Trans Canada decides $700,000.00 Keystone safety investment to much

[rdean]

Bloomberg Businessweek calculated that it would cost about $705,000 — $5,000 per mile — to install advanced fiber-optic cable technology along 141 critical miles of the pipeline, areas where drinking water, ecosystems, and population centers are at risk. That’s hardly a drop in the bucket compared to the overall $5.3 billion cost of the pipeline. And investing in better spill-detection technology pays off:

Equipment available to spot spills more quickly would have cut 75 percent off the estimated $1.7 billion toll in property damage caused by major incidents on oil lines from 2001 to 2011, consultants said in a December report prepared for the [U.S. Transportation Department].

Internal systems such as the one planned for Keystone XL have a spotty record catching leaks, according to the Transportation Department’s report, prepared by the engineering firm Kiefner & Associates Inc., of Worthington, Ohio. Members of the public reported 23 percent of the 197 oil and liquids pipeline leaks between January 2010 and July 2012, according to the study, compared to 17 percent identified by the pipeline companies.

Keystone XL won't use state-of-the-art spill technology

I can never understand why Republicans aren't bothered by this stuff.

The reason Obama gets to choose is because this pipeline is "international", meaning it's "foreign oil", Republicans "oil of choice".

 

[rdean]

I kind of understand why some Americans don't really care too much about oil spills. They might even think oil spills are "fun".

 

[dilloduck]

What's your idea of fun Mr. Dean? Mocking republicans ?

 

[Sallow]

What's your idea of fun Mr. Dean? Mocking republicans ?

Keystone XL basically nixed the idea of installing state of the art detection systems on their pipes. This would give them a mechanism to alert them of breaches in real time. Given that XL doesn't even have a real disaster recovery plan for major tar sands spills, this should be really troubling.

Well?

Do you find it troubling?

 

[dilloduck]

What's your idea of fun Mr. Dean? Mocking republicans ?

Keystone XL basically nixed the idea of installing state of the art detection systems on their pipes. This would give them a mechanism to alert them of breaches in real time. Given that XL doesn't even have a real disaster recovery plan for major tar sands spills, this should be really troubling.

Well?

Do you find it troubling?

Not nearly as troubling as my own government spying on me. It's not as if Keystone has no leak detection system at all because they in fact do have one. It's just not as perfect as the opponents want it to be but then again--the opponents don't want it to be there at all so they spin it.

 

[Sallow]

What's your idea of fun Mr. Dean? Mocking republicans ?

Keystone XL basically nixed the idea of installing state of the art detection systems on their pipes. This would give them a mechanism to alert them of breaches in real time. Given that XL doesn't even have a real disaster recovery plan for major tar sands spills, this should be really troubling.

Well?

Do you find it troubling?

Not nearly as troubling as my own government spying on me. It's not as if Keystone has no leak detection system at all because they in fact do have one. It's just not as perfect as the opponents want it to be but then again--the opponents don't want it to be there at all so they spin it.

This thread isn't about government spying. It's about Keystone.

And "opponents" include some state level republicans that have no wish to have a repeat of the Kalamazoo River in their backyard.

kalamazoo river oil spill | Michigan Radio

2.5 years..and still the clean up continues.

 

[Old Rocks]

This pipeline will, at some point, rupture. Then the very people defending Trans-Canada will scream about why the government did not prevent the spill from happening. The Tar Sands oil is a disaster from point of origin to wherever it is used.

 

[Mr. H.]

And here's your solution k00ks...

Crude Oil Train Derailment Prompts Massive Evacuation in Canada | Video | TheBlaze.com

 

[Samson]

What's your idea of fun Mr. Dean? Mocking republicans ?

Keystone XL basically nixed the idea of installing state of the art detection systems on their pipes. This would give them a mechanism to alert them of breaches in real time. Given that XL doesn't even have a real disaster recovery plan for major tar sands spills, this should be really troubling.

Well?

Do you find it troubling?

I find the lack of reference in your post troubling.

I also find the use of disqualifying modifiers troubling.

E.G.: "'basically' nixed" and "a 'real' disaster recovery plan"

In fact, they have not decided to install NO detection system: They have decided to install a detection system other than one you would call "state-of-the-art."

In fact, they MUST have a disaster recovery plan, regardless of how "real" you think it might be.

 

[prepster]

I kind of understand why some Americans don't really care too much about oil spills. They might even think oil spills are "fun".

If you do not live in an area of the country where oil or natural gas production is prevalent, then you likely do not fully comprehend the true impact of spills and other public health issues. I live in a part of New York where we actively fought against natural gas production. Royal Dutch Shell was planning to establish an offshore liquified natural gas refinery off the north shore of Long Island. Environmental organizations such as the one I previously worked for were able to get a measure passed prohibiting the corporation from operating in the Long Island Sound. If Shell was successful, we would have tankers carrying LNG into the nearby waters, which would then go through the last stage of refinement before being shipped off to market. The commercial activity had innumerable downsides, from threats of spills in one of the country's biggest metropolitan centers, to the decline of fisheries and the continued elimination of the already dwindling fishing industry. It was a no-go among LIers.

This does not even begin to describe the day-to-day downsides of oil and natural gas production on individual persons. For the most part, oil and natural gas production is carried out in areas where employment opportunities are relatively scarce, income levels are low, and property values are depressed. Oil and natural gas companies come in to an area and go on a land buying spree, offering lease rates that are often just to financially tempting to property owners. A lot of times, these property owners are reluctant to give up their land. They know from previous areas where oil and natural gas production is carried out that if they sign on with a company, their property rights will be curbed in the name of a quick buck. However, because their livelihoods already suck, to put it bluntly, they do it anyway, and the drilling or fracking begins.

From here, you get all the big and small spills, leaks, and explosions, many of which are wiped under the rug due to the disproportionate legal power or the oil and natural gas companies. In other words, your individual rights and freedoms, which exist independent of new government fiat, are superseded by those of a corporation whose rights and freedoms require the imposition of state power. Not such a happy and care-free process as people think it is.

 

[Mr. H.]

If you do not live in an area of the country where oil or natural gas production is prevalent, then you likely do not fully comprehend the true impact of spills and other public health issues. I live in a part of New York where we actively fought against natural gas production. Royal Dutch Shell was planning to establish an offshore liquified natural gas refinery off the north shore of Long Island. Environmental organizations such as the one I previously worked for were able to get a measure passed prohibiting the corporation from operating in the Long Island Sound. If Shell was successful, we would have tankers carrying LNG into the nearby waters, which would then go through the last stage of refinement before being shipped off to market. The commercial activity had innumerable downsides, from threats of spills in one of the country's biggest metropolitan centers, to the decline of fisheries and the continued elimination of the already dwindling fishing industry. It was a no-go among LIers.

This does not even begin to describe the day-to-day downsides of oil and natural gas production on individual persons. For the most part, oil and natural gas production is carried out in areas where employment opportunities are relatively scarce, income levels are low, and property values are depressed. Oil and natural gas companies come in to an area and go on a land buying spree, offering lease rates that are often just to financially tempting to property owners. A lot of times, these property owners are reluctant to give up their land. They know from previous areas where oil and natural gas production is carried out that if they sign on with a company, their property rights will be curbed in the name of a quick buck. However, because their livelihoods already suck, to put it bluntly, they do it anyway, and the drilling or fracking begins.

From here, you get all the big and small spills, leaks, and explosions, many of which are wiped under the rug due to the disproportionate legal power or the oil and natural gas companies. In other words, your individual rights and freedoms, which exist independent of new government fiat, are superseded by those of a corporation whose rights and freedoms require the imposition of state power. Not such a happy and care-free process as people think it is.

I've got 36 years in the oil and gas business under my belt, and you are frighteningly full of shit.

 

[prepster]

If you do not live in an area of the country where oil or natural gas production is prevalent, then you likely do not fully comprehend the true impact of spills and other public health issues. I live in a part of New York where we actively fought against natural gas production. Royal Dutch Shell was planning to establish an offshore liquified natural gas refinery off the north shore of Long Island. Environmental organizations such as the one I previously worked for were able to get a measure passed prohibiting the corporation from operating in the Long Island Sound. If Shell was successful, we would have tankers carrying LNG into the nearby waters, which would then go through the last stage of refinement before being shipped off to market. The commercial activity had innumerable downsides, from threats of spills in one of the country's biggest metropolitan centers, to the decline of fisheries and the continued elimination of the already dwindling fishing industry. It was a no-go among LIers.

This does not even begin to describe the day-to-day downsides of oil and natural gas production on individual persons. For the most part, oil and natural gas production is carried out in areas where employment opportunities are relatively scarce, income levels are low, and property values are depressed. Oil and natural gas companies come in to an area and go on a land buying spree, offering lease rates that are often just to financially tempting to property owners. A lot of times, these property owners are reluctant to give up their land. They know from previous areas where oil and natural gas production is carried out that if they sign on with a company, their property rights will be curbed in the name of a quick buck. However, because their livelihoods already suck, to put it bluntly, they do it anyway, and the drilling or fracking begins.

From here, you get all the big and small spills, leaks, and explosions, many of which are wiped under the rug due to the disproportionate legal power or the oil and natural gas companies. In other words, your individual rights and freedoms, which exist independent of new government fiat, are superseded by those of a corporation whose rights and freedoms require the imposition of state power. Not such a happy and care-free process as people think it is.

I've got 36 years in the oil and gas business under my belt, and you are frighteningly full of shit.

Explain. I am a supporter of domestic oil and natural gas development, so do not believe for a second that I do not recognize the upsides of the industry.

 

[Mr. H.]

Ok, maybe a whiff of poo poo.

 

[Mr. H.]

It's New York's loss to deny an LNG export terminal. Same for the ban on hydraulic fracturing.
Operators lease ground, they don't buy it.
You go on to paint a rather unrealistic picture of the industry.
Working for an environmental organization obviously has you sufficiently brainwashed.

 

[prepster]

It's New York's loss to deny an LNG export terminal. Same for the ban on hydraulic fracturing.
Operators lease ground, they don't buy it.
You go on to paint a rather unrealistic picture of the industry.
Working for an environmental organization obviously has you sufficiently brainwashed.

Never did I say that operators buy land. Granted, I basically used the phrases 'buying spree' and 'lease' synonymously, but that is more out of my uncaring desire to be semantically correct than out of sheer lack of knowledge. Of course operators lease land. The terms of the lease are explicitly spelled out in the contract between the property owner and operator. That is the least of the property owner's worries. Problems arise in the form of the fine print, and the lobbying efforts of oil and natural gas corporations, who have frequent access to local, state, and federal environmental protection agencies.

 

[Samson]

From here, you get all the big and small spills, leaks, and explosions, many of which are wiped under the rug due to the disproportionate legal power or the oil and natural gas companies.

What Explosion was "wiped under the rug?"

Hell, an oil company executive cannot fart without the EPA showing up to monitor air quality.

Apparently, you've lost the ability to distinguish reality from your vivid imagination.

 

[prepster]

From here, you get all the big and small spills, leaks, and explosions, many of which are wiped under the rug due to the disproportionate legal power or the oil and natural gas companies.

What Explosion was "wiped under the rug?"

Hell, an oil company executive cannot fart without the EPA showing up to monitor air quality.

Apparently, you've lost the ability to distinguish reality from your vivid imagination.

Read The End of Country by Seamus McGraw. His neighborhood suffered from an explosion and a succeeding public health disaster that was half-heartedly handled by environmental protection agencies and Cabot Oil and Gas, the company at fault. The EPA failed to act as well until it was too late. In other words, it was environmental regulators and big oil, working in harmony to cover up the fiasco. In turn, my hatred for state and federal environmental regulators and fossil fuel companies is not mutually exclusive.

 

[Samson]

From here, you get all the big and small spills, leaks, and explosions, many of which are wiped under the rug due to the disproportionate legal power or the oil and natural gas companies.

What Explosion was "wiped under the rug?"

Hell, an oil company executive cannot fart without the EPA showing up to monitor air quality.

Apparently, you've lost the ability to distinguish reality from your vivid imagination.

Read The End of Country by Seamus McGraw. His neighborhood suffered from an explosion and a succeeding public health disaster that was half-heartedly handled by environmental protection agencies and Cabot Oil and Gas, the company at fault. The EPA failed to act as well until it was too late. In other words, it was environmental regulators and big oil, working in harmony to cover up the fiasco. In turn, my hatred for state and federal environmental regulators and fossil fuel companies is not mutually exclusive.

By "half-heartedly handled by the EPA," I'm guessing you mean in the subjective opinion of the author, Seamus McGraw.



Get back to me when you receive information that is objective, and have something more than conspiracy theories: Last summer wells were fracced about 300 yards from my back yard. It was loud for a few days, but that was it.

 

[prepster]

What Explosion was "wiped under the rug?"

Hell, an oil company executive cannot fart without the EPA showing up to monitor air quality.

Apparently, you've lost the ability to distinguish reality from your vivid imagination.

Read The End of Country by Seamus McGraw. His neighborhood suffered from an explosion and a succeeding public health disaster that was half-heartedly handled by environmental protection agencies and Cabot Oil and Gas, the company at fault. The EPA failed to act as well until it was too late. In other words, it was environmental regulators and big oil, working in harmony to cover up the fiasco. In turn, my hatred for state and federal environmental regulators and fossil fuel companies is not mutually exclusive.

By "half-heartedly handled by the EPA," I'm guessing you mean in the subjective opinion of the author, Seamus McGraw.



Get back to me when you receive information that is objective, and have something more than conspiracy theories: Last summer wells were fracced about 300 yards from my back yard. It was loud for a few days, but that was it.

Not at all. That is my reaction to his accounts, not his. Oh, just so you know, McGraw has a natural gas platform on his property as well, and he has had to deal with spills and leaks. He is still working out the issues with Cabot Oil and Gas, according to the last update that I received from him from my sources on his plight.

By the way, environmental protection agencies is not the EPA. In the statement you quote, I refer to more than one environmental protection agency, namely the local and state authorities.

 

[Mr. H.]

It's New York's loss to deny an LNG export terminal. Same for the ban on hydraulic fracturing.
Operators lease ground, they don't buy it.
You go on to paint a rather unrealistic picture of the industry.
Working for an environmental organization obviously has you sufficiently brainwashed.

Never did I say that operators buy land. Granted, I basically used the phrases 'buying spree' and 'lease' synonymously, but that is more out of my uncaring desire to be semantically correct than out of sheer lack of knowledge. Of course operators lease land. The terms of the lease are explicitly spelled out in the contract between the property owner and operator. That is the least of the property owner's worries. Problems arise in the form of the fine print, and the lobbying efforts of oil and natural gas corporations, who have frequent access to local, state, and federal environmental protection agencies.

"The fine print".

As to allegations of "frequent access" I'll take your word for it.

Not.