Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
ghostjmf
Posts: 7420
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 11:09 am

Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#1 Post by ghostjmf » Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:09 pm

That's South Dakota; I ran out of characters

That's why people don't like pipelines through their land

5,000 barrels, if you think in barrels

This is the pipeline that's already built, not the one people are still trying to stop

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 12780
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#2 Post by BackInTex » Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:09 pm

ghostjmf wrote: That's why people don't like pipelines through their land

5,000 barrels, if you think in barrels
This is comparable to a large commercial plane crashing with 100 people killed.Still 99 percent safer than driving.

The safety of pipelines compared to rail or other surface transportation is much higher. Accidents will happen. No mode of transportation is perfect.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
ghostjmf
Posts: 7420
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 11:09 am

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#3 Post by ghostjmf » Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:11 pm

BiT:

When a truck crashes the oil leak is much less. Ditto for rail crash unless the entire load catches fire.

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 6264
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#4 Post by jarnon » Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:43 pm

I feel bad about it, but it's not as bad as this:

Image
Слава Україні!
עם ישראל חי

User avatar
Estonut
Evil Genius
Posts: 10495
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:16 am
Location: Garden Grove, CA

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#5 Post by Estonut » Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:30 am

ghostjmf wrote:BiT:

When a truck crashes the oil leak is much less. Ditto for rail crash unless the entire load catches fire.
How many trucks need to be on the road to transport as much volume as the pipeline?

Comparing apples to apples, the Exxon Valdez leaked 10.8 million gallons (260,000 barrels, if you think in barrels) into the pristine Prince William Sound. That area is still recovering. Would you prefer more of those than pipeline leaks over land?
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.
Groucho Marx

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 6264
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#6 Post by jarnon » Fri Nov 17, 2017 6:30 am

According to this article, the various methods of transporting oil have comparable risks.

I live next to a railroad line, and even if they build a pipeline near me it'll carry natural gas not dirty oil, but YMMV.
Слава Україні!
עם ישראל חי

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 12780
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#7 Post by BackInTex » Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:37 am

jarnon wrote:According to this article, the various methods of transporting oil have comparable risks.

I live next to a railroad line, and even if they build a pipeline near me it'll carry natural gas not dirty oil, but YMMV.
Here is another article of similar nature

It shows trucking spills almost twice the oil while rail only about 1/4, but rail kills more people when it spills.

The article gives a lot of pluses and minuses for each mode of transport and does not, at least in my quick read, recommend or put one form of transport above another. It is simply putting the facts out there and letting the reader decide.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 26427
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#8 Post by Bob Juch » Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:51 am

I prefer solar energy spills.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 12780
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#9 Post by BackInTex » Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:52 am

Estonut wrote:
ghostjmf wrote:BiT:

When a truck crashes the oil leak is much less. Ditto for rail crash unless the entire load catches fire.
How many trucks need to be on the road to transport as much volume as the pipeline?
The current capacity of Keystone is 24,780,000 gallons per day (590,000 barrels). A truck carries 9,000 gallons so it would take about 2,800 trucks delivering every day. Assuming the trip from the north to the south takes 3 days, and then 3 days to go back it would take putting another 16,800 trucks, half of them full of oil, to replace that one pipeline. That one pipeline currently is only 3-4% of the US refining capacity. To feed all refineries by truck would take 420,000 trucks driving every day, carrying some of the most hazardous cargo.

This doesn't even account for the logistics of getting that many trucks into the region, let alone, into the refineries, and then the time to connect and offload the product. Probably would need to add 2-3 days of queuing, so add 50% to the number of trucks. Then you have 70,000 trucks parked, sitting with product waiting for an ignition event to end it all.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 12780
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#10 Post by BackInTex » Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:53 am

Bob Juch wrote:I prefer solar energy spills.
I prefer reality.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Appa23
Posts: 3747
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:04 pm

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#11 Post by Appa23 » Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:53 pm

Estonut wrote:
ghostjmf wrote:BiT:

When a truck crashes the oil leak is much less. Ditto for rail crash unless the entire load catches fire.
How many trucks need to be on the road to transport as much volume as the pipeline?
Regarding a similarly-sized pipeline (DAPL):

"Assuming the average oil tanker truck is capable of holding about 220 barrels of oil, the transportation of
the initial capacity of the proposed Project (450,000 bpd), would require a total of 2,045 (450,000/220)
full trucks to depart the proposed tank terminals daily, and more than 85 (2,045/24) trucks would have to
be filled every hour with a 24-hour/day operation. Time spent in transit, loading/offloading, and
additional time for maintenance would add to the number of trucks needed to offset for the DAPL Project.
For a trucking mode, an increase in daily truck traffic would lead to an increase in the degradation of public
roads as well as contribute to the noise pollution adjacent to the roads. For both truck and rail modes, an
increase in exhaust would be anticipated due to truck and locomotive combustion. An increase in air
pollution would also be anticipated from potential releases during the filling operations for trucks or rail
cars."

For rail cars:

"Assuming a carrying capacity of 600 barrels per car, a total of 750 rail cars would be required to depart
the tank terminal daily to transport 450,000 barrels of crude oil to its final destination. Loading and
offloading 750 rail cars in a day would require servicing more than 31 rail cars per hour. With an
assumption of 125 rail cars per train, six trains would have to depart the tank terminal every day. With
10 to 12 trains currently leaving the state per day carrying Bakken crude, the DAPL Project would represent
a 50 to 60% increase in the number of trains transporting crude oil out of the state, likely exacerbating
issues with delays (Horwath and Owings, 2014).

Rail operations on the scale of the DAPL Project do not exist in the U.S. An oil-by-rail facility designed to
handle an average of 360,000 bpd has been proposed in the Port of Vancouver, Washington. Known as
the Vancouver Energy proposal, the project would be the largest rail terminal in the country (Florip, 2014).

A rail transportation alternative to handle the volumes of the DAPL Project would require the design and
construction of 125 to 158% of that of the Vancouver Energy proposal. A facility of this size would incur
its own environmental consequences.

From a safety standpoint, railroad transport consistently reports a substantially higher number of
transportation accidents than pipelines (DOT, 2005). A series of major accidents taking place in 2013 to
2014 in Canada and the U.S. has heightened concern about the risks involved in shipping crude by rail
(Fritelli, 2014).

Increases in rail traffic necessary to transport the volume of crude oil proposed by the DAPL project would
increase the emissions of combustion products due the use of diesel engines which could have an adverse
impact on air quality in the region. This alternative would also directly affect communities along utilized
rail lines by increasing noise and creating transportation delays due to the substantial increasing rail traffic
across railroad crossings of roads."

User avatar
BackInTex
Posts: 12780
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Location: In Texas of course!

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#12 Post by BackInTex » Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:57 pm

Appa23 wrote:
Regarding a similarly-sized pipeline (DAPL):

"Assuming the .......[lots of stats] crossings of roads."
I see nothing about the left's preferred method of transportation; unicorns! It would only take 12.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson

Spock
Posts: 4295
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#13 Post by Spock » Fri Nov 17, 2017 3:45 pm

Bob Juch wrote:I prefer solar energy spills.
The bestest, bestest thing about solar energy is that the cells are made of unicorn poop on-site and no dirty yucky things like mining or processing or manufacturing or transportation or transmission lines are required.

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 26427
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#14 Post by Bob Juch » Fri Nov 17, 2017 9:38 pm

Spock wrote:
Bob Juch wrote:I prefer solar energy spills.
The bestest, bestest thing about solar energy is that the cells are made of unicorn poop on-site and no dirty yucky things like mining or processing or manufacturing or transportation or transmission lines are required.
Isn't it nice that mining ore, refining it, and making steel is nice and clean?
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

User avatar
Bob Juch
Posts: 26427
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Contact:

Re: Keystone Pipeline leaked 210,000 gallons of oil in SD

#15 Post by Bob Juch » Sat Nov 18, 2017 9:55 pm

They're now saying it's 800,000 gallons.

Image
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.

Post Reply