Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Sunday November 19 2017, @04:25AM   Printer-friendly
from the color-me-oil dept.

Keystone Pipeline leaks 210,000 gallons of oil in South Dakota

Keystone Pipeline leaks 210,000 gallons of oil in South Dakota

"A total of 210,000 gallons of oil leaked Thursday (Nov 16, 2017) from the Keystone Pipeline in South Dakota, the pipeline's operator, TransCanada, said.

Crews shut down the pipeline Thursday morning, and officials are investigating the cause of the leak, which occurred about three miles southeast of the town of Amherst, said Brian Walsh, a spokesman for the state's Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

This is the largest Keystone oil spill to date in South Dakota, Walsh said. The leak comes just days before Nebraska officials announce a decision on whether the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline, a sister project, can move forward."

Keystone pipeline - major leak/spill

Elsewhere there are notes of smaller spills in the same pipeline--this AC submitter is wondering about the long term use of a pipeline that is leaking when it's nearly brand new. Doesn't sound good for the long term.

PBS has a followup article from today (Saturday), 'We need to know' more about Keystone oil pipeline leak, tribal chairman says

The leak comes as the debate over the proposed path of the Keystone XL pipeline rages on. Nebraska's Public Service Commission is scheduled to announce its decision Monday on whether to permit TransCanada to build Keystone XL along its proposed route in the state, the Omaha World-Herald reported. A spokeswoman for the commission told the AP that the board's members will only use information provided during public hearings and official public comments in order to make their decision.

Related:
US District Court: Approval of Dakota Access Pipeline Violated the Law
Dakota Access Pipeline Suffers Oil Leak Even Before Becoming Operational
Company Behind Dakota Access Oil Pipeline Sues Greenpeace


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Arik on Sunday November 19 2017, @05:29AM (13 children)

    by Arik (4543) on Sunday November 19 2017, @05:29AM (#598848) Journal
    "Not your typical puncture, just bad welding."

    Assuming you are correct, that's actually much worse. That would indicate substandard construction, not a one-off accident.
    --
    If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Redundant=1, Insightful=3, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday November 19 2017, @05:50AM (12 children)

    by frojack (1554) on Sunday November 19 2017, @05:50AM (#598851) Journal

    Yes, it could be worse.
    But chances are it forces a review of all the weld x-ray images. And that might turn up other suspect joints.
      Baring a leak, there's no reason to do this kind of a review.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:06AM (9 children)

      by fustakrakich (6150) on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:06AM (#598856) Journal

      Baring a leak, there's no reason to do this kind of a review.

      I thought the idea was to prevent leaks, not to be fixing them all the time, but maybe they have other plans.

      --
      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 20 2017, @01:43AM (8 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 20 2017, @01:43AM (#599096) Journal
        That's what maintenance is about. You don't make a perfect pipeline. Instead, you keep a pipeline in good, working order.
        • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday November 20 2017, @02:04AM (7 children)

          by fustakrakich (6150) on Monday November 20 2017, @02:04AM (#599105) Journal

          Instead, you keep a pipeline in good, working order.

          Only if it's cheaper than fixing it when it breaks. That's how business is done [wfu.edu]. You do what's "cost effective", not what's best. That is a fundamental of capitalism.

          --
          La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @02:08AM (2 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @02:08AM (#599107)

            You do what's "cost effective", not what's best. That is a fundamental of capitalism.

            Market bad?

            I thought you say market good! [soylentnews.org]

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @02:14AM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @02:14AM (#599111)

              That's what you get for thinkin'! You're only gonna hurt yourself

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @05:26AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @05:26AM (#599156)

                You should get together with fustakrakich. He has the exact same view as you!

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 20 2017, @02:51AM (3 children)

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 20 2017, @02:51AM (#599123) Journal

            Only if it's cheaper than fixing it when it breaks.

            That is maintenance too.

            As to the Pinto example, it turned out to not be cost effective. Ford lost a lot of money, customers, and reputation on that.

            • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday November 20 2017, @03:35AM (2 children)

              by fustakrakich (6150) on Monday November 20 2017, @03:35AM (#599128) Journal

              Well, there is that little thing called preventative maintenance that nobody wants to pay for because it's more expensive than damage repair to property.

              As to the Pinto example, it turned out to not be cost effective. Ford lost a lot of money, customers, and reputation on that.

              No, it was only that the lawsuits were more expensive than anticipated. Both Ford (Grand Vic) and GM (Some pickups) had subsequent flaws that were similar. Business practices have not changed one bit. The bottom line is all there is. Everything is built to be marginally serviceable when new instead of robust and durable. That includes pipelines.

              --
              La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
              • (Score: 2, Informative) by khallow on Monday November 20 2017, @03:55AM (1 child)

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 20 2017, @03:55AM (#599131) Journal

                Well, there is that little thing called preventative maintenance that nobody wants to pay for because it's more expensive than damage repair to property.

                When true, that's a good reason not to pay for it.

                No, it was only that the lawsuits were more expensive than anticipated.

                And if those lawsuits weren't, it would be because the Pinto wasn't as dangerous as it ended up being.

                Business practices have not changed one bit.

                Yet somehow some businesses have more difficulties with preventative maintenance than others.

                Everything is built to be marginally serviceable when new instead of robust and durable. That includes pipelines.

                Except when they don't do that. For all your talk, I don't see the indications that the Keystone XL pipeline has been poorly constructed or has a poor preventative maintenance to post-accident maintenance balance. One leak (or even the modest sequence of leaks mentioned in the story) doesn't indicate a problem.

                • (Score: 2) by drussell on Monday November 20 2017, @06:08AM

                  by drussell (2678) on Monday November 20 2017, @06:08AM (#599164) Journal

                  Just for clarification, this leak was in the Keystone pipeline, not the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which is to be an expansion leg phase added to the existing system. The XL expansion is intended to increase the coverage area and total capacity as the current pipeline but via a different route to be able to also pick up US-origin oil from the Baker, Montana terminal to send it to refineries further south as well as increase the capacity from Alberta to those same US refineries.

                  https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Keystone-pipeline-route.png [wikimedia.org]

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by Arik on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:20AM (1 child)

      by Arik (4543) on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:20AM (#598858) Journal
      "But chances are it forces a review of all the weld x-ray images. And that might turn up other suspect joints.
        Baring a leak, there's no reason to do this kind of a review."

      Huh?

      Granted I've never worked on a pipeline, but I'd expect higher standards there not lower. The practice I've seen and would expect is that x-rays are reviewed before the weld is considered to have passed inspection, not that it gets filed without anyone looking at it. That sounds like a massive, systematic failure at QA.
      --
      If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @03:24PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @03:24PM (#599258)

        I believe he is rationalizing the sin, due to the sin of neglect being the most convenient and profitable outcome for those responsible, considering the facts.

        remember, those in charge of the pipeline place no value on the land the pipe goes through. that's someone else's problem and valuation, and the laywers already know how to tie up small claims like this forever. someone might get a pay out somewhere, but that's just to keep the PR from going entirely negative. mostly negative is OK.