- Nov
15
2012
You know that Keystone XL pipeline that President Obama is likely to approve? You know that foreign and possibly faulty steel TransCanada used in the Keystone 1 pipeline and has already been stockpiling here on the Great Plains for Keystone XL? You know that "tar sands oil," the mix of oil and grit that Keystone 1 transports and someday Keystone XL will transport across our land and aquifers?
Check out this video from the Oil Sands Discovery Centre, brought to you by the oil industry and the rah-rah-tar-sands Alberta government, to see what tar sands, also called bitumen, do to steel:
After enjoying that long Canadian "o" in "process," go to around 1:40 in the video to hear the presenter discuss the damage the bitumen does to her spoon. "It wears away all the steel equipment that it comes in contact with."
Now the tar sands transported in TransCanada's pipes are thinned to remove some of that sand. But the piped product is still heavy, gritty stuff. And that gritty oil moves through the pipelines at much higher temperature and pressure (try 1600 psi) than the nice lady is applying in her beaker with that spoon.
It wears away all the steel equipment that it comes in contact with. Reread that, President Obama.
p.s.: Grist contends the President may not be as likely as Moody's thinks to approve the pipeline, since the four main arguments he could make for the pipeline are weaker now than they were when he put off Keystone XL last winter.
pp.s.: And don't forget: the whole point of Keystone XL is not to supply the United States with more oil; it's to clear the glut of oil in the central U.S. and export that Canadian oil to the global market where it can fetch better prices.
ppp.s: The conservative (relatively speaking) Canadian government is so in the tank with the oil industry that it is muzzling Environment Canada scientists to keep them from talking about their own research on the pollution caused by tar sands extraction.
24 Responses to “Tar Sands Hard on Steel, Will Corrode Pipelines”
Tar sands is not the same as conventional crude. It requires much more refining ($$$$) to produce synthetic oil. That means much higher costs when the goop arrives at the refinery.
Oil pumped from the Bakken costs much less to refine. It's less dangerous to transport through a pipeline. And there is a lot more oil in the Bakken fields than estimated. You do the math!
We pushed the PUC to get a sample of the product they planned to transport through the pipeline for testing and in order to do a complete job when approving Keystone XL. Instead they accepted the company's word that there would be no problem. This crap scares me, I've seen too many parts fail when a seal fails and grit gets into a hot, high pressure area. Here that's what they are planning to do and they tell us there will be no problems. They haven't convinced me.
If you look at a photo of the Enbridge pipeline blow-out on the from a few years ago at Kalamazoo, Mich., you'll see the gaping hole was along the welded seam of the pipeline which indicates a manufacturing failure. Imagine the risk from the welds made in the field during installation which is far from the controlled, indoor environment of a pipeline factory. Here is a link to a photo and an updated report:
http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/Enbridge_Fined_Over_Kalamazoo_River_Tar_Sands_Pipeline_Spil_999.html
From the Energy Daily story, "During the Kalamazoo spill, it took Enbridge 17 hours to shut the pipeline down and while the total amount of tar sands spilled is still unknown, spill responders have recovered 1,150,000 gallons of tar sands and oil still remains in the river."
Judging from the Keystone Pipeline leaks in South Dakota and North Dakota, I don't think TC or pipeline technology are ready for prime time with tar sands. You'll note that the new KXL route is moved east, but still runs through the Ogalala Aquifer, but not as many miles as before. That means it is still a threat to North America's largest aquifer, and I suspect TC knows even less about the hydrology dynamics of this crucial subsurface water body. Can you imagine how TC plans to clean up 1 million gallons of chemicals and tar sands from an underground drinking water resource?
This is a game of Russian roulette, with five shells in the chamber instead of one.
South Dakota's PUC should never have been the agency for review and decision of something this complicated and hazardous. The politicians on the board reacted like rubberstamps to a demand by "the job providers." They are unqualified to make such a decision which gave automatic powers to TC to use the billy club threat of eminent domain to cherry pick whose land would be taken.
In Nebraska's case, TC must wait for U.S. Department of State approval before it can legally impose eminent domain and trample over the rights and properties of landowners. Maybe there are legislators in Pierre who might want to fix this injustice to farmers and ranchers in our state so that the bobbleheads on the PUC won't screw them over again.
All pipelines leak, but at the same time they do have benefits and of the thousands of miles of pipelines there are only a select few leaks, and of those few even a smaller were significant. While that is said, and again I'm not totally against a pipeline, I am against the federal and state government allowing cheaper steel, and no regulations on the type of crude transferred, or the rate transferred through the pipeline. I guess if regulated correctly I think the pipeline can be a plus. I just don't have my faith in the South Dakota PUC to do this
Sure, Joe, there are risks and benefits. Problem is, no one has really made the case that we will gain any major benefits that outweigh the risks. Our oil consumption is down. Domestic production is up. Keystone XL only reduces our local supply and raises our prices by getting more oil to the Gulf and higher-price export markets. Jobs are minimal; more could be had by investing the same amount of land and capital in wind power and transmission lines. TransCanada will make money, but you and I have no compelling reason to bear their risks to boost their profits.
Perpetual easements need to go bye-bye. Long term leases tied to the land and not the person would help alleviate landowner discourse. In this manner land would retain its value rather than lose. Depending on the wording of lease could possibly even increase in value. But who am I to suggest changes to a system that has been fleecing property owners out of their holdings for eons.
Just in, Renewable Fuels Standard upheld: Senator Johnson.
I'm surprised you're for the RFS Larry. Most liberals seem to be just as against ethanol as they are oil. Apparently we should have hopped directly from the horse and buggy to gravity-powered hover cars.
Where was my support indicated, BS?
Oh ok Larry my bad lol. I assumed you were showing support for Senator Johnson. Sometimes your little blurbs are so short it's hard to tell where you're coming from.
Look: I drive my own agenda. My posts here are for Cory to expand upon if he chooses and to provide focus for my party going forward.
You are not a member of my caucus but merely an amusement for the people allowed call me kurtz.
Holy cow, Bret! That perpetual easement will be there long after the tar sands wear away the whole pipeline!
Now you've done it "Kritz", you've run poor Bree off.
Don't be silly Les. Mr. Kurtz can think I'm here for his amusement if he wants. I personally wonder how his posts provide any "focus" since I find the majority of them utterly confusing - but then again I am a stupid cow so how could I possibly comprehend his brilliance?
Bree S.,
Before I come to Larry's defense(and he surely does not need me to defend him) I should tell you I am a die hard Regan Republican.
The world is much better off with people just like Larry Kurtz(not like but just like). He is an intelligent, free thinker who has used his upbringing and his father's guidance to come to the conclusions he has. He and I rarely agree on pure politics but in most cases we have the same social concerns. That he and I have a different idea on how to solve those concerns is immaterial so long as we are looking at the same problem using the same facts. That is what make America great.
Many of his off the wall comments are not really off the wall comments at all, but just a way of getting someone else to think about or at least consider his point of view(sometimes they make no sense or are meant to be a little sh---y). My son, who had an upbringing much like Larry's, comes to his decisions the same way Larry does and Larry is left of center while my son is right of center but I can tell you that if the two of them sat down over a beer they would be laughing and joking together about what they have in common and how they effect people around them. I always like to say, God bless Larry. The same goes for Bill Fleming.
I have nothing against Larry and take nothing he says personally. I don't even disagree with most of the problems he brings up. I entirely disagree with his proposed solutions as well as his tactics.
Well, thank you, Mr. Thompson. You sir are a consummate gentleman and I salute you. (*sticks tongue out at Bree*)
Old folks like us with their tongue out are usually thought to be choking or spitting up Flem.
How could anyone not have a certain fascination with "Larry" Joseph? You have not shared the same Kurtz paragraph with Sen Tom Nelson and US Rep Noem. I'm sure they don't need me to defend them but I will never approve of decimating a person for political or other type of gain.
They have more than enough political issues we don't need the personal unbacked character attacks.
If your son would partake of that Joseph, it would be a blow to my picture of your image.
With that being said, Larry's intel has darn sure penetrated three digits more than a little.
Yes, Les. To be sure we seniors must be mindfull of the context of our gestures and deeds, less we be misinterpreted at a time of real need. ;^)
Les,
My son is able to seperate political belief from character just as I do. He works for a non politcal non profit organization in California and at least half of his friends are very liberal Californians. He is like his father and truly believes character counts.
Wouldn't share my thoughts on the behavior with most elected officials because I expect very little from them so I am rarely disappointed. I have higher standards set for Larry Kurtz and Bill Fleming than I do for Representative Noem or for that matter President Obama and even though I generally disagree with Larry and Bill I have the utmost respect for them because of who Larry is and what Bill has been involved in. Both can talk the talk and I will listen,because both have walked the walk. I even give them a little slack when they upset me by getting a little personal with some posters because it usually happens when they are frustrated with someone or when someone posts something that makes them shake their heads.
That's enough for this one, think I'll go to Church now and say a prayer for both Bill and Larry. Night
Have a good night Mr. Thompson. I enjoyed reading your opinions. Bill and Larry will both definitely need your prayers ;)
Don't ever be stingy with those prayers Joseph. There's more than a few of us in need. Thanks for your usual good sense comments.
Mr. Thompson: always nice to see you are still above ground, Sir.
It would be interesting to compare notes in more depth with you sometime, Mr. Thompson. Unlike you with me, I find myself in agreement with most of what you assert. But then, perhaps that's because I'm a liberal. ;^)
Leave a Reply