Pipeline Spill, No 2,299,487,540
- Thread starter TenPenny
- Start date
Been 3 derailments within a few miles of me the last few years,I have the trans Canada pipeline also 100 meters from my home,no problems yet.
Lots of leaking lines are very old,they cut a lot of corners 30 years ago on some jobs.
Expect a lot more.
The sad fact of the matter is that while technology has progressed in many respects, the overwhelming mindset in the energy industry is the same as in the rest of the market driven economy: do it faster and as cheap as you can get away with. Randy Eresman (CEO of Encana) was on record for telling his employees that he wanted them to challenge the regulators on many of the regulations they had to obey (i.e. put the onus on the regulatory bodies such as ABSA and the ERCB as to "prove" why they were applicable and should be followed): unfortunately on asset integrity side of the business, those regulations are there because of environmental catastrophe or loss of life, so challenging them doesn't help avoid failures. In many cases (like Encana's numerous failures on shallow sweet gas gathering lines in SE Alberta) the consequences are minor, so the motivation to avoid them is minor as well.
Nope,theres an inspector for allmost every 2 guys on the pipeline now,pictures and video are taken through every step of the job,due diligence,this stuff can come back to bite you in the ass 30 years later so better do it right and to engineer specs.
Cover your ass,name of the game now a days.
Been 3 derailments and they knew the moment it happened, how much was aboard and how much, if anything, spilled. Can you claim the same for pipelines built by the lowest bidder and maintained as cheaply as possible in the name of profit?
Last edited:
Sorry, but as a corrosion engineering and inspection professional in the energy industry, I can tell you quite honestly that in many cases, all that is done is enough to make some execs in some towers in Calgary feel like they can tie things up in court long enough to act as a disincentive to prosecute them, or break a small company/individual in a civil suit. It is CYA, but only to a point where it you're unassailable, not necessarily in the right. There is a lot more than can, and in many cases SHOULD be done, but these things take time and shave a percentage point or 2 off the profit margin, thus are ignored. Changes have come to the industry, especially on things like the construction end, but usually its driven by a sudden catastrophic event.
Not sure where your getting your perspective on Oil exec in the Calgary Towers, but to imply that they would support an oil spill is just pure silly.
Nobody wants an oil spill, nobody wins with an oil spill, least of all the CEO's of any company.
Like anything there is always more that can be done but it always comes down to reaching the appropriate levels of risk.
Even cars can be made more safer, but even here it comes down to a number of professionals making a judgement decision.
So I think your comments are based on a lack of knowledge and a baise to only your trade.
OK. Since you're displaying a lack of reading comprehension and trying to invent statements for/by me, no, no one WANTS a spill or leak, but there is a very real limit to what most execs in Calgary will do to prevent one, when it means a project gets delayed or even in some cases, if the budget increases.
Risk assessment is a phrase they like to throw around when really most people don't have a true appreciation for the consequences. Its all well and fine until its your property and loved ones that become at risk because someone decided that $150 000 needed to be trimmed off a $5 million project. In many cases the decisions aren't made by engineers, but by MBAs and accountants, who have no technical knowledge to base their decisions on, just an understanding of profit margins and how larger ones translate into bigger bonuses for them.
And I don't what language you're butchering with "a baise to only your trade" but my comments are made as a professional with over 25 years in the Oil & Gas industry, 15 of it dealing with asset integrity, and someone who grew up in and lived all his life in and around the industry. I also realize internet credential claims are worth exactly what you pay to read them, but I am telling to READ and THINK, not skim and pass judgement. I don't have a hate on for it: I work in it and respect the majority of hard working, honest people who earn their livings through it, but by the same token, I am also well versed in the downsides and clusterf***s that can result from idiots in high office making poor decisions.
+200
And since you don't troll, or troll trolls, just ignore the ensuing claims of you being either an easterner or an enviro weenie with an agenda.
Last edited:
The lowest bidder is not allways the bid winner.
Most of these leaking lines are decades old and there should be safeguards that shut them down when a leak is detected but obviously some one is not doing their due diligence.
The operators should be hitting some of these sites every day and checking valves and pressure readings,you wont be in the business long if you can let a line leak for that much time unnoticed.
There's good companies and bad ones,with all the regulations these days the bad ones wont last very long.
Theres good companies and bad ones,the bad ones wont be around in a couple years when the fines start rolling in.
I worked for Resdin inspections,I know how it works.
You probably know my old boss Deano
That's much different than your claims the other day, about how great and safe it is in Alberta.
You have no idea how many miles of pipe are in the ground,whats put in right now with all the regulations and inspectors is safe,yes,I said that.
What was put in 50 years ago may also be safe,then again it might be ready to fail,a small nick on plastic coating on a pipe back then will take 20 years off it's life.
I also dont recall any fatalities from fracking here either.
Instead of executive bonuses being a given or based on profits they should be based on safety and regulatory compliance. In the long run it would be much more profitable for shareholders.
Probably the oil industry much like the forest industry needs to take control away from bean counters and MBAs and put it back in the hands of professionals.
Probably the oil industry much like the forest industry needs to take control away from bean counters and MBAs and put it back in the hands of professionals.
The problem with this is its based on the flawed assumption that the Alberta gov't will get hard nosed with producers, when they will bend over backwards to avoid it for one simple reason: being hard-nosed means shutting in production for offenders and that in turn means loss of royalties in the provincial coffers. If you talk to most older (40+ yr old) person working for the ERCB/AEUB, they will tell you that (unless you're in a meeting where they are trying to find out what happened with an oops and then they will growl convincingly but unless it is an epic screw up, the growling is as far as it goes). Because of the way revenues play into this, bigger companies can and will get away with more: negative press is really more of a deterrent than gov't regulations. As in the case with Pace's leaks in the muskeg up north, out of sight is out of mind all too often: Alberta Energy/Encana was able to play this way down on the Block in CFB Suffield for years, as was Amoco (before BP bought them) at Nipisi/Utikima Lake and other large companies have as well.
BC is a little different because their O&G commission was designed to be more of an enforcement agency than a community cop (like the ERCB is).
I'm not sure if I know Deano, but I did work with a lot of Resdin guys (and gals) over the years, especially in the GP area and NE BC: some great people to work with
But there is a significant level of removal from construction inspectors and the actual operations of a facility...p.s. for the record I think the fraccing thing is unjustified hysteria (see the one post Capt Morgan made about it): the sources of any contamination are from poor cement jobs/poor bonds with casing/water producing zones, which has been an issue for years (water zones are usually where you get "lost circulation" zones while drilling and are notoriously hard to seal off from a wellbore), and poor management of fluids on surface, which again has been an issue for years with people who want to take short cuts.
That explains a lot.
I acknowledged the problems with liners. But all I got from the usual chest thumpers was, there's no problem, Alberta is just awesome.
Thanks for the honesty. As always.
It’s quickly become what some call a public relations nightmare for the province. There have been three oil spills in the past month, and more than 300 in the last year. Now, the pressure is mounting for a full review of the pipeline system.
230,000 litres of heavy crude leaked out of Enbridge’s Athabasca pipeline near Elk Point this week. A pipeline owned by Plains Midstream Canada leaked up to 475,000 litres of light sour crude into the Red Deer River on June 7. Before that, there was a spill in May, near Rainbow River up north. There, nearly 800,000 litres of oil leaked out.
Word of the spills is making headlines around the world.
“It’s not just a PR thing,” Brian Mason says. “These are real serious problems in our province.” Alberta’s NDP leader says the issue goes far deeper than just how the province is perceived. “It’s more than the optics… we need to be moving towards a system of monitoring and enforcement on the infrastructure that exists in Alberta, which is extensive.”
230,000 litres of heavy crude leaked out of Enbridge’s Athabasca pipeline near Elk Point this week. A pipeline owned by Plains Midstream Canada leaked up to 475,000 litres of light sour crude into the Red Deer River on June 7. Before that, there was a spill in May, near Rainbow River up north. There, nearly 800,000 litres of oil leaked out.
Word of the spills is making headlines around the world.
“It’s not just a PR thing,” Brian Mason says. “These are real serious problems in our province.” Alberta’s NDP leader says the issue goes far deeper than just how the province is perceived. “It’s more than the optics… we need to be moving towards a system of monitoring and enforcement on the infrastructure that exists in Alberta, which is extensive.”