Most severe hazmat derailments involve massive fires, which is undesirable in a location packed with buildings and people. That’s how I view that anyways. One particularly bad one was in Quebec somewhere in 2013, and something like 70 people burned to death, and this was in a very small town. Hard to find an “ideal” place for any derailment honestly.
If you are attempting to convince me that contaminating the immediate water supply of one of the main inland fresh water rivers in the US as well as contaminating the water table for the entirety of the midwest is less bad than 70 people burning to death, I think we can just agree to disagree
Not attempting anything. That water table has regularly been contaminated long before this incident is very much worth considering however. Thanks for the solid responses fren, agree to disagree should really be a more common agreement.
Most severe hazmat derailments involve massive fires, which is undesirable in a location packed with buildings and people. That’s how I view that anyways. One particularly bad one was in Quebec somewhere in 2013, and something like 70 people burned to death, and this was in a very small town. Hard to find an “ideal” place for any derailment honestly.
If you are attempting to convince me that contaminating the immediate water supply of one of the main inland fresh water rivers in the US as well as contaminating the water table for the entirety of the midwest is less bad than 70 people burning to death, I think we can just agree to disagree
Not attempting anything. That water table has regularly been contaminated long before this incident is very much worth considering however. Thanks for the solid responses fren, agree to disagree should really be a more common agreement.