
               | Personally, I've seen management and bean counters
               | override engineers constantly, so I tend to assume that's
               | standard.
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | The cars weren't leaking, they were vented and ignited
               | because they had the potential to explode otherwise. The
               | other cars were burning from the crash, and an explosion
               | would make the situation exponentially worse.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | fabian2k wrote:
         | You're assuming that the vinyl chloride burns perfectly and all
         | of it will be converted without residue, which I don't think is
         | a safe assumption. The products of burning it are less
         | problematic than the original, but setting it on fire doesn't
         | simply solve all problems here.
        
         | unethical_ban wrote:
         | It should not be seen as business as usual when these kinds of
         | things happen. It was at least tolerable due to my ignorance
         | when you talked about these chemicals boiling off, but then to
         | say "no biggie that petroleum spilled everywhere, I'm sure it
         | burned off too."
         | 
         | The whistle has been blown on the rails and the rail companies
         | for some time, and now a catastrophe has occurred.
         | 
         | We should be severely punishing the rail companies if not
         | nationalizing them. We should make sure every citizen is taken
         | care of and their homes are safe to live in.
         | 
         | I don't have to believe in a conspiracy theory to be angry at
         | negligence causing an environmental disaster in a city.
        
           | xwdv wrote:
           | Nationalizing is an overreach. This is why events like this
           | have to be downplayed because if you don't the vultures will
           | swoop in with their own agendas and try to stir up emotions
           | to garner support for unpopular causes.
        
             | unethical_ban wrote:
             | I don't see why nationalizing critical infrastructure is
             | off the table. I know it's unrealistic because our federal
             | government is so feckless they can't even apply safety
             | regulations or stand up for workers.
             | 
             | I'll let the citizens of East Palestine know they need to
             | stay calm lest someone propose a policy solution you don't
             | like.
        
               | TechBro8615 wrote:
               | It's confusing to me why you think nationalizing the rail
               | company would solve any problem. The government can't
               | even keep us safe when it's telling the rail company what
               | to do. In fact, the issue here doesn't seem to be "rail
               | company not listening to government" so much as
               | "government not listening to rail workers." So you think
               | that same government - which just legislatively forced
               | those workers back to work - can _run_ the rail company,
               | while complying with all the same (and new) regulations,
               | and also not turning it into a loss-making operation
               | funded by taxpayers in perpetuity (or at least as long as
               | the country /economy still exists)?
        
               | kneebonian wrote:
               | Well given the way they've been running Amtrack I don't
               | trust their ability to run shipping.
        
             | Sakos wrote:
             | Unpopular causes like regulating train safety and disaster
             | handling/cleaning?
        
               | MrOwnPut wrote:
               | Airlines are regulated heavily and safe without
               | nationalizing / seizing ownership.
        
               | LarryMullins wrote:
               | Airline accidents kill hundreds of people outright. The
               | media gives those stories tons of attention ( _If it
               | bleeds, it leads_ ) and accordingly the airline industry
               | knows it must take safety seriously to protect their
               | profits.
               | 
               | Meanwhile the chemical industry kill the gods only know
               | how many thousands of people over the course of decades
               | with a steady trickle of statistically correlated
               | illnesses, but the media doesn't cover it and the
               | consumers of chemical goods feel insulated from harm
               | which seems very abstract and indirect to them. A
               | consumer buying a chemical good is not _directly_
               | imperiled by the chemical industry in the same way as an
               | airline flier is threatened by airline crashes.
               | 
               | It doesn't take a genius to figure out why the airline
               | industry is better at safety than the chemical industry.
        
               | MrOwnPut wrote:
               | Yes I agree, that was my point. Though I was comparing
               | train derailments overall, not chemical spills. Chemicals
               | are needed for society.
               | 
               | Nationalizing trains will not help. Nationalizing
               | chemical transfers won't help either if it's the same EPA
               | in charge that said 9/11 debris was safe or this spill
               | was okay.
               | 
               | Heavier regulations on trains may be needed, especially
               | when transferring hazardous loads, but nationalization
               | would be horrendous.
               | 
               | All that be said, investing in pipelines is a much safer
               | form of transfer for these chemicals. Trains are too
               | risky.
        
           | thepasswordis wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
             | unethical_ban wrote:
             | In theory, I don't see government ownership of society-
             | critical industries with no opportunity for competition to
             | be crazy. Tell me how you'd spin up a competing national
             | rail line network.
        
               | jasonlotito wrote:
               | It's not worth replying. "Is this a joke?" is not asking
               | if it's a joke. It's an worthless insult. Nothing more.
        
               | unethical_ban wrote:
               | Agreed they were low effort, so I put in little as well.
        
               | claytongulick wrote:
               | Ayn Rand wrote a sci-fi/political philosophy book about
               | this exact subject, named Atlas Shrugged.
               | 
               | The main character in the book is a railroad executive
               | struggling to keep her company afloat in the face of
               | ruinous regulations that were designed to drive the rail
               | systems towards nationalization.
               | 
               | The flip side of course, that she fails to address
               | completely in that book, is unethical behavior by private
               | industry, such as super trains with one engineer, unsafe
               | working conditions, etc...
        
               | yamtaddle wrote:
               | > political philosophy
               | 
               | Mmph.
               | 
               | Hm.
               | 
               | I guess if _Dianetics_ is a work on metaphysics, sure.
        
               | claytongulick wrote:
               | You may not agree with Ayn Rand, and in many cases I
               | certainly don't, however she was a well known philosopher
               | responsible for Objectivism and heavily influenced the
               | formation of the Libertarian party.
               | 
               | There are many philosophers that I disagree with, but I
               | wouldn't challenge whether they or their works are
               | philosophical in nature.
               | 
               | Atlas Shrugged used trains and science fiction as a
               | literary device to illustrate her philosophy.
               | 
               | I found it to be more engaging than her non-fiction
               | works, which was the point, I suppose.
        
               | mrguyorama wrote:
               | Also, you know, it's fucking fiction from an asshole who
               | knew nothing about the world?
        
               | claytongulick wrote:
               | Do you believe that this comment adds to the
               | conversation?
        
               | thepasswordis wrote:
               | Looking around and it looks a little bit like she knew a
               | fair bit about the world.
        
               | thepasswordis wrote:
               | The market tried to solve this problem with workers going
               | on strike a few months ago. Government regulations are
               | what stopped it.
        
               | yamtaddle wrote:
               | The market doesn't meaningfully have organized labor in
               | the first place without government intervention.
               | 
               | It also doesn't have corporations.
               | 
               | (though I agree that smacking down these workers was some
               | real bullshit)
        
               | MockObject wrote:
               | The craziness appears when you realize that US
               | governments are no more accountable than US corporations.
               | Nobody lost their job over 9/11, or the Afghanistan
               | pullout, or any other debacle you can name from the past
               | few decades. Charges were dropped against the low level
               | jail guards who allowed Jeff Epstein to die; Acosta
               | resigned as Labor Secretary only due to public outcry and
               | 12 years later.
               | 
               | Responsibility is a quaint tradition of a lost America.
        
         | colpabar wrote:
         | The reason people are so upset isn't necessarily because of the
         | environmental impact, it's because the people who work on these
         | trains have been warning things like this could happen for
         | years, and when they tried to strike over it, the federal
         | government stepped in and crushed them into submission. There
         | was a car on that train that was on fire for at least 20 miles
         | before the derailment. If I can get pulled over for having a
         | busted tail light, a train full of toxic chemicals should get
         | stopped for being on fire.
         | 
         | You've been frantically telling everyone to calm down in every
         | thread about this story for some reason. People are upset
         | because it's another case of the government completely failing
         | to do their jobs of keeping regular people safe, and before you
         | claim that people on reddit are saying crazy things again,
         | _this isn 't reddit and no one is saying those things here_.
        
           | xhrpost wrote:
           | > There was a car on that train that was on fire for at least
           | 20 miles before the derailment
           | 
           | Do you have a link talking about this? Any timeline I read
           | online just mentions the derailment around 9p, nothing about
           | a car fire prior to derailment. Thanks.
        
             | robotbikes wrote:
             | This article has information and various photos from
             | security cameras showing the sparks coming off of the car
             | prior to the derailment -
             | https://unicornriot.ninja/2023/like-the-doors-of-hell-
             | were-o...
             | 
             | Also DemocracyNow! has been covering the disaster the last
             | two days featuring interviews with both local residents and
             | railway workers.
        
           | sithadmin wrote:
           | >There was a car on that train that was on fire for at least
           | 20 miles before the derailment. If I can get pulled over for
           | having a busted tail light, a train full of toxic chemicals
           | should get stopped for being on fire.
           | 
           | Unfortunately, a wheel/bearing running hot for ~20 miles
           | could be well inside the usual spacing for defect detector
           | stations[1] in the US. Can't speak for this specific rail
           | line but they're often as far as 30 miles apart, and not
           | every detector will have the sensor package to identify
           | wheel/bearing issues (though most will).
           | 
           | If you ever ride Amtrak, you'll occasionally hear trackside
           | detector units radio in a diagnostic report over the
           | conductors' radios. They have automated voice systems that
           | announce their position, sensor reading states, etc.
           | 
           | [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defect_detector
        
           | Workaccount2 wrote:
           | I'm not denying the accident was bad, I'm tempering an
           | unwarranted level of hysteria for what is another small scale
           | industrial accident.
           | 
           | People are drumming up hysteria for political capital, but
           | its not fair to people who live in Ohio or Pennsylvania and
           | now think they can't use their water, they're doomed to
           | cancer at 45, and their kids will be mutants.
           | 
           | It's being blown _way_ of of proportion to the reality of it.
           | It also why expert testimony is so thin. You 'd think by now
           | all the experts would be pouring out to condemn the
           | government. Meanwhile the best NPR could get was one sentence
           | about potential indoor air quality issues going forward
           | (which the EPA report addresses with "no concerning levels
           | detected".
        
             | colpabar wrote:
             | > People are drumming up hysteria for political capital,
             | but its not fair to people who live in Ohio or Pennsylvania
             | and now think they can't use their water, they're doomed to
             | cancer at 45, and their kids will be mutants.
             | 
             | Can you show me a single comment on _this website and not
             | on reddit_ that is saying those things? Also, did you know
             | that the EPA also said that all the dust in the air on 9
             | /11 was perfectly safe? I am not implying malice here, but
             | sometimes the authorities are just wrong, so it seems naive
             | to just believe them.
             | 
             | https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/10/epa-head-
             | wro...
        
               | dsfyu404ed wrote:
               | >Can you show me a single comment on this website
               | 
               | Ask and ye shall receive, from this very thread:
               | 
               | > This is a total disaster that will impact the health of
               | people in the area for generations.[1]
               | 
               | [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34791609
        
               | voxl wrote:
               | This website is not the only place discussing this
               | matter, and it is a strawman to continue requiring any
               | evidence of public outcry be limited to specifically this
               | website. Moreover, reddit is not the only _other_ place
               | discussing this. There are hundreds of videos on TikTok
               | from people in Ohio that are saying this is a horrible
               | disaster on par with Chernobyl.
        
               | xadhominemx wrote:
               | How about this?
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34773513#34774984
        
             | chaps wrote:
             | I'm not sure why you think this is blown out of proportion.
             | The fact that they had fear of the train car explode and
             | cause a much worse disaster (ie, not small scale) cannot
             | and should not be written off.
        
               | mrguyorama wrote:
               | People all over social media are calling this
               | "Chernobyl", which is absurd.
        
               | Apocryphon wrote:
               | A lot are also calling this "Bhopal"
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | Because people don't trust the government and the companies
             | on stuff like this. "BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!", isn't
             | exactly what people want to hear years after many of these
             | sorts of accidents. Which has happened in the past. I mean,
             | it took 2 weeks just to disclose additional chemicals in
             | this incident.
        
           | kortilla wrote:
           | >If I can get pulled over for having a busted tail light, a
           | train full of toxic chemicals should get stopped for being on
           | fire.
           | 
           | What makes you think this isn't what normally happens? Trains
           | aren't just cruising around constantly on fire.
        
             | chaps wrote:
             | I think you deeply underestimate how many derailments
             | happen each year in the US
             | 
             | https://www.wric.com/news/u-s-world/how-often-do-trains-
             | dera...
        
             | causi wrote:
             | _Trains aren't just cruising around constantly on fire._
             | 
             | If they were, would you know? I wouldn't.
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34784255
        
           | ClumsyPilot wrote:
           | > There was a car on that train that was on fire for at least
           | 20 miles before the derailment. If I can get pulled over for
           | having a busted tail light, a train full of toxic chemicals
           | should get stopped for being on fire
           | 
           | Ifwe did the same shit they get away with, we'd be in jail
           | real fast
        
           | pdabbadabba wrote:
           | > The reason people are so upset isn't necessarily because of
           | the environmental impact, it's because the people who work on
           | these trains have been warning things like this could happen
           | for years, and when they tried to strike over it, the federal
           | government stepped in and crushed them into submission.
           | 
           | I've seen a few people say this. I'm sympathetic to the rail
           | workers but, what's the evidence that this derailment had
           | anything to do with the attempted rail workers strike? AFAIK,
           | the primary issue there was sick leave--and, generally, a
           | more humane work schedule. While I'm very much in favor of
           | these things, I don't see what it has to do with this
           | accident, other than that it presents a superficial
           | opportunity to score some points.
           | 
           | Perhaps some mistake was made that would have been more
           | likely if the workers were better rested? But if that's the
           | extent of the connection, without any evidence of a real
           | causal relationship, the argument seems irresponsibly
           | speculative.
        
             | dendrite9 wrote:
             | As I understand one of the things the rail companies want
             | to do is have just one person running a train instead of
             | the current two. In this case the single engineer likely
             | would not have been able to decouple the other 10 hazardous
             | containers and pull away. Also that this failure happened
             | due to a seized axle or bearing is indicative of the
             | refusal to invest in the rail equipment and safety systems.
             | There are a number of different ways to detects failing
             | bearings that have been at least deployed for decades. I
             | thought I heard this might have been a broken rail but that
             | seems to have just been a guess on the day of the accident.
             | 
             | "The crew was able to uncouple the locomotives and move
             | them to safety, preventing an even bigger tragedy. This
             | would not have been possible under the various management
             | schemes now being proposed to operate such trains with
             | single person crews. Further, because Train 32N carried the
             | standard crew of two or more workers, they were able to
             | immediately take the necessary emergency measures to ensure
             | a safe and effective response."
             | 
             | From a RWU email:
             | https://myemail.constantcontact.com/Press-Release--Fiery-
             | Ohi...
        
             | Bonooru wrote:
             | If there is any chance that human error contributed to this
             | disaster (either via the people there or maintenance
             | deferred or done less than perfectly), then "a more humane
             | work schedule" would have made that less likely due to
             | everyone involved being well rested.
        
               | colpabar wrote:
               | It's funny yet sad at how differently HN reacts to a
               | company making its employees go into the office than
               | this. Maybe that's how we should frame it - "railroads
               | force employees back into office, even when sick" might
               | garner some more sympathy.
        
             | slantedview wrote:
             | > what's the evidence that this derailment had anything to
             | do with the attempted rail workers strike? AFAIK, the
             | primary issue there was sick leave--and, generally, a more
             | humane work schedule.
             | 
             | The workers had many other complaints, including companies
             | forcing workers to drive dangerously long trains with a
             | single person staffing it. That seems absolutely relevant
             | when you have a train car burning and nobody notices.
        
               | notch898a wrote:
               | If you drive a vehicle knowing it is unsafe shouldn't you
               | refuse? Any other vehicle and we would hold the worker
               | accountable for not refusing such a negligent order.
               | 
               | The news articles about the rail workers complaining it
               | was unsafe seems to show they are complicit as they
               | continued operating in unsafe conditions anyway.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | c1ccccc1 wrote:
               | > Any other vehicle and we would hold the worker
               | accountable for not refusing such a negligent order.
               | 
               | Say the worker refuses that order and their boss says
               | "okay, you're fired". Would we also give that worker
               | legal protection? Would we also hold accountable the
               | higher ups who gave that order and set the policies for
               | how trains are to be run? If not, then you now understand
               | why the accident happened.
        
               | notch898a wrote:
               | >Would we also give that worker legal protection?
               | 
               | Yes I believe that's exactly what is to happen. See this
               | explicitly spelled out https://www.osha.gov/laws-
               | regs/mou/2012-07-16 .
               | 
               | I've worked in goods transport in interstate navigable
               | waterways and we had the same thing, literally anyone can
               | "stop work" for unaddressed imminent dangerous conditions
               | and are protected against retaliation. Even if the
               | protection fails it is better my own family starve to
               | death than to poison an entire city; just following
               | orders isn't an excuse (and in any case, such a company
               | of such character company would fire you after the
               | wreck).
               | 
               | note: not legal advice
        
               | Apocryphon wrote:
               | I wonder if anything disempowering happened in that
               | industry recently that might have discouraged rail
               | workers from speaking out
        
               | pixl97 wrote:
               | This is exactly what is happening. Any worker that
               | continually bring up problems is removed one way or
               | another and you effectively get the normalization of
               | deviance via the dead sea effect. Things that should be
               | called out are suddenly "That's what we always have to do
               | because we don't have enough time", and 99.999% of the
               | time it works out fine. Then the ten thousandth time you
               | explode a gaping hole of poison in the earth.
        
               | ruined wrote:
               | the legislation last year forcing an end to the labor
               | dispute meant that rail workers stopping work had no
               | legal protection. the railway labor act makes it illegal
               | to stop work before exhausting a lengthy dispute process
        
               | aqme28 wrote:
               | > If you drive a vehicle knowing it is unsafe shouldn't
               | you refuse?
               | 
               | So a strike then? You're literally describing what they
               | tried to do.
        
               | notch898a wrote:
               | In a way but legally they aren't identical. Conditions:
               | 
               | - Where possible, you have asked the employer to
               | eliminate the danger, and the employer failed to do so;
               | and
               | 
               | - You refused to work in "good faith." This means that
               | you must genuinely believe that an imminent danger
               | exists; and
               | 
               | - A reasonable person would agree that there is a real
               | danger of death or serious injury; and
               | 
               | - There isn't enough time, due to the urgency of the
               | hazard, to get it corrected through regular enforcement
               | channels, such as requesting an OSHA inspection.
               | 
               | Note the MOA I cited above shows the railroad enforcement
               | has an interlocking agreement with OSHA to this effect
               | that explains this. [0]
               | 
               | You're also instructed to remain on the work site which
               | is a key difference from a "strike." You may not be
               | protected if you say ask for more pay or sick days, so if
               | they weren't showing up to work or asked for that it
               | would really muddy the waters. It's my understanding the
               | "strike" was planned days in advance so it wasn't an
               | immediate response to imminent danger (if it was, should
               | have just been done immediately instead it looks
               | premeditated) and the "strike" asked for stuff like
               | better pay or days off which then made it non-protected.
               | 
               | If you truly follow all of the bullets above then it's
               | protected and the anti-strike order isn't really valid as
               | it's considered protected stop-work activity rather than
               | a strike.
               | 
               | Note: not legal advice
               | 
               | [0] https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/mou/2012-07-16
        
             | colpabar wrote:
             | Stealing someone else's comment -
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34784255
             | 
             | The sick day thing is the only thing that gets talked about
             | so that people come to the same conclusion you have. That
             | was a big part of what they wanted, sure, but they also had
             | plenty of demands on better safety precautions.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | gruez wrote:
           | >The reason people are so upset isn't necessarily because of
           | the environmental impact, it's because the people who work on
           | these trains have been warning things like this could happen
           | for years, and when they tried to strike over it, the federal
           | government stepped in and crushed them into submission. There
           | was a car on that train that was on fire for at least 20
           | miles before the derailment. If I can get pulled over for
           | having a busted tail light, a train full of toxic chemicals
           | should get stopped for being on fire.
           | 
           | This feels like a motte and bailey. A quick skim of the
           | comments in this thread that people are equally worried about
           | the health impacts from the accident specifically, as about
           | the general plight of railway workers and/or the state of
           | safety on railways. The NPR article also largely talks about
           | health impacts from the specific accident rather than
           | systemic safety issues. I'm not saying that people _aren 't_
           | outraged about the systemic safety issues on railways, but
           | it's pretty clear that the main thing on people's mind is the
           | immediate environmental impacts.
        
             | Spooky23 wrote:
             | The problem is an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of
             | cure. I have friends in this industry so I have more
             | context than most.
             | 
             | Railroads were a sleepy corner of the world for a long
             | time, until business types realized that trucking had
             | peaked out from a capacity perspective. These companies are
             | all chasing higher return on assets at all costs.
             | 
             | Motor carriers are much better regulated than rails because
             | the railroads are all consolidated and they can hook
             | themselves to politically powerful industries like coal and
             | oil.
             | 
             | As the parent stated, roads are regulated more effectively
             | and strictly. If you are a CDL driver with a carrier with
             | lots of violations, you can lose your license for a minor
             | brake violation or even a torn seat. That creates a market
             | dynamic where drivers refuse to drive for shitty carriers.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | themitigating wrote:
           | "People are upset because it's another case of the government
           | completely failing to do their jobs of keeping regular people
           | safe, "
           | 
           | Even though this is a private company you only blamed the
           | government?
        
             | kevviiinn wrote:
             | Part of the government's responsibility is to regulate
        
               | themitigating wrote:
               | Not according to republicans
        
             | cshimmin wrote:
             | I think this comment is referring to the govt blocking the
             | rail workers from taking collective action against the
             | private companies.
        
               | themitigating wrote:
               | and what does that have to do with the crash?
        
               | delecti wrote:
               | Part of the rail workers' demands included safety
               | concerns.
        
               | llbeansandrice wrote:
               | The demands of the union included a lot of increased
               | safety precautions.
        
               | yunwal wrote:
               | Including the fact that trains are too long, which
               | directly contributed to this incident.
               | 
               | https://www.timesunion.com/allnews/article/Railroad-
               | union-sa...
        
           | joseph_grobbles wrote:
           | [dead]
        
           | shadowgovt wrote:
           | The reason people are so upset is because they watched a
           | smoke plume reach all the way to the cloud layer. That's it.
           | That's the whole story.
           | 
           | The average citizen's grasp of the medical risks of chemicals
           | is basically negligible. But a smoke plume that reaches all
           | the way to the cloud layer makes everyone ask questions about
           | things they didn't care about 3 weeks ago.
        
             | steviedotboston wrote:
             | that and a bunch of people on twitter who like Bernie are
             | still really mad that Buttigieg won the Iowa primary and is
             | now transportation secretary and see this as an opportunity
             | to blame him. Of course the vast majority of people find
             | that an incredibly confusing and asinine line of thought to
             | follow.
        
               | weakfish wrote:
               | Can you source this claim or is it just your projection
               | of the situation? This doesn't read as empirical.
        
               | yunwal wrote:
               | Huh, because from my view, rail workers expressed concern
               | over unsafe working conditions, complained about cost-
               | cutting measures, negotiations were shut down without
               | giving into demands by Biden and Buttegeig.
               | 
               | Then, a safety issue _that was mentioned by union
               | leaders_ [0] contributes to a train derailment days
               | later. These seem very related to me, can you enlighten
               | me as to why they're not?
               | 
               | [0] -
               | https://www.timesunion.com/allnews/article/Railroad-
               | union-sa...
        
               | colpabar wrote:
               | Can you please please please take a moment and really be
               | honest with yourself and think about how you and the rest
               | of the mainstream media would be responding to this if
               | pete was a republican appointed by a republican president
        
             | yunwal wrote:
             | This has echos of the Flint water crisis all over it. The
             | "trust authorities" crowd would have happily let Flint
             | residents drink yellow water until lead poisoned an entire
             | generation.
             | 
             | Turns out, people are right to question things that don't
             | pass their smell test. Sometimes, there's a reasonable
             | explanation, other times there's not
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | Question, yes, but then the question needs an answer.
               | "Just asking questions" with no follow-up is just signal-
               | jamming.
               | 
               | Follow-up on the question in Flint found both elevated
               | lead levels in kids and a mechanism by which the changed
               | purification process released previously-fixated lead in
               | pipes.
               | 
               | In contrast, this is a big scary smoke cloud of a well-
               | understood volatile compound that we've spilled into the
               | ecosystem in the past and already tracked the effects of.
               | We know what vinyl chloride, phosgene, and hydrochloric
               | acid do.
        
               | yunwal wrote:
               | > In contrast, this is a big scary smoke cloud of a well-
               | understood volatile compound that we've spilled into the
               | ecosystem in the past
               | 
               | In past events, vinyl chloride was not burned, and
               | minimal amounts of it went unrecovered. We also know that
               | hydrogen chloride is a byproduct of burning vinyl
               | chloride, and when combined with water, makes
               | hydrochloric acid, which is not good to come into contact
               | with, and has killed many of the fish in East Palestine.
               | We know vinyl chloride is a cancer-and-birth-defect-
               | causing carcinogen. We also have seen some evidence that
               | animals nearby are dropping dead and humans feeling sick.
               | 
               | We also know that the rail company, purposefully or not,
               | did not accurately tell officials which chemicals were
               | released. We also know in the past that corporations
               | responsible for ecological disasters have repeatedly
               | downplayed the incidents. We also know that a reporter
               | was wrongfully arrested for asking questions about the
               | incident.
               | 
               | We also know that rail union leaders were talking about
               | the exact safety concerns that led to this derailment,
               | and were told to suck it up by strikebreaking federal
               | officials.
               | 
               | The correct thing to do is not dismiss concerns, but to
               | put in place measures to stop corner-cutting and provide
               | guidance to residents of East Palestine that isn't just
               | "don't worry about it". There are real concerns here and
               | no one is providing real evidence that things are safe.
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | > We also have seen some evidence that animals nearby are
               | dropping dead and humans feeling sick.
               | 
               | This is precisely the kind of decontextualized data that
               | leads to inaccurate conclusions. Without data on normal
               | animal die-off rates, there's no reason to believe
               | finding dead animals is unusual in this part of town.
               | 
               | And of course people feel sick; they've been told they
               | were exposed to a scary chemical. It's going to be very
               | hard to separate psychosomatic effect from physiological
               | effect.
               | 
               | (The dead fish are probably directly causal. Swimming in
               | hydrochloric acid will do that. But they can also
               | directly sample the water to figure out if the HCL levels
               | are dangerous for human consumption or contact, and I've
               | seen no reporting to suggest that is the case; fish are
               | way more sensitive to water quality than humans).
               | 
               | > The correct thing to do is not dismiss concerns, but to
               | put in place measures to stop corner-cutting
               | 
               | No argument there. Independent of this specific accident,
               | we know there's a pattern of accident rate increase that
               | indicates a culture of lax safety standsrds (and I
               | completely believe the rail workers who have told us they
               | are heavily incentivized to cut those corners). That
               | should stop.
               | 
               | > and provide guidance to residents of East Palestine
               | that isn't just "don't worry about it".
               | 
               | Unfortunately, that _is_ the only guidance in the absence
               | of other data. Otherwise, proving  "everything is fine"
               | is proving a negative. Is the question "is their risk
               | higher than last month?" Yes. "How much higher?" Pretty
               | much not very much if they didn't get sick by now. "What
               | should we do?" They're doing it in the form of burning
               | off the carcinogen and checking low-lying areas for any
               | escaped volatiles.
               | 
               | What else is there? For an average citizen, they may as
               | well go pray to whatever god they believe in; it's as
               | useful a preventative as anything else they could do.
        
               | yunwal wrote:
               | > But they can also directly sample the water to figure
               | out if the HCL levels are dangerous for human consumption
               | or contact, and I've seen no reporting to suggest that is
               | the case
               | 
               | But they have not yet done this, and tests are a week
               | out. FEMA hasn't provided food or resources to residents
               | of East Palestine. Churches in Youngstown are traveling
               | en masse to provide any kind of support. There's videos
               | of entire coops of chickens dying out. But oh, this is
               | all just a misunderstanding? Sorry, but are you f***ing
               | kidding me? When are you gonna start looking with your
               | eyes rather than listening to what people with clear
               | conflicts-of-interest are telling you? I bet you thought
               | there was nothing to be done about Uvalde too, huh?
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | > There's videos of entire coops of chickens dying out
               | 
               | There is currently a rampant bird flu ripping through the
               | US shared between wildlife and farm chickens with a
               | 90%-100% mortality over 48 hours. This is _exactly_ the
               | kind of situation human threat-assessment is bad at.
               | 
               | I know experts make mistakes, but replacing expert wisdom
               | with "the guesses of the masses" is a bad idea in
               | general. I don't trust Norfolk Southern, but I trust a
               | mob a darn sight less.
        
               | yunwal wrote:
               | > I know experts make mistakes
               | 
               | This is where you're wrong. Experts don't make mistakes
               | in situations like this. They consistently [0] downplay
               | [1] every [2] environmental [3] disaster [4] and withhold
               | information from neutral parties until it loses the
               | public's attention. When are we going to stop acting like
               | this isn't standard operating procedure? When are we
               | going to assume that this is default behavior of people
               | responsible for disasters?
               | 
               | [0] - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-toxic-cover-up/
               | 
               | [1] - https://www.history.com/news/chernobyl-disaster-
               | coverup
               | 
               | [2] - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-oil-rig-leak-
               | idUSTRE6430A...
               | 
               | [3] - https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/flint-water-
               | crisis/six-mor...
               | 
               | [4] - https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/05/california-finds-
               | pge-equipme...
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | If you have specific evidence of what exposure to
               | (burned, trace amounts of) vinyl chloride might do, feel
               | free to share them. This isn't a mystery chemical; we've
               | been working with the stuff since _1835_ , we've spilled
               | it into the environment numerous times, and we are
               | decently familiar with it enough that even given experts
               | with vested interests will downplay the risks, I have no
               | reason to believe panic is in order.
               | 
               | What is your goal in this exchange?
        
         | flavius29663 wrote:
         | So how do you explain the dead fish, chickens, and people with
         | rashes etc.?
        
           | legitster wrote:
           | I mean, dead fishes and chickens and rashes occur at natural
           | rates in any population regardless of the presence of
           | chemicals.
        
           | Workaccount2 wrote:
           | Because the accident released a ton of nasty chemicals in one
           | spot. However they are pretty volatile and naturally
           | dissipate. If you see recent pictures from the crash site,
           | nobody is wearing PPE and the EPA has deemed the area as safe
           | to be in.
        
             | slenk wrote:
             | EPA also said the dust from the towers collapsing on 9/11
             | was safe.
        
               | legitster wrote:
               | The actual EPA pronouncement was that the air and water
               | in NY city were safe (not to warrant an evacuation). They
               | still recommended that first responders and people in the
               | vicinity wear respirators.
        
               | slenk wrote:
               | Didn't realize that distinction - thank you.
               | 
               | Do you know if they recommended it right away or after a
               | few days?
        
               | legitster wrote:
               | Well, I don't think the EPA was in a position to make any
               | statements right away - they weren't going to stop people
               | from running in and trying to save lives so they could
               | take air samples back to a lab.
               | 
               | The amount of blame that got pinned on them after the
               | fact was probably pretty unfair.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | Are you going to list every call the EPA made and whether
               | it was right or wrong? Or just cherry pick?
        
               | slenk wrote:
               | I just think it would be wise to not blindly trust any
               | agency right now. I would like to see some independently
               | verified levels at the crash site and at the locations
               | where people are reporting issues.
        
         | MrOwnPut wrote:
         | Agreed on not losing your mind, that's never good to do, but
         | downplaying it is too far on the other scale.
         | 
         | Seems too early to tell doesn't it? I don't think you can
         | safely say "it would hardly register" without knowing the
         | results from the contaminated regions...
         | 
         | --
         | 
         | Water Runoff
         | 
         | Responding crews discovered contaminated runoff on two surface
         | water streams: Sulphur Run and Leslie Run. Under Ohio EPA
         | oversight, Norfolk Southern emergency response contractors
         | installed booms and underflow dams to restrict the flow of
         | contaminated water as well as contain and collect floating
         | product.
         | 
         | U.S. EPA took water samples at the streams and has sent them to
         | a laboratory for analysis. Emergency response staff noticed
         | impacted aquatic life and notified the Ohio Department of
         | Natural Resources and the U.S. Department of Interior. Ohio DNR
         | is on site and is assessing the situation and the impacts to
         | aquatic life. Downstream water utilities were also notified.
        
           | legitster wrote:
           | I think this is more evidence of the effectiveness of our
           | safeguards and procedures than anything else.
        
           | Workaccount2 wrote:
           | It's seems most likely the run off is from the ruptured
           | tanks, petroleum lube oil, diethylene glycol, polypropyl
           | glycol, and butyl acrylates. And likely primarily the non
           | flammable ones, the oil and the glycols.
        
             | MrOwnPut wrote:
             | Interesting, do you have details on that, or is that a
             | guess?
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | Generally flammable things burn in a fire.
        
               | MrOwnPut wrote:
               | So a guess then, that's disappointing. Generally things
               | don't burn 100% perfectly.
               | 
               | Unless you were onsite testing what was in the runoff and
               | have the results, you're speculating.
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | There is certainly runoff, the question is there enough
               | to perpetually poison hundreds of billions of gallons of
               | water and make it through water treatment.
               | 
               | Clearing the first hurdle is hard, clearing the second is
               | even harder.
        
         | badrequest wrote:
         | You should at the very least be willing to put that much Hcl in
         | your own water table/air supply before suggesting everybody
         | else be comfortable with it.
        
           | Workaccount2 wrote:
           | There probably already is
           | 
           | 250,000 gallons (if it was 10 cars and all 10 converted
           | perfectly to HCl, and all of it went into the water supply)
           | into a water table of, lets be conservative with 10 billion
           | gallons, is 0.00002% concentration or .02ppm
           | 
           | Compare this to your stomach, which has an hydrochloric acid
           | concentration of 5000ppm.
           | 
           | So yes, I would have no issue with it. All the water you
           | drink mixes with a much higher concentration of HCl every
           | time you drink it.
           | 
           | Like I said, their is a hysteria building around this and a
           | total lack of nuance and understanding.
        
             | pixl97 wrote:
             | HCl itself isn't going to be a direct issue in the water
             | supply. HCl interaction with all those other things in the
             | environment that were otherwise inert is the big problem
             | here. If you dump your HCl in a limestone environment,
             | we'll you'll dissolve a bunch of rocks. It gets more
             | problematic when there heavy metal compounds get dissolved
             | into solution and suddenly people can't use their wells or
             | municipal water has to shut down or work extra hard at
             | filtration.
             | 
             | Problem is the only way you know if this is occurring is
             | constant sampling and testing over the affected region by a
             | competent and trustworthy set of testing groups.
        
             | throwaheyy wrote:
             | That amount of hydrochloric acid doesn't just magically
             | dilute evenly into the water table in one instant.
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | It's actually more mixed than you would think since it
               | forms HCl in the atmosphere and falls down with rain.
               | 
               | For reference 1 inch of rain over 1 sq. mile is
               | approximately 18 million gallons.
               | 
               | So even if we concentrated the full 250k gallons
               | (remember that HCl is just one byproduct too, so we are
               | being very generous with 250k gallons, most of the
               | byproducts are carbon monoxide/dioxide), but 250k gallons
               | into 1 sq mile of rain fall....138ppm
               | 
               | In reality this will fall over thousands of square miles
               | too.
        
         | alldayeveryday wrote:
         | The EPA famously declared the air safe following 9/11. Their
         | credibility is, at least for me personally, negligible. The
         | flint water crisis and the Gold King Mine are other examples.
         | 
         | People are rightfully worried and angered. Your dismissal of
         | them as "losing their mind" or "hysterical" is at best tone
         | deaf, and at worst an intentional tactic to downplay the event.
         | Appeals to governmental authority falls flat when the trust of
         | the people no longer exists for their governmental
         | institutions.
         | 
         | From the article: U.S. EPA continues to assist Norfolk Southern
         | and Columbiana Emergency Management Agency with voluntary
         | residential air screening. ... To increase the rate of
         | screening, Norfolk Southern--with U.S. EPA assistance--is
         | bringing more teams and equipment to East Palestine.
         | 
         | You expect Norfolk Southern to perform honest screening which
         | would result in millions upon millions in damages to be paid
         | out? Why isnt the EPA in charge of this rather than following
         | the lead of Norfolk?
        
           | xxpor wrote:
           | The EPA has absolutely nothing to do with Flint.
        
       | duffyjp wrote:
       | I just watched the HBO Chernobyl miniseries (excellent, btw) and
       | the parallels to the initial lack of action to a huge public
       | health threat is chilling. If there is a carcinogen in the air,
       | get people out of there!
        
         | xadhominemx wrote:
         | There is not a carcinogen in the air. They evacuated the town
         | while they performed the controlled burn, but now the
         | combustion products (not really carcinogens) have dispersed and
         | it's safe to return.
        
           | lm28469 wrote:
           | Just like 911's ground zero was safe ;) nothing to see, move
           | along, uh what cancers are you talking about ?? you must be
           | imagining it
        
             | sschueller wrote:
             | There was an asbestos ad [1] featuring the twin towers. How
             | can one expect the air to be safe after we know what
             | asbestos does to you.
             | 
             | [1] https://preview.redd.it/8cf7ufrnxlw31.jpg?auto=webp&v=e
             | nable...
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | Yet: "Former EPA head admits she was wrong to tell New
               | Yorkers post-9/11 air was safe"
               | 
               | It's the real world and in the real world you have dozens
               | of entities competing against each-other to get their
               | version to be believed. Same shit with Hussein's weapons
               | of mass destruction. The truth doesn't really matter
               | until decades later.
               | 
               | You'll have overly cautious people, overly pessimistic
               | people, overly optimistic people, straight up lying to
               | cover their asses people, &c.
               | 
               | https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/10/epa-head-
               | wro...
        
             | xadhominemx wrote:
             | Excellent example to make my point. First responders stood
             | directly on the smoldering pile of thousands of chemical
             | compounds for months with no PPE. You see how that is very
             | different from the EP situation, no?
        
           | realce wrote:
           | So you would feel fine having your kids live their day-to-day
           | in this area? Would you buy a house 1 mile away from the
           | epicenter?
        
             | xadhominemx wrote:
             | Ya. It's easy to measure the contamination and the spilled
             | products have very short half lives in the air/soil. I
             | would probably want to monitor my well water for a little
             | while if I were in the immediate vicinity.
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | > It's easy to measure the contamination
               | 
               | Can you elaborate on how you'd do that ? Don't tell me
               | you'd trust the official line, given the track record
               | it's not a viable option
               | 
               | Same for well water ? Can you get a same day reading on
               | it ? What would you do in the meantime ? Wouldn't it be
               | too late by the time you get the air results ?
        
       | Julesman wrote:
       | I see a lot of these responses starting with "The reason." I
       | don't see many people talking about institutional bias. I don't
       | see a lot of people talking about this disaster getting no
       | coverage while the media is stuck on shooting down balloons. I
       | don't see many people talking about the fact that if this was
       | anywhere close to wealthy people that it would have been headline
       | news. I don't see many talking about the absolutely soulless
       | response of everyone responsible. I don't see many talking about
       | historical precedents that paint a clear picture of what is
       | likely happening. I don't see many talking about how the best
       | coverage of the event has been on Tiktok and that people on the
       | ground might have something valuable to report.
       | 
       | This is NOT s trivial thing in any way. This is not a wait and
       | see thing. This is a total disaster that will impact the health
       | of people in the area for generations. And without any pushback
       | the terrible people responsible well likely just get away with
       | it.
        
         | nyjah wrote:
         | _I don 't see many people talking about the fact that if this
         | was anywhere close to wealthy people_
         | 
         | They don't put wealthy neighborhoods near railroads carrying
         | toxic chemicals. Or rarely do they. Meanwhile, lower end
         | neighborhoods will have the train tracks and some even a
         | garbage dump within view.
        
         | JumpCrisscross wrote:
         | > _don 't see a lot of people talking about this disaster
         | getting no coverage_
         | 
         | Oh my god this is the only thing people are talking about.
         | Please don't do this. Let's talk about the actual disaster
         | instead of spinning up another useless whirlpool of meta-
         | debate.
        
           | kolanos wrote:
           | > Oh my god this is the only thing people are talking about.
           | Please don't do this. Let's talk about the actual disaster
           | instead of spinning up another useless whirlpool of meta-
           | debate.
           | 
           | This may be true in your circles. But almost no one in mine
           | even know this happened. It has not been a top headline in
           | any of the mainstream news sites, I only learned about it by
           | visiting alternative news. It's pretty disturbing how hard
           | the news is trying to bury this story.
        
           | Julesman wrote:
           | I know it could seem this way. And now that's true. But when
           | it first happened big media largely ignored it or parroted
           | available talking points without any real attempt to do
           | meaningful reporting. But I agree that the impact on people
           | is more important than the media critique.
        
             | gowings97 wrote:
             | Correct - there has been a total lack of coverage after the
             | first day or two; it's completely dropped off most front
             | pages, barely getting a blurb at this point. Far away from
             | the header news sections/now relegated to back pages. The
             | EPA should be providing daily updates, and the major news
             | outlets should be syndicating these daily updates.
             | 
             | This is the largest land-based environmental disaster since
             | Three Mile Island.
             | 
             | I just checked US News & World Report and CNN front pages -
             | not even listed.
        
           | distrill wrote:
           | i feel similarly to you but i'm finding that people who are
           | less online than i am have no idea that anything even
           | happened in ohio. my media is full of coverage and lots of
           | people pulling their hair out about the lack of coverage,
           | which seems totally inaccurate. but my family who watch tv
           | news and spend no time on reddit or hn or tiktok basically
           | still haven't heard about this yet.
        
           | anigbrowl wrote:
           | I generally agree with you, and I also agree about the
           | uselessness of meta-commentary. But this story has been
           | ranking quite low on news sites, eg on the default) Google
           | News it's not on the homepage at all and is 7th in the US
           | news section which usually displays 3 stories per 'page'
           | requiring scrolling. PBS Newshour, which normally covers
           | environmental stories in detail - especially the kind
           | involving long term problems like cancer cluster - only
           | addressed it yesterday and then very briefly.
           | 
           | We need a better way to quantify media coverage to assess
           | whether stories are under- or over-reported relative to
           | others of the same type, but absent that people-talking-
           | about-it is what we've got. I sometimes think HN could use
           | meta-headings to cluster exceedingly obvious topic
           | subthreads, because the top-to-bottom linear format is not
           | ideal for multi-lateral discourse.
        
           | johndevor wrote:
           | The NYT does not have this barely at all. There should be a
           | giant picture of the mushroom cloud on their front page to
           | reflect the severity (potential or real) of the situation.
           | It's shameful.
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _should be a giant picture of the mushroom cloud on their
             | front page to reflect the severity (potential or real) of
             | the situation_
             | 
             | It was front page on Bloomberg. I admit I didn't click on
             | it. To the degree this is of urgent national concern, it's
             | in a rail safety bill we have months to debate.
        
               | jakelazaroff wrote:
               | Not sure when you checked, but right now it's literally
               | nowhere to be found on Bloomberg. I count three stories
               | on shooting down UFOs, though, and one on comedians
               | finding side hustles as babysitters.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _when you checked, but right now it 's literally
               | nowhere to be found_
               | 
               | When this happened. Nobody clicked on it so it fell off.
               | (I'm still failing to see why this is a national tragedy
               | requiring minute to minute updates.)
        
               | jakelazaroff wrote:
               | I'm not sure how to reconcile "this is the only thing
               | people are talking about" with "these stories have fallen
               | off all the top news sites because nobody is clicking on
               | them".
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | This story _should_ get more traction. It isn't because
               | it isn't of general interest. Not because of a
               | conspiracy.
        
               | t-writescode wrote:
               | This is not reflective of modern news practices. There
               | isn't interest because that interest hasn't been spun up.
               | When all attention has been pulled to manufactured
               | stories, it's reporters' jobs to pull and manufacture
               | interest into things that matter.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _that interest hasn't been spun up_
               | 
               | This usually happens outside the news room, investigative
               | journalism being the exception. The lack of environmental
               | NGOs raising a fuss may be part of the problem, if you
               | think spin is the issue. (I do not. I think most
               | Americans simply aren't concerned with this, and those
               | who are, and have influence, are mostly looking at
               | rulemaking and liability ramifications.)
        
               | TaylorAlexander wrote:
               | This is going to give a whole lot of Americans cancer.
               | I've heard this described, by an extremely level headed
               | commentator I trust, as "we just nuked an American town".
               | This story is way bigger than some balloon.
        
             | ng12 wrote:
             | I cancelled my NYT sub over the pandemic. I felt dirty
             | supporting them even for just the word games.
        
             | prof-dr-ir wrote:
             | I think that it is the NYT's policy to not put giant
             | pictures of _potential_ disasters on their front page to
             | avoid being sensationalist.
             | 
             | I would not fault you for disagreeing with that style. Most
             | importantly I think that it risks missing important events:
             | at first they are either not verified (or not verified to
             | be important, like here) and a few days later they are no
             | longer newsworthy. But at least it seems that there is some
             | logic to it.
        
               | pphysch wrote:
               | _avoid_ being sensationalist?
               | 
               | The Chinese spy-on-the-weather balloon debacle is the
               | textbook definition of sensational yellow journalism. NYT
               | has had constant front-page coverage of it.
        
             | legitster wrote:
             | Because this is a regional story being amplified by Chinese
             | state media. The NYT not running shock headlines based on
             | trendy internet topics probably has more to do with their
             | editorial scrutiny.
        
             | xhrpost wrote:
             | Wow you're right, only mention is way at the bottom of the
             | main page, just a title "A Train Carrying Toxic Chemicals
             | Derailed in Ohio. Here's What to Know." No picture, not
             | even a mini-summary like some of the other links.
        
           | jakelazaroff wrote:
           | No it's not? There's one measly story way down past the fold
           | on the NYT homepage.
           | 
           | It's nowhere on the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal or
           | USA Today homepages (I cmd+F'd).
           | 
           | There's a tiny clip on the left of the Fox News homepage
           | that's tangentially about it but really about Tomi Lahren
           | bashing Pete Buttigieg.
           | 
           | The most prominent is the New York Post, which has a headline
           | about it being "worse than feared" after a bunch of scrolling
           | past stories about Kathy Hochul banning gas stoves and Emily
           | Ratajkowski hanging out with Eric Andre.
        
             | Spooky23 wrote:
             | It's since moved further down. Mike Pompeo is angry about
             | balloons, which is clearly more important.
             | 
             | There's probably some political issue around the incident.
        
         | wilsonnb3 wrote:
         | > I don't see a lot of people talking about this disaster
         | getting no coverage while the media is stuck on shooting down
         | balloons.
         | 
         | I've seen hundreds of comments and posts with this sentiment on
         | Reddit, including some that made it to the top of r/all.
         | 
         | Usually they say something like "why aren't major media outlets
         | covering this?" while linking to CNN or CBS or some other major
         | media outlet that is in fact covering the event.
        
           | dsfyu404ed wrote:
           | It was the better part of a week before it got any coverage
           | beyond local news. That's what people are pissed off about.
           | 
           | It probably wouldn't have gotten the coverage it did as quick
           | as it did if some uppity cop didn't rough up some uppity
           | reporter giving the media an axe to grind.
        
             | mminer237 wrote:
             | It had articles on Reuters[1] and CNN[2] within a day.
             | 
             | [1]: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/train-derailment-
             | causes-mas...
             | 
             | [2]: https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/04/us/east-palestine-ohio-
             | train-...
        
         | shadowgovt wrote:
         | > This is a total disaster that will impact the health of
         | people in the area for generations.
         | 
         | [citation needed]. Vinyl chloride breaks down quickly
         | (especially when it's all set on fire) and doesn't bio-
         | accumulate. That's why the OSHA standards for it are for
         | career-long exposure. Its byproducts are also pretty volatile
         | and should burn through biology and dilute quickly.
         | 
         | There's no 4-alarms here because it's not a 4-alarm situation.
         | It's a disaster, but one of the more well-understood and
         | easier-to-contain ones.
        
           | xxpor wrote:
           | Right. It's essentially impossible to be both highly reactive
           | and build up persistently in the environment. It'd just
           | react!
        
           | toiletfuneral wrote:
           | [dead]
        
       | BLO716 wrote:
       | I'm still trying to find a reliable boots-on-ground in people's
       | face news journalism. Anyone have boots on group stuff?
        
         | fragmede wrote:
         | This guy has been giving daily updates
         | https://www.tiktok.com/@nickdrom
        
       | kolanos wrote:
       | Still don't see this story anywhere in my Google News feed.
        
       | fifteenforty wrote:
       | Weird comment about masks not working for vinyl chloride. Whilst
       | it's true that a particulate filtering mask (N95) isn't enough,
       | you can definitely get some protection from an organic vapour
       | cartridge fitted to a reusable respirator. See
       | https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/19...
        
       | smm11 wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
       | gaoshan wrote:
       | The train that was carrying all of this passed through Cleveland,
       | Ohio, just prior to this accident. Imagine the fallout if this
       | had happened around a population of hundreds of thousands of
       | people?
        
       | fredgrott wrote:
       | What is being underplayed:
       | 
       | -Same chemical by products as the chemicals stored at the Bhopal
       | disaster -Railroad unions have been warning of this outcome for
       | more than 10 years
       | 
       | They will end up suing NS as the town will have to be evacuated
       | again and demolished as they will find that the water-table has
       | been polluted beyond repair.
        
         | NotYourLawyer wrote:
         | Bhopal was methyl isocyanate.
        
           | downvotetruth wrote:
           | The most concerning chemical when Bhopal occurred was methyl
           | isocyanate. _But_ , although it was the most concerning, many
           | other chemicals are at Bhopal that would be a significant
           | problem in themselves, which are not possibilities for the
           | current topic.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | yabones wrote:
         | ...Not to mention the dispersion along the entire Ohio River
         | watershed, which supplies drinking water for about 5M people.
        
         | rgrieselhuber wrote:
         | Not sure why this is being downvoted.
        
           | pdabbadabba wrote:
           | Because it's extremely misleading. They're invoking the name
           | of the Bhopal disaster even though they seem to know that the
           | actual toxin released in that disaster (methyl isocyanate) is
           | not one of the chemicals on the NS train (or one of their
           | products, as far as I know). Instead, they're talking about
           | the chemicals "stored at" the Bhopal disaster, which may make
           | the comment technically true (I don't know) but very very
           | misleading since those chemicals had nothing to do with the
           | mass death for which the incident is infamous.
        
           | hoppyhoppy2 wrote:
           | > _Please don 't comment about the voting on comments. It
           | never does any good, and it makes boring reading._
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
           | mrguyorama wrote:
           | Because it's entirely wrong.
        
           | hanniabu wrote:
           | Gotta keep the profit train going at all costs
        
       | korroziya wrote:
       | Train derailments are the latest conspiracy theory for tinfoil
       | hats right now. I guess food processing plant fires fell out of
       | vogue.
       | 
       | "nO oNe iS rEpOrTiNg aBoUt tHiS" cries the conspiracy theorist
       | reporting about the incident using screencaps from news reports.
        
         | lm28469 wrote:
         | It's not completely unreported but compare it to the few
         | balloons you guys popped in the last week that made
         | international news it's weird. Especially since these balloons
         | are 99.9% mass hysteria
        
           | mrguyorama wrote:
           | One is about global geopolitical games and a possible
           | upcoming war in the next few decades.
           | 
           | The other is a local environmental disaster. There's a
           | national angle in pointing out this is exactly what the rail
           | unions told us would happen but is even Fox News reporting on
           | that?
        
             | alexandre_m wrote:
             | > is even Fox News reporting on that?
             | 
             | There was a segment by Hannity and Tucker Carlson about
             | this yesterday which I found on Youtube.
        
           | coolbreezetft22 wrote:
           | The balloons seemed to get the most coverage and hype on
           | social media / twitter. And now the same social media /
           | twitter is complaining about how the news spent too much time
           | talk about the balloons.
           | 
           | Reading the economist on a weekly basis, the balloon story
           | didn't get the same kind of hysterical coverage that I was
           | lead to believe by twitter. I wish people would actually
           | spending time reading instead of just scanning headlines and
           | twitter and drawing strong conclusions and getting angry
           | about it
        
             | cycomanic wrote:
             | I can tell you the balloon made front-page news for at
             | least the BBC, the guardian, der Spiegel (Germany) and the
             | NZ herald (New Zealand). And I'm not even talking about US
             | news. It definitely was blown way out of proportion in
             | regular media and not only on social media (there is
             | probably an interesting discussion about cause and effect
             | to be had here).
        
       | ifaxmycodetok8s wrote:
       | I grew up ~12 miles from the incident. My family still lives
       | there. To add insult to injury, the local Shell plant is also
       | doing a safety burn right now.
       | 
       | https://twitter.com/BreatheProject/status/162525554863023311...
        
       | steeleyespan wrote:
       | Another 4Chan conspiracy proven to be false! Toxic fumes are
       | proven by science to be safe and effective. The dose never leaves
       | the muscle tissue.
        
         | xadhominemx wrote:
         | > The dose never leaves the muscle tissue.
         | 
         | Yes it does, quite rapidly in fact.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related:
       | 
       |  _Ohio train derailment: environmental disaster quietly
       | unfolding_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34783940 - Feb
       | 2023 (300 comments)
       | 
       |  _Ask HN: Any HNers have air quality sensors near-ish 'East
       | Palistine, Ohio'?_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34783664 - Feb 2023 (11
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Ohio vinyl chloride accident summary_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34781184 - Feb 2023 (7
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Ohio catastrophe is 'wake-up call' to dangers of deadly train
       | derailments_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34773513 -
       | Feb 2023 (230 comments)
       | 
       |  _Toxic gases connected to Ohio train derailment cause concern_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34772687 - Feb 2023 (212
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Health concerns mounting as animals become sick after train
       | derailment_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34758525 - Feb
       | 2023 (128 comments)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-02-14 23:01 UTC)