Pipelines: The Safest Way to Transport Energy

[Toro]

CALGARY, AB—Oil transport by pipeline presents significantly lower safety risks to workers than oil movement by road or rail, concludes a study published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

The study, Intermodal Safety in the Transport of Oil, determined that the rate of injury requiring hospitalization was 30 times lower among oil pipeline workers compared to rail workers involved in the transport of oil, based on extensive data collected in the United States. Road transport fared even worse, with an injury rate 37 times higher than pipelines based on reports to the U.S. Department of Transportation for the period 2005-2009.

The study also found the risk of spill incidents is lower for pipelines per billion ton-miles of oil movement compared to rail and road. ...

Road transport had the highest chance of a spill, almost 20 incidents per billion ton-miles. Rail had slightly over two incidents per billion ton-miles annually while pipelines had less than 0.6 per billion ton-miles annually. ...

Pipelines pose fewer risks for workers and less spills compared to transporting oil by rail or truck | Fraser Institute

 

[HenryBHough]

But in a Democrat run green country there's no need to transfer energy. Everybody will live in their own dark little Hobbit-Hole and eat only what they (organically) grow. Provided they're better at that than is The First Sharecropper.......y'know, the one who lets the crops rot in the fields.

 

[Mr. H.]

Obama and the State Department wholeheartedly agree...

Permit for Alberta Clipper Pipeline Issued

The Department found that the addition of crude oil pipeline capacity between Canada and the United States will advance a number of strategic interests of the United States. These included increasing the diversity of available supplies among the United States’ worldwide crude oil sources in a time of considerable political tension in other major oil producing countries and regions; shortening the transportation pathway for crude oil supplies; and increasing crude oil supplies from a major non-Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries producer. Canada is a stable and reliable ally and trading partner of the United States, with which we have free trade agreements which augment the security of this energy supply.

Approval of the permit sends a positive economic signal, in a difficult economic period, about the future reliability and availability of a portion of United States’ energy imports, and in the immediate term, this shovel-ready project will provide construction jobs for workers in the United States.

 

[Mr. H.]

So... here we have the State Department lauding, and Obama approving, a Canadian pipeline that carries tar sands crude across the International Border... traversing several United States, and terminating at U.S. refineries.

Now tell me... how is this different from the Keystone XL?

 

[Old Rocks]

So... here we have the State Department lauding, and Obama approving, a Canadian pipeline that carries tar sands crude across the International Border... traversing several United States, and terminating at U.S. refineries.

Now tell me... how is this different from the Keystone XL?

Well now, had I the time, perhaps I could look at the route and check to see what aquifer intakes that line traversed.

At present, we have far too many pipelines in the ground that are way over age. Many that are being used at half the pressure they were designed for because of corrosion that has weakoned them. On a monthly basis we see reports of thousand to tens of thousand barrel spills from pipeling blowouts.

We need more stringent laws concerning the lifespan and use of pipelines. They are only safe as long as the metal in them is intact. The companies that own these lines are in an industry that makes hundreds of billions in profits yearly. They can afford to invest in replacing the old lines. Only then will I pass on the safety of the pipelines.

 

[mamooth]

I'm pretty sure the safest way to transport energy is by an electrical transmission line. After all, wires don't crash or spill.

 

[flacaltenn]

Perhaps GoldiRocks should be worrying about what aquifers the next TRAIN derailment will be near..

From this week...

Canadian hamlet evacuated after oil train crash causes huge blaze | World news | theguardian.com

Canadian hamlet evacuated after oil train crash causes huge blazeEmergency crews battle fire after tanker cars carrying crude oil and petroleum gas leak following derailment in Alberta
Share 150

inShare.1Email Associated Press in Gainford, Alberta
•theguardian.com, Saturday 19 October 2013 12.09 EDT


A Canadian National spokesman, Louis-Antoine Paquin, said 13 cars four carrying petroleum crude oil and nine loaded with liquified petroleum gas came off the tracks around 1am local time in the hamlet of Gainford, about 50 miles from Edmonton. The entire community of roughly 100 people was evacuated

Questions about the increasing transport of oil by rail in the US and Canada were raised in July after an unattended train with 72 tankers of oil rolled into the small Quebec town of Lac-Mégantic near the Maine border, derailing and triggering explosions that killed 47 people. The town's center was destroyed. The rail company's chairman blamed the train's operator for failing to set enough hand brakes

 

[Mr. H.]

So... here we have the State Department lauding, and Obama approving, a Canadian pipeline that carries tar sands crude across the International Border... traversing several United States, and terminating at U.S. refineries.

Now tell me... how is this different from the Keystone XL?

Well now, had I the time, perhaps I could look at the route and check to see what aquifer intakes that line traversed.

At present, we have far too many pipelines in the ground that are way over age. Many that are being used at half the pressure they were designed for because of corrosion that has weakoned them. On a monthly basis we see reports of thousand to tens of thousand barrel spills from pipeling blowouts.

We need more stringent laws concerning the lifespan and use of pipelines. They are only safe as long as the metal in them is intact. The companies that own these lines are in an industry that makes hundreds of billions in profits yearly. They can afford to invest in replacing the old lines. Only then will I pass on the safety of the pipelines.

Agriculture destroys aquifers, not pipelines...

Polluting the Ogallala
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/01/opinion/polluting-the-ogallala-aquifer.html?_r=0

And I'd be appreciative if you can point me to information regarding those monthly spills resulting in blowouts of those proportions.

More stringent laws? I'm with ya there.

 

[GWV5903]

So... here we have the State Department lauding, and Obama approving, a Canadian pipeline that carries tar sands crude across the International Border... traversing several United States, and terminating at U.S. refineries.

Now tell me... how is this different from the Keystone XL?

Well now, had I the time, perhaps I could look at the route and check to see what aquifer intakes that line traversed.

At present, we have far too many pipelines in the ground that are way over age. Many that are being used at half the pressure they were designed for because of corrosion that has weakoned them. On a monthly basis we see reports of thousand to tens of thousand barrel spills from pipeling blowouts.

We need more stringent laws concerning the lifespan and use of pipelines. They are only safe as long as the metal in them is intact. The companies that own these lines are in an industry that makes hundreds of billions in profits yearly. They can afford to invest in replacing the old lines. Only then will I pass on the safety of the pipelines.

In a perfect world your point would be well taken, but obviously we do not live in that world...

If Oblammer had any common sense he would recognize this is an infrastructure project with legs under it...

Instead he sucks as a leader and panders to BS...

 

[Mr. H.]

Century Gothic has spoken.

Oh my eyes....

 

[ScienceRocks]

Fusion probably is the best way....BUT you're right until then.

That's why the hyperloop(eon musk) is also the best way to transport humans long distrances.

 

[Mr. H.]

Derailed Alberta Cargo Cars Still Burning - WSJ.com

Oct. 20, 2013 3:11 p.m. ET

TORONTO—Two railcars were still burning on Sunday almost 36 hours after a cargo train carrying crude oil and liquefied petroleum gas derailed in a rural area of Alberta, officials said. No injuries were reported, but more than 100 people remained evacuated.

 

[martybegan]

So... here we have the State Department lauding, and Obama approving, a Canadian pipeline that carries tar sands crude across the International Border... traversing several United States, and terminating at U.S. refineries.

Now tell me... how is this different from the Keystone XL?

Well now, had I the time, perhaps I could look at the route and check to see what aquifer intakes that line traversed.

At present, we have far too many pipelines in the ground that are way over age. Many that are being used at half the pressure they were designed for because of corrosion that has weakoned them. On a monthly basis we see reports of thousand to tens of thousand barrel spills from pipeling blowouts.

We need more stringent laws concerning the lifespan and use of pipelines. They are only safe as long as the metal in them is intact. The companies that own these lines are in an industry that makes hundreds of billions in profits yearly. They can afford to invest in replacing the old lines. Only then will I pass on the safety of the pipelines.

I love the sound of goalposts moving in the morning, it sounds like, rationalizing.

 

[Old Rocks]

So... here we have the State Department lauding, and Obama approving, a Canadian pipeline that carries tar sands crude across the International Border... traversing several United States, and terminating at U.S. refineries.

Now tell me... how is this different from the Keystone XL?

Well now, had I the time, perhaps I could look at the route and check to see what aquifer intakes that line traversed.

At present, we have far too many pipelines in the ground that are way over age. Many that are being used at half the pressure they were designed for because of corrosion that has weakoned them. On a monthly basis we see reports of thousand to tens of thousand barrel spills from pipeling blowouts.

We need more stringent laws concerning the lifespan and use of pipelines. They are only safe as long as the metal in them is intact. The companies that own these lines are in an industry that makes hundreds of billions in profits yearly. They can afford to invest in replacing the old lines. Only then will I pass on the safety of the pipelines.

Agriculture destroys aquifers, not pipelines...

Polluting the Ogallala
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/01/opinion/polluting-the-ogallala-aquifer.html?_r=0

And I'd be appreciative if you can point me to information regarding those monthly spills resulting in blowouts of those proportions.

More stringent laws? I'm with ya there.

Exxon oil spill cleanup ongoing in Arkansas, pipeline shut | Reuters

ND wants answers on ruptured pipeline inspections | Wichita Eagle

Maybe not monthly, but often enough to be a serious concern. Understandable were the energy corps on a thin budget, but they are making many billions in profits per month. Some of that needs to go to the infrastructure that includes these pipelines. A 65 year old pipeline with a new product both thicker and more corrosive than what was pumped prior to that is a recipe for disaster.

 

[ScienceRocks]

The safest way to transport energy is through powerlines directly from hydro, wind and solar power stations