It is most certainly wise to choose rail ways for the purpose of transportation of oils, as it saves fuel and prevents accidents. North Dakota's emergence as a oil-producing state has provided jobs to its residents and I hope it will make much more jobs to help tackle the unemployment problems of our country.
It will be interesting to see how ND adapts to this economic boom over the next few years. Something has to give for the energy expansion to continue.
Re: Rail Is Not Dead!
AskAsa
11/4/2011 7:59:46 PM
It seems like this oil development occurred so quickly that it caught the small communities off guard. I'm sure its creating mixed emotions. People are probably grateful for the jobs and economic growth but dismayed at the same time by the loss of what they valued as a way of life.
So much comes back to adequate infrastructure. You have to start at the bottom-with roads, sewers, planning--if you want an area to really profit from development.
Re: Rail Is Not Dead!
cat tail
11/4/2011 7:41:04 PM
I think the oil companies have been fairly proactive in reaching out to the local communities. The issue is they really can't do anything about the traffic and congestion. It's just a natural side effect of development.
Re: Rail Is Not Dead!
Jacob
11/4/2011 1:40:45 AM
Noreen, excavating natural resources and usingit hem tor public benefit is very good. What I would like to suggest is that the government shares a part of the income from the oil production with the local communities for their well being. More over providing some employment opportunities for the local people also can uplift their living standards. By doing this, both the local communities and the people in them benefit from the natural resources .
Re: Rail Is Not Dead!
AskAsa
11/3/2011 8:57:10 PM
Trains remain a low cost reliable way to move freight. It seems like a reasonable way to deal with the transportation issue in a high growth area.
Re: Rail vs. Truck Safety
TelecomFreq
11/3/2011 12:43:41 PM
If all that cargo is going to the same general area then it only makes sense to load it onto a single train and let it carry the goods all the way then use trucks to piece it out if need be.
Agree with @TelecomFreq and @Dex that rail is safer.
Just think about one rail-car on a track versus 4 trucks being driven 1000 miles. The trucks have at least 4 times the risk of drivers falling asleep and that's before you consider the additional safety built into rail systems.
The exception to the rule maybe an act of intentional sabotage or terrorism. The rail car or train presents a much larger target to someone intent on causing harm.
PC
Re: Rail Is Not Dead!
TelecomFreq
11/3/2011 10:06:45 AM
I am no expert, but I would think that rail might be safer than transporting via truck, but with the potential for a bigger issue if there were an accident than if just a single truck were to have an accident.
The blogs and comments posted on Investor Uprising do not reflect the views of Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, or its sponsors. Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, and its sponsors do not assume responsibility for any comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
Tweet This